Posted on 02/24/2009 9:19:12 PM PST by nickcarraway
The election of 2008 proved catastrophic for opponents of comprehensive immigration reform. Republicans lost seven Senate seats -- eight if the courts sustain Al Franken's lead in Minnesota. On June 28, 2007, each of the eight previous office-holders (Republicans, all) voted to block the Bush administration's immigration bill. Replacing these eight immigration hardliners are five new senators clearly favorable to a comprehensive approach -- six, counting Franken -- and two whose positions are unclear. All, of course, are Democrats.
In the House, comprehensive immigration reformers picked up at least 14 votes, and "enforcement-only" advocates lost 14. Ten incumbent members of the restrictionist House Immigration Reform Caucus were defeated. The "enforcement first/enforcement only" cause lost such major spokesmen as Tom Feeney, Virgil Goode, Thelma Drake, Marilyn Musgrave, Ric Keller, Bill Sali, and Nancy Boyda.
In the face of such obvious losses, what's an immigration hawk to do? Writing for the Center for Immigration Reform, James Gimpel, professor of Politics at the University of Maryland, provides an answer: disclaim all responsibility. In Latino Voting in the 2008 Election, he uses the gigantic Edison-Mitofsky exit polls of 2004 and 2008 to make two principle points: first, that Latino voting patterns do not differ noticeably from national trends; and second, that the immigration issue played a negligible role in the election. He writes: "Latino voters just aren't that different from other voters in the national electorate. Their support for Republicans rises or falls when support for GOP candidates rises among the broader electorate."
There is a major problem with Professor Gimpel's assertion: the evidence he adduces in its defense disproves it. John McCain underperformed George W. Bush by 5 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Total BS. The immigration issue wasn’t on the table in the Presidential election and played a minor role at the state level.
Hardline? Open borders (RNC) versus nonexistent borders (DNC).
FOS
It is because ACORN used illegal voters to change the results.
We see how well open borders Mccain fared, eh?
Bah...beat me by that much!
Not allowing illegal immigrants a free pass into residency and citizenship was popular with most Americans IMO.
We lost seats because of President Bush being unpopular.
NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!
That “hardline” kept November 4th from being a landslide.
Nadler is an idiot.
“The immigration issue wasn’t on the table in the Presidential election and played a minor role at the state level.”
Bullsh—T...
It WAS on the table, especially in the Spanish Media. The Illegal Immigrant Riots of 2006, sponsored by all the Soros-funded groups like La Raza, ACCORN, and MoveOn.Borg turned Hispanics VEHEMENTLY against the Republican Party.
No a soft line on immigration for the last 40 years has hurt Republicans.
Most of the polls I say at the time showed 70% of the American public was against amnesty. How would taking a position favored by an overwhelming majority of the electorate (which McCain decidedly did not do) harm the ticket? I don’t get it.
” Spanish Media.”
The very fact that we now have “Spanish Media” tells you all you need to know about how out of control and entrenched illegal immigration has become.
If we can’t get the crooks in the GOP and the Dems to deport the illegals themselves then maybe we can try a different law, one that deports the apologists for illegals. As if any country would want that assemblage of traitors.
“I don’t get it.”
Well I get it. Nadler and the Spectator crowd wouldn’t tell the truth if it would save them from hanging.
BS
What rubbish. No one pushed any harder for amnesty than George W Bush and John McCain. The entire Republican leadership joined the Democrats in pushing for amnesty for illegal aliens. By doing so they sold out the American people.
Juan Hernandez worked on John McCain’s campaign. The Republicans lost because they betrayed their base. In fact they did everything they could to betray the American people.
An example of the duplicity involved in the issue was the sneering comment of Hernandez after the election. He said that Hispanics would make the Republicans pay for their failure to support amnesty. Obviously the Republicans did everything they could to push amnesty on the American people and apparently that wasn’t good enough for Hernandez and the open borders lobby.
I suspect that they knew Democrats were going to throw the borders open even wider than they had been over the last eight years. The whole thing is a monstrous charade. The American people have been hosed. It was bipartisan effort too.
"Coming soon to your obscure cable channel: RINO Hunter. Thrill as intrepid tracker NRT goes beyond the norm to bring these elusive beasts to justice. Moan as he's thwarted at each step by ancient legalize, obscure protective legislation and outright arrogance. Will our hunter bring down his prey? Don't hold your breath."
Seriously though, the people really DO get what they vote for. Or what they don't bother to vote for. I fear a wild run by the Democrats will wake the citizens to their responsibility too late to steer the ship back to stability.
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.