The bluing of America

By Carl 

Ted Cruz, the Senator-elect from Texas, has an interesting observation to make:

"If Republicans do not do better in the Hispanic community," he said, "in a few short years Republicans will no longer be the majority party in our state." He ticked off some statistics: in 2004, George W. Bush won forty-four per cent of the Hispanic vote nationally; in 2008, John McCain won just thirty-one per cent. On Tuesday, Romney fared even worse.

"In not too many years, Texas could switch from being all Republican to all Democrat," he said. "If that happens, no Republican will ever again win the White House. New York and California are for the foreseeable future unalterably Democrat. If Texas turns bright blue, the Electoral College math is simple. We won't be talking about Ohio, we won't be talking about Florida or Virginia, because it won't matter. If Texas is bright blue, you can't get to two-seventy electoral votes. The Republican Party would cease to exist. We would become like the Whig Party. Our kids and grandkids would study how this used to be a national political party. 'They had Conventions, they nominated Presidential candidates. They don't exist anymore.'"

Long-time and careful readers of my prose will recognize this statement. I've long held that the U.S. is due to swing the political pendulum back to liberal thinking and policies.

Normally, pendulums lose momentum and gravitate towards the center, and that will eventually happen, but in this instance, Karl Rove and the Republicans, in an effort to create what Rove termed a "permanent Republican majority" have pulled the pendulum really far to the right.

And you know what happens when you pull a pendulum really hard: it swings back, fast and hard.

Cruz is one of a handful of Republicans -- Marco Rubio and Susana Martinez are among the others -- who could prevent this from happening, but it seems really unlikely to occur. It's pretty clear that Florida (Rubio) and New Mexico (Martinez) have cemented the Democratic Party as the party of the minority vote. But that's not the issue, identity politics. It's something much more basic and subtle.

I want you to think back to the election campaign, particularly the general election: can you name one Republican proposal for the next four years that didn't involve lowering taxes for the wealthy?

Meanwhile, Obama still has a raft of policies from his 2008 campaign that he can call upon at any time and propose. This is what we might term "leadership."

People respond to this. People in trouble especially respond to proposals that will lift us all out of trouble. It's fine to propose a tax cut -- claiming it's for all but in truth, it benefits the wealthy the most -- but when people aren't so worried about their next paycheck as their next car or their house or their retirement or their children, short-term proposals lose an awful lot of their luster.

If Hurricane Sandy benefitted President Obama at all -- apart from looking presidential, I mean -- it is on this very subtle point. Sandy showed that everything we build up for ourselves to ensure a future can be wiped off the face of the earth in an instant, and then where do you begin again?

Tax cuts help, to be sure, but they don't address the underlying problem: jobs don't pay as much as they used to and second jobs are really embarrassing.

Wage growth will help Americans. To play with tax cuts at this point in time is preposterous. It's like giving someone a five percent discount off a TV, when what they need is a job that pays enough so they can pay for that TV out of their own pocket, not borrowing the money.

This, above all other reasons, is why I believe America is heading for a progressive agenda over the coming decades. People are tired of crumbs and want the bread, and minorities are only the canary in the coalmine on this point.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Rosie Perez is so great

By Richard K. Barry

This is a new American Bridge video with the multi-talented Rosie Perez. She's responding to Mitt Romney's "quip" that he would have a better chance of being elected president if only he were Latino.

Stay classy, Mitt.


(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

New Poll: No más for Mitt

By Richard K. Barry 

This seems to be my theme today. What can I say? Now a new poll by Latino Decisions has Obama earning the support of 73 percent of Latino voters. It's the first time he has 70 percent in the six weeks they have conducted a tracking survey. Their poll puts Romney at 21 percent support among Latinos.

As TPM adds:

This week's installment also shows that more than 70 percent of Latino voters trust Obama over Romney on issues related to the economy, women, the Middle East and Latin America.

These are indeed brutal numbers.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

How does Romney pretend to be popular among Latinos?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Easy.

