MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Friday, November 28, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 28.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

The Immigration Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:48 am

wack wack wrote: Aside from a comically hypocritical embracing of Christianity, what do Republicans have to offer Hispanics?


In 2004, George W received 44% of the Latino vote. All the Republicans have to do is return to that level of support and the Dems' Hispanic juggernaut is no mas.

2004 predated the 2007 immigration fight when the Republican xenophobes hit the ground running.

I'm not predicting that the Republicans will be able to make the necessary shifts on immigration, but the opportunity is there.

You mention Christianity as a throw-away, but evangelical christianity is a growing BFD south of our border.

I can't really give you a speech on why Hispanics might vote Republican. The Repubs sell the family values, work ethic brand, hispanics purportedly lean conservative in these respects. The evidence is that half our population leans Republican. The burden is on you to explain why hispanics would be less receptive to the Republican schtick than whiter Americans.

Specifically, I think the Republicans can get away with a compromise involving a difficult path to citizenship for Hispanics. Question is whether Dems will go along with it.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby wack wack » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:13 pm

Huckleby wrote:In 2004, George W received 44% of the Latino vote. All the Republicans have to do is return to that level of support and the Dems' Hispanic juggernaut is no mas.


George W received the vote, not the Republican party. If ever a population voted for a man rather than a party, this was it.

Huckleby wrote:The burden is on you to explain why hispanics would be less receptive to the Republican schtick than whiter Americans.


Republicans are racist, greedy, hateful and selfish. They openly lobby to treat immigrants as second class humans. They do not want to do anything to help those at the lower end of the economic spectrum... the immigrant end.

Seriously, need I go on? Now, how about suggesting even one non-religious reason Republicans might appeal to immigrant voters, specifically Hispanics.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby rabble » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:25 pm

wack wack wrote:
Huckleby wrote:In 2004, George W received 44% of the Latino vote. All the Republicans have to do is return to that level of support and the Dems' Hispanic juggernaut is no mas.


George W received the vote, not the Republican party. If ever a population voted for a man rather than a party, this was it.

I understand that to Huck and me, that election wasn't all that long ago. But in terms of what's happening now it's the middle ages. The Republican party isn't anything at all like it was then, its members can't throw out their own ideas and promises like they could then, and their base wasn't whipped into a mob mentality then.

I think Huck is still right, they can get back on the track. He's just wrong about the time it will take. They don't just have to rebrand. They have to reboot, purge, and reconfigure. Not necessarily in that order. They might be able to do that by 2016 but I'm not sure. They have to get started right now and they're in the middle of a civil war.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6475
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:31 pm

Huckleby wrote:In 2004, George W received 44% of the Latino vote.
that means he didn't get 56% of the Latino vote.

How dare those Hispanics not all vote the same way! It makes idiotic generalizations so much more difficult...

Tell me, everyone -- how will all white people vote next election?
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:36 pm

November 8, 2012. Sean Hannity announces that he has evolved, and he supports a pathway to citizenship.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/11/0 ... -en/191280
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby rabble » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:43 pm

Huckleby wrote:November 8, 2012. Sean Hannity announces that he has evolved, and he supports a pathway to citizenship.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/11/0 ... -en/191280

What does that prove, other than that Hannity is on that particular side in the Republican Civil War?

Or I should say, Hannity is currently on that side and could evolve in a totally different direction tomorrow. What influence does he have?
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6475
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:44 pm

rabble wrote:They might be able to do that by 2016 but I'm not sure. They have to get started right now and they're in the middle of a civil war.


Yes, the Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. And their Gerrymandered House of Representatives is a ball-and-chain on the issue.

But I am not declaring the Republican Party dead yet. They may be able to accept a path to citizenship (with new voters cynically delayed for 10 years or so) and emerge from this bind.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:48 pm

rabble wrote: Or I should say, Hannity is currently on that side and could evolve in a totally different direction tomorrow. What influence does he have?


Sean Hannity is not just another voice, he is a Tea Party high priest.

All you need is about 20% support among Republicans for a pathway to citizenship to go through. Which is to say you just need the Tea Party to bitterly swallow and not make too much of a ruckus.

