GOP Rhetoric Hurting Party Among Latinos

[babylonsister]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/03/08/gop_rhetoric_hurting_party_among_latinos.html

March 08, 2012

GOP Rhetoric Hurting Party Among Latinos


GOP pollster Whit Ayres told the Christian Science Monitor the "tone" of the immigration debate has damaged the image of the Republican party among Latino voters.

Said Ayres: "It is pretty obvious that we can't continue to lose Latinos two to one as we did in 2008 and remain competitive as a national party. If we don't do better among Latinos, we are not going to be talking about how to get back Florida in the presidential race, we are going to be talking about how not to lose Texas."

A Fox News Latino poll released this week found that Latino voters favor Obama by six-to-one over any of his possible Republican presidential challengers.

[Firebrand Gary]

1. Susana Martinez will be the VP nominee, so they think they are going to be fine.

Thats obviously a prediction on my part, but thats exactly the way the GOP operates.

[baldguy]

2. If the GOP wants to be competitive among Latinos

They should stop promoting laws which treat them like plague-carrying vermin.

[otohara]

3. GOP loco en la cabeza

especially in Arizona

[yellowcanine]

4. Is it possible they could screw the pooch so badly on this that they lose Texas?

I am thinking depressed Repub turnout + pissed off Latino protest vote for Obama - is it possible?

[babylonsister]

5. I don't know, but why not? There are a lot of latinos in TX...wouldn't

that just be sumthin'!

[RZM]

11. That will take another 50 years of immigration n/t

[CreekDog]

25. Wrong again --stop making up numbers --Hispanics will be the largest group in Texas by 2020

and projected to be a majority by 2040 (28 years).

50 years from now is 2062.

[HopeHoops]

6. AAAAAAHHH!!!! MORE SCARY DARK-ish PEOPLE!

Well, except the Saudis. They're GOOD scary dark people or something like that. Oh wait - they have oil. Never mind.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. Latinos and Women are disgusted with Republican's views toward them.

Republicans hateful and exclusive rhetoric is catching up to them as a party. No real surprise there. It was bound to happen eventually.

[babylonsister]

9. You got it. Makes me wonder who rethugs are trying to woo. Odd, weird, funny, win for Dems! nt

[davidpdx]

8. Anyone who hasn't seen 9500 Liberty

should see it. The documentary follows what took place in a county in Virginia just prior to the 2008 election. It was filmed by a woman who is a Korean immigrant (which for me is meaningful since I am an American who immigrated to Korea). It is just unbelievable the hate shown in the film. Yet at the same time, I can believe it because I grew up in a small rural town in Oregon and saw it first hand.

[babylonsister]

10. Sadly, no one has seen that. Maybe post the video? This is how we

will get the truth out.

[davidpdx]

13. Unfortunately I can't even find it on Youtube

And even if I could I'm not sure I'd like it because someone got dinged the other day for posting a link to a site for downloading because it was against the TOS.

Video stores are going out of style and most people seem to be either using services like Netflix through the mail or paying for streaming online.

Being outside the US you can get away with a lot more, but at the same time we have to pay for VPN's to get network stuff like Hulu because it's blocked outside the US.

I wish I could offer a better answer, but the truth is I don't have one.

[tkmorris]

14. They have a Youtube channel

http://www.youtube.com/user/9500Liberty

[davidpdx]

15. I had forgot about the Youtube channel that was in the movie

the problem is the actual full length film is not available. They have lots of videos, but it is kind of piecemeal. To see the finished movie really makes you understand how the story behind the movie comes together.

[RZM]

12. Right now this matters very little

Latinos are a small portion of the electorate. Anti-immigration rhetoric will probably help the GOP in the short term, while the Latino share of the vote is relatively small.

[CreekDog]

16. RZM, wake up, it's no longer 1960. Latinos matter, stop saying they don't.

The GOP sowed their demise in CA in 1994, scapegoating Latinos. In California, by 1998, Republicans were losing most statewide races and have been just barely above 33% of the State Legislature. The Hispanic vote is large enough in the US to end the Republican party as it has in California in a matter of years --if not this fall.

New Mexico 43% of potential voters.
Texas 33% of potential voters.
California 27% of potential voters.
Arizona 21% of potential voters.


?w=400&h=833#038;h=833

[RZM]

17. The idea that Latinos will make or break the election is classic MSM hogwash

The narrative is way premature. Assuming current demographic trends continue, in 2056 that may be the case. But now, not so much. Just look at the deep south. Mississippi is 37 percent black. Black voters were 95 percent for Obama in 2008, yet Mississippi is solid red. Why? Because the Republicans dominate the white vote.

