Obama’s Hispanic Vote (Updated x2)
[Guest post by DRJ]
A post-election study by a Democratic think tank argues the Hispanic vote accounted for Obama’s margin of victory in Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico:
“In Colorado, Obama’s Hispanic support accounted for 12.4% of the electorate, while Obama only won by 7%. In Florida, Obama’s Hispanic support accounted for 7.9% of the electorate, while Obama only won by 2%. In Nevada, Obama’s Hispanic support accounted for 12.4% of the electorate, while Obama only won by 12%. In New Mexico, Obama’s Hispanic support accounted for 28.3% of the electorate, while Obama only won by 15%.”
Obama’s win in those states were important to his victory and will likely be important in future races, too. If this study is correct, I’m curious how it affects amnesty and immigration legislation. Historically immigration has been like abortion — polarizing political issues that neither Party wants to face head on. Maybe this will convince the Democrats that amnesty should be on the agenda.
I have a feeling it might but I hope not.
UPDATE 1: Karl Rove thinks Hispanic voters are essential to the GOP’s future success:
“Republicans must regain ground among critical voting groups. Voters ages 18–29 voted Democratic by a 2-to-1 margin. A market-oriented “green” agenda that’s true to our principles would help win them back. Hispanics dropped from 44 percent Republican in 2004 to 31 percent in 2008. The GOP won’t be a majority party if it cedes the young or Hispanics to Democrats. Republicans must find a way to support secure borders, a guest-worker program and comprehensive immigration reform that strengthens citizenship, grows our economy and keeps America a welcoming nation. An anti-Hispanic attitude is suicidal. As the party of Lincoln, Republicans have a moral obligation to make our case to Hispanics, blacks and Asian-Americans who share our values. Whether we see gains in 2010 depends on it.”
That sounds great but how do we do it?
UPDATE 2: Janet Murguía, the President of the National Council of La Raza, also thinks Hispanics were the reason Obama won Nevada, Colorado, Florida and New Mexico. Here’s what she expects from Obama in return:
“At some point in the first term we would definitely expect to see an effort to move responsible immigration reform,” Murguía said. “It would be a big mistake not to act on this important priority.”
— DRJ
I’ve always wondered how having somewhere between 1/5th and 1/4th of their citizens living in our country affects our political relationship with Mexico.
Techie (62bc5d) — 11/15/2008 @ 1:31 pmThe margin in NV is all Clark County (Las Vegas), and can be laid at the doorstep of the SEIU, who is a major factor in organizing the labor force on the Strip.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 1:48 pmNow, the real question is, how many of those votes are non-citizens?
(Sorry, not attempting to threadjack)
Techie (62bc5d) — 11/15/2008 @ 1:49 pmI think McCain lost Hispanics due to the rhetoric that came out of people like Michelle Malkin.
Malkin was right to point towards illegal immigration as a huge problem, but Hispanics are as easily insulted by being browbeaten with words like “invasion” “reconquista” and all that other unnecessary inflamatory language.
There were plenty of other ways to get her point across without totally driving ALL hispanics away… legal hispanic voters began to feel like it was us (white GOP) vs. them (brown, maybe Mexican, “ILLEGAL!!!!”). All the right wing mouthpieces were yelling and polarizing away.
Democrats have to still be giggling at the folly of Republicans driving that immigration bill in an election year and then running it onto the rocks…. presto…. GOP loses all the hispanic voters that Bush drew in.
Hispanics have a strong core subgroup of voters with very conservative values. Catholic, hard working, family oriented, valuing loyalty and honor. Respect is huge.
Most Mexican people I know have family members… (and remember that they count family out beyond 2nd cousins) who have been here illegally at some point. They tend to empathize with them.
Once the hispanic voters felt dishonored and disrespected by the broad brush of the shrieking right on immigration… they turned their backs on the GOP.
Regaining their trust needs to start now.
SteveG (71dc6f) — 11/15/2008 @ 1:50 pmThere are certain words that white America uses offhandedly like “stupid” or “criminal” that are deeply insulting to Mexicans for cultural reasons.
Part of regaining that trust would be to learn how to articulate a conservative immigration position without insulting the hell out of voting hispanics… I’d suggest the GOP invites them in for the conversation and then just listen for a while. We’d find that hispanic voters have real issues with illegals too and ideas on how to handle them.
We’d find that hispanic voters have real issues with illegals too and ideas on how to handle them.
Comment by SteveG — 11/15/2008 @ 1:50 pm
That being the case, their voting for the Party that wishes to dismantle any legal controls on immigration sure seems to be a strange way of dealing with a problem that effects themselves.
And, where are these ideas?
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 2:01 pmAll we hear here in SoCal are the “crazies” touting the Aztlan/Reconquista/LaRaza BS.
Are the “moderates” in the Hispanic community as cowed as the “moderates” in the Islamic community?
