Jan Brewer?

[feeblepizza]

I think that if Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer ran for President in 2012, she could win CO, all of NE, FL, IN, and NC. This would place Obama at 295, and Jan Brewer at 243. I think NV and OH would be very competitive, hell, even NH. What do you guys think about her possibilities? Maps are optional.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Heh, just imagine a high Latino turnout for Obama.

[pbrower2a]

I think that if Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer ran for President in 2012, she could win CO, all of NE, FL, IN, and NC. This would place Obama at 295, and Jan Brewer at 243. I think NV and OH would be very competitive, hell, even NH. What do you guys think about her possibilities? Maps are optional.

Governor Brewer has taken a high-stake gamble that demagogic legislation directed at illegal aliens will solve social problems that other methods won't, and with trivial consequences for the GOP. It is good for political exploitation, but it can still blow up. Some of it has failed a quick court challenge, indicating that the legislation has not been thought out well enough.

To be sure, illegal aliens of any kind are at the mercy of the INS. Illegal aliens are not the threat to Arizona that drug traffickers are.   

[DS0816]

I think that if Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer ran for President in 2012, she could win CO, all of NE, FL, IN, and NC. This would place Obama at 295, and Jan Brewer at 243. I think NV and OH would be very competitive, hell, even NH. What do you guys think about her possibilities? Maps are optional.

Further pissing away any support the Republican Party wants to win back with Hispanics,
Jan Brewer would join Barry Goldwater and John McCain as would-be Arizona presidents — struggling to win 100 electoral votes.

[Mjh]

I think that if Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer ran for President in 2012, she could win CO, all of NE, FL, IN, and NC. This would place Obama at 295, and Jan Brewer at 243. I think NV and OH would be very competitive, hell, even NH. What do you guys think about her possibilities? Maps are optional.

Further pissing away any support the Republican Party wants to win back with Hispanics,
Jan Brewer would join Barry Goldwater and John McCain as would-be Arizona presidents — struggling to win 100 electoral votes.

Agreed.
On a side note though, McCain easily cleared a 100 electoral votes. His total was 173.

[Bo]

She would lose in a landslide. Latino turnout would be through the roof.

[King]

Shrill people do not win elections.

[Thomas D]

She cracks 100. Obama 431-107.

[Progressive]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

[Dr. Cynic]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

[Bo]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

[Mjh]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

That is far too early to say. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/31/dems_down_to_2004_levels_with_minorities_106534.html

[Bo]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

That is far too early to say. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/31/dems_down_to_2004_levels_with_minorities_106534.html

Well, those polls show that the GOP still can't crack 30% of Latinos and 10% of blacks. Many are undecided right now, but even if the undecideds break 50/50, the Dems will still win 2/3 of Latinos and 90% of blacks. And exit polls in 2004 were proven to be wrong about the Latino vote. Bush won 39% or 40% of the Latino vote that year, not 44% as was initially reported.

[Dgov]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

That is far too early to say. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/31/dems_down_to_2004_levels_with_minorities_106534.html

Well, those polls show that the GOP still can't crack 30% of Latinos and 10% of blacks. Many are undecided right now, but even if the undecideds break 50/50, the Dems will still win 2/3 of Latinos and 90% of blacks. And exit polls in 2004 were proven to be wrong about the Latino vote. Bush won 39% or 40% of the Latino vote that year, not 44% as was initially reported.

I think he was referring to the bottom poll (the CNN one) where the GOP picks up 39% of Hispanic voters to the Democrats 54.  Naturalized to 99% with a 50-50 split on those undecideds would mean they'd vote for the Democrats about 57-42, or MORE than they did for Republicans in 2004.  Which, interestingly enough, would suggest that the Biggest swing away from Obama over the last two years would be from Hispanic voters, who supported him with 69% of the vote, indicating about a 12-point move towards the Republicans.

As for why this might have happened, I'm actually at a loss.  The economy probably has something to do with it, given that more established Hispanics (i.e. non-recent immigrants) tend to be pro-small-business, though the argument that 2008 was a fluke is more likely, given the large numbers of Hispanics affected by the mortgage meltdown in 2008 (like 1/3rd if i remember correctly) and the fact that these numbers seem very similar to the 2004 ones.

[Bo]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

That is far too early to say. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/31/dems_down_to_2004_levels_with_minorities_106534.html

Well, those polls show that the GOP still can't crack 30% of Latinos and 10% of blacks. Many are undecided right now, but even if the undecideds break 50/50, the Dems will still win 2/3 of Latinos and 90% of blacks. And exit polls in 2004 were proven to be wrong about the Latino vote. Bush won 39% or 40% of the Latino vote that year, not 44% as was initially reported.

