Besides Hayworth, which House members who were enforcement first lost their seats to challengers proposing "comprehensive" legislation?
One of the panel members on Brit Hume listed off several last night. Mainly they were Republicans that desperately tried to salvage their losing race by talking up enforcement only positions.
All I heard out of Heyworth for the last year has been borderfenceborderfenceborderfence. One could make the case that being tough on border security does not make swing voters vote against someone. But for certian it demonstrates that talking up border enforcement isn't a winner.
Swing voters are the one's who decide the election, and they're obviously not motivated by tough talk. The base loves it, but the base that likes tough talk was going to vote for J.D. anyway. The Swing voters want border issues fixed (note the polls), but that doesn't mean they want simpleton toughness when the problem is obviously more complex.