A Bruce Walker writes on one blog, "Tom Tancredo would make a wonderful president, but has little chance of winning either the nomination or the general election." He states this as if it is some scientific or religious fact and gives no reasons why Tom Tancredo can’t win. He states it as dogma.

I did not see the O’Reilly show last night, but some people emailed me saying that O’Reilly said about the same thing, "Well, we all know you can’t win." How the hell does O’Reilly know that? Is it written in a book somewhere?
Worse yet, Tancredo sat there and agreed with him. I thought the job of a politician was to convince people that he should be elected, what he was going to do when elected, and why people should vote for him. Not to agree, that it is a hopeless effort.

For every other candidate one can make an argument why they cannot win the nomination or the presidency: Gingrich (has NAFTA hanging about his neck); McCain (so many reasons we can’t list them); Romney (not strong on immigration): Giuliani (never pass muster with the conservatives); Duncan Hunter (no strong base of support), and so on.

Tancredo has not one specific negative. Yet everybody is badmouthing his chances, and Tancredo is agreeing.

Tom Tancredo has a base of grass roots supporters that no other candidate has. Tancredo is a bottom-up candidate, while everyone is a top-down candidate. Every other Republican is running on the basis of "I’ll raise enough money, do some market research and then we will fool the public for a while."

Tancredo is running on what he believes in. And his supporters know what side of the fence he is on, and what kind of decent man he is. What amazing luck!!. Americans can actually vote for a man with some integrity.
Probably Tom, in his heart of heart, doesn’t believe he got in this position. Well, never mind all that, he is in that position, so lets get elected.

Tom Tancredo is not helping himself by declaring that he is running to get the issue of immigration on the table (it is already on the table), or to influence other candidate’s positions (we know what they are, they lie and cover their tracks after they are elected).

He is not exactly leading a charge up San Juan Hill with his campaign. He should take stock of himself and have a more positive outlook on this. It is one thing to be realistic, that there is a long hard fight ahead; it is another thing to discourage your supporters with your own negatively. Leaders solve problems. Leaders are positive about what they are doing and communicate that to people.

Mayor Giuliani spoke in New Hampshire. He oozed confidence. He has been the mayor of a big time city that was attacked in 911. He talked confidently about budgets and taxes. Newt Gingrich has his plan for America. He was third in line for the Presidency. He is full of hot air. But they are both big time players with power drives.

When the commentators are talking about Tancredo not having a chance, they are looking at him as a person, as a candidate, not what he stands for or who supports him. So he had better get himself in a fighting mode.

Either lead, or get out of the way for a candidate that wants to protect our country and feels that he can do that best from inside the White House.

Tancredo can raise money, he has supporters, he has people committed to him, and he is a known political figure with a fine reputation, so what else do you want, or does he want?

So, would somebody tell Tancredo, "You are the leading candidate! You are going to win the nomination and the presidency."

Paul Streitz
Co-director
CT Citizens for Immigration Reform for details on Tom Tancredo’s campaign. Sign up and give money  for bumper stickers, badges, or to join a national rally on Feb. 13th for Tancredo.

Mr. Streitz is author of Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I, The Great American College Tuition Rip-off and America First, Why Americans Must End Free Trade, Stop Outsourcing and Close Our Open Borders.