A new study by ImmigrationO8 about Latinos and the November elections confirms what we’ve been saying here for awhile: Immigration is a winning issue for Democrats if they know how to handle it right, and a losing issue for Republican bigotry-mongers.
Most of all, it’s an important opportunity: Progressives can establish that they can solve seemingly intractable policy problems by taking a pragmatic and humane approach, contradistinct from the Republican scapegoating approach that only makes the problem worse.
In introducing the study yesterday at a conference call [audio here], Frank Sharry of America’s voice put it best:
Immigration is an issue that works for Democrats who lean into it rather than for Republicans who demagogue it.
Polling maven Celinda Lake joined Sharry on the call, and offered advice to Democrats based on what her group found whenever immigration became a campaign issue: "It’s an issue you cannot duck and hide from," she said. Candidates are successful, she said, when they engage voters in what it means to enact comprehensive immigration reform.
The study itself also debunked a lot of the myths about the election that are commonly bandied about among the pundit class, most of which fit into the "Americans aren’t eager to end the war" insofar as they have any grounding in reality. For instance, the notion that Latinos are unsure about Obama and like McCain. Bzzzzt! Likewise, ixnay on the "Clinton’s Latino supporters voted against Obama"ay.
But this is particularly worth remembering:
Anti-Immigrant Politics Push Latinos Away From the GOP
As with most Americans, Latinos view the Republican Party as being on the "wrong side" of key issues such as immigration, health care, the war, and the economy. In addition, the Republican Party’s embrace of harsh anti-immigrant campaign tactics and policies has clearly undermined its ability to attract and retain Latino voters.
George W. Bush received approximately 40% support from Latinos in 2004. This number could become the high-water mark of Latino support for a Republican presidential candidate unless the GOP undergoes a major realignment on their immigration stance.
Since 2004, Republican opposition to immigration reform legislation and support of harsh, anti-immigrant policies has pushed Latinos into the Democratic fold.
- Partisan Gap Grows: 57% of Hispanic registered voters "now call themselves Democrats or say they lean to the Democratic Party, while 23 percent align with the Republican Party-a 34 percentage point gap in partisan affiliation among Latinos. In July, 2006, the same gap was just 21 percent. In 1999, it had been 33 percent." [Pew Hispanic Center, Hispanics and the 2008 Election: A Swing Vote?, 12/6/07]
- Nearly Half of Latino Voters Say Democrats Are More Supportive of Latinos than Republicans. By a 44% to 8% margin, Latinos say the Democratic Party has more concern for them than the GOP [Pew Hispanic Center, Hispanics and the 2008 Election: A Swing Vote?, 12/6/07]
- Nearly Half of Latino Voters Believe Democrats Do a Better Job Handling Illegal Immigration. By 41% to 14% margin, Latino voters say the Democrats are doing the better job of dealing with illegal immigration than the Republicans. Approximately 26% say neither Party is better, nor 12% say they don’t know. [Pew Hispanic Center, Hispanics and the 2008 Election: A Swing Vote?, 12/6/07]
When Democratic congressional candidates hit the hustings this summer — and presidential candidates too — immigration will finally give them a chance to show they can run against right-wing "conventional wisdom" and win. Most of all, the issue will give them the chance to stand up to the right, to stand for something important, and to speak good common sense — the kind that voters appreciate.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Good Morning David.
now to read.
Ah yes, the humane approach. Democrats should have that all to themselves, if memory serves.
Wonderful post, David. Thank you.
This continues the string of ideas making me think of Molly Ivins and missing her terribly. She was always so caring and sensible in considering policy on immigration, human rights, education, … everything.
I greatly appreciate people like you carrying on the banner. Good on ya!
Thanks, David. Hear that, Rahm?
China We Can Believe In!
Paulson to make statement about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Their stock has dropped nearly 50% in value.
Meanwhile crude oil future is trading at $146.45
T-bills are in a dive.
Just another day in the land of Bushonomics.
Molly was an inspiration to us all.
David. One thing that continues to make me very uneasy is concern over whether and how we can ensure a fair election, honest.
The fear-mongering Lou Dobbsians of the country seem as if they would do anything and everything to tip and taint the process.
Is any progress at all being made against potential election fraud. To hear Dobbs, of course, all the attention should be on voter fraud, scouring voter rolls, putting up roadblocks against voting rights for any brown people whatsoever. It’s repulsive, but calling it that is not enough. What can we DO to ensure genuine, qualified votes are actually counted?
How soon before Obama goes anti-immigrant?
can someone find our from Schecter why the post thursday on the two florida gooper congressman brothers shows them both ahead, but the post says they are in TROUBLE?
also–must change schecter grafic, as HRC is no longer in race.
