1) The amendment to make English the oficial language passed overwhemingly, as did other intiatives having to do with preservation of the American culture and our border by the people of Arizona.
2) J.D.'s opponent ran as a border hawk.
3) When you can find a way to explain how intiatives favored by border hawks passed by more then merely a small margin, around 70%?, and explain away how a Democrat won with the same position as J.D. on the border, and somehow find a way to tie this all into a rejection of enforcing the border? I'll listen. But I don't think you can do it because logically your claim doesn't make a damn bit of sense when one looks at these pesky little details.
He supports a Guest Worker bill and a Path to Citizenship...some Hawk.
2) J.D.'s opponent supported a comprehensive solution. J.D. didn't.
3) As explained above, J.D. didn't have the same position as the Dem who won.
The bottom line is that someone who is rabid about "border fences first", and we'll consider other measures later, was going to vote for J.D. no matter what. But a moderate that understands that the issue is far more complicated will not vote for someone who apparently doesn't understand that, even though both support dealing with immigration issues.
J.D. and the house Republicans got their fence, but held their ears saying "LaLaLaLaLa" to anything more complex, and they lost. Get it?