Saturday, May 06, 2006

Latinos Mad at GOP


As a wedge issue, immigration is a bust. Sure, you have your Minutemen and George Allens of the world, but over-all, the issue is a snoozer for most Americans.

But not for Latinos. According to Hispanic PR Wire, an affiliate of US Newswire, "[a] new national survey released today" shows Bush tanking with Latinos, much more than previously believed and reported.

Oh my, there goes that political mirage by Rove where Hispanics vote against their interests and elect GOPers to Congress forever more.

"These findings debunk the conventionally held notion that Bush enjoys better than average affection among Latino voters," said Celinda Lake, president of Lake Research Partners, who conducted the poll. "In fact, Bush's unpopularity among Latino voters has the potential to cause serious damage to Republicans as they head into the 2006 midterm elections."

The national poll found that Bush's positive job performance rating among Latino voters is a staggeringly low 23 percent. In contrast, 75 percent of Latino voters have a negative view of the job the president is doing.

Potential "mi fondillo." Expect Hispanics to overwhelmingly return to the Democratic Party in the fall; and yes that means Rove's wishful delusion of attracting 40 percent or more falls victim to the right-wing wackos he so assiduously courted to win past elections.

You just knew the coalition couldn't last long. Eventually self-interest would outweigh any lame wedge issue. The majority party is splitting apart into a million little pieces; the difference between 40 and 23 percent.

Comments:
So, why are they mad at Bush? He opposes sending illegals home, he wants a new work visa program for all the existing illegals, and to streamline citizenship -- at least that's what the conservatives say when they attack him.

He spoke well of the Senate bipartisan immigration bill which Harry Reid wanted to vote on without amendment.

So why are they mad at Bush over immigration? He even called the minutemen "vigilantes", and asked them to go home.

I can see being upset with republicans who are fighting for strict enforcement (although legal immigrants should appreciate not having to compete against illegals working for lower wages). But why Bush, whose position on immigration is almost indistinguishable from the democrats position?

Hey, he speaks less about defending the borders than Senator Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean.

BTW, I can't agree that americans are unaware of the immigration issue. That may have been true a couple of months ago, but since the demonstrations, every parent with a child in school is acutely aware of the issue.

It's showing up now on the list of top issues for November, with the war on terror and high gas prices.

A huge majority want the borders controlled, and a plurality would chose a candidate who would send illegals home over a candidate who would grant them a path to citizenship in place, by a 49% to 40% margin.

I'm somewhat in the "right-center" on the issue, probably about where Bush is -- I don't support the felony laws (which will be removed from any bill in conference), I support a guest worker program under tight controls, and wouldn't forbid current illegal immigrants from getting in the back of the line for citizenship.

But watching hundreds of thousands of people marching with signs telling me to go back to Europe, and calling for returning lands back to Mexico, makes it harder for me to defend my position.
 
Latinos don't like Bush's plan because they would forever remain second class citizens; and history has shown that creates a slew of problems.

Look up the history of Algerians in France; or Palestinians in Israel, to name a few.

But you're right, Bush's plan is far better than the Draconian House immigration version; and as much as I dislike Bush, I must admit he is no racist. Unlike George "Goober" Allen.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?