If they were serious about following the laws of the country they have chosen to live in, perhaps they could start by doing something about the Hispanic Gang Culture?
Or, would that be sacrificing their identity?
“Maybe this will convince the Democrats that amnesty should be on the agenda.”
They’d be dumb to make many moves. Its better to let the GOP make its nativist moves. It’s such a winning issue for Dems to just let the GOP drive the hispanic vote towards them.
imdw (4d50ce) — 11/15/2008 @ 2:06 pmI don’t know about Michelle Malking being a big cause…I teach in a school that’s 70% Hispanic (25 black 5 Pacific Islander), and no one I’ve talked to, kids or adults, teachers and parents, have heard of Malkin. Of course, I never asked, so take that with a grain of salt.
In my opinion, I think it had lots to do with McCain spearheading immigration reform. Even though it might not have been extreme as, say, Tancredo, and even though it was a bipartisan effort (was it? Can’t remember, though I seem to remember that being a big part of it), Latinos where I live reacted veeery harshly to McCain. They accused him of being racist. They were pretty shocked when they found out I supported him for Pres. It doesn’t matter that their fear and accusations weren’t well-founded…that’s their perception of him, and my point is perhaps that’s why they flocked to Barry O.
Rich Bordner (fab40f) — 11/15/2008 @ 2:13 pmComment by Rich Bordner — 11/15/2008 @ 2:13 pm
A community that has such a large following for a myth such as the “chupacabra” seems to be susceptible to lies and distortions.
And, I denounce myself!
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 2:17 pmI think McCain lost Hispanics due to the rhetoric that came out of people like Michelle Malkin.
Most of my friends have no idea who she is, and I’d guess that the average Hispanic 1st generation immigrant has no idea as well. You’re living in a very small bubble if you honestly believe that canard. Besides, when has any GOP candidate for the WH received more than 30% of the total Hispanic vote?
Dmac (e30284) — 11/15/2008 @ 2:43 pmIn many of the states you have to look at the breakdown of the Hispanic vote and you will see that the youth Hispanic vote in many states ran exactly the opposite of older Hispanic voters.
daytrader (ea6549) — 11/15/2008 @ 4:07 pmI think McCain lost Hispanics due to the rhetoric that came out of people like Michelle Malkin.
McCain did not “lose” Hispanics because he never had them to begin with. He got about the normal Republican share of their vote.
And Republicans normally get about one third of the Hispanic vote because they are big government supporters and the GOP makes noises about being a small government party. (Even if those noises are all in jest.)
The GOP’s path to capturing the Hispanic vote is simple, straightforward, and expensive. Start off with universal healthcare and spend more from there.
Hispanics have a strong core subgroup of voters with very conservative values.
That’s a popular fiction on the open borders right. But it’s not true. Hispanics are fiscal liberals and they are no more socially conservative than the population at large.
Subotai (9ece8e) — 11/15/2008 @ 4:07 pmRegaining their trust needs to start now.
If I’m the GOP, I’d be a lot more worried about regaining the trust of the people who used to be die-hard Republicans and who are fed up with the party behaving like a more corrupt, incompetent, and liberal version of the Democrats.
On the other hand, it ain’t called The Stupid Party for nothing.
Subotai (9ece8e) — 11/15/2008 @ 4:13 pmAnother issue is distribution of the Hispanic vote.
Many of them are located in Deep Blue states and if you win by 1 vote or 1 million the electoral vote is still the same.
As the numbers finalize and are reported in the data mining will start in earnest but now all we have is preliminary data and part of that is projections from exit polls which mean less each year as more states enable early voting and larger percentages of the voter pool don’t participate in them.
Some of the exit polls are already showing variations from some of the state data which is being close to fully verified now.
daytrader (ea6549) — 11/15/2008 @ 4:18 pmLatinos where I live reacted veeery harshly to McCain. They accused him of being racist. They were pretty shocked when they found out I supported him for Pres. It doesn’t matter that their fear and accusations weren’t well-founded…that’s their perception of him, and my point is perhaps that’s why they flocked to Barry O.
And the voting patterns of Latinos of Mexican background (or, for that matter, other central/south American societies), if they had never migrated northward and were still residing in their native country–where illegal immigration is not a big issue and people like Michelle Malkin are a non-entity–are different in what way?
Less liberal, less favorable to Mexico’s version of the US’s Democrat Party?
I don’t think so.
However, there is the irony that the government of Mexico, dominated for generations by politicians who are a lot closer on the philosophical spectrum to an Obama than a McCain, is quite quite tough when it comes to that nation’s own dealings with illegal immigration and immigrants.
Mark (411533) — 11/15/2008 @ 4:49 pmComment by Dmac — 11/15/2008 @ 2:43 pm
Perhaps in 2004 at 39%. The study is here
http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/papers/2004vote.pdf
Seems that 39% might be the ceiling based on data from the past.
