Posted on 10/18/2003 12:29:25 PM PDT by JustPiper
If the 2004 election is another squeaker, President Bush could lose it because he failed to follow through on his promise to help undocumented Hispanic immigrants gain legal status.
Polls indicate that Latino voters regard immigration as a litmus test issue -- the way African Americans do civil rights, one expert said -- and Bush shows signs of losing once-promising support.
Meantime, Democratic presidential candidates and members of Congress -- with some assistance from Republicans -- are moving to seize the immigration issue that Bush so far has dropped.
Bush can recoup -- and some GOP strategists say he must -- by showing renewed interest (or even taking leadership) to help illegal immigrants get legal and secure U.S. borders at the same time.
Bush carried 35 percent of the Latino vote in 2000 after a vigorous outreach effort (and frequently speaking Spanish on the stump) -- nine percent more than GOP candidate Bob Dole got in 1996.
On Sept. 6, 2001, with Mexican President Vicente Fox by his side, Bush said ''there are many in our country who are undocumented and we want to make sure their work is legal.''
After Sept. 11, 2001, homeland security concerns put a freeze on Bush's plans, and then relations with Fox soured because Mexico opposed the Iraq war. Both immigration and U.S. policy toward Latin America get constant coverage on Spanish-language television.
So this August, a New York Times/CBS poll showed that only 21 percent of Latinos would vote for Bush. And a poll for the GOP Latino Coalition showed that a generic Democrat would beat Bush by 49 percent to 30 percent.
The latest bipartisan Battleground survey showed that, of all demographic groups, Latinos showed the largest ''dropoff rate'' -- a 15 point difference between Bush's personal approval rating of 61 percent and his job performance of 46 percent.
The falloff has also hurt the GOP. In 2000, GOP congressional candidates won 34 percent of the Latino vote, according to exit polls. In 2002, it was 35 percent. But in the August Latino Coalition poll, registered voters said they'd vote Democratic 55 percent to 25 percent.
All this is despite findings that 35 percent of Latinos defined themselves as ''conservative'' and only 22 percent as ''liberal'' -- and by a whopping 53 percent to 7 percent, they said that lowering taxes was a better way to grow the economy than raising taxes.
Conducted by the GOP firm of McLaughlin and Associates, the poll found that 86.7 percent of Latinos favored a policy allowing the federal government to ''normalize the status of illegal workers in this country'' provided they have a clean record.
Moreover, 90.8 percent polled said it was ''important'' -- and 74.8 percent, ''very important'' -- that U.S. immigration laws be reformed to ''reduce illegal immigration by promoting a system which increases the legal flow of workers into this country.''
The leading Democratic presidential candidates are all in favor of plans to legalize undocumented immigrants with clean records, increase the number of work permits and visas, and reach an agreement with Mexico to strengthen border security.
In Congress, several bills have been introduced -- or will be -- to liberalize immigration rules. The most generous is a forthcoming measure being worked out by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) allowing immigrants who have been in the country for five years, have paid taxes for three and have taken English instruction to get legal work permits.
While some Republicans are as progressive on immigration issues as most Democrats, the GOP has a significant nativist wing calling for the denial of public services to illegals.
GOP pollster Ed Geoas, who has done extensive polling on immigration, says he's convinced that Bush and White House political adviser Karl Rove are eager to take steps toward liberalization, but are waiting until homeland security and economic conditions are better.
Another key GOP strategist says, ''we have to revisit it. It's a big issue in battleground states like New Mexico and Florida.''
Bush had best not wait too long.
Without a doubt!
Except for the laws that he and Karl Rove think are politically inconvenient. Those don't count, you see. It's known as The Clinton Exception- obeying the law and honoring your oath of office is now optional.
I may do the same, for the first time in my long life. I cannot vote for George Bush again.
Latinos make up 13% of the population (half of whom are in this country illegally and CAN'T vote).
Non-Latinos make up 87% of the population and are against ILLEGALS.
If Bush was smart, he would worry less about the 13% and more about the 87%!
This is a biased question. (1) The people being asked probably have only a very vague idea of what "normalize" means; (2) Normal is good, everyone wants things normalized, don't they? We certainly don't want abnormal. (3) Provided they have a "clean record". Illegals by definition don't have a "clean record", they are illegal.
This is a push poll.
If they really wanted to know how people were thinking they would have asked: "Do you favor amnesty for those immigrants living here illegally? But they didn't want that answer, did they?
Am I missing something here? If the Dem contender gets only 55% of the Latino vote, he's toast.
Illinois primarily had ghost votes in Chicago wards, but illegal alien votes have always provided a nice boost to Democrats here as well.
Gore won NM by a razor-slim margin of about 400 votes. With those kinds of numbers, I have little doubt that Bush probably won the state by a fair amount if ONLY the legally cast votes had been counted. You will notice in previous 'close' elections where the outcome could have gone either way, the GOP took New Mexico:
NEW MEXICO - 2000
Gore/Lieberman Democrat 286,783 47.91%
Bush/Cheney Republican 286,417 47.85%
NEW MEXICO - 1988
Bush/Quayle Republican 270,341 51.86%
Dukakis/Bensten Democrat 244,497 46.90%
NEW MEXICO - 1976
Ford/Dole Republican 211,419 50.53%
Carter/Mondale Democrat 295,602 39.80%
NEW MEXICO - 1968
Nixon/Agnew Republican 169,692 51.84%
Humphrey/Muskie Democrat 130,081 39.74%
The once stauchly conservative Republican Arizona (remember, this was Goldwater country 20-30 years ago), has also been treading Democrat lately with the massive influx of illegal aliens it's been getting. It may be in play for 2004 if Bush is not careful. Certainly if he grants amnesty, it would be extremely difficult to stop the Democrats from carrying Arizona. Conservative Republicans would be disgruntled and show up in slim numbers, and Napolitano & Grijalva would have a MUCH easier time getting their "base" to show up and vote in mass numbers.
Ford/Dole Republican 211,419 50.53%
Carter/Mondale Democrat 295,602 39.80%
Ford took New Mexico in 1976. Something is wrong with these numbers.
Concerning 2000, I heard that the Republicans wanted to put all their efforts in keeping Florida figuring that New Mexico would not make a differance.
We've got a hell of a problem with trespassers into our own damn country!
Noboby will convince me Bush couldn't stop the flood if he wanted to. It's crap. Eisenhower did it more than fifty years ago. He started rounding the bastards up and shipping them out by the trainload. The word got out and millions left voluntarily. It takes a serious government and the United States government is only serious about everything in the world except an invasion of our own country.
Bush is giving the finger to citizens and legal aliens by allowing this flood to continue. He thinks these lawbreakers have a right to be here. That's globalism and a mockery of sovereignty and citizenship. He's not only morally wrong to allow foreigners to break our duly-passed laws, he's on the losing side of the political argument because so large a majority, including legal Hispanic residents, are furious about the flood of illegals.
I read about this recent flap about the wording of our Citizenship Oath. What good is an oath our own president doesn't respect? I personally know naturalized citizens who worked hard for the privilege of becoming a citizen. Does Bush care about them? HELL NO! He's allowing their hard work to be ridiculed by those who just waltz into our country and assume every privilege without any legal constraints.
The president is sworn to uphold the laws of this country. He isn't doing it with respect to illegals. Period.
Don't give me the Bush-bashing lecture. I worked my ass off to help elect the guy.
Progessive versus Nativist. More PC words by a liberal elite. I would say 75% of the LEGAL citizens of this country would say NO to amnesty if put to a vote. Maybe more.
Call me a nativist then.
Good article and thanks for the ping.
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.