Thread: LATINO SWING VOTE - Univision Hosts First Spanish Gov Debate

Univision Hosts First Spanish Gov Debate

The Bay Citizen
By Elena Shore, New America Media

While many California voters are looking forward to the first debate between Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman on Sept. 28 at UC Davis, Spanish-language media are anticipating another first -- the first-ever Spanish-language gubernatorial debate in California, to be held October 2 at CSU Fresno.

The debate, hosted by KFTV Univision 21 Fresno, will be moderated by national Univision anchors MarÃ*a Elena Salinas and Jorge Ramos. It will air at 4:00 p.m on KDTV Univision 14, with closed caption subtitles available in English and Spanish. The debate will also be broadcast on Univision Radio San Francisco's public affairs program, and will be available online in English and Spanish. Univision is inviting viewers to participate in the debate by sending in their questions by Sept. 27 to pregunta@correo.univision.com.
http://www.univision.com/content/conten ... id=2541090

Univision reports that more than 21 percent of all California registered voters are Latino, and the numbers are growing: more than 46 percent of registered Latino voters in California have registered to vote in the past eight years.

The latest Field Poll shows that Whitman has closed Jerry Brown's lead among Latinos to just 3 percentage points. In an interview with La Opinión Sacramento correspondent Araceli MartÃ*nez Ortega, Whitman credits her extensive advertising in Spanish-language media; her bilingual website; her campaign offices in East L.A., Chula Vista, Fresno and Santa Ana; and her focus on jobs, a topic she said resonates especially with Latinos, who have a higher unemployment rate.
http://www.impre.com/laopinion/noticias ... mentsBlock
http://newamericamedia.org/2010/09/lati ... l-tied.php

It remains to be seen, La Opinión reports, how Latino voters will respond to Whitman's stance on undocumented immigration, which includes eliminating sanctuary cities and opposing driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants. But one thing is clear: "I can't win without the Latino vote," Whitman told La Opinión.

Source: http://www.baycitizen.org/blogs/pulse-o ... ov-debate/

Univision reports that more than 21 percent of all California registered voters are Latino, and the numbers are growing: more than 46 percent of registered Latino voters in California have registered to vote in the past eight years.

===========================================



In less than twenty years from now, and because the (then) United States Government REFUSED to defend it's own border with Mexico, MEXICANS WILL BE THE MAJORITY POPULATION THROUGHOUT the United States (whatever it will be called then).

If only citizens can vote, and if a requirement of citizenship is to speak and read English, why is this necessary or desireable.

this latino thing is utter non sense and EXTREMELY dangerous! Just because CA has a strong Latino population does NOT mean they don't speak english and it doesn't mean we have to promote Spanish. What about Americans of German ancestry, are we promoting German?

THIS IS UTTER NON SENSE AND NEEDS TO STOP. BEING OF HISPANIC ANCESTRY DOES NOT ENTITLE YOU. WHAT ABOUT ALL OTHER ETHNICITIES?

Originally Posted by ReggieMay

If only citizens can vote, and if a requirement of citizenship is to speak and read English, why is this necessary or desireable.

That is my question also. Only citizens can vote and even naturalized citizens have to know English to become one so why the need for Spanish?

Originally Posted by HAPPY2BME

[b]

That reminds me of EXACTLY what Meg Whitman has been running in California. At first I liked her, because she ran ads acting like an immigration hawk.....Then I learned her real views on immigration, and that she was running ads in Spanish saying the opposite of her English ads. John and Ken ruined her on their show and asked "Why don't you run ads like this for the English speaking residents of Costa Mesa and Irvine?????"

I think her response was "So, blah, blah, blah."

Anyone ever notice that when Meg answers a question on immigration she always starts her response with "So..." She did the same thing last night in the debates. I cringed when she said she always opposed prop 187, and opposes a law similar to Arizona's for us. She supports emloyer sanctions, but not e-verify, and wants a guest worker program

I knew when Whitman spouted "no amnesty" in her campaign ads awhile back that it just meant that she is for CIR because with an amnesty there would be no penalties such as paying back taxes, learning English, etc. Beware when any politician says they aren't for amnesty because what it really means is that they are for CIR which would mean allowing these milions to stay here and become legalized anyway.

Don't kid yourself

CIR means amnesty right now

All penalties like back taxes , learn English or pay fines will be waived

Amnesty would be immediate ,

Enforcement would be NEVER