Thread: Latino vote a big loss for Obama

Latino vote a big loss for Obama
By Maria De Los Angeles Torres
February 10, 2008

Last week's primaries were dubbed "Hispanic Super Tuesday," and indeed the Latino vote proved pivotal to Hillary Clinton's gains. She received an overwhelming majority of Latino votes despite Barack Obama's last-ditch efforts to differentiate his position on immigration.

The support Obama had enjoyed in Illinois' Latino communities even slipped significantly since the last time he ran for office.

Some have speculated that Latinos support Clinton because she is better-known. Others say Obama's advisers just don't get Latinos. Still others speculate that Latinos will not vote for an African-American.

In reality, Latinos have supported African-American candidates for decades. That has been true across the country, in many races, including the 2004 U.S. Senate contest that Obama won. Though the Democratic primary in that race included a popular and prominent Latino candidate, Gery Chico, 70 percent of Illinois Latinos voted for Obama.

Why? Issues.

Obama campaigned against the war, at the time a top issue for Latino voters. Most importantly, he embraced humane and comprehensive immigration reform, including a path to legalization. He pledged his support for issuing driver's licenses regardless of immigration status.

He supported the Dream Act, which would give all high school students qualified to enter universities a shot at financial aid regardless of immigration status.

On the foreign policy front, Obama also supported policies aimed at strengthening Latin American economies, a key component of a sound hemispheric immigration policy.

Latino support for Obama continued -- and indeed grew. Like so many Americans, Latinos were moved by Obama's speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and especially by his reference to his own immigrant roots.

Latinos everywhere held major fundraisers for him.

Once in Washington, however, Obama disappointed many of them. There were many unexpected votes, including his vote to confirm Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state -- his first chance to truly act on his expressed opposition to the war.

But what truly shattered hopes among Latinos across the nation was Obama's pandering to anti-immigrant sentiments during the 2006 congressional races, and his vote to build a fence along select stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border. For Latinos, and for many people around the world, the fence symbolizes backward and bigoted thinking, particularly in a modern era committed to bringing down walls, not erecting them.

There was something deeply unsettling during these debates about the absence of references by Obama to the decent, hardworking immigrants who contribute to our quality of life or to the daily nightmares faced by mixed-status families. At the core, the commitment was missing to the great American tradition of providing shelter for the poor and huddled masses yearning to breathe free, a tradition Obama had promised to restore.

The vote for the fence resonated with particular strength because it coincided with some of the largest protest marches in the history of the United States. Millions of demonstrators around the country, including in Obama's hometown of Chicago, were demanding fair and humane treatment for immigrants. Latinos embraced that as their civil rights movement.

Ignoring the messages of those marches was a serious mistake for politicians. A University of Illinois at Chicago study found that the overwhelming majority of participants in the largest march, held in Chicago, were citizens who voted. That appears to have been the case in other cities as well.

Clinton also voted for the fence. Concerns for immigrants and a commitment to Latin American policies were conspicuously absent from her campaign as well as from Obama's until the race tightened. But Clinton had never made the promises Obama had made.

What's more, she brought Latinos into her inner circle, including her campaign manager, a fact not missed by her supporters. Her advocacy for children speaks to many Latino families with young children. Clinton also has strong ties to Latino civil rights leaders, many forged through her own activism. This, coupled with the fact that she is better-known in Latino communities, gives her a clear advantage in the absence of real differences on policies.

With Texas looming as a key primary state, Clinton's work registering farmworkers in the Texas Valley could pay dividends with Latino voters.

Her ties with Franklin Garcia, a well-known union organizer and early leader of the Mexican-American empowerment movement, carry great symbolism even among young Latino Texans.

As the race goes forward, both Clinton and Obama would benefit from denouncing the ugliness of "the wall," embracing immigration reform and calling for humanizing the condition of immigrants.

That would help Clinton consolidate her support. Obama could regain his credibility with an important constituency. Both would distinguish themselves from John McCain, the likely Republican nominee.

McCain will have a difficult time balancing his efforts to reach out to Latino supporters while placating anti-immigration forces in the Republican Party. He had been a champion of immigration reform and a voice for civility in the immigration debate, a position that has opened him up to attacks from the right.

Immigration will be a major issue in November. It is not a single issue. It is complex, because in many ways it is the issue through which the future of democracy in a globalized world is being debated.

Most voters are not buying into the histrionics of the anti-immigrant pundits. Polls show they support some path to legalization without the imposition of criminal penalties. And for Latinos as well as many other immigrant communities, this deeply felt issue is finding expression in the ways they cast their votes, votes that may be crucial in a close national election.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... 2604.story

I'd cry for Obama but I'm all out of tears.

No voy a llorar para Obama!

As the race goes forward, both Clinton and Obama would benefit from denouncing the ugliness of "the wall," embracing immigration reform and calling for humanizing the condition of immigrants.

Who cares if it goes against the will of the majority of Americans who want the fence built!!!!???? The majority of voters are NOT Latino and the blacks and whites and others want the fence built. The election doesn't hinge on them. It hinges on the millions of Americans of all races who want the country secured and the laws enforced. There are a heck of a lot more of those than the ones being pandered to.

Isn't sickening to see them pander to those who have broken the laws and continue to waste our culture and commit crimes while taking jobs and depressing wages.

I'd like to add that Hillary has removed her Hispanic campaign manager, and replaced her with an African-American woman. What gets me about this article is that it never talks about WHY Obama and others support a fence being built. I promise you if we were being invaded and colonized by folks with lily white skin and blue eyes, we would still want a fence built if those folks spoke another language and refused to assimilate or respect American culture. Hispanics -NOT Mexicans or Mexican-Americans, want to vote for the candidate who's most in line with their way of thinking and beliefs, and maybe it's time politicians wake up to that fact. Maybe Hillary has...LOL

Originally Posted by Sharona

With Texas looming as a key primary state, Clinton's work registering farmworkers in the Texas Valley could pay dividends with Latino voters.

Umm, I thought over 80% of farmworkers were illegal or non-citizens? Anybody in Texas want to look into this?

Originally Posted by Expendable

I promise you if we were being invaded and colonized by folks with lily white skin and blue eyes, we would still want a fence built if those folks spoke another language and refused to assimilate or respect American culture.

That is basically what happened in 1920, Americans got fed up with hordes of unassimilated low skilled European immigrants and forced passage of a symbolic fence, the national origin quota law.

Sharona, what do you think of the Knack?
Have you ever heard the song My Sharona?
Were you the inspiration for it?

Just kidding!

My Give a Dam is busted..

Ignoring the messages of those marches was a serious mistake for politicians. A University of Illinois at Chicago study found that the overwhelming majority of participants in the largest march, held in Chicago, were citizens who voted. That appears to have been the case in other cities as well.

Are they kidding? Did they take a survey at the marches so see who was legal? What a crock of s**t. Apparently ignoring the message wasn't too serious a mistake. Obama is kicking Hillary's butt.