I think he was referring to the bottom poll (the CNN one) where the GOP picks up 39% of Hispanic voters to the Democrats 54.  Naturalized to 99% with a 50-50 split on those undecideds would mean they'd vote for the Democrats about 57-42, or MORE than they did for Republicans in 2004.  Which, interestingly enough, would suggest that the Biggest swing away from Obama over the last two years would be from Hispanic voters, who supported him with 69% of the vote, indicating about a 12-point move towards the Republicans.

As for why this might have happened, I'm actually at a loss.  The economy probably has something to do with it, given that more established Hispanics (i.e. non-recent immigrants) tend to be pro-small-business, though the argument that 2008 was a fluke is more likely, given the large numbers of Hispanics affected by the mortgage meltdown in 2008 (like 1/3rd if i remember correctly) and the fact that these numbers seem very similar to the 2004 ones.

Sorry. I didn't see the bottom one. Well, the bottom one still seems to be an outlier in comparison to the other two, but I would wait for more polling data to come out to make firm conclusions.

[DS0816]

I think that if Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer ran for President in 2012, she could win CO, all of NE, FL, IN, and NC. This would place Obama at 295, and Jan Brewer at 243. I think NV and OH would be very competitive, hell, even NH. What do you guys think about her possibilities? Maps are optional.

Further pissing away any support the Republican Party wants to win back with Hispanics,
Jan Brewer would join Barry Goldwater and John McCain as would-be Arizona presidents — struggling to win 100 electoral votes.

Agreed.
On a side note though, McCain easily cleared a 100 electoral votes. His total was 173.

That's why I broke up my statement with an em dash. Goldwater had 52 electoral votes and McCain 173. Maybe Brewer would hit 112. But it's questionable that she could get to 100.

[Dan the Roman]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

That is far too early to say. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/31/dems_down_to_2004_levels_with_minorities_106534.html

Well, those polls show that the GOP still can't crack 30% of Latinos and 10% of blacks. Many are undecided right now, but even if the undecideds break 50/50, the Dems will still win 2/3 of Latinos and 90% of blacks. And exit polls in 2004 were proven to be wrong about the Latino vote. Bush won 39% or 40% of the Latino vote that year, not 44% as was initially reported.

I think he was referring to the bottom poll (the CNN one) where the GOP picks up 39% of Hispanic voters to the Democrats 54.  Naturalized to 99% with a 50-50 split on those undecideds would mean they'd vote for the Democrats about 57-42, or MORE than they did for Republicans in 2004.  Which, interestingly enough, would suggest that the Biggest swing away from Obama over the last two years would be from Hispanic voters, who supported him with 69% of the vote, indicating about a 12-point move towards the Republicans.

As for why this might have happened, I'm actually at a loss.  The economy probably has something to do with it, given that more established Hispanics (i.e. non-recent immigrants) tend to be pro-small-business, though the argument that 2008 was a fluke is more likely, given the large numbers of Hispanics affected by the mortgage meltdown in 2008 (like 1/3rd if i remember correctly) and the fact that these numbers seem very similar to the 2004 ones.

There is another possibility. Perhaps the numbers should not be normalized on 50-50 but 90-10. Blacks tend to respond in polls with about a 66-11 breakdown for Democrats and on election day go 88-12 for them. If you look at polls from 2008 you will see a similar thing with Hispanics. They tended to give Obama leads in the area of 55-29 or so and then went 69-31 on election day. Frankly I think anyone making generalizations about Hispanics going to the GOP with a poll showing them doing five points worse than in 2004 is in extremely tenuous territory because evidence overwhelmingly indicates that blacks and Hispanics always have a shy tory effect in polls in regards to the degree of their overwhelming support for Democrats.

That said, I am also not convinced Brewer would do all that badly. Illegal Immigration is an issue on which even a large number of liberals part ways with Obama. She may well bomb badly with posters on this board, but I think she would be quite competitive. The real problems for the GOP would however come later, as they did with Pete Wilson in California. He won and quite comfortably, but he locked in demographic patterns which in the long run meant doom for the party.

[Progressive]

Latino outreach could be permanently damaged

Agreed. The Republicans would lose a very important constituency.

The Republicans already lost Latinos.

