Hispanic Vote 2008: SU VOTO ES SU VOZ!

The Immigration Debate was much larger than Immigration - it was not only deciding one of the most important issues of our time and how we need to address it - it was deciding the fate of an entire voting block of US Citizens that are Hispanic.

It is sad that Comprehensive Immigration Reform could not be passed in this new Millenium and those disappointed by that should show it at the voting booth in 2008!

Thank you Laura, this was very insightful

You're right Drea - you'd think by now the country could acknowledge the immigration issue for what it is - it is here to stay legal or otherwise and we have to do something about it. I'm just sad that we missed - or I should say - they - the Congress missed their chance for now. Whatever the short term gain for the majority of the Republican Party - I believe will be a long term loss for our country and this issue.

Thank you

Good point Jeff

I don't know if the Republicans have lost the Hispanic vote but I'm really more concerned that the party has been taken over by Domionist.

Laura,

Excellent article and you've provided me with statistics of which I was unaware. I don't necessarily think this is a net loss for the Republicans next year. I believe there is a lot of time left for spin doctoring and wooing by both parties. I think we'll just have to see how it plays out.

I'm surprised about the statistics for Hillary Clinton but I'm sure her campaign is savvy enough to maximize any gains she has garnered! I don't think, like Morris does, that she has the nomination tied up yet but she has a powerful campaign machine.

As a Hispanic, I was outraged at the Radical Right using racial slurs against ALL Latinos. The shock jocks were promoting racial hatred. "SHOOT MEXICANS", well I am a U S born citizen as my parents and their parents but I don't think any Timothy McVeighs out there would ask for proof of citizenship before blowing somebody away. If I promoted shooting whites, how long would I last? I especially did not like how "LA RAZA" was literaly translated to English to convey a wrong impression of arrogance. They were quick to use this quirk in translation to further their hate.
The question arises, who would the KLAN vote for.
You are only fooling yourself if you don't think the Republican Cheerleaders like Rush Limpaugh don't have a racist agenda.
Having your cheerleaders denigrate a race is not the way to win over their votes.

A friend is Hispanic and was a Right Wing Republican for years. He said he feels betrayed by the party and is tired of being wooed every time they want his vote. But he was ignored the rest of the time. He said it seemed they were embarassed to have his support.

You see, America is a land which all races and all peoples of the world have formed. Go Hispanics, and make our nation a better place for our children, so they have the opportunity of making the world into their dreams!

Good article!

Interesting question. I long for the day when votes can't be grouped into the "Hispanic vote," "African-American vote," "Blue state," or "Red state." The implication is that every Hispanic or White or Black or Republican or Democrat or whatever thinks the same, has the same impacts of life upon them, and votes lock-step with their groups' "assigned views."

Having said that, the Republicans likely got the Hispanic vote because Bush is from Texas (well, sort of anyway), speaks Spanish fluently, and because Karl Rove was a master at manipulating strong religious beliefs for political gain. The Democrats probably will get the Hispanic vote this time because the Republican patronization turned everyone off (who likes to feel used after all?) and because the Democrats appear more likely to push a "comprehensive" immigration policy (aka amnesty if you are a Lou Dobbs fan).

The Republicans during this administration have certainly embraced their implied politics of elitism (which leads to order and organization and absolute dedication to the party line), while the Democrats have always embraced the politics of inclusion (which leads to chaos and disorganizaton and internal disagreements on policy). Perhaps the Independents can figure out how to consider all viewpoints, yet still be able to make decisions and move things forward.

Keep in mind that the US is diversifying at an incredible rate. Whereas in the early stages most (willing) immigrants came from Europe, the current immigration trends include far greater numbers of non-Europeans (Central and South Americans, Asia/Pacific Rim, Africa, etc.). With greater diversification comes greater opportunity for new ideas, new cultural influences, and new demographic dynamics. This country was built on diversity, so it seems like we all better figure out how to get along with each other soon, eh.