Pew says McCain got about 31% so that is a significant drop.
[I found this in the filter. Sorry for the delay. — DRJ]
voiceofreason2 (dcd181) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:06 pmDMAC,
voiceofreason2 (dcd181) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:08 pmMy links keep getting tagged for some reason. According to a couple of studies Bush had 39-40% of the Hispanic vote versus McCain’s 31%.
Bush seemed to reach a ceiling compared to previous elections. Reagan got as high as 37%.
I think the assumption by some commentators here that a vote and hispanic and illegal are somehow intertwined or more importantly one and the same is one reason that Hispanics – may have crossed over to the side of those who don’t denigrate them.
In Faulty Towers they call this the “Bloody Obvious” game
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:33 pmYes, and every non-citizen who votes reduces the value of the votes of actual citizens, and re-inforces the cynicism towards voting that is so widespread throughout America today.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:40 pmAD, Eric was trying to claim that people are calling all Hispanics illegal aliens.
Another silly strawman.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:41 pmAnother Drew
Yes and every hyperbolic assumption without facts makes it okay to broadly brush stroke hard working Americans who just happen to be a little different from some other Americans
Yes I agree lets stoke up the 20’s ad 30’s all over again for the sake of electing a guy who wasnt really even a republican.
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:43 pmComment by EricPWJohnson — 11/15/2008 @ 5:43 pm
“…every hyperbolic assumption without facts…”
Is this just a general criticism, or do you have something in particular that you want to stick me with?
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 5:50 pmOn a little side note. Tomorrow, 16th November is my birthday. Thank you in advance for all your well wishes. Glad to know you all.
love2008 (e3fbde) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:03 pmIt’s also bloody obvious that the MSM refuses to differentiate between legal and illegal and always moves very close to libel by stating a person talking about illegal immigration is against ALL imigration.
EricPWJohnson, it is really simple. Does a nation have the right to both control its own borders and set its own parameters for immigration?
Darleen (187edc) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:10 pmDarleen
Sure, or we could rephrase the question differently
does a country that has a history of open immigration, albeit founded on open immigration.
In fact the very essence and core of what makes it a unique and vibrant source of hope and freedom in the world – suddenly change the rules for one set of of racially homogenous subset of people…….
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:22 pmComment by EricPWJohnson — 11/15/2008 @ 6:22 pm
The “rules” were changed by the Congress of the United States in the period following the Civil War, so as to ascertain who was entering the United States.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:34 pmThere have been several modifications of those rules over the years. The last major substantial change was the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty in the late 80’s.
Those who were against amnesty at that time warned that the granting of amnesty would just encourage additional uncontrolled illegal immigration under the impression that the U.S. would be forced to do an amnesty provision again, for all the same reason.
The backers of Simpson-Mazzoli down-played those nay-sayers by affirming that substantial employment sanctions were in the bill, and that people who couldn’t get a job, wouldn’t come here.
Then, the Congress, never funded the enforcement of those employment restrictions.
And, we are where we are.
EricPWJohnson
That open immigration policy also included standards of health, sponsorship AND the country’s physical borders have always been protected.
My grandfather rode the Texas border with the US Army (on horseback) between WWI and WWII.
Also, there was no welfare state.
You want the old standard? Fine, stick the US army back on the border and absolutely no freebies to immigrants.
Darleen (187edc) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:36 pm“does a country that has a history of open immigration, albeit founded on open immigration.
In fact the very essence and core of what makes it a unique and vibrant source of hope and freedom in the world – suddenly change the rules for one set of of racially homogenous subset of people ”
I’m sorry: how did we change the rules? By not choosing to ignore them for a particular subset of people?
Patterico (df4eaf) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:39 pmDarleen
There are only two countries in the world that have a secure border (not counting the United States)
The salient point is that I wonder why Mexicans are voting for Democrats
The obvious answer is present in the tone and insinuations in this thread.
Lok I got a presentation to work on so – thanks for the discussion – have a good day – got to go
BTW – I’m talking about the reasons why they vote for the other side – I’ for deportation of criminals – I’m for a fence – I’ for strict measures against all criminals – I’m for alot of things – except deluding myself as to why some sections of America could get offended by rhectoric….
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:45 pmGOP RIP. Thank you demographically unaware Bush and McCain.
Terry Gain (26e16a) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:47 pmPew says McCain got about 31% so that is a significant drop.
It’s the historical norm for Republican Presidential candidates, or maybe a bit higher.
Subotai (c4af51) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:48 pmI’ve updated the post with a Karl Rove link that addresses the Hispanic vote.
DRJ (a50047) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:50 pmThe salient point is that I wonder why Mexicans are voting for Democrats
The obvious answer is present in the tone and insinuations in this thread.
In order for that to be true, we’d have to believe two things.
The first is that Hispanics as a group read this thread.
