Thread: Linda Chavez: Immigration stance may turn red states blue

This is an extremely biased article with an obvious agenda...amnesty. I do not believe it's premise. That is, legal resident and U.S. citizen Hispanics want amnesty for illegal aliens. In other words, the Hispanic legal voting community does not care that illegal aliens are lawbreakers and have criminally entered the U.S., they want amnesty for them anyway. If this proves to be true, then this would be a truly sad state of racial and cultural affairs.

Linda Chavez: Immigration stance may turn red states blue
12:00 AM CDT on Monday, October 8, 2007

Republicans need all the votes they can get next November if they are to have any hope of retaining the White House and winning back control of Congress. But one group of voters – among whom the GOP has gained considerable ground over the last few elections – now seems about to slip away, perhaps permanently.

Hispanic voters are poised to turn several red states blue come 2008, virtually guaranteeing a Democratic presidential victory and a pickup in congressional seats as well, according to a new analysis of Hispanic voting behavior. "Border Wars: The Impact of Immigration on the Latino Vote," released by the conservative Americas Majority Foundation, demonstrates that congressional Republicans' ham-handed approach to immigration will cost them dearly at the polls.

Richard Nadler, the study's author, analyzed 2006 voting patterns in 145 Hispanic precincts or voting blocs in three congressional districts in the Southwest. In each district, candidates who favored an enforcement-only approach faced opponents who favored comprehensive immigration reform, including a guest-worker program and a path to legalization for illegal aliens. Mr. Nadler found that the enforcement-only approach significantly eroded support for the Republican candidates among Hispanic voters from their 2004 levels; in each case the Republican lost the seat.

In Arizona's 5th District, six-term GOP incumbent Rep. J.D. Hayworth actually switched positions on immigration from being a sponsor of guest-worker legislation to becoming one of the most outspoken opponents of immigration, even advocating a moratorium on legal immigration from Mexico. In 2004, he received almost as many Hispanic votes as his Democratic opponent, about 48 percent; but in 2006, Mr. Hayworth lost 59 to 36 percent in Hispanic precincts.

In the 8th District of Arizona, a pro-comprehensive reform Republican, incumbent Jim Kolbe, retired, and the Republican nominee, Randy Graf, made illegal immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. In 2004, Mr. Kolbe won almost 43 percent of the vote in Hispanic precincts. In 2006, Mr. Graf won barely 18 percent of those precincts' votes – and Republicans lost the election 54 to 42 percent.

Perhaps most illuminating of all, Mr. Nadler's analysis of Texas' 23rd District shows how divisive the immigration issue can be even when the Republican candidate is Hispanic. Henry Bonilla, a seven-term incumbent, was defeated in 2006 after redistricting produced a more heavily Hispanic and Democratic district. Mr. Nadler's analysis showed that even in those heavily Hispanic counties included within district lines in both 2004 and 2006, Mr. Bonilla lost ground, winning 59 percent of the vote in those Hispanic precincts in 2004 but only 30 percent in 2006. Mr. Nadler attributes the erosion in support among Hispanics to Mr. Bonilla's support for an amendment to impose criminal penalties on illegal aliens.

Mr. Nadler predicts that an enforcement-only approach to immigration will cause Republicans serious problems in 2008. He projects that, all other factors being equal, Latino voters alone could cost the GOP presidential candidate the election if their turnout increased equal to their percentage of eligible voters.

But all is not lost for Republicans – if they manage to stake out more moderate ground on immigration. A number of Republicans did just fine among Hispanic voters, even if they favored some tough approaches to illegal aliens.

Rep. Steve Pearce of New Mexico's 2nd District, the most heavily Hispanic district (47 percent) in the nation's most heavily Hispanic state (42 percent), actually increased his support slightly among Hispanic voters between 2004 and 2006 (from 39.5 percent to 40.1 percent), even though he advocated deporting criminal aliens, building 700 additional miles of fencing along the border and creating more secure identification cards. But he also supported comprehensive reform and opposed criminal penalties against illegal aliens.

The Republican presidential hopefuls would do well to follow Mr. Nadler's advice as they craft their message in the upcoming primaries: "Participants ... needn't like this conclusion. But they better understand it."

Linda Chavez is author of "An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal." Her e-mail address is lchavez@ceousa.org.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 0680f.html

This is the email I sent Ms Chavez:


Lets not forget the millions of LEGAL immigrants who are NOT LATINO. After waiting in line and paying their dues, MANY of them are now VOTING AMERICANS who would be slapped in the face with shamnesty.

Add them to the LEGAL LATINO IMMIGRANTS who have raised their voices AGAINST the ILLEGALS, and maybe, just maybe, this story is just another pile of bull written by yet another liberal LATINO.