1) By threatening Univision and the University of Miami, which hosted the Univision forums with the two presidential candidates last week, saying he'd "reschedule" if his demands were not met.

2) Specifically, given that there weren't nearly enough supportive students to fill the hall, by demanding that the rule agreed to by the two campaigns that the forums be attended mostly by students be lifted in his case.

3) And so by being "allowed to bus in rowdy activists from around southern Florida in order to fill the extra seats at [his] town hall" while the president "stuck to the original parameters and allowed a large chunk of the tickets to be distributed to interested students on campus."

4) And by being able to do this because the university official "charged with coordinating the forums," Rudy Fernandez, is a member of Romney's Hispanic steering committee.

5) That is, by getting preferential treatment and making it seem as if he didn't.

Oh, yes, the Romney camp gloated with glee, the manipulated contrast "glaring enough to evoke some boasting from the Romney campaign in the immediate aftermath":

When the Republican took his place Wednesday night in the first of two back-to-back candidate forums televised on the mega-network, he was greeted by an adoring, raucous crowd that cheered his every word, and booed many of the moderators' questions. The next night, President Obama was treated to stone cold silence from the audience as he was aggressively grilled on his lackluster immigration record.

But of course the two crowds were different and so were bound to have different responses, what with this preferential treatment and breaking of rules, and, indeed, "Romney's non-student activists ignored instructions to hold their applause."

And so really "the enthusiasm gap" was "an optical illusion."

Which is hardly surprising -- and, indeed, the real enthusiasm gap is quite the reverse -- given that Obama is way ahead of Romney among Latinos, and given that Romney takes an extremist right-wing position on immigration and has called for, as he did at the forum, "self-deportation," hardly a popular position to take in that community.

And given that Romney's whole campaign is built upon dishonesty and deception.

Ann Romney woos Latino voters with the typical Romney mix of ignorance, entitlement, and douchebaggery

By Michael J.W. Stickings

By most accounts, it would seem that Ann Romney's pre-Christie speech on Tuesday went quite well, though, really, did anyone expect otherwise? She's a polished business/political wife and she now has a lot of experience trying to humanize her husband.

It went well? Big deal.

Then again, she's one-half of a rich douchebag couple -- she drives a couple o' Cadillacs, is really into dressage (a rich white person's "sport"), comes across as remarkably stuck up despite her various and ongoing attempts at modesty and humility, and refers to those beneath her, which she and Mitt see as pretty much everyone, as "you people."

So there was certainly ample opportunity for her sense of entitlement and privilege to come across in her speech, or at some point during the convention. And... well, it did, just a day after her supposed triumph:

Ann Romney's convention speech was directly aimed at wooing female voters, but at a lunch event Wednesday she changed her focus and pitched her husband to Hispanic voters, a voting bloc that is especially important in this battleground state, urging them to get past the "biases... from the Democratic machine."

Right, their biases. Like, you know, being against xenophobia and immigrant-baiting. Like being for the DREAM Act, addressing the issue of undocumented immigration with compassion, and being open to the idea of America as a land of opportunity for all, not just for the privileged (white) few.

Seriously, is Ann Romney so fucking clueless about the extremist right-wing -- and indeed outright nativist -- positions Republicans have taken on the very existence of Latinos in America?

It's not all about "small business," which Romney mentioned in her speech, as if Latinos are all small business owners -- again, what utter lack of understanding, what utter ignorance.

And then to suggest that she "know[s] what it’s like to be the daughter of immigrants" because her grandfather was a Welsh coalminer? Seriously? Nothing at all against Welsh coalminers, who had it rough, but that's completely ridiculous. (One of my grandfathers landed on the beaches on D-Day with the U.S. Army, while the other was a British bomber pilot. I know what it's like to fight the Germans!)

You know, if Mitt Romney were his own wife, he'd be just like Ann. They're perfect for each other.

Hopelessly Misinformed Latinos for Romney (HMLR) -- Part 2

By Miguel

(I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message. Estoy Mitt Romney y apruebo este mensaje.)

Hola! My name is Miguel. You may remember me from my last message to Latino voters. Since then, things have changed for the better and I wanted to return once more and encourage all Latinos to vote for Señor Romney for President in 2012.

Recently, people have been saying that Mr. Romney has changed his position on immigration and that he is playing to the Latino base by walking back his original comments about sending us all back home. Mi amigos, this is nothing more than the liberal media trying to confuse you. Mr. Romney is a man of his word, and no matter what you may hear, he has not changed his stance. He still wants to help us.

Not too long ago, Mr. Romney said this:

Well, the answer is self-deportation... People decide that they could do better by going home because they can't find work here because they don't have legal documentation to allow them to work here.

Now, some people read this and think Mitt Romney does not support Latinos. This is wrong! In reality, Mr. Romney has big plans for latinos to do better... in our native homeland! If you read between the lines you see a man who wants to improve conditions outside the United States and bring prosperity to places that for centuries were nothing more than America's puta, a place worth less than the hourly wage of our hardworking children.

I see Mitt Romney for who he really is: an honest man who truly cares about Latinos and wants what is best for us. This is a man who has sent many of America's jobs to countries that truly needed the work. With a record like that, how can we not support him? I do not know how many of those jobs came to Tijuana, but from the looks of things down there we need a man like Mr. Romney to help put Mexicans back to work.

President Obama recently promised to allow undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States without fear of deportation. But allowing us to stay indefinitely only prolongs the hardships that our families face back home. If more jobs stay in America, then our families back home continue to suffer. Mr. Romney has different plans. In this era of global economics, we need a leader who thinks outside of Washington and outside of the United States. We need Mitt Romney.

On election day, vote for a leader who will put us back to work globally and do for Mexico what he has already done for China. If you love your families and are proud of where you came from, then do what is right.

Vote Mitt! You won't be sorry.

Mitt Romney 2012 – A Better America.

Paid for by Hopelessly Misinformed Latinos for Romney.

**********

By tmcbpatriot (not Miguel, but close)

Some good news but mostly bad news for Romney on immigration and the Latino vote

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Given his recent dithering, and more so given his sucking up to the jingoistic, xenophobic right during the primaries, it's good news for Romney that immigration isn't the #1 issue. (A new Gallup poll places it well back of health care and various economic/fiscal issues, at least among registered voters. Latinos generally have it tied for first alongside health care and unemployment.)

The bad news for Romney is that President Obama commands a huge lead among Latinos. The same poll has him up 66 to 25 among registered Latino voters.

In other words, Obama is way up among Latinos even though immigration, an issue on which he has a huge advantage over Romney, isn't a dominant priority for them.

On the one hand, Romney could take comfort here. It likely won't get worse for him on immigration, and so he can try to work to narrow the gap with this key demographic by continuing to blame Obama for not doing enough to fix the economy and by stressing what he claims are his economic bona fides, specifically his business record.

On the other hand, it very well could get worse for him on immigration, not least given the Supreme Court's decision to uphold perhaps the most egregious part of Arizona's draconian anti-immigrant law even as it struck down most of the law on jurisdictional grounds. In response, Romney may not have gone the extremist right-wing Scalia route and railed against illegal immigration (proving that he is fully ideologue and partisan, not dispassionate jurist), but his refusal to take a stand on the ruling, similar to his refusal to take a stand on Obama's executive action implementing the DREAM Act, was telling. He wants nothing to do with immigration as an issue because he knows it's a losing issue for him, but he likely won't be able to avoid it. At some point, he'll have to side with the right-wing extremists who dominate the issue in the Republican Party or take a more sensible approach and alienate Republican voters.

Add to this the fact that most people aren't paying attention (and won't until the campaign gets underway in earnest later in the summer) and Romney's "support" among Latinos could very well go down once Romney's dithering/pandering is contrasted to the president's strong, sensible positioning (and clear personal views), including on yesterday's ruling.

But even if the numbers stay roughly the same, that would mean Obama winning this demographic by an overwhelming margin, putting even more pressure on Romney to pick up even more support among white males, his core demographic. He's well ahead among white males, to be sure, but the question is whether he'll win by enough to offset his losses elsewhere.

Perhaps it won't matter in 2012. Perhaps the Latino vote won't be the difference one way or the other. For Republicans, though, the fact that this fast-growing demographic is overwhelmingly Democratic spells electoral disaster in elections to come. And, Romney's dithering aside, it won't get any better for them if they continue to insist on taking extremist positions on immigration, as well as on other issues that evidently matter a great deal to Latinos, as to so many Americans, like health care.

Politics continues to be political

By Richard K. Barry 

A new poll released on June 17, 2012 by Latino Decisions and America's Voice finds that Latino registered voters really like President Obama's recent announcement that he will "halt deportations and provide temporary work permits to some young undocumented immigrants":

Prior to June 15, 2012, many immigration reform advocates had stated that the record high levels of deportations of immigrants under the Obama administration was causing some Latinos to grow weary about the Obama re-election campaign. In a Latino Decisions/Univision News poll in early 2012, 53% of Latino voters said they were less enthusiastic about Obama in 2012 than they had been in 2009, while just 30% were more excited about the President. Overall, when asked what they thought about Obama’s deportation of 1.2 million immigrants, 41% of Latino voters said they were less enthusiastic about Obama, compared to 22% who were more enthusiastic, a net enthusiasm deficit of -19 points. The announcement on June 15 appears to have clearly erased Obama’s enthusiasm deficit among Latinos.

Repeat that last line: The announcement "appears to have clearly erased Obama's enthusiasm deficit among Latinos."

On Face the Nation over the weekend, Mitt Romney told Bob Schieffer that as for Obama's announcement, politics was "certainly a big part of the equation."

Isn't it interesting that Mitt Romney, a man who has changed so many of the political positions he once held to pander to a very conservative Republican Party, would sneer at anyone else for "being political."

That's politics. And, you're right, Mitt. Obama's announcement was political. Bazinga!

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Obama needs to energize Latino voters

By Richard K. Barry

Here are some more numbers on President Obama's commanding lead over Mitt Romney with Latino voters, as reported by MSNBC, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll of Latino respondents:

• Obama has a 34-point lead over Romney among registered Latino voters, 61 to 27 percent.
• Obama's approval rating among all Latino adults is 61 percent, compared to 48 percent of all Americans in the new NBC/WSJ poll.
• Obama's positive/negative score among Latinos is 58/23 percent. Romney's is 26/35 percent.
• 40 percent of Latino voters think the country is headed on the right direction, compared to 33 percent of all Americans.

The only dark cloud for Obama is that far fewer Latino voters say they are highly interested in the upcoming election, only 68 percent, compared to 81 percent of all voters who express a high degree of interest.

That's no small problem, but at least Obama knows what he has to do.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Liberals are fapping

By Carl 

We probably shouldn't be, because something similar could happen to Democrats, eventually: 

Washington (CNN) -- When presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney appears before Latino small-business owners in Washington on Wednesday, he'll address a group whose explosive birth rates foreshadow a seismic political shift in GOP strongholds in the Deep South and Southwest. 

"The Republicans' problem is their voters are white, aging and dying off," said David Bositis, a senior research associate at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, who studies minority political engagement.

"There will come a time when they suffer catastrophic losses with the realization of the population changes." 

Remember, there was a time, in my lifetime so not too long ago, when Republicans were the liberal party and Democrats were the racist bigots. Had that dynamic not changed, a lot of us would be battling each other right now, defending which party actually was the more liberal.

Hard to believe, I know.

Diversity is a good thing. It generates new ideas and solutions. Look at the Republicans. Their entire platform can be summed up in four words: tax cuts for the rich. This is the same message they've run on since 1980 and on the whole it's been an epic failure, dramatically highlighted by the fact that when Democrats have managed to reverse some of those deep cuts and given them to the middle class, the economy has soared.

The problem with diversity is precisely what the DNC is facing right now. You have Blue Dog Dems and progressive Dems and DLC centrist Dems and the struggle for the soul of the party is going on right now. Our leadership, incluing President Obama but more in Congress (Pelosi and Reid) tout modestly progressive policies with the occasional nod towards populism, but they can't even get the flanks of their party to line up behind them.

It makes one long for the days of an LBJ or even Tip O'Neill, a day when the rank-and-file would join in on a vote.

Republicans have demonstrated that kind of party unity until very recently. The rise of the Teabaggers has seen that unity torn asunder under what amounts to loyalty oaths (Norquist's tax pledges) and threats to primary mavericks like Orrin Hatch and the recently deposed Richard Lugar.

Ironically, it is this demographic shift that makes these pledges and threats untenable. Sure, you might retain a Republican seat but if the electorate around him is shifting to a more Democratic-favorable population, then you lose the long-term battle that a moderate might win (I know, calling Hatch and Lugar "moderates" is a little like calling peanut butter "lubricating").

Even more ironically, these demographic shifts are occuring in the very states that have gone out of their way to make themselves a) insular and b) refuges for businesses.

That's right. It is the right-to-work states that have seen the largest influx of Latinos, meaning even more job pressure on the residents there. Those Latinos will work even cheaper than the poor white folks, so I expect to see "white-to-work" laws being rammed down the throats of the legislatures in those regions.

After all, look at what happened in Georgia and Alabama when anti-immigrant legislation was passed: crops practically withered and died until Hispanic groups and local farmers pushed back against the legislation.

Really. When the kindest thing your entire party can say about Hispanics is that they'll "self-deport" in the face of challenging economic times (Romney), you've jumped the shark on the entire demographic.

Latinos comprised the fastest-growing demographic in the south and are directly responsible for giving many if not most of the new Congressional seats apportioned to states like Texas and Georgia. Eventually, those groups will demand the political power that comes with this gift. Republicans have done yeoman work to make sure they won't be the party to benefit.

I said that diversity was a good thing, generally, and that means we really need a Republican party, too, but we need one that is vital and vibrant, generating ideas and solutions, not the same old failed mantras parrotted for decades.

Thing is, if the Republicans manage to throw themselves on the sword of self-oblivion, what rises up to take its place may not be much better. 

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Latino voters are still with Obama

By Richard K. Barry

Maybe not surprising, but a Univision News/Latino Decisions poll released recently made clear the strength President Obama continues to have with Latino voters.

According to the poll released Tuesday - one year before Election day 2012 - registered Latino voters in the 21 states with the largest Latino populations prefer Obama over the top three GOP presidential candidates, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, and Rick Perry by a two-to-one margin. The president is up 65 percent to 22 percent on Cain, 67 percent to 24 on Romney, and a whopping 68 percent to 21 on Perry.

That is certainly good news for Obama, and this is good news too:

If demographic trends are an indication, Latinos could play an even greater roll in 2012 than they did in the 2008. Last election, 6.6 million Latinos voted, but next year a record 12.2 Latinos are set to vole, a 26 percent increase from 2008, according to projections from the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund. Simply put, they are the fastest-growing voting group in the nation.

One other number worth noting is the very high percentage of Latino voters who are not blaming Obama for the struggling economy.

Sixty-seven percent believe that President George W. Bush is most responsible for the nation's economic woes (including 25 percent of Latino Republicans) and only 19 percent say Obama shoulders most of the blame. Those numbers track significantly higher than the sample of the general population, which split 50-33 percent between Bush and Obama.

Clearly the president will not want to take any constituency for granted, but this is a pretty good point from which to start making a pitch with this particular voting community.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)