The second is that Hispanics as a group have precognition, and have known for generations what we would one day write in this thread. Because they have always been Democratic voters.
Subotai (c4af51) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:51 pmthe very essence and core of what makes it a unique and vibrant source of hope and freedom in the world
the very essence and core of what made America unique was that it was a country of law and order, and a country of freedom. The freedom part is tightly entwined with the law and order part.
People like you want to make America more like the rest of the world. More corrupt, more unfree. More like Latin America.
Subotai (c4af51) — 11/15/2008 @ 6:55 pmKarl Rove thinks Hispanic voters are essential to the GOP’s future success
Is that news? He’s been waging war on the Republican party to try to pass amnesty for several years.
Republicans must find a way to support secure borders, a guest-worker program and comprehensive immigration reform that strengthens citizenship, grows our economy and keeps America a welcoming nation.
None of that garbage has the slightest chance of securing the Hispanic vote, and anyone who listens to Mr Permanent Republican Majority is begging for trouble.
We had “comprehensive immigration reform” in 1986, including amnesty. The GOP’s share of the Hispanic vote dropped in the aftermath.
It occurs to me that if the GOP did not work so frantically to populate America with Hispanics, it would not need to turn itself inside out trying to pander to them. This is not something that is just happened and is happening. It’s something that Bush and Rove made happen.
Seeking Roves advice on what to do now is like asking Howard Deans for tips on a Republican recovery.
Subotai (c4af51) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:04 pmSubotai
I am busy but I’m curious
Please point out any law that built a work ethic into America
Also most of those voting Democratic are of the 50,000 or less income earners – wouldn’t that be a significant subset of the minority vote? – and if it was, that would mean that Hispanics making under 50,000 a year cross over to vote Republican in greater ratio’s than African Americans?
Also corrupt and crime laden – here are the latest statistics of world crime
International Crime Statistics
Crime happens all over the world. But where do certain crimes happen more often? Here are the latest statistics from Nationmaster (per capita refers to amount of victims per 1000 people):
Total Crimes:
1. United States – 23,677,800
2. Germany – 6,264,723
3. United Kingdom – 5,170,831
4. France – 3,771,849
5. South Africa – 3,422,743
Burglaries per capita:
1. Australia – 21.93
2. Dominica – 18.72
3. Denmark – 18.39
4. Estonia – 17.34
5. Finland – 16.79
Car Thefts per capita:
1. Australia – 6.98
2. Denmark – 5.94
3. New Zealand – 5.50
4. Norway – 5.10
5. France – 4.99
Assaults per capita:
1. Montserrat – 10.38
2. Mauritius – 8.83
3. New Zealand – 7.55
4. Canada – 7.18
5. Australia – 7.08
!
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:23 pmIf we can’t secure the border, is this what our future looks like.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:27 pmComment by EricPWJohnson — 11/15/2008 @ 7:23 pm
Please point out any law that built a work ethic into America
It didn’t take a law.
It was the Calvinist work ethic of the early settlers to build and sacrifice today,
to ensure a better future, and after-life.
I denounce myself for mixing state and religion in the same comment.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:32 pmCalvin told black slaves to work hard? Calvin is right now telling an indian family from Karela that running a hotel working 15 hours a day building an American Dream or somehow did they figure that out themselves?
Who is Calivn?
Heck I’m a Lutheran and my Grandfather came here illegally just like 90% of all Swedes – Calvin told them to build Minnesota, Chicago? Wisconsin? Michigan?
Where is this Calvin –
Please…..
Are you one of those who actually believe the story (emphasis story) of thanksgiving? Maybe Betsy Ross did sew the flag… George Washington neve told a lie and the indians were mean to Custer….
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:38 pmBack to work –
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:40 pmWho is John Calvin?
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:48 pmAre you one of those who actually believe the story (emphasis story) of thanksgiving? Maybe Betsy Ross did sew the flag… George Washington neve (sic) told a lie and the indians were mean to Custer….
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 11/15/2008 @ 7:38 pm
I could be all of those things; but, one thing I’m not, is someone with a Giant Sequoia log for a chip on his shoulder.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:50 pmIt is in how the message is framed. If the outreach to the heavily Hispanic communities carries a message of how the LEGAL citizens benefit from enforcement of the laws and reduction of the number of illegals protects their jobs in an increasingly poor economy it may work.
voiceofreason2 (dab6db) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:09 pmGood point.
DRJ (a50047) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:35 pmImmigration laws are a phenomenon are Italian coming in the early 1900s. Up until then it was open border to anyone so …
Eric, not illegal. Sorry one strike for you.
It is only after the Wilson administration I think that something was done to slow down immigration. The cities had gotten crowded and nasty and the Protestant Upper Class got a little upset.
Swedes, Germans, Irish and first wave Italians all got here with NO PAPERS (WOP) and where immediately welcomed to WORK.
