Establishment GOPers don’t quite get the power of TEA party movement, but scared Democrats do

The Collins Report ^ | May 3, 2010 | Kevin “Coach” Collins

[yongin]

The GOP establishment thinks they need to appeal to Latinos in order to stay viable in future elections. After Bob McDonnell’s big win, Ed Gillispe touted how McDonnell did not vilify Latinos. Thus he urged other Republicans not to focus on polarizing issues like border security.

[kabar]

The GOP establishment is wrong. Republicans are deluded if they believe that altering their views on immigration and amnesty will win them more Hispanic votes. Ronald Reagan signed a “one-time” amnesty in 1986, but that did not change the fact that the majority of Hispanics still vote Democrat. The reality is that historically the majority of immigrants, not only Hispanics, vote Democrat. Unless the Republican Party can slow down the immigration numbers, it will be the permanent minority party or become just another wing of the Democrat Party.

In 2008, if John McCain had received 60 percent [vice 55 percent] of the “white vote,” he would have won even if Barack Obama had received the entire Hispanic vote. Credible surveys indicate that the major policy concerns of Hispanics/Latinos were no different than the concerns of non-Hispanics/Latinos. The economy and jobs topped the list. There is little evidence that immigration policy was an influential factor in Hispanics’/Latinos’ choice between the two candidates once basic party predispositions are taken into account. The size of the Latino voting population should be kept in perspective alongside other subsets of the electorate. An estimated 11.8 million voters were of Latino ancestry, compared with 17 million African Americans, 19.7 million veterans, 23.6 million young people, 45 million conservatives, and 34 million born-again white Christians

[yongin]

Ed Gillespie conducted a poll of what independents want. He says:

Suggested messaging solutions included calling for “amending” – rather than “repealing” – the healthcare overhaul, talking about “legalization” rather than “amnesty” in any discussion about providing illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, and not denying that climate change is taking place.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36766.html

[kabar]

Gillespie's poll runs counter to other polls.

talking about “legalization” rather than “amnesty” in any discussion about providing illegal immigrants a path to citizenship

Any legislation that legalizes the status of the lawbreakers already here is an amnesty. The Orwellian use of language doesn't change reality. The overwhelming majority of Americans are against amnesty, which is why McCain and Obama deny that they are in favor of amnesty.

No one denies that climate change is taking place. The issue is whether it is anthropogenic or part of the natural cycle.

[yongin]

Ed Gillespie has the ear of GOP Congressional leaders. He will use Bob McDonnell as a source of credibility. The folks in Congress will listen to him.

On the definition of amnesty, last week Juan Williams was subbing for Bill O’Reilly. Juan challenged Karl Rove’s support for Bush’s guest worker program. Rove said Bush’s plan was about making illegals learn english, pay fines, assimilate into American culture, and go to the back of the line for citizenship. Thus Rove argued that Bush’s plan was not Amnesty.