J.D> Hayworth's(2006 immigration hardliner) election results from 2000-2006

CNN Election reults ^ | November 15, 2006

[Dane]

2000
Arizona-6
Hayworth 171,446 61%
Nelson 101,697 37%

2002
Arizona-5
Republican Hayworth 86,191 61%

Democratic Columbus 52,192 37%

Libertarian Severin 3,703 2%

2004
Arizona-5
Republican Hayworth 159,455 60%

Democratic Rogers 102,363 38%
Libertarian Kielsky 6,189 2%

2006
Arizona-5
Democratic Mitchell 73,762 51%

Republican Hayworth 67,830 46%
Libertarian Severin 4,754 3%

[Dane]

Huh from 2000 to 2004, J.D. Hayworth had at least 60% of the vote, but between 2004 and 2006, when Hayworth joined the immigration hardline bandwagon in 2004, he loses in 2006 in a conservative district.

[Rokke]

He was "being taught a lesson".

[TeenagedConservative]

I love how the MSM will play this as if immigration lost him the election.

Immigration was not a national issue in 2000 or 04. Plus, Hayworth was kicked out by the outraged base, not miffed middle voters.

[My2Cents]

I have yet to see any real evidence that a hard-line on immigration is a political winner.

[libbylu]

Excuse me for yelling.... THERE WAS MORE TO IT THAN AMNESTY/IMMIGRATION. WHY THE HECK DO YOU THINK ARIZONA PASSED 4 COUNT THEM 4!!!! ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAWS?????????
Nevermind, but don't ask me to drink your koolade.

[Riverman94610]

Also note that GOP turnout was way down and so was overall turnout comparing 2004 to 2006.
I think it was more of Hayworth getting swept up in the Dem tidal wave rather than just his anti-illegal platform since his Dem opponent was not much different on that issue than Hayworth.

[taxed2death]

Tancredo.

[Jeff Head]

I do not believe it was because of his immigration stand. His oppnent on this issue was also taking a realtively hard line. Why? Because in the state of Arizona they are passing popular ballot initiatives addressing the issue too...so I do not believe it was his stance on immigration that cost him the election.

But that's just my opinion from way up here in Idaho.

[John Lenin]

Do you trust these two?

[Holden Magroin]

Bush probably sent out an order to cut off support to anyone who deigned to oppose his plan to grant amnesty to 20 million illegals. Bush is hellbent on crippling his own party.

[Soul Seeker]

Not that it will ever penetrate your head, but the poster in #8 is correct.

J.D.'s opponent ran as a hard liner on illegal immigration and Arizona voters overwhelming approved amendments that took a hard line against illegal immigration.

Ergo, J.D.'s stance on illegal immigration was neutralized because his opponenet took the same position. So if you wish to prove enforcement is a loser, you'll have to take a look at the intiatives on the ballot. And given they went the border enforcement crowd's way, YOU seem to find yourself embarrassed in the conclusion amnesty is a peferred path by the American people.

[Dane]

I think it was more of Hayworth getting swept up in the Dem tidal wave rather than just his anti-illegal platform since his Dem opponent was not much different on that issue than Hayworth.

Really, his democrat opponent who's first vote in the 110th Congress will be for nancy pelosi was different from J.D Hayworth's immigration position.

[msnimje]

Where were the other 100,000 Republicans who voted for him in 2004?

Shame on them.

[McGavin999]

Actually Jeff, you're correct. I spoke to some of the people in his district that are very active. Most were furious about the accusations of the Abrahmoff money supposedly paid to JD.

[Dane]

Bush probably sent out an order to cut off support to anyone who deigned to oppose his plan to grant amnesty to 20 million illegals. Bush is hellbent on crippling his own party.

Really? Then when why did the Republican party pay for this ad for Hayworth?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W7ocPBqApc

[zbigreddogz]

Immigration was not a national issue in 2000 or 04.

If that's true, why are all the Tancredo folks out there shouting that it's because wern't harsh enough on immigration that we lost?

[Dane]

Ergo, J.D.'s stance on illegal immigration was neutralized because his opponenet took the same position. So if you wish to prove enforcement is a loser, you'll have to take a look at the intiatives on the ballot.

Really a person whose first vote in the 110th Congress(Mitchell) will be for nancy pelosi had a tougher line on immigration.

LOL!

[zbigreddogz]

He's won what, exactly, other then a safe house seat?

[catholicfreeper]

The current hardline position is not. I wished people would look at the Dems that rans against these guys and their immigration position. There seems some propaganda that keeps circulating that Haysworth opponent copied him on immigration. That not true

Haysworth opponent was very tough. Wnated big border security and really wants to fine Employers. He also talked about guest worker and pathway for those that paid a fine, learned English, were not violent felons, and held a job. This was different from Hayworth. People like programs that are tough but rational.

As to these amendsments many of them got vast Hispanic support. THe problem is that many of these hispanics voted for the Dem because ven though they are against illegal immigration they think the Tancredo approach is too hardline. We never listened to them. We ask for their votes on pro life issues etc but to listen to thme on this was called hispandering. I cant think of anything more insulting. Why would many hispanics would vote for a party where so many people in the party use the term hispandering. I am not saying we got no hispanic vote. But I think overall it was a turnoff. Last year was nasty and often the rethoric was over the top. We can expect some collateral damage from this

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

Maybe some vote count shenanigans going on here? Maybe they are sllllowly counting these ballots so that JD will just fade on out. This is just insane that the count is taking so long. No doubt, the 'Rats are using their system of math. One for you, two for me.