Da'Shiznit (089453) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:40 pmThings change as conditions change.
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:44 pmNothing is forever.
Well, count me as one who likes immigration. We should be much more open to all parts of the world.
We should however focus on folks with existing families here and high end degrees — support system plus ability to find work.
The family-less and poorly educated should not be allowed in and should be sent back if unemployed.
We should require english only everywhere and no bilingual education for anyone’s kids.
Da'Shiznit (089453) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:51 pm_________________________________________
Crime happens all over the world.
And I would be thrilled and relieved to see all those people in America (particularly Hollywood celebrities) who’ve threatened in the past to leave this country–for mainly Canada or Europe only–if an election ended up not to their liking (ie, non-pro-leftwing, non-pro-Democrat Party) be required to pack up and move to the following nation. A nation, by the way, where large majorities of its populace often favor variations of lazy-liberal politics, or scroungy socialism, or government leaders along the lines of Barack Obama.
As to all those in the MSM throughout America who think and vote in a similar way–who also have a big soft spot in their heart for the disenfranchised, the downtrodden, the “undocumented”–who think that being nice to felons, or an anything-goes culture, is a sign of a person’s humanity and do-gooderism–they also should be required to pack up and move to locales such as:
Mark (411533) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:54 pm
All I can say is thanks for the 43 million new voters. Hopefully, we will make them happy, while people like Another Drew stand on street corners and ask for their papers. Keep on accusing them of being illegal and Mexican, rather than Mexican-American, Darleen. Prop 187 delivered 55 electoral votes. Here’s hoping your short-sighted opinions make it to the GOP mainstream and you can do for America what you did for California!
Interestingly, a demographic study I read posited that soon enough Democrats will be able to challenge Republicans in Texas, thanks to the short-sighted silliness of the GOP. Thanks of your guys help in electing Obama, please keep it up.
timb (8f04c0) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:55 pmMark
According to the FBI (but what do they know)
8.5 million prisoners last year in the world – total
1 out of 4 were in the USA
Oh well –
VOR2
Right – let start telling all Catholics that – There never was any legal immigration from Catholic countries (which is true according to some eggheads but there are volumes of ancedotals on both sides so who knows?)
And see how several generations of Catholics feel about Republicans
just sayin
Your pont was a good one but the rhectoric went too far and you know its like toothpaste and the tube thing
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 9:04 pmVOR2
I meant the rhectoric for months about illegal immigration not from you specifically
Sorry trying to do two things at once –
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 9:06 pmYou shouldn’t just post “me too” comments but Subotai is so right I can’t think of anything to say except “me too”.
David Blue (6e2e09) — 11/15/2008 @ 9:19 pm1 out of 4 were in the USA
And so if you had your way, this country — in terms of law enforcement and punishment — would be more similar to…
Mexican nongovernmental groups say that 99% of all crimes go unpunished.
…And so, therefore, we’d have no more than, say, 1 out of 30, or 1 out of 60, prisoners found throughout the world.
If my assumption is correct, I’d guess you’re one of those phony-baloney liberals who see themselves as so tolerant, so worldly, so open-minded, so humane, so loving and so caring, but who nonetheless avoids walking around or driving to certain parts of town, avoid moving to certain neighborhoods, resists the idea of taking a vacation to places like Mexico, and would die at the notion of moving to a country like that one compared with a nation like this — assuming that a combination of lazy liberalism, Euro-socialism and sloppy Third-Worldism doesn’t eventually make the US about as pathetic as a society like Mexico, etc.
Mark (411533) — 11/15/2008 @ 9:24 pmThe words Hannity, Malkin and others use filter out into the mainstream and are pinned on the GOP.
Rightly so too.
When a hispanic who has an illegal but otherwise honest and hardworking Tio Jorge hears rhetoric that turns sainted Tio Jorge into a “criminal” or “thief”, they get offended. It’s cultural.
Many Mexican-Americans have a Tio Jorge in the family tree
The conversation should start with respect.
Mexican’s in particular are all about respect and protocol demands it.
Give respect to the work and the struggle. Bring up gangster illegals and benefits cheaters gently and let the hispanics run with their thoughts and ideas. Trust me that they don’t like illegal gangsters or benefits cheats either.
DMac
SteveG (71dc6f) — 11/15/2008 @ 10:12 pmHablas en pendejadas.
I never said hispanics know who Michelle Malkin is. She is an example of a purveyor in the type of rhetoric I described as detrimental to the conversation. Even though you are a muleheaded dumbass, I know you understood who I was talking about and why… but then failed to transcend.
Maybe you were dropped on your head as a child…. which would explain the slow wittedness but not the ill temper.