Good Morning David and Firedogs -
most of you know I have been lmao about this since 10/06 – The Sensenbrenner/Tancredo carnival didn’t just piss off the young or undecided – they increased registration by 60+% and then wiped out significant blocs of latino votes long held by the Republics – not exactly dfh’s here :D –
haven’t looked at Obama’s remarks at the DC Latino Conference yet – what is it Democrats should be saying about the immigration issue ?
is that just a gratuitous slap? what’s the point?
I was hoping we got a lot of that sort of rancor spewed and stewed earlier in the week.
I don’t want to be a scold, but suggest we at least TRY to keep it sober today.
Yes, but these are Democrats we are talking about here. So what are the odds they will stand for anything? These are, after all, the same guys who voted for the gutting of FISA and the 4th Amendment 2 days ago, and for the promotions of the pro-Bush Iraq war generals Petraeus and Odierno yesterday.
My expectations are at least one hard right turn per week.
i’m gone berry-picking folks.
i got a bellyful of this bile yesterday.
Apologies David. It’s a terrific post, full of ideas to discuss, if … they want to.
Bye for now.
hey Molly! if yer there, snap a towel r’ somethin’ hon!
imo anyone who supported clinton’s trade policies of the ’90s is, unless they’ve changed their views, anti-immigrant. because it was the resulting combination of immigration pressure (up) and wage pressure (down) that has fed into the our current backlash against immigrants.
personally, i find it incredibly dishonest for dems to be taking electoral advantage of the situation – when they have yet to address, let alone discuss, the underlying causes for which they are in large part responsible.
On the left side of the blogosphere, we are supposed to be fact based. The facts are that Obama has taken on a number of right wing positions in the last few weeks: on gun control, faith based intiatives, abortion, Israel, FISA, Iran, and the promotions of Petraeus and Odierno. So yes, it is legitimate to question how serious he is on immigration reform, especially because this would clash with his pursuit of what Clinton called “white working class” voters.
Ask & ye shall receive:
Immigration 101 for Beginners and Non-Texans
Of course it is. The cheap-shot slamming is a waste of valuable time and bandwidth.
LOL! holy cow! how did you do that? I just got a couple database error messages. *g*
thank you. yer sweet. i have all her books.
Just heard on NPR, Paulson says government actions will be focused on supporting Freddie and Fanny as they are currently structured. There may be more to what he is saying but off hand it doesn’t sound like much, and I have to say this would be in keeping with his hands off, anti-regulatory style.
They are incumbents in what had been safely R districts; who in an election year are sitting with approval ratings in the low 40s and the challengers are within five or so points.
That is the very definition of “trouble” when they had previously won those same seats by solid double digit numbers and had polled into the upper fifties and low sixties.
calm down hon. me too, on multiple threads. the hamsters are werry werry skittish today, apparently.
Damn, I dunno, but that’s one of those “how do we end global hunger” questions. We keep hammering at the issue until we can guarantee clean elections.
I don’t think this election will be close enough for them to steal, to tell the truth. At least I hope not. All of the measures used so far — voter suppression, ballot manipulation, etc. — are the kind that generally only work on a relatively small scale and thus tend to effect mostly tight races.
FDL is loading at a glacial pace for me.
ditto
I tend to take Jane’s approach on this: Don’t expect politicians to lead, because in the era of hyperpolling and focus groups, they seem to have lost that ability. We have to lead them — push them to do what we expect them to do.
OT: petition
http://salsa.democracyinaction….._KEY=25161
Yep – for about 3 days now.
Full disclosure: I was an avid supporter of Clinton’s free-trade policies in the early 1990s, mainly because I believed his rhetoric about ensuring that measures like NAFTA have worker protections included (particularly enhancements for unionization, etc.). That wasn’t the NAFTA he actually delivered, and we all just kinda crossed our fingers and hoped it would work after that. It didn’t.
Man-oh-man, I hope you’re right. I will NEVER get over 2000, and watching the crooks at play in the highest power positions in the land (starting with SCOTUS and producing starburst in all directions).
The picture of DeLay’s henchmen storming Miami-Dade’s attempted recount, that picture is burned into my brain. Nothing. was. ever. done. People in power were proven guilty as sin, and … well… we lost our democracy right then and there. All the rest has been smoke and ashes.
I want hope to be possible again. But, yes, that might be too much to ask, especially if true, fact-based, talented, dedicated progressives don’t stop harping and settle down to FIX the #% BROKEN SYSTEM.
Sorry. Yes, Hugh. I’m looking at you. You can run circles around me intellectually. Prove it! NOW!
/r
Here is another one on zionism for religous people:
http://salsa.democracyinaction…..n_KEY=1310
That sounds very wise to me.