David, you wrote: "Now try to point to one area, one neighborhood - JUST ONE - where current immigrants have made that place better, increased property values, added to the community."

Well, I'll do something better. The true Americans - in this case I will use the Navajo (Dineh) as an example - have an exquisite culture that has, unlike most European cultures, survived unbroken for millennia. I studied their culture very up-close for some years. Deep in the reservation where they hold on to their traditions, poverty is totally another thing than we think it to be. They are wealthy and rich in a way we would have a hard time understanding. Only at the boundary regions, like along I-40, do we see a conflict, where Western culture and the native American culture clash... where children go around selling trinkets... where there is a lot of social issues. But deep inside, along the buttes and in the valleys where they care for sheep, or as they say, the sheep herd us, and where they have these incredible nine-day long rituals to bring a child into responsible adulthood within their society... where they see the western lifestyle and have meshed it into their Creation Story, which is like our Bible, for moral codes of life, where whatever is taken from the earth, is put back in some form... all these things are only adulterated and made worse by the Euro-American immigrants around their nation.

We see a similar thing in Tijuana and other boundary communities between the US and Mexico....

The point is, cultural assimilation does not mean that a foreigner must leave his culture behind. It means that he shares his culture with where he now is, for what he or she brings to America is just as rich as what he or she may get from becoming American. America grows by learning from other cultures. Other cultures grow by learning from America. And America has countless subcultures that are very distinct. The current situation is not the fault of illegal immigration. it is the fault of a very unfair G-8 driven economic theory, which has its heyday from centuries ago in Europe, but which began to get really bad under Reagan.

Rich, I'm sorry to inform you that you are not living in the real world with these statements. It's not meant personally at you, just your words...

David,

You raise some great insight from your Hispanic friend – especially since they were a right wing Republican for years. It gives credibility to the argument of the Republicans loosing the Latino vote. This is an ethnic voting block that was wooed by both a Republican President and a Republican Party. But since the President is all but a lame duck – and it was the President that wanted comprehensive reform (who is not an incumbent) and the majority of the Republican was against the same comprehensive immigration reform – these hard feeling will be taken out on the party in its entirety – not just one figurehead or one member of its party. There are all so many already hotly contested races for Congress in 2008 – that this debate made their significance more prevalent. Some Hispanic Republicans that may have voted for a Republican before – will not be able to be counted on to vote for them again!

It's going to be a very interesting race in 2008 in many ways.

Thanks for commenting!

Laura

Bent,

Thank you for your multiple comments – especially the difference between leaving behind and sharing cultural differences which in many cases become similarities.

Thank you,

Laura

David K,

Thanks for coming back to the group and commenting – you have proven to be a staple of this group and it is much appreciated!

As usual you raise a great point – why all this segregation of voting blocks? Senator Obama had a great line in his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston. He said we are not a Blue America or a Red America we are the United States of America. That line gave me chills then and still does today when I hear it or even just rewrite it. What a great point – but a point that does not yet reflect reality. Even in his own campaign like all the rest of the others (and those still to enter the race) they look at an America divided by issues and needs and ethnicities and genders and economics and perceived values. It is their political strategy and their micro-targeting that will decide what campaign letter each voter will received based on what magazines they subscribe too in their everyday life.

So that's campaigning but I think the difference now is that a group that was thought to have settled in the red column is now at least purple or turning blue.

Thanks again for your comments!

Laura

Thanks for joining in the conversation Drea!

I like what you wrote about the fact that "those disappointed by that should show it at the voting booth in 2008!" They can and I think they will. You know we are hearing a lot about this debate in particular, we are hearing a lot on Iraq – approval ratings are falling and people are just unhappy. This week Senator Russ Feingold has suggested and will most likely put forth legislation to "censure" the President. He has not garnered much support if any and there is zero chance that a censure would be voted by Congress – even many Democrats think that is wasting time. But I'd be remiss if I hadn't thought about Americans being able to vote "no confidence" when ratings get this low as they can vote no confidence in Europe and exchange a current leader – but seriously – what would that do? We all already see approval ratings or lack there of and we all are able to vote no confidence when we go to vote and choose a different name then the one we have or the opposite party. I really agree with you Drea – it's about making your vote count and your voice heard in the voting booth.