Well, if we’re Republicans looking at the election data and wondering how to win in the future, these are the options, from most to least plausible: a) figure out a way to take a larger share of the Hispanic vote; b) figure out a way to take 65% of the white vote in 2012, and an even larger percentage in the elections that follow; c) hope that blacks suddenly see the light; d) hope that blacks and Hispanics both become discouraged for some reason and start voting in smaller numbers, while the white vote holds constant; or e) hope that we can overcome the legal and political obstacles to imposition of a heavy poll tax.
Failing any of that, we have one other option: resign ourselves to the minority.
Paul S. (3a4d3f) — 11/15/2008 @ 10:31 pmMark
As with the rest of your post and most assumptions in general…..
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 10:57 pmMark
you also should be careful of non governmental groups that say 99% of crime goes unreported that would equate Mexico’s potential prison population to exceed 15 million or more than twice the number world wide.
Thats a really big number
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/15/2008 @ 11:00 pmIt would help if we were actually realistic on the subject of illegal immigration. We don’t like to admit it, even to ourselves, but we have illegal immigration because we want illegal immigration.
That’s the only explanation. We continue to hire illegal immigrants, we continue to buy products from companies we know damned well use illegal immigrant labor, we do absolutely nothing that would crimp our own lifestyles by avoiding buying things we know were made with illegal immigrant labor — usually telling ourselves that, well, we don’t really know that illegals were used — and the only thing we do is combitch about illegals.
I will be impressed with arguments against illegal immigration when the people arguing against it demonstrate some will in not subsidizing it, every single day, with their own economic choices.
The Dana in Pennsylvania (556f76) — 11/16/2008 @ 12:33 am56
Yep – Texas and California have the Largest economies in the United States add in the large Hispanic populations in Chicago and New York (porportional to be sure)
Happenstance?
There are valid arguments either way but this constant meandering in self destructive borderline rhectoric (not you Dana) is fueled with the emotions of a very dissapointing election.
I understand deeply how many of you feel and to a greater extent than some of you realize I appreciate the source of some of your sentiments.
Being over here in Qatar seeing the young men and women on leave from the battle zones – they are all of us – to the arabs they are us.
We live as we say – in the land of the free and home of the brave
Bravery is facing new challenges – convincing people – winning their support.
Free – if we are afraid of our elections – convince ourselves that regulation and restriction are the only winning strategy we have – well how really free are we?
Anyway got to get back to it – thanks for listening
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 3:15 amThe obvious solution is to annex Mexico.
Techie (62bc5d) — 11/16/2008 @ 8:37 amComment by timb — 11/15/2008 @ 8:55 pm
Thank you, for your ad hominum attack.
Another Drew (91c7e4) — 11/16/2008 @ 9:07 amMay the force be with you.
Timmah guilty of an ad hominem attack?
What were the odds?
Icy Truth (aedb2f) — 11/16/2008 @ 10:33 amEven though you are a muleheaded dumbass, I know you understood who I was talking about and why… but then failed to transcend.
Gosh, another witty rejoinder from a person who’s a self – professed member of the tolerant class. Nice to see how easy it is to get under that thin skin of yours, sweetheart.
Dmac (e30284) — 11/16/2008 @ 10:59 amyou also should be careful of non governmental groups that say 99% of crime goes unreported
And you’re implying that Mexico actually isn’t such a swamp, full of crime–particularly mind-boggling types of crime (eg, cut-off heads, gunned-down cops, assassinated reporters)–that is reminiscent of the darkest parts of Iraq or the Middle East in general?
Moreover, the value of economic energy or synergy (referring to the role of illegal immigrants in greasing the gears of the economy) in the long run starts to lose its punch when the society attached to it ends up a forever-dysfunctional place. For instance, when was the last time a country like Mexico was not notorious for its high levels of slums, poverty, low academic standing, corruption, crime?
So if more of that becomes more a part of America, we can all be content and happy? Yep, because it’s not like the US doesn’t already have more than its fair share of the underclass — certainly by First-World standards — more than its fair share of crime-plagued urban dumping grounds!
Mark (411533) — 11/16/2008 @ 12:18 pmEricPWJohnson
More people means a larger economy. As Mark Krikorian of the CIS has said a million times, if you took the entire population of Bangladesh and plopped them down in the US, doing exactly what they were doing in Bangladesh, you would get a huge increase in the overall economy. It wouldn’t, however, increase our quality of life.
Oh, and it has to be said again and again and again for people like Timmah , Pete Wilson won. Pete Wilson Won. PETE WILSON WON!!!
Mitchell Young (f72ef9) — 11/16/2008 @ 2:53 pmI’ve updated the post with a quote from the President of the National Council on La Raza.
DRJ (a50047) — 11/16/2008 @ 4:44 pm“…responsible immigration reform…”
Sounds like total amnesty and/or instant citizenship to me!
Another Drew (e3760b) — 11/16/2008 @ 5:01 pmMexican’s in particular are all about respect and protocol demands it.
They can start by respecting our laws and our country. Respect is a too way street and must be earned. All they are earning so far is our dislike.
