Posted on 02/26/2010 6:08:35 AM PST by jmaroneps37
You’re right, we shouldn’t try to attract socially conservative, pro-business voters to our party.
It is one thing to say that the GOP shouldn’t betray our principles in a pointless attempt to attract pro-amnesty Hispanics, but to say that we shouldn’t reach out to Hispanics, period, is not only stupid, but prejudiced (and thus something for Democrats, not Republicans, to do).
Hispanics voted around 45% for President Bush in 2004, and, of course, certain Hispanic groups (Cuban-Americans being most prominent, but also Venezuelans, Colombians, and Puerto Ricans born and raised in PR) voted for President Bush in much higher percentages. Painting all Hispanics with a broad brush is idiotic.
So the GOP share of the Hispanic vote dropped by 12% or so in 2008? That means that, like some members of other ethnic groups, many Hispanics were angry at Republicans and some were fooled by Obama. If you’re going to ignore (or alienate) every group most of whose members voted for Obama you’re going to leave the GOP with a small (and decreasing) electorate.
We should welcome conservatives irrespective of background. That doesn’t mean that we pander in betrayal of our principles, but it does mean that we don’t insult people.
Here is a plot of how Hispanics and other groups voted in two different elections in Houston some years ago. Data used to create the plot were published in the Houston Chronicle right after each of the two elections. As I remember, in some years the Chronicle tabulated votes by the groupings I used. Other times they just reported votes by areas of the city -- if you know the predominant racial and economic makeup of those areas, you can use the data to better understand voting behavior.
one can tell you missed the battles here over this 4 years ago...we asked the same thing
answer: political correctness...the incredibly naive notion that most immigrants who come here illegal or otherwise will be conservative because we are such a cool country..
and completely ignoring all the evidence to the contrary
Bush and Rove knew some conservative latinos and Jeb by God had married one so what the heck right?
lol
“Karl Rove is a legend in his own mind. Bush and Rove’s push for anmesty divided the GOP and helped the Dems brand it as a racist party.
We had the sorry spectacle of people like Karl Rove and Lindsey Graham castigating their fellow Republicans who opposed amnesty using such epithets as bigots, racists, and nativists. These criticisms just reinforce the Democrat branding of the GOP and alienate minorities who perceive that they are not welcome in the party. Moreover, being branded as a “racist” political party hurts the GOP in recruiting new members, regardless of race or ethnicity. America is not a racist country and no one wants to be associated with a racist organization. “
Yep! And Grover Norquist was the #1 man on immigration for Rove/Bush
CPAC’s Grover Norquist Joins Obama Push For Illegal Alien Amnesty
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2459446/posts
Sorry for being snotty.
Many of the FReepers who respond to me either don’t completely read my posts or they don’t understand them.
I generally agree with you. What is hard to overcome is the cultural bias toward getting the most possible from the largesse of a generally oppressive patrón. Socialism looks like a kindly patrón.
But in a sense, we have a golden opportunity to educate entrepreneurial hispanics in conservative principles. They are a select population, motivated to understand the benefits of enlightened self-interest.
On the other hand, those who come here “to do the work whites won’t do” are obviously low probability candidates for ever imbibing conservative principles, being here simply to draw out of the system what they can.
BTW, I have observed this dichotomy at work since 1993 in Chile, living there eight years and continuing with projects right now. Socialist principles tend to have the upper hand because they appear to be more “humane” that capitalism. But a conservative was just elected Prez. We’ll see.
“Sorry for being snotty.”
I didn’t take it like that. My post, as worded, could have been interpreted as “disagreeing” with you. No harm, no foul. :-)
I look forward to having many more discussion with you, my FRiend.
Have a great day!!
Do you have a link for that one? Thanks
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/02/25/americorps-nursing-a-culture-of-dependency/
http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/sad-tale-juan-diego-castro
When you say “Spanish” immigrant you have an uncomplicated matter
When you have an “Hispanic” immigrant you are opening up a huge grab bag. The less “indigenous” the Hispanic immigrant, the greater the chance he is conservative and his children will be conservative. The more “indigenous” the Hispanic immigrant the greater the chance he and she will latch onto welfare and other gimme programs without any shame and that you are importing millions of new affirmative action claimants
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.