Thanks again for joining in!

Laura

Bent :
I agree with Rich. Multiculturalism is not the healthy thing it is hyped up
(often by greedy employers seeking cheap labor), to be. Having received a degree
in Geography and taught that subject in college for 3 years, allow me to present a
definition of a NATION : A stable, historically developed community of people with a territory, economic life, distinctive culture, and language in common.
Although I speak fluent Spanish (my grandparents being from Central America),
I refuse to speak that language except in rare instances. The reason is I am an
American, and I resent the way our culture is being paved over with bilingualism &
other cultural accomodations which neither my grandparents from British Honduras
(now called Belize), or my mother fom Denmark got when they came to this country.
I support the words of ex-President Theodore Roosevelt who addressing a group of new immigrants in 1915, said : "The immigrant must become an American and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. We have room but for one flag, the American flag. We have room but for one language, and that is the English language, and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is
loyalty to the American people."
Some of our Senators ought to read this (Reid, Kennedy, Lott, Graham, Spector,
Feinstein, et al.)

The only racism is among those who, in defiance of the words of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, voluntarily seperate themselves from our distinct
culture, by imposing their foreign language and culture upon us, and refusing to accept our culture.

Robert, I won't flaunt my three degrees here. All I can talk about is my experiences in the nitty-gritty of several very very distinct cultures in my life, and in my analysis of experience and study, I find you are very mistaken.

Remember that history books have always been written by the victors in a clash between cultures. Yesterday, nation A was IT! Today, Nation A is shit. History books get rewritten all the time because of that. Every empire or nation that has attempted to enforce its take on culture on others has failed miserably. Only when all participate in the salad bowl of culture can a nation survive. The "US culture" is composed of many cultures, most of whom interact and mesh and grow very well, because as time goes on, we are all enriched by the variation, making and transforming the "US culture" ever stronger. Often, there are issues that crop up in this variation as it interacts with less resilient features in the larger culture, who generally are the ones whining over "immigrants." Historically, those who engender the greater devotion to their children and elders wind up surviving better. From what I have seen, if I can digress stereotypically for a moment, Hispanic and Middle Eastern families have great great devotion for their children and elders. Much of Western European and American culture has lost that, sending their children to strangers and their elders to wane forgotten in nursing homes.

In fact, variation is a principle element in evolution, including cultural. Cultural evolution is not distinct from biological evolution. They are part and parcel to survival. Once you begin toying with that variation, you have problems.

Denmark actually has a biological problem with inbreeding due to this...

Rich, I not once had the thought "racist" pop into my mind in reading your post. I just stated that you were mistaken in your writing. I definately would not assume you are racist, and I don't believe you are. I believe you just want the best for our nation. And you are making a fundamental scientific mistake in your logic.

There's a difference between imposing and sharing cultures - the sharing and RESPECT has made this country what it is today!

Stereotye - a fixed or conventional notion or conception, as of a person, group
or idea, held by a number of people. So why does this exist ? It is because the
stereotyped people make it exist, that's why. Generally, stereotypes are accurate.
They get that way by objective observation. Illegal aliens are perceived as
harmful to our society because they swipe jobs away, reduce wages and working
conditions, reduce tax bases, overconsume government services, overconsume
scarce natural resources (ex. oil & fresh water) in a badly overpopulated country,
overcrowd schools, hospitals, prisons, roads & highways, recreation facilities,etc.,
reintroduce longthought eradicated diseases (ex. TB and leprosy), and bring in a
longstanding disdain for the people and culture they are imposing upon.
Most Americans are oblivious to the scorn for America that is standard program
in Mexican, and now American, schools, stemming from the Aztlan theory and
"reconquista" "ideology.
If Illegal aliens, and others in our society who describr themselves as "Hispanic"
"Mexican-American", or some other hyphenated name wouldn't deliberately seperate themselves (often cheerfully), from the American culture, they'd have no
problen being accepted, if they are here legally.
I, as a Central American, by extraction only, haven't had a problem as I am fully
accepting and participating in our American culture.
As for "respect", there is nothing less respectful than demanding that a society
go against it's own laws (in this case immigration), which are some of the most
pro-working class laws we've ever had, to accomodate them (and their country who
is making a bundle of money from this ruse).