Subotai (5a5c55) — 11/16/2008 @ 5:33 pmI am busy but I’m curious
Why do you constantly keep telling everyone how busy you are? It seems to be a regular feature of your regular commenting. It looks like you are not so busy that you can’t spare the time to type those words. Do you imagine that everyone else here spends all day sitting around in their pajamas?
Please point out any law that built a work ethic into America
I’d say “don’t be obtuse” but you probably can’t help it. If you look really closely, you’ll see that I never said “Americas work ethic was made by passing a law”. You have plenty of time on your hands for constructing straw men, at least.
Also most of those voting Democratic are of the 50,000 or less income earners – wouldn’t that be a significant subset of the minority vote? – and if it was, that would mean that Hispanics making under 50,000 a year cross over to vote Republican in greater ratio’s than African Americans?
Given that blacks under 50,000 per year vote Democratic by a margin of 95% to 5%, that’s not saying much. The more important question is “which party do Hispanics vote for”, not “are they as monolithic as blacks”.
Any further silly questions?
You did not think to ask, but the likelyhood that Hispanics will ever pass 50k/yr in 2008 dollars, as a group, is very remote.
But since you’re a Democrat, you don’t care about this stuff. What you are supposed to care about are things like the poor, the earnings gap between them and the rich, and the environment. Large scale Hispanic immigration drives down the wages of the existing working poor, widens the gap between them and the rich, and is devastating for the environment.
How do the Democrats on the thread justify that?
Subotai (5a5c55) — 11/16/2008 @ 5:53 pmIt is in how the message is framed. If the outreach to the heavily Hispanic communities carries a message of how the LEGAL citizens benefit from enforcement of the laws and reduction of the number of illegals protects their jobs in an increasingly poor economy it may work.
I don’t like sounding like a broken record, but HISPANICS CITIZENS DON’T MUCH CARE ABOUT AMNESTY.
Why should they? There’s nothing in it for them.
Subotai (5a5c55) — 11/16/2008 @ 5:59 pmMark
Its just a simple fact that despite being much poorer and less educated than the United States – Mexico has a significantly lower crime rate
USDOJ also has some studies (granted they are somewhat dated) that shows economic circumstances is a leading factor in the propensity of an individual to committ crimes as high as 8/9
Adusting the US crimes to its 150,000,000 who are below 50,000. Would give us an even higher crime rate
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:00 pmHere are the numbers of legal immigrants to the US in 2005, broken down by country
Country Total Percent
Mexico 161,445 14.4
India 84,681 7.5
China, People’s Republic 69,967 6.2
Philippines 60,748 5.4
Cuba 36,261 3.2
Vietnam 32,784 2.9
Dominican Republic 27,504 2.5
Korea 26,562 2.4
Colombia 25,571 2.3
Ukraine 22,761 2.0
Canada 21,878 1.9
El Salvador 21,359 1.9
United Kingdom 19,800 1.8
Jamaica 18,346 1.6
Russia 18,083 1.6
Guatemala 16,825 1.5
Brazil 16,664 1.5
Peru 15,676 1.4
Poland 15,352 1.4
Pakistan 14,926 1.3
Other countries 395,180 35.2
Note that Mexico already represents more immigrants than any two other countries combined. It’s hard to argue that the US is closing its border to Mexican immigrants.
Steverino (db5760) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:13 pmMitchell Young
Washington DC. Delaware, Conn and Mass are the top four by capita and have a combined population of ten million and account for 730 billion but of which 25% or more are governmental expenditures
So they have a private sector GDP < 500 billion for a population 1/8th of Texas and California
California, Texas and New York are the top three by volume ( 4 Trillion plus) and account for 40% of all GDP and more than ten % of the worlds GDP and together are the worlds second most powerful country when combined together with a population of 53 million
To make it easier to understand Texas California and NEw York make more than all our governments try to spend.
But of which less than 15% is governmental expenitures
Per Capita both California and Texas’ rankings are quite high for such large and basically “bangledeshie countries”
In fact Mitchell Bangledesh has a GDP of about 210 billion with a population reaching 160 million
Texas and California are about half of that and 20 times greater.
got to go
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:24 pmMexico has a significantly lower crime rate
LOL. And OMG.
Yep, EricJ, you’re obviously of the left — deluded and nonsensical about the fundamentals of reality.
Mark (411533) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:26 pmSorry the combined pop of California, Texas and New York is about 70 million still 1/2 of Bangledesh and about 20 times greater the GDP and GDP per capita
So much for the – “they are a drag on the economy” subhuman goebbellian theory number 26
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:28 pmMark
Yeah what does the FBI know anyway….