Latinos don't exist in a vacuum. They do vote Democratic because many are turned off by some Republican policies and candidates. But those same policies can reap dividends among white voters. Arizona's recent immigration law is a good example. It was a winner nationally, with over 50 percent support. It's support in Arizona was about 65 percent. That's 65 percent of all Arizonans, including the 21 percent who are Latino, meaning it's support among whites was almost certainly higher, probably in the 70s.

This is why I said all of this could actually benefit the GOP in the short term. In the long term, you're right - they will eventually be swamped. But while the Latino share of the population is still relatively small, tough stances on immigration can improve GOP standing among whites, which is where elections are 'really' won and lost, since whites are still a majority of the electorate. A few points either direction in the white vote can change outcomes. Among the Latino vote, not so much.

Among the states you cited, I don't think 2012 will be any different than 2008. Obama might make a play for Arizona (I'm skeptical though - he probably won't end up spending that much money or time there). It will stay red, as will Texas. California and New Mexico will stay blue. But Republicans don't need either one to win.

[Obamacare]

18. Rethugs need FL, to win.

You are out of touch if you don't Latinos play a part in swaying the general election. Minorities, heavily helped Obama to win VA, NC, NM and FL. White liberals aren't enough to help win you an election. Latinos, helped GWB win FL in 2004. If John Kerry would've campaigned hard for the Latino vote, like GWB did, he would've won FL, NV and NM and therefore won the election. In states like FL,NV and NM winning the Latino vote is crucial to winning those states.

[RZM]

22. Every vote counts, of course

I'm not trying to say they don't matter at all. I just think people are putting way too much stock in the Latino vote right now. The narrative that they hold the keys to the election is way premature.

But you're right. In swing states, every voter is crucial, no matter who they are. But I'm not so sure that a different campaign could have given Kerry the win. The more time you spend courting one group of voters, the less time you spend courting anybody and everybody else. And sometimes that kind of thing can backfire too. It's dangerous to spend too much time courting a minority group because a backlash against that in the white vote can make the whole enterprise a net loss. Maybe Kerry could have done a bit better among Hispanics. But would that have cost him white votes? I don't know, but it's possible.

This year, I think the Republicans will take back NC and Obama will keep NM. Florida and Virigina are tossups. The Republicans need both to be in the game. Obama can win without them.

[CreekDog]

20. You just said 21% of AZ is Hispanic --it's actually 30%

i recommend "reading" and doing "research" before "posting".

Whites don't have to be merely a majority of the electorate to make Republicans win. With nonwhite voters giving margins, huge margins among the largest groups, to Democrats, when white voters are just a bare majority of the vote, Republicans lose.

i'm surprised you're saying these things without actually understanding them.

[RZM]

21. Condescension won't win the argument for you

I can run circles around you on this shit. Keep baiting me and you'll see.

21 percent of eligible voters, 30 percent of the population . . . whatever. Actually, that error bolsters my case, because the larger the Hispanic share of the population there, the more significant the 65 percent approval of the immigration law is.

The idea that Latinos can 'end' the Republican party this year is ludicrous. When Republicans win Texas and Arizona this fall, I'll expect to hear an admission that you were wrong. But we both know you'll still have the same story. I'm surprised you can't see this narrative for what it is . . . laziness on the part of the MSM.

[CreekDog]

23. You aren't even trying --you're trying to win arguments w/o any effort

that's why you are losing.

and i won't win this argument with condescension, i'll win it because i've taken the time to look at the numbers and you decided to just pull something out of your head.

[CreekDog]

24. you're arguing that Hispanics in Arizona are more Republican

which is wrong and your basis is statistics from me that you don't even understand (because you haven't bothered to read them) and extrapolation of a poll which you haven't even quoted that you are suggesting shows that Hispanics aren't going to vote all that Democratic.

that you expect to win this argument with wrong facts says that you are the one condescending to all of us.

[RZM]

26. You're completely missing my point. I don't think thing Arizona Hispanics are 'more Republican'

I never said that. I said Arizona will go Republican in 2012 and that the immigration law polled at 65 percent in the state.

Here's the poll. It is from 2010. I don't think anybody has bothered to ask about it more recently.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-07-28/news/27071095_1_immigration-law-immigration-status-arrests-of-illegal-immigrants

CBS also did a poll around the same time, which is mentioned in that article.