Sylvia, if you hate immorality and dishonesty so much, I am floored that you are a Republican in the way you state you are. But then, in the next moment, I will respect whatever experiences in your life has brought you to that place. I don't go after party ideology when I vote. I go only after the morality of my heart. A heart that very much loves God. And I say this as a scientist and author who absolutely respects the scientific method. It could be a Republican or Democrat. But as I travel more into the world, and see first-hand the incredible human suffering and disgustingly wanton destruction of families and family vgalues all over the world by the present course of Republicans since Reagan, I would go against my Christ to vote Republican right now.

PS, please, I don't want to entertain a religious debate. That was not my intent.

I am really amazed at the numbers you have shown and more amazed with the lower percentage that Gov. Richardson has with the hispanic population. This is very surprising to me. You really did a lot of research on this one and I throughly enjoyed this article. Please keep up the good work. (10+)

Bent :
When all (all ?) participate in the salad bowl of culture, that's when we no longer have a nation. A nation is a grouping of culturally homogeneous people.
It is cutural HOMOGENEITY, not heterogeneity. As Theodore Roosevelt said, "The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it become a tangle of squabbling nationalities".
A nation is defined by it's one culture, not a salad bowl of them. I am a nationalist. Obviously, you are the opposite - a multiculturalist. Just as how you
perceive me, as a multiculturalist , I find you are very mistaken.
One last point. Language is the most important aspect of a nation's cultural homogeneity - what makes it a NATION. Notice the names and languages of most
nations are synonomous (England/English, Sweden/Swedish, Russia/Russian,
Greece/Greek, Japan/Japanese, China/Chinese, Germany/German, etc.).

To Rude D

"As a Hispanic, I was outraged at the Radical Right using racial slurs against ALL Latinos. The shock jocks were promoting racial hatred. "SHOOT MEXICANS", "

Can you please given an example of some people on the "radical right" that used racial slurs against Latinos??? No of course you can't, because you just made it up because you're mad that every poor non-English speaking unskilled illegal immigrant wasn't given citizenship rights. Also, I like to see who exactly said "Shoot Mexicans". Frankly, I'm sick and tired of open-borders people like you trying to accuse those opposed to illegal immigration (which the majority of American CITIZENS are) as racists and bigots. I can give 10 reasons to stop illegal immigration, none of which have to do with race. So we can debate this issue using facts, data, and reason or we can resort to what this poster does which is try to smear people he or she disagrees with and play on emotion.

Also, the poster writes "Having your cheerleaders denigrate a race is not the way to win over their votes. "

Again, please cite one example (just one) of our "cheerleaders" who denigrated a race during the immigration debate. I heard a lot about illegal immigrants that come here and commit crimes, illegal immigrants that don't pay taxes, the fact that legal immigrants wait in line to follow confusing and burdensome rules and regulations while illegal immigrants don't and the fact that American workers are losing jobs to these illegal immigrants who are lowering wages in the process. You know what I didn't hear a lot about was race, except from fear-mongers like you who kept calling everyone that you disagreed with "Racist!" and "Bigot!".

Now to address the actual article..

First, 40% of Hispanics voting for George Bush is now conclusively regarded as the maximum end of the scale. The closer number is somewhere between 33-40% after more careful examination of the exit polls and polling data. Second, Hispanic votes to Republicans went down in 2006 by roughly the same % that other voting groups did. So this wasn't a mass exodus of just Hispanics to the Democratic party in 2006. It was an exodus of all voters. Think the Iraq War had something to do with that?? Maybe just a little. Fourth, its not quite accurate to compare 2004 results to 2006 results since one is a presidential election (2004) and the other is a non-presidential national election (2006).

