Replies

"the House decision — in which the Republican leadership averted defeat by a single vote — established that the White House no longer has the Re publican votes to push through its larger plans to amnesty 3 million illegal Mexican "guestworkers" as a favor to Mexico's President Fox."

Some people didn't believe me when I said the House GOP was ready to rebel against Karlos Rova's amnesty plan in August 2001.

But this article clearly shows the majority of elected Republicans know damn well that Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, will never vote GOP.

Fortunately it's not too late for the GOP to save itself by changing Legal hispanic immigration.

"The Texas primary confirmed these gloomy results for the GOP even before the results were tabulated. Hispanics were 12 percent of the Texas electorate in 1998, and are expected to be 20 percent — the "tipping point" at which their rise will make Texas a Democratic-leaning state — within six years.

Thanks Bush, you dork, now come remove this situation you have created in Texas with troops.

Pubbie, not only is this article really old, and many of the author's claims were proven wrong in the November 2000 elections, but it fails to consider the fact that conservatives can get more Hispanics to support us by stressing conservative issues. The one issue espoused by many (perhaps a majority) of conservatives that turns off most Hispanics is opposition to immigration and immigrant rights. While I oppose giving amnesty to illegal aliens, I think it is (i) bad economics and (ii) bad politics to demonize immigrants and try to stop all immigration into the U.S. Yes, I would crack down on illegal immigration, but I would also consider setting up a real guest-worker program---one in which Mexicans can legally come to America to work in jobs nobody wants, for much more money than they could possibly hope to get in Mexico, but with no right to claim legal residency (and thus eventual citizenship) in the U.S. However, the Tancredo policy of demonizing immigrants and blaming them for all of our ills is largely responsible for making Hispanics (especially Mexican Americans) register in large numbers with the Democrat Party. If we can get 40% of the Mexican-American vote, we can put New Mexico's electoral votes in our column, keep (or make) Texas, Arizona, Colorado and Nevada safely Republican, and make California very difficult for the RATs to carry. How can we get a larger share of the Hispanic vote? By stressing social conservatism and economic opportunity (as JohnnyZ so aptly put it) and not trying to hit immigrants over the head with a baseball bat. It's not so hard, really.

This nattering nimrod doesn't realize that Tx Gov Perry pulled 35% of the Hispanic vote against a Hispanic nominee. Jeb Bush got roughly 50% in his re-election bid in Florida. And Hispanics supported the Iraq war at greater numbers than whites. To abandon the Hispanic vote is to accept the GOP's role as the permanent minority party for a long, long while. Ignore morons like the author.

The problem with these types of analyses is that they are static. They assume what is true today will continue to be true tomorrow. This is almost surely not a valid assumption.

I tend to agree that the majority of Hispanics will vote for the RATS for the forseeable future. However, if Hispanics and Blacks truly begin to dominate the RAT party, look for fallout elsewhere. For example, liberal white women are likely to be less than thrilled with their agenda. They may move on to a more suitable home in the Green Party. Homosexuals may do the same.

Another possibility is that Republicans may well pick off some members of organized labor which tend to be conservative on social issues and may pick off a fair number of these new Hispanics as well.

As such, I can't buy into the doom and gloom about the impending death of conservatism and the Republican party just yet. These things almost never work out the way the so-called experts predict.