| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| New McCain-Palin ad: "Mavericks" |
| 2008-09-08 |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #11 CNN + FOX > Pundits in both are in rough consensus that MCCAIN-PALIN = GOP is potentially making a major campaign mistake by seemingly making MINOR TO NO ADS TARGETING OR APPEALING TO THE US HISPANIC VOTE AT THIS TIME VEE BLACKS AND WHITE-BLACK WOMEN. SAME > CONVENTIONAL WISDOM = MCCAIN-PALIN/GOP WILL LOSE 2008 IFF THEY LOSE THE HISPANIC VOTE + BULK OF MINORITY VOTE??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-09-08 19:57 |
| #10 Instead of mavericks, I want them to come out strongly in favor of party discipline. If Republicans work together as a team, reward loyalty and punish disloyalty and misbehavior, then they will win. No more kids in a candy store behavior if they get the majority on congress again. Discipline must be strict, rewards and punishments must be certain. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-09-08 19:56 |
| #9 Becuz "Maverick is the Legend of the West"! |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-09-08 19:48 |
| #8 The money has already been appropriated to build the "fence". It is being built slowly. I expect McCain, once in office, to get it built quickly. And once that starts happening, I expect him to start the debate on what to do about illegals here and laborers who want to enter for seasonal work. Signing the legislation to be contingent on finishing the border security system. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-09-08 19:03 |
| #7 Agreed, all.  Hispanics are no more a monolithic block than women. ;-) That said - my small sample of actual hispanic friends and relatives by marriage, here legally, get very very nervous when they hear someone campaign on getting tough re: immigration. They know the destructive effects of illegal immigration but also feel real compassion for the conditions from which those illegals fled.  In many cases they have church or even family ties to them, too. So, given that the R brand is currently declining as a % of the total population, I gently suggest it does not make sense in this highly contested, tight race to push those people away by taking a stand which the President will be in no position to push through Congress anyway (unless there is a huge shift in congressional races over the next 7 weeks). |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-09-08 18:19 |
| #6 "Two Kinds of Mexicans," by Carlos Mencia, a VERY funny man, is spot on. Hispanics are NOT a monolithic block. |
| Posted by: Minister of funny walks 2008-09-08 12:49 |
| #5 A lot of legal Mexicans are unhappy with Illegal immigration. YOu just need to frame the debate properly. I would suggest three points: (1) Cutting in line is unfair when others had to wait and go through a bunch of hurdles. So we need to clear out some hurdles but we also need to stop the line-jumping. it's just not right. (2) We believe in minimum wage and health and safety in the workplace laws. Those that hire illegals do so to avoid those laws. I do not believe that someone should be put at risk or mistreated because of their race. Either we need to rethink these minimum wage and health and safety laws or we need to stop those who exploit them. (3) Mexico refuses to reform and become the great nation she could be. Because of that her bravest and boldest risk everything to come to the US. The US is not here to allow the Mexican elites to abuse their citizens. The security and drug issues don't need to even be said. They are known well enough already and can easily be painted as racist. On the other hand it becomes very hard to argue against my three points above without leaving yourself open to charges of racism. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-08 12:11 |
| #4 I respectfully disagree w. LOTP. The theory you propound is based on the conventional "inside washington" knowledge that all hispanic/latino voters are in favor of illegal immigration. This proposition, while attractive to those who adopt the "tribal" view of the world on which the Democrat strategy has always been based Simply stated: loyalty to one's minority group identity will always trump loyalty to the ideals on which the U.S. was founded. There's simply no empirical research (or other research) to support the proposed phenomenon. I think it's insulting to over-simplify the debate over illegal immigration as one between the "brown's" and the "white nativists"; which is what one does when he accepts the Democrat/inside the beltway terms on that issue. I know many latinos who have immigrated LEGALLY and who wish the interlopers who have come here ILLEGALLY would be forced to face the consequences of their crime. A more accurate distinction, and one which more closely identifies conservatives and Republicans than does the "tribal" view is the division between those who respect the law and those who do not respect the law. The legal latino immigrants mentioned above are the former; they are potential Republican/conservative voters and they would vote for immigration enforcement. The illegal immigrants are the latter, and are not potential Republican/conservative voters anyway. How does "losing" those who would not vote for the Republican party ANYWAY represent a loss to the party? On the contrary, there are a great many conservative republicans whose vote was nearly permanently lost due to the "comprehensive immigration reform" by the GOP. I attribute the GOP's new populism to Karl Rove's desire to establish a "permanent GOP majority". The problem with his theory was the idea that so long as Repubs remain slightly to the right of the Dems, they can slide to the left far enough to capture most of the middle. That's just not the case. I and many other conservatives (including latinos) would rather stay true to our principles and lose the Republican majority; than support a Republican party that abandons all conservative principles. After all, what good is a Republican majority if it represents a Democrat-lite socialism? |
| Posted by: mjhlaw 2008-09-08 11:14 |
| #3 It would have been one thing if he'd been trying to "walk a fine line on immigration" back in '07. But that wasn't what he was doing - he flat out climbed into bed with the creator of the mess we find ourselves in today. I agree with lotp's analysis near term, but I'm still afraid that the only real winners in this election will be the open-borders lobby. |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2008-09-08 11:02 |
| #2 I watched McCain on Face the Nation yesterday.   It was pointed out that demographic shifts apart from illegal immigration mean that the R party had better start attracting hispanics and blacks if it wants any chance to govern over the next few decades. I think Mac knows there are problems w/ illegal immigration and the borders. But I also think he's looking long term and trying not to totally alienate that growing hispanic population who are naturals for the R message of social conservatism, hard work, family and military service. I'm watching things in PA in that light as I mentioned y'day.  Forget about abortion as a wedge issue - Palin and Mac don't scare most moderate women on that. But hit hard on illegal immigration and there's a good chance the Rs will lose hispanics not only this election but for a generation. It's a tough balance to pull off which is why he doesn't want to go there IMO. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-09-08 09:02 |
| #1 good, but he's gotta be reminded that sticking his finger in the republican eye on base issues (see: "illegal immigration amnesty") isn't gonna win this election. Frame it as "battling corruption" and he can win. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-09-08 08:42 |