CO-Project New America/Keating Research (D): Obama up 4

[Sbane]

Hispanics can't help themselves for voting Obama a 2nd time when their unemployment jumps to 11%.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-06-03/hispanic-voters-unemployment/55367198/1

It's better than what the Republicans would do to them.

I'm calling that BS.

As opposed to Republicans who want to racially profile them and pull them over and check their citizenship? Look at Gallup's numbers. Obama's approval rating among Hispanics is around 52-53% but he is getting about 65% of their votes. If the same thing happened with the overall electorate, Obama would have 58-59% of the vote with his 46% approval ratings. Hispanics are starting to vote in large numbers for the Democrats due to what the Republicans have done towards them or said about them. In 2004 about 40-44% of Hispanics voted for the Republicans. Which is probably the same as whites if you control for income. But the Republicans decided to go for the xenophobe vote. That's what they chose and shouldn't complain when Hispanics and other immigrants don't vote for them.

[Sbane]

I think this discussion of Hispanic voting trends very quickly turning into a discussion on illegal immigrants voting perfectly illustrates why Hispanic LEGAL citizens will be voting 2:1 for Obama and the Democrats even though only half approve of the job they have done. If illegals were voting in any significant numbers, California's electorate would be 35-40% Latino as opposed to the 20% it is.

[Sbane]

Are we talking about illegal immigrants voting?  How often do you think that happens, percentage-wise?  Just curious.

Los Angeles Times poll of registered voters has 41% of California Latinos admitting to being born in a different country.  These results are quite stable from poll to poll.  It's within the realm of possibility that they're just confused but then you'd have news stories every election about millions of illegal immigrants being turned away at the California polls.  Saying they must've come through legal channels just insults our intelligence.

Naturalized citizens can vote wormy. What the hell are you talking about?

[Sbane]

Hispanics can't help themselves for voting Obama a 2nd time when their unemployment jumps to 11%.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-06-03/hispanic-voters-unemployment/55367198/1

It's better than what the Republicans would do to them.

I'm calling that BS.

As opposed to Republicans who want to racially profile them and pull them over and check their citizenship? Look at Gallup's numbers. Obama's approval rating among Hispanics is around 52-53% but he is getting about 65% of their votes. If the same thing happened with the overall electorate, Obama would have 58-59% of the vote with his 46% approval ratings. Hispanics are starting to vote in large numbers for the Democrats due to what the Republicans have done towards them or said about them. In 2004 about 40-44% of Hispanics voted for the Republicans. Which is probably the same as whites if you control for income. But the Republicans decided to go for the xenophobe vote. That's what they chose and shouldn't complain when Hispanics and other immigrants don't vote for them.

Combating illegal immigration and it's harmful negative side effects is not xenophobia

By pulling over anyone who looks Hispanic? Why not protect the border instead of racially profiling people? Just doesn't motivate the racist base that well, does it now?

[Sbane]

Are we talking about illegal immigrants voting?  How often do you think that happens, percentage-wise?  Just curious.

Los Angeles Times poll of registered voters has 41% of California Latinos admitting to being born in a different country.  These results are quite stable from poll to poll.  It's within the realm of possibility that they're just confused but then you'd have news stories every election about millions of illegal immigrants being turned away at the California polls.  Saying they must've come through legal channels just insults our intelligence.

Naturalized citizens can vote wormy. What the hell are you talking about?

The number of Mexicans in the entire country (not just California) who became naturalized citizens in the period 2002-2010 is 889,929 according to the Department of Homeland Security.  According to exit polls, Latinos were 22% of the California electorate in 2010, or about 2.2 million voters.  41% of them is over 900,000 votes.  It is not possible that illegal immigrants are not voting in large numbers in California.

Why restrict it to those who were naturalized from 2002-2010? Why not look at everyone naturalized since 1970 or 1980? The vast majority of them would still be voting. Indeed they would be voting in much higher numbers than those who are recently naturalized.

[Sbane]

Why restrict it to those who were naturalized from 2002-2010? Why not look at everyone naturalized since 1970 or 1980? The vast majority of them would still be voting. Indeed they would be voting in much higher numbers than those who are recently naturalized.

Because I don't have that data available and the number of Mexicans naturalized in the state of California prior to 2002 is pretty negligable. 

What is this based on? There has been Mexican immigration occurring into California since..well, forever. Immigration trends actually changed recently with more Mexicans heading to other states as opposed to just California. I see this first hand with Hispanics in Tennessee being much more "fresh of the boat" than a random Hispanic you meet in Southern California.

Also if we are talking about Hispanics as a whole, we shouldn't just restrict it to Mexicans. Even from 2002-2010, how many Hispanics as a whole were naturalized?

[Sbane]

But, since facts and figures are key, if we assume the proportion of naturalized Mexicans naturalized in California in 2011 (39% of the total) holds true for previous years, and estimate that Mexican naturalizations since 1970 were at the same average rate as between 2002 and 2010, minus the outlier year of 2008 (almost certainly an overestimate), then there were about 1.37 million Mexicans naturalized in California from 1970 to 2010.  Assuming 20% died, moved out of California, are not registered voters, or are too young to vote (almost certainly an underestimate), and 60% of the rest turned out (almost certainly an overestimate), that gets us to 660,000 votes - 250,000 still unaccounted for.

First of all about 20% of Hispanics in California are not Mexican. So that 250,000 unaccounted for shrinks considerably to about 75,000 assuming the naturalization rates are the same for the rest. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-04.pdf

Then we have to ask whether naturalization of Mexicans in California is only 39% of the total when averaged from 1970-2010. It is probably higher. Like I said, recently a greater proportion of Mexican immigration has headed to other places than California. Back in the 1980s and 1990s it was going in higher proportions to California. Also the 20% figure who have either moved or died is a little high. You have to remember that most immigrants are young and so the vast majority of immigrants from even the 1970s will still be alive. Also it's really the 1980s and 1990s where we saw a great increase in immigration. And averaged over 1970-2010, I really have to question whether there will be a net migration of immigrants from California to other states. Maybe native whites and blacks might be moving from California, I highly doubt that is the case with Hispanics or even Asians for that matter. And as for being too young to vote, if you come through legal channels, it can take up to 5-15 years to get naturalized. Many who came as kids would be eligible to vote, or at least within a few years of naturalization, in most cases. And immigration rates among the young are not that high iirc (double check me on this point though). Most immigrants tend to be from 20-40 years old. The young and definitely the old are underrepresented.