If Jan Brewer is the nominee, Latinos will vote even more-so with Democrats. Even if Brewer is not xenophobic/racist, it is bad for the GOP to make her the nominee

[DS0816]

She cracks 100. Obama 431-107.

I see things similarly to you, but with the following changes:

ELECTION 2012

Jan Brewer (R-Arizona) vs. * Barack Obama (D-Illinois)

Brewer 39.8% | Obama 58.9%

Jan Brewer would struggle to hold her home state of Arizona as President Barack Obama runs up double-digit margins in Democratic Pima County (Tucson). Brewer would have to run up the margins further Republican in Maricopa County (Phoenix).

South Carolina would be a pure toss-up. If North Dakota flips to the Democrats, so does S.D. And if we're dealing with Obama further increasing his popular-vote margin by at least ten points, Nebraska 01 is gone. And Neb. (statewide) and Kansas become toss-ups.

Side Note: It would also be interesting to see how the female vote is playing in the likes of Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

[timmer123]

Wow you guys are lame.  In case you didn't notice the people are overwhelmingly on Brewer's side.  She wouldn't lose states like Ohio, Indiana, North Dakota and such because of this. That is flat out ridiculous.  As it stands, her approval rating in Arizona is 67%

On a side note, Latinos are pretty shallow if they would vote against Republicans for passing a law that simply reiterates existing federal law.  Open border Latino activists constantly beat the drum that illegal immigrants are not just Latinos, but when laws are passed against Illegal immigration they take it as a personal affront.  Basically what you all are saying is that Latinos want to be coddled and that's the only way to get their votes.  I'm not gonna go for that.  That's unethical.

[DS0816]

Wow you guys are lame.  In case you didn't notice the people are overwhelmingly on Brewer's side.  She wouldn't lose states like Ohio, Indiana, North Dakota and such because of this. That is flat out ridiculous.  As it stands, her approval rating in Arizona is 67%

On a side note, Latinos are pretty shallow if they would vote against Republicans for passing a law that simply reiterates existing federal law.  Open border Latino activists constantly beat the drum that illegal immigrants are not just Latinos, but when laws are passed against Illegal immigration they take it as a personal affront.  Basically what you all are saying is that Latinos want to be coddled and that's the only way to get their votes.  I'm not gonna go for that.  That's unethical.

Your post gave me some laughs. Thanks.

[pbrower2a]

Wow you guys are lame.  In case you didn't notice the people are overwhelmingly on Brewer's side.  She wouldn't lose states like Ohio, Indiana, North Dakota and such because of this. That is flat out ridiculous.  As it stands, her approval rating in Arizona is 67%

On a side note, Latinos are pretty shallow if they would vote against Republicans for passing a law that simply reiterates existing federal law.  Open border Latino activists constantly beat the drum that illegal immigrants are not just Latinos, but when laws are passed against Illegal immigration they take it as a personal affront.  Basically what you all are saying is that Latinos want to be coddled and that's the only way to get their votes.  I'm not gonna go for that.  That's unethical.

Support for the legislation is slipping. The right to privacy is very much a characteristic of American life. Don't be fooled; immigrants and their descendants almost invariably learn to like the freedom to not be asked for papers showing that they have the right to be where they are.

Freedom has some value over some alleged benefit from regimentation. Few Americans want to carry Soviet-style internal passports or Apartheid-era pass books. Some sections of the legislation have been struck down in a court "inferior" to the USSC, and most Americans associate unconstitutionality with legal impropriety, 

[Dgov]

Disapproval from the Left is at 23%?  Ouch.

[Holmes]

Wow you guys are lame.  In case you didn't notice the people are overwhelmingly on Brewer's side.  She wouldn't lose states like Ohio, Indiana, North Dakota and such because of this. That is flat out ridiculous.  As it stands, her approval rating in Arizona is 67%

On a side note, Latinos are pretty shallow if they would vote against Republicans for passing a law that simply reiterates existing federal law.  Open border Latino activists constantly beat the drum that illegal immigrants are not just Latinos, but when laws are passed against Illegal immigration they take it as a personal affront.  Basically what you all are saying is that Latinos want to be coddled and that's the only way to get their votes.  I'm not gonna go for that.  That's unethical.

Support for the legislation is slipping. The right to privacy is very much a characteristic of American life. Don't be fooled; immigrants and their descendants almost invariably learn to like the freedom to not be asked for papers showing that they have the right to be where they are.

Cite?  I have mine already:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20010460-503544.html

Cool, you posted a pollster that everyone on the right on this site was bashing just last year.