Bunch of rubes if you ask me
and the incarceration rate of white males under 25000 and all black males I mean how dare the United States Department of Justice even publish such driviel
I mean don’t they know – gee all those people actually in the field – they should be calling mark
He’s the guy who reeeally knows
Damn – would’ve saved a whole lot of time and money…
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:30 pmIts just a simple fact that despite being much poorer and less educated than the United States – Mexico has a significantly lower crime rate
It’s not a fact, simple or otherwise.
got to go
I know, you’re really busy. Until you come back five minutes later.
So much for the – “they are a drag on the economy” subhuman goebbellian theory number 26
I see you still have ample time on your hands for making those straw men.
Subotai (55ae94) — 11/16/2008 @ 7:57 pmCalifornia, Texas and New York are the top three by volume ( 4 Trillion plus) and account for 40% of all GDP and more than ten % of the worlds GDP and together are the worlds second most powerful country when combined together with a population of 53 million
Golly! You don’t say?
Does all this hot air have anything resembling a point?
Subotai (55ae94) — 11/16/2008 @ 8:01 pmMr. Johnson seems to have a great amount of data at his disposal. What he seems to lack is the ability to assemble that data into coherent arguments for whatever his point of view is.
Well, got to run, my washer isn’t.
Another Drew (e3760b) — 11/16/2008 @ 8:09 pmI still haven’t seen a persuasive argument for why the U.S. should not be able to determine its own immigration policy independent of the pressures of other nations, whether or not such nations share a contiguous land border with the U.S.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/16/2008 @ 8:49 pmThe only argument that could be made is that the sovereignty of the United States is not important as being a member of the world community.
Another Drew (e3760b) — 11/16/2008 @ 8:59 pm“…is not AS important…”
Another Drew (e3760b) — 11/16/2008 @ 9:00 pmDaleyRocks
I agree, I STRONGLY feel we should
BUILD A FENCE
ELIMNATE IMMIGRATION (NOT JUST ILLEGAL)
END ENTITLEMENTS FOR EVERYONE
AND FOR PETE”S SAKE DEPORT CRIMINALS!
What I am pointing out is that some (not you) are using illegal immigration as the cause and effect and using it to divide America’s strongest political party into factions with bitter rhectoric and totally incorrect facts and generalities.
What challenges do we have as a country?
Well overall crime to me is only 2nd to government spending and wealth transfer and to me crime is not an illegal immigration problem per se –
Immigration IMO is a mechanical fix – allocate the money – problem goes away without bashing hispanics, canadians and left handed serbs.
Just build the wall – without the Khurschevian drama thumping speeches from Poe, Dana, et al.
And at the way we are alienatng people with this over the top stuff – add to it the over the top DEMCCRAT spin to it – I’m wondering why we got any votes at all…
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 9:23 pm“There are only two countries in the world that have a secure border (not counting the United States)”
The issue is really potentially controlling immigration, which is related to but not guaranteed by a “secure border.” Illegal immigration takes place by sea and air as well as by land. It’s a nice straw man to raise to divert the discussion.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/16/2008 @ 9:31 pmEricPW – Spin from politicians is one thing. When the comprehensive immigration reform bill was defeated in the Summer of 2007, public opinion was 60%+ against it. That is a winning issue for the GOP. Pure spin lets it get away from us.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/16/2008 @ 9:45 pmDaleyrocks
this is what I hate about spin to us (you and me) and opinion polls
ask anyone on the street are you for illegal immigration I would be surprized if the number was even just 25%
but some polls asked a second question if you are against it – would you still be IF IT MEANT forced deportations of peaceful people?
overwhelmingly against – not even close
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/16/2008 @ 11:19 pmYeah what does the FBI know anyway….
Huh?? What?!
The FBI says that Mexico has a “significantly lower crime rate” than the US??! If so, that agency also must have reported that Mexico is a truly stable, prosperous, wonderful, happy society, in which high percentages of its young people perform so well academically that if they were citizens of the US, they’d be accepted to Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc, etc.
An alternative universe!
Mark (411533) — 11/16/2008 @ 11:32 pmMark
Yes that’s exactly what the FBI says
look you believe what you believe and if the FBI cannot convince you well there is nothing more to say..
No one made the statement that there was not any crime, in Mexico. No one said it was a low crime country – but the numbers show that the USA has the most crimes every year in the world and 1/4th of all the currently incarcerated people in the world are US citizens.
Its sad that we have soo much crime isn’t it Mark?
Its even sadder that a Democrat of Dubious reputation did make it the hallmark of his political platform and was reelected because he recognized that crime was a problem
Not a peep about crime in this last campaign – to me its second only to gonvernmental spending.
And now we have someone who wants MORE sympathy for criminals…
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/17/2008 @ 2:17 amAnother Drew
The incoherent argument I am making is the 4 major concentrations of hispnic populations historically – over time also happen to be in the largest most robust economies in the United States
I used data to back up my assertions – feel free to correct me at any time – but out of respect to your views I tried to bring in facts and figures so you could see where I am coming from.
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/17/2008 @ 2:29 am