Nadler is open borders. Latino voters were, what, about 8% of the vote in the last prez election, and like all groups, this vote is not monolithic. Look at the great group "You don't speak for me."


_________________


Call the Senate: NO AgJOBS Amnesty !

I already told her she is a racist. Apparently she doesn't care.

This was a response I received from Linda;


You are hard-hearted and bitter. Sorry life has treated you so badly. Let me guess: You are a man/woman in your 60s or 70s, without much education. You worked hard when you were younger, but life didn't turn out quite like you hoped. You resent these Mexicans and others because they are different from you and because you believe they are welfare cheats, that despite the fact they are helping pay for your Social Security and Medicare (no, your tax contributions when you were working don't pay for your benefits-- add it up and you'll find they cover barely a year or two of your costs). You live off the government, but resent others whom you wrongly suspect do as well. Yet, your grandparents weren't much different from the illegals who are coming today. They arrived without visas or any other documents, but the laws were different then. All you needed was the price of a ticket in steerage. Yet they too were deeply resented by the anti-immigrants of their day.

I'll pray for you.

I posted (above) the email I sent to Linda Chavez. Here is the laughable answer I received FROM CHAVEZ herself:

Go tell the Democratic National Committee that Linda Chavez is a liberal. Tell that to the National Council of La Raza. Tell anyone from the Reagan, Bush I, or Bush II administrations that Linda Chavez is a liberal. Seriously, see how long it takes for them to stop laughing at you.

Linda Chavez is one of the nation’s foremost conservative activists. She is chairman of the Republican Issues Campaign, Stop Union Political Abuse, and runs the Pro-Life Campaign Committee. Her organization the Center for Equal Opportunity is the nation’s most prominent conservative civil rights organization, fighting against affirmative action, against bilingual education, and promoting English as the official language of the United States.

You are so out of touch with reality it’s almost frightening.

I replied to her email: Democrat says it all!

She really is quite pathetic.

THE ONLY LEGAL LATINOS THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ARE THOSE WHO HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS THAT ARE ILLEGAL OR WHO ARE MARRIED TO SOMEONE WHO IS HERE ILLEGALLY. OR PERHAPS THEY HAVE A VERY VERY CLOSE FRIEND WHO IS ILLEGAL. ALMOST ALL OTHERS ARE OPPOSED TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. FOR ONE THING THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND DONT APPRECIATE SOMEONE ELSE GETTING A FREE RIDE. IN ADDITION, ILLEGALS ARE NOT SCREENED AND ANY TYPE CAN CROSS OVER THE BORDER. ALL SORTS OF RIFF RAFF ARE PARADING AROUND THE COUNTRY GIVING LEGAL HISPANICS A BAD NAME. LEGAL HISPANICS ARE ALSO GETTING SHAFTED IN THE WORKPLACE DUE TO THE PREFERENCE IN FAVOR OF ILLEGALS WHO HAVE NO POWER OR KNOWLEDGE OF LABOR LAWS.

Originally Posted by dyehard39

Yet, your grandparents weren't much different from the illegals who are coming today. They arrived without visas or any other documents, but the laws were different then. All you needed was the price of a ticket in steerage. Yet they too were deeply resented by the anti-immigrants of their day.

This is total bull. While there were no numerical limits 100 years ago, documents were required as were health checks. Plus there was absolutely no public assistance of any kind. It was very hard to survive and 1/3rd of these immigrants couldn't make it and went back home.

100 years ago America did not have the world's best economy and technology like today. I guess Linda want's to turn our economy and country back 100 years so 1 billion foreigners will no longer want to move here!

PS Linda, 100 years ago women could not vote.

Originally Posted by dyehard39

Yet, your grandparents weren't much different from the illegals who are coming today. They arrived without visas or any other documents, but the laws were different then. All you needed was the price of a ticket in steerage. Yet they too were deeply resented by the anti-immigrants of their day.

This is total bull. While there were no numerical limits 100 years ago, documents were required as were health checks. Plus there was absolutely no public assistance of any kind. It was very hard to survive and 1/3rd of these immigrants couldn't make it and went back home.

100 years ago America did not have the world's best economy and technology like today. I guess Linda want's to turn our economy and country back 100 years so 1 billion foreigners will no longer want to move here!

PS Linda, 100 years ago women could not vote.

I disagree with Ms. Chavez's assertion that the illegal immigration issue will turn the red states into blue states. Take a good long look around you Ms. Chavez, America has slowly started changing nationwide into that semi third world border state look. The American people are getting mad at seeing our Nation and its future sold out for the fast corporate buck. The thing to remember is the huge surge of new "latinos'" are mostly illegal aliens that cannot vote. I strongly suspect that we'll soon see blue states start voting red as people get sick and tired of seeing America getting sucked downward into the thirdworld.