What the poll shows is that whites in Arizona support a tough stance on immigration. That's something a Republican can capitalize on. Mitt's advisers know this - it's no coincidence he's taken a pretty tough line on that issue. Personally, I doubt he means it or even cares one way or another (this is Mitt, after all), but he's certainly not above trying to benefit from it.

Obama, on the other hand, really can't do much with the white vote on immigration. He's already doubled down against the Arizona law. He'll carry the Hispanic vote in Arizona handily, but that can't get him over the finish line. According to this data, he would need close to 47 percent of the white vote to win the state. In 2008 he got 40. I don't see him gaining seven points. Do you?

http://www.nationaljournal.com/where-obama-s-white-vote-matters-less-in-2012-20110331

[CreekDog]

29. you mean that the Justice Dept. fighting SB1070 is purely political?

are you so amoral that you only see it as a political and not constitutional issue?

you keep blathering on and on at every opportunity at how popular it is.

[RZM]

30. All I did was cite the poll. That's not blathering

I'm sure advisers examined the justice department suit against Arizona from every angle possible before it went forward. I'd guess their reasoning is a combination of several factors. It probably wasn't a purely political act. But . . .

At the end of the day, constitutional issues ARE politics. Different people have different ideas about what the document does and doesn't allow or provide for. It's not the first time the federal government has disagreed with a state about what that state can and can't do.

[CreekDog]

31. do you oppose Arizona's SB 1070?

you say quite a lot about it, not just here, but you've been talking about it endlessly for months.

yet, we don't know what you think of it, and that's a bit odd, come to think of it.

[RZM]

32. 'Endlessly,' huh?

LOL. You sure are angry about something. I'm a little surprised to see that you are trying to act like you follow my posts closely. But I suspect you're bluffing. If you did follow me closely, you probably would have picked up on the fact that I don't really have positions on a lot of these issues. I view most of this stuff as entertainment. There are a few things I feel pretty strongly about, but SB1070 isn't really one of them.

Even if I did feel strongly about it, I certainly wouldn't tell you. It's laughable that you think you have the right to play the role of inquisitor here. You're not an ideological enforcer. You're just a random poster. I don't get why you are taking this so personally. I think the narrative that Latinos will decide the 2012 election is just plain wrong. I made my case and SB1070's poll numbers were part of that case. Why does that rankle you? Why do you even care?

[CreekDog]

33. Didn't realize you had no position on SB 1070

[RZM]

34. I answered your question. Why won't you answer mine?

Why are you getting personal here? Why does it bother you that I have a different take on the significance of the Latino vote?

[CreekDog]

35. answers:

1) i think it's odd to comment so much about SB 1070 and not state an opinion on it, especially when it's unconstitutional and nearly universally opposed by progressives and liberals. do you really not have an opinion or do you hesitate to post one because of what that opinion is?

2) the issue with the Latino vote, yes, we can can disagree, i have no problem with simple disagreement. i have a problem with dismissing their vote out of hand, based on no information. i also found it grating that you claimed i was trying to win an argument on bluster when in fact, i posted numbers and arguments and links.

meanwhile, you were sloppily misquoting statistics, saying 21% or 30% of voters or votes was "whatever" as if it weren't any different. in fact, you were the one trying to win the argument on bluster and that's what you were calling me out as doing.

[Robbins]

27. Well

The republicans will win Texas.Noone thinks Obama will Texas.

Hispanics helped Bill Clinton carry Arizona In 1996.Hispanics are reason Obama will make play for Arizona.

Nevada,New Mexico,Colorado.Hispanics are a large reason for Democrats strength there.even In 2010 harry Reid beat teabagger
In Nevada.Democrats won the Governor's mansion and keep a senate seat there because of Hispanics.

Even RAs has Obama doing very well In New Mexico.

In 2008 Obama won hispanic vote In Florida except for older Cubans.He can repeat It this year.

If Hispanics start voting for democrats like Blacks Republicans are screwed.

If Kerry won Hispanics like Gore did he would have won Nevada and New Mexico and come closer In florida and colorado(Gore lost Colorado by 15.Kerry lost It by 7.If Kerry would have gotten the hispanic vote Gore did It would have been even closer)

Some of the Hispanic Mccain voters are disterting Republicans for Obama.

[Shannon1981]

28. Would be extraordinarily foolish

for Latinos to vote GOP. All of the candidates right now HATE them.