We have to work with what are dealt, plus what we personally bring to the table. In today’s system, leadership is rare, partly imho because it brings risk of failure. Also because it takes more effort, and brains. We shouldn’t be afraid of shoving things around, respectfully of course [*g*], to suit our own ideals.
There ARE some good people out there trying. We should be helping and encouraging them, even while we “work” on the lesser lights and/or to replace those.
TY Tech Folks! Ms. Adie, We blew it by not taking to streets en masse instead of sitting there in shock and disbelief. I was stunned and waiting for direction and I believe that is exactly what you’re saying, is it not? We are the leaders we’re looking for! I’ll be posting pictures on the FDL image site all next weekend starting Thursday night (CCR is having what looks to be the first NN shindig & I’ll be there with my trusty camera) of the people that need to be the crest of this wave.
Lordy, I’m going for sure now, if only to give the hamsters a break.
Thank you dear (((techies))), for we know not what you do. *g*
i’m with you – i wasn’t paying attention in the ’90s. i figured if clinton said is was good then it must be.
woo boy was i wrong to do that. (that was part of the reason i spent a week in miami in support of the ftaa protests – down payment on making amends).
my complaint was directed at you, btw. it was directed at those pols who implement bad policy and then attempt to benefit from the problems it causes.
Believe!
yea, except Schecter said one of them was behind and the other is in a very close race:
We can already see this in the numbers we covered yesterday, showing one of the Diaz-Balart brothers behind and the other in a very close race.
neither is behind.
correction: my complaint was NOT
you are cracking me up!
lol :)
the Diaz-Balart brothers are both up only by single digits
unfortunately Ross-Lehnteinen is up by 27 points – although there were signs a month back of possible vulnerability – she issued a mailer emphatically stating she was no “rubber-stamp republican”
link
Yes. and Thank You (((nonplussed))).
Slight tweaking of the idea: everyone ought to feel free to work within their own capabilities. E.g., I have an awful time making good phone calls, or talking face-to-face on a regular basis – easily get into stammer-sputter mode, so I usually only do e-mail pestering and encouraging. I also have a powerful aversion to mob-crowd demonstrating, but have great respect for those who can put up with it’s demands and risks.
Others have their own style, and I suggest they follow what suits them best. Besides, the last thing we want is to look like we’re mindlessly marching in lockstep. I suspect it’s more effective to have individual efforts working right along with the mass efforts like big ads, petitions, demonstrations of all sorts, etc.
Imo, smash-mouth abusive & demeaning demonstrations only hurt our cause and make it that much harder for us to accomplish our real aims. That sort of stuff will always trigger a tougher negative reaction by the people we’re trying to reach and influence, if only by spooking them. I like some of Ghandi’s handy rules of thumb, and Molly’s amazing mix of very effective tricks of the trade.
I’m not flying blind. My masters was in behavior, all the more useful because it was animal behavior (ethology). My major prof. was truly gifted at reading people as well as other critters. I had the honor of meeting the great Konrad Lorenz back in the dark ages of my grad student days. I did a lot of animal training, and that would include a number of unwary people. lol.
P. E. A. C. E.
Hey Pups the Digg linky is working again so please digg it!
I’ve always been a sucker for a sob story. I would have definitely benefited from having that fellow around! I had to operate on that old saw, “Better a chump than a cheat!”
Interesting . . .
He already is.
More hamsters!
Whoops!
It’s not clear what he’s up to on this admittedly divisive issue.
That I respect and can understand. Yes. We both would/will be disappointed to say the least.
Don’t discount that sort of wisdom, if you see it makes sense.
Many many voters who regularly do their civic duty at the polls act on that “gut feeling” rather than nitty-gritty details of the day-to day campaigning by strangers.
IF I ever re-locate the fascinating study that discovered how astoundingly ccurate that strategy was for low-information voters, I’ll be thrilled witless. I have dear neighbors who basically go by that sort of formula, and I wouldn’t trade them for all the voters from Rover’s secret list. They and we have frequent contact. At this point, she admitted with a grin, they voted for a fella they never heard about, simply because we had his sign out by our driveway. They also, on their own, have spread their growingly progressive message to formerly recalcitrant relatives and beyond – and these dear friends are shy, not given to “preaching”.
Long story made short, low-key and working with contacts one-on-one, on their terms, DOES spread good information in spite of the MSM saturation.
Please don’t give up, no matter what your stage in the process.
AND, don’t feel the need to press people who don’t want to hear what you had planned to say. If they back off. Suggest you back off, unless you’re on some sort of crusade different from mine and able to handle total rejection really really well. People these days are sick to death of being told what to do. But they will listen. Most will listen. Just try and don’t treat farther than you should. Try sharing an e’mail address, or a favorite blog, etc. . . .