Personally I believe that passing this immigration bill would have absolutely killed the Republican party for years to come. 12-40 million new "citizens" (really foreign nationals) the vast majorities of which are unskilled, and lowly educated would surely break for the Democrats, mainly due to their appetite for government social programs. Reagan gave several million Hispanics amnesty (yes, flat out amnesty with almost no waiting period) in 1986. Did we ever see a majority of Hispanics vote Republican?? No, of course not. The closest was 40% (which was really much closer to 35%) in 2004. So this naive idea that these illegal immigrants would somehow reward the Republican party for giving them amnesty (oh sorry, a "path to citizenship") is just loony. Finally, I don't buy the notion that all Hispanics support legalizing illegal immigrants and are therefore going to turn away from the Republicans. I've seen numerous letters in the Miami Herald and heard numerous callers on talk radio from LEGAL immigrants decrying this shamnesty bill and amnesty in general. I just Thank God that at least 40 senators came to their senses (and to the will of a large majority of the American people) and killed this bill for good.

Truth m :
Last night's Senate vote on the border security amendment providing another $3 Billion for 23,000 more border patrol agents, a doubling of detention space near the Mexican border for arrested illegal aliens, and 700 miles
more new fencing construction, shows that they are not intimidated by any vote,
Hispanic or any other.
Also, since a bulky amount of the tidal wave of calls and emails they got
against the Senate Amnesty bill, S.1639, were from Hispanics, this further pushes
them in the direction of enforcing immigration law. At this point , very few members
of Congress are still with Bush in his pro-illegal alien position. The vote in the
Senate was 89 - 4, a veto-proof majority.

Robert,

I know...I was actually shocked (pleasantly) when I heard that the bill had passed by such an overwhelming margin. Of course, the support of the American people for gaining control of the Southern border is roughly the same percentage (90%). The whole during the debate on the "shamnesty" bill I was wondering why measures like these couldn't be passed separately on their own and why they required legalization attached to them. In any case, the funniest part of the process was seeing Harry Reid admit that he was completely and totally wrong about Jon Cornyn's amendment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1fazL8wgao

I notice once again that when the issue of illegal immigration arise that the first word that is forgotten is "illegal." Most of us don't give a rat's fuzzy backside if the people living next door are Philippino or Mexican as long as they are here legally. I chose those two nationalities because they happen to represent my neighbors at the moment. My former son-in-law and his family, with whom I am still friendly are Puerto Rican. All here legally. You see, it's not the immigration people are up in arms about. It's the illegals.

I spent some time recently reading up on La Raza and some of the politics associated with them and the notion that our entire southwest is actually theirs and should be "retaken" by illegals. Sorry, but that's just plain an act of war.

La Raza ("the Race") - is really pushing their luck. I believe it was their foolish
influence that instigated those idiotic protest rallies the past May 1st, and the year
before. What could Janet Murguia and these groups' other leaders be thinking ?
Their dumb protests did nothing but wake up the American people and infuriate us all the more, leading to the decisive defeat of the equally idiotic amnesty bill.
As for "reconquista" being an act of war, of course. So is the $25 Billion/yr
Mexico is stealing from us in remittances, and the $35 Billion in human services payouts (us paying Mexico's poverty bill). We are being colonized by Mexico now
as bad as we were colonized by England before the American Revolution.
As long as Mexico remains unwavering in its attitude and actions toward us,
I cant see this going in any direction except full scale war against Mexico, as soon as Bush is out of office and the troops are out of Iraq.
Mexican leaders ought pick up a DVD of the movie Tora, Tora, Tora, and observe the the very end when the Japanese admiral looks across the Pacific, toward the US, and says "I'm afraid we have awoken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve". 4 years later that "terrible resolve" occured when they got
nuked.