Posted on 11/26/2012 9:51:06 AM PST by LucianOfSamasota
Last week, I pointed out that there is no such thing as a natural social-conservative skew among Latino Americans. But that leaves open a rejoinder, expressed by several readers: The GOP doesn’t need to get all of the Latino vote, just its fair share. That’s true, and I should have made my point clearer. In the wake of the election, some social conservatives have tried a new version of the old Silent Majority argument, contending that Republicans can continue to make their candidates pass litmus tests on abortion and gay marriage and still win national elections if only it taps the natural social conservatism of Latinos. Exposing that illusion was the point of the numbers I presented.
This time I will explicitly offer a broader argument and then give the numbers. My thesis is that the GOP is in trouble across the electoral board because it has become identified in the public mind with social conservatism. Large numbers of Independents and Democrats who are naturally attracted to arguments of fiscal discipline, less government interference in daily life, greater personal responsibility, and free enterprise refuse to vote for Republicans because they are so put off by the positions and rhetoric of social conservatives, whom they take to represent the spirit of the “real” GOP.
I use Asian-Americans as an example of how powerfully this antipathy can alienate a naturally conservative voting bloc. Let it be clear: The causal link with social conservatism is asserted here, not proved. But the GOP had better take the hypothesis seriously.
Let’s start with data from the Current Population Survey from 2003 on some key socioeconomic indicators for adults ages 30–49. (The CPS first started identifying Asians separately from other ethnic groups in 2003).
(Excerpt) Read more at aei-ideas.org ...
Bingo.
However remember China is the big Asian country.
It makes a difference in the voting patterns, when there are 1.3 billion or so fellows, out there taking advantage of “trade” which really isn’t trade at all.
Further off, Indians are also quite liberal.
We need a new approach. The current approach is broken.
“Liberal” as in socially liberal or in ‘gubmint owes me because of my skin color’, economically liberal?
I’d hazard a guess that it’s more of the later being sold to them and their children in the schools or the pamphlets and documents upon immigration.
“A new approach”, whereby we re-take the public institutions and the cultural meme, will take generations. After all, it took progressivism 100 years to turn some members of my paternal family who are alive today from self-reliant, small government-minded descendants of two Revolutionary War officers into Obama-loving socialists (my cousins).
“Then we are doomed as a nation.”
Old news, buddy.
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.