Nothing can be proven, all is subject to speculation.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby wack wack » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:54 pm

Huckleby wrote:Sean Hannity is not just another voice, he is a Tea Party high priest.

All you need is about 20% support among Republicans for a pathway to citizenship to go through. Which is to say you just need the Tea Party to bitterly swallow and not make too much of a ruckus.

Nothing can be proven, all is subject to speculation.


The impression that I get from your posts is that you think Hispanics want more than anything to be able to vote for Republicans, there's just this one problem, and as soon as this one problem is fixed they'll be free to worship The GOP.

I don't think it matters who opens the door.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby rabble » Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:03 pm

Huckleby wrote:
rabble wrote: Or I should say, Hannity is currently on that side and could evolve in a totally different direction tomorrow. What influence does he have?


Sean Hannity is not just another voice, he is a Tea Party high priest.

All you need is about 20% support among Republicans for a pathway to citizenship to go through. Which is to say you just need the Tea Party to bitterly swallow and not make too much of a ruckus.

Nothing can be proven, all is subject to speculation.

The Tea Party is in a mortal battle with the party leaders and the Tea Party kills the high priests who stray from the holy path. The Republicans have proven you can force any discussion to a standstill with a very small group of people. Twenty percent won't be nearly enough.

I like the "not make too much of a ruckus" part, though. Did you type that with a straight face?
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6475
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby fisticuffs » Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:19 pm

All you need is about 20% support among Republicans for a pathway to citizenship to go through. Which is to say you just need the Tea Party to bitterly swallow and not make too much of a ruckus.


Wrong. in the Republican House they have a rule. It's called the Hastert Rule and it means no items go up for a vote that won't pass with Republican votes alone. Pretty much a giant Fuck You to the idea of bipartisanship. If Dems were in charge, then yes, 20% of republicans would get it passed.
fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7849
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:24 pm

You got to keep your ear to the ground. The right wing has been very subdued on immigration. Rush Limbaugh had a very respectful interview with Marco Rubio on his show.

Listen to what you are NOT hearing. I'm not hearing so much anti-immigrant grumbling.

Eric Cantor now supports the Dream Act, I've already touched on that Machavalean maneuver, but this is a signal for and from the far right.

Most of the right wing columnists at Wash Post are laying
groundwork for grudging acceptance of a pathway to citizenship. They mostly want to make it a long path.

And yes, only about 20% of Republicans in Congress have to support immigration reform for a bill to pass. Maybe less than that. If the Tea Party types do not make a loud and public campaign against immigration reform, enough Republicans will dare to cross over. I don't see Rush Limbaugh, at least, leading another anti-reform effort.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:29 pm

fisticuffs wrote: Wrong. in the Republican House they have a rule. It's called the Hastert Rule and it means no items go up for a vote that won't pass with Republican votes alone.


Ya, that's a good point. Yet I don't know how solid that rule is followed. For instance, the TARP bill would never have passed if the Hastert Rule was iron clad.

I don't know what is going to happen, I agree with you that the Republicans are in a tough spot. But assured destruction has a way of refocusing minds.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby The One » Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:27 pm

This is why I, at times, hate debating politics. I ask a simple question in good faith to let people who write on this topic, that have an opposite view on immigration as I do, give their reasons why they would support a path to citizenship. Instead of an answer, I'm bombarded with how people are brain washed lock stepping Republican, a claim that I don't have a reason for not supporting a path to citizenship, a question about my religion (btw, yes I am a Christian), and a claim that Republicans are anti-immigrant.

I wanted to debate immigration on a topic called, "The Immigration Debate". But all I'm seeing is pages of how Republicans are screwed with the Hispanic community and how they must cave on immigration in order to get any of what little love Hispanics have for them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah
The One
Senior Member
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby peripat » Thu Feb 14, 2013 6:09 pm

That would be because that is all that remains of the immigration debate in this country...if you were hoping for racist screeds or lists of types of persons who shouldn't be allowed to pass the borders of the US this is probably the wrong place
peripat
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:59 am

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar