Americans favor immigration executive action, 67-28 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 06:27:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Americans favor immigration executive action, 67-28 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Americans favor immigration executive action, 67-28  (Read 5513 times)
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,839
United States


« on: November 25, 2014, 11:35:20 PM »

Favorite Texas joke:

Do you know what you call a Texan who speaks good English?



MEXICAN!



Really, one of the best ways to avoid detection as an illegal alien is to speak unexceptionable English.  That implies paying attention to one's schoolwork, which is more than many Americans do.

Breaking families to enforce a law as rigidly as possible makes a mockery of the law. Obama did right, and GOP pols might as well accept that he actually can do something right.

...I'd love to see a new approval poll for the President.



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,839
United States


« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2014, 11:18:08 AM »

Obama already only won 39% of white people. If Democrats keep this up, they will become known solely as the party of minorities. Doesn't that worry you even a bit?

That sounds better than getting 8% of blacks, but either way, I don't think Democrats are worried about a perceived connection to minorities.  LMAO.

I didn't say that. You are missing my point.

IF you take away all minority voters, you realize that the Democrats who are damn near out of business in many parts of the country would be even WORSE off than they are today. If only whites voted, Mitt Romney would have won 46 states.

Doesn't that bug you at all, that there is a chance of a massive white backlash beyond 1994, 2010 and 2014? What if the Democratic nominee ended up with only 20% of the white vote in 2016? That was my question, you aren't bothered by that?

I'm not really bothered by that because outside of your fantasies, minorities will continue to exist.

If you're asking me if I am personally troubled as to how whites are now voting, yes, but probably for different reasons than you.

I mean, it's been said that midterm elections keep swaying towards the Republicans more and more because they're an older, whiter electorate. But older and whiter didn't used to mean more Republican.

What did the Democratic Party do so bad to piss off the largest demographic in the entire country?

It's not what the Democrats did to peeve white people. It's how the Republicans played gullible, superstitious, bigoted white people who can only be hurt by profits-first, profits-only economics.

The GOP would bring back segregated lunch counters if such would pleas such people.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,839
United States


« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2014, 08:00:25 PM »

Obama already only won 39% of white people. If Democrats keep this up, they will become known solely as the party of minorities. Doesn't that worry you even a bit?

That sounds better than getting 8% of blacks, but either way, I don't think Democrats are worried about a perceived connection to minorities.  LMAO.

I didn't say that. You are missing my point.

IF you take away all minority voters, you realize that the Democrats who are damn near out of business in many parts of the country would be even WORSE off than they are today. If only whites voted, Mitt Romney would have won 46 states. If only whites voted, no more Mark Warner. We'd have Senator Scott Brown. You realize that all of the eggs are in one basket.

Doesn't that bug you at all, that there is a chance of a massive white backlash beyond 1994, 2010 and 2014? What if the Democratic nominee ended up with only 20% of the white vote in 2016? That was my question, you aren't bothered by that?

According to CNN Exit Polls, Democrats got 38 percent of the white vote in 2014. I believe they received 44 percent in ‘96, 41 percent in ‘00, 40 percent in ‘04, 43 percent in ‘08, and 39 percent in ‘12.

I don’t know the other midterm numbers off the top of my head. Regardless, the white vote has been pretty stable for democrats in presidential years since the turn of the century. Unless there’s another recession, it’s reasonable to suspect that they’ll maintain 38 percent of it in 2016, especially with Hillary Clinton. If they’re able to drive up support among minorities ala 2012, they will win the presidency again.

In other words, democrats aren’t worried about the white vote. They think they’ve reached their floor.

They’re worried about moderate Hispanics jumping to the republicans in 2016. For that to happen, republicans need to move on from immigrate reform (accept defeat) and talk about the size of government, high taxes, and national security. Republicans can win by using these issues to drive a wedge between democrats and some Hispanic voters.

Obama is hoping this order prevents that from happening. He knows Hispanics are passionate about immigration. This is something that will resonate with them, and stick with them. He’s relying on republicans alienating them by kissing up to their base, and coming out as anti-immigrant. It’s a long con. Immigration reform is a losing argument for republicans in 2016. Look at Chris Christie. He isn’t touching this issue right now. He knows he can’t win. He says he’s for immigration reform, and he loses in Iowa in the primaries. He says he opposes immigration reform, and he loses Nevada and Colorado in the general. Every minute Christie, Jeb Bush, and Scott Walker fumble over immigration is a minute less they spend talking on the issues that helps them.

That's why democrats aren't worried.

White and non-white votes are individually equal in importance.

In recent years, the non-white, non-Anglo, non-Christian, and non-straight part of the middle class vote has gone heavily Democratic. Even if the Republicans used to expect gains among all groups of voters as they left poverty due to concern about taxes, the Republicans have lost trust among such voters.

Someone middle class and  non-white, non-Anglo, non-Christian, or non-straight has good cause to distrust the Republican Party. One may attribute one's success and the potential for the success of one's children to formal education, and Republicans offend such an attribution with pervasive anti-intellectualism. Republicans used to treat education as a good proxy for Republican voting as educated people were less likely to fall for demagogues within the Democratic Party. Education was then, as now, a good proxy for income  In the 1950s, educated people voted heavily Republican. In 2008 and 2012,  the higher one's formal education the more likely one was to vote for the Democratic nominee for President. Income mattered as little as ever, with a slight edge in favor of Obama with higher income. (Ethnicity and living in a densely-populated environment mattered more).   

The Republicans have been relying heavily upon blatant rejections of objective science to appeal to white ignoramuses. They have been pushing young-earth creationism and denial of global warming. Although it is not science they have been accusing the President of being things that he isn't (like un-American and Muslim) contrary to fact; they keep playing up the death of an American diplomat in Benghazi as evidence of the incompetence of the President when in fact the President could not act fast enough in a fast-moving situation.

When intellectual integrity matters again, the GOP is in deep trouble. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.