The reason I’m not that upset about last night’s results is that I think Republicans are fucked if they can’t get more of the Latino vote. They did horribly last night in that regard and it’s why Democrats didn’t do so badly out west:
<p>Reid got an amazing 90% of the state’s 12% Hispanic voters, according to exit polls; Sharron Angle got just 8%.</p><p> And as Democrats talk today of a “Western Firewall,” the trend that stands out is the disastrous Republican collapse among Hispanic voters. Hispanics make up over a third of the California electorate, and Meg Whitman’s dismal peformance — she got just 31% of the vote — gave Jerry Brown his margin. Carly Fiorina got just 28%.</p><p> And Hispanic candidates out West didn’t make much difference for Republicans. Brian Sandoval did better than Angle, but wound up with a mere 33% of the Hispanic vote in Nevada. Similar stats for New Mexico aren’t available, but regional patterns suggest that Susanna Martinez didn’t break the trend.</p>
In a Republican wave year, Republican candidates who are themselves Latinos can’t get over a third of the Latino vote. Democrats need to start pushing harder on comprehensive immigration reform. Even if they can’t get something passed (I hope they do because the current situation is awful for a lot of families), it’s a winning political issue.
Yup. It’s one of several reasons why I see this election as a disaster, but not Armageddon. (I also think the one thing that could have mitigated the losses would have been passing immigration reform…but then the Republicans knew that.)
But they were saying they were going to get the Senate, and they didn’t! Buncha losers.
And while I was hoping this was not the usual “party in power loses congress seats,” it turned out it was. So, then?
People keep saying stuff like this, and I keep wondering when it’s going to actually start becoming reality.
@fasteddie9318: I keep wondering when it’s going to actually start becoming reality.
Out here in the West, yesterday.
First Draft says it well —
On the flip side, Republicans recognize the trend too. So crazy shit like repealing the 14th amendment will get more and more popular, and it’ll only be a matter of time before states and courts start trying to end run around citizenship to deny Hispanic families their human rights.
Be careful what you wish for on immigration reform.
I can see that taking Obama down in 2012. There is not a public consensus yet, as much as there might be on BJ (for the most part).
Strikes me as something to deal with in a second Obama term.
not gonna happen tim. not after all the white people went to the GOP and the teabaggers.
These things take a while, but if in ten years, they’re pulling under a third, they won’t win any national elections.
Brian Sandoval, when he was asked if he was worried about his family getting profiled if they went to Arizona, told Univision it wasn’t a problem because his kids didn’t look Hispanic. I doubt the Nevada Republicans made a lot of friends in the Latino community with that ad saying “don’t vote.” Also, too, Michael Steele got like 25% of the black vote in his Senate race.
If they pushed to pass some form of immigration legislation AND repeal DADT in the lame duck session…
…then yes, they might have a chance.
Republicans wont be able to maintain a majority as long as they keep pissing off non-white folks. Luckily for Democrats, Republican bigotry seems to be intensifying rather than cooling off.
Perhaps this is the last hurrah of the pissed off old white voter?
What a relief to know that we can go on with letting the other side control the narrative, misplaced priorities, and “working with the other side” until Latinos outnumber white folks nationwide.
But Doug, a Republican Latino Senator was elected in Florida and New Mexico elected a Republican Latina Governor. Things are very, very much in flux with where the Latinos will end up.
Here’s a little known fact about last night:
The GOP swept the Presidential swing states in the midwest. They swept Florida. They control redistricting in the most important swing states.
It will ensure a Republican Majority in the House for quite some time, and Hopey can’t win without the rustbelt.
@fasteddie9318: It’s the reality in California, Nevada, and Colorado. Yesterday’s election indicates that the white heartland of this country is morphing into a withered, bloodsucking, zombie, alive enough to drag the rest of the country down, but without hope of ever having its vitality restored.
The midwest has become like the Russian hinterlands in the wake of communism’s fall: abandoned factories, and the sting of a defeated ideology being soothed by rabid nationalism and substance abuse.
Exactly, Doug. If only to burn into the synapses of the nascent demographical time bomb who is on who’s side.
drosophilo melanogaster III
how’d angle do with the asians
I seriously do not understand why Obama did not push for immigration reform.
Seeing the GOP frothing at the mouth with racism would have kept some of those blue seats blue.
But then I don’t understand anything Obama does…
The good reason to have waited on immigration reform is so that they push for it at the end of the coming summer. That way the GOP primaries will be in full swing and they will all be rushing to out-xenophobe each other.
How’s that Paliny-Planny thing workin’ out for Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell and Joe Miller? They won just like you predicted, right?
@change: or not. Thanks to Tom Delay, we now have a precedent of redistricting any time a state’s political climate changes enough to allow it. Those state legislatures and governships go back to being blue, and they can be redistricted right back again.
That analogy may not be that far off:
sorry, i meant dougj.
In the LA Times, Marshall Ganz pretty much echoes hamsher on the veal pen.
I never said O’Donnell would win. The MSM raped her after the primaries then left her for dead.
The Senate this time doesn’t matter. We’ll get it in 2012 thanks to the map. Better to have an ineffective Democrat majority in charge to get the blame.
More change is coming in 2012! Obama can’t win without white, working class voters in the rustbelt, that’s just a fact.
Hopey and the Chump Patrol really screwed the pooch. i still have to watch the whole press conference, but judging from the reaction of some pretty loyalist O-bot kossacks, it was a big disappointment.
I’m sure the TeaTards would quietly support any initiative by the Republican leadership in the House to propose sane and human immigration reform.
And if they don’t, it will be proof that leading Republicans failed to get the message sent by the entire population of America, which is that they want limited government which is able to round up and throw out 11 million illegal immigrants who currently work for all those conservative small businesses and medium sized industries and large size agricultural concerns who support the Republican Party.
It’s my understanding that Susanna Martinez from NM isn’t actually Hispanic — her husband is, but she’s anglo…
He’s a weak-kneed pussy indeed. He has no clue what he’s in for once we take control in January.
No compromise. No surrender!
He’s a weak-kneed p*ssy.
The Republican motto when we take control in January: no compromise, no surrender, make him a one-term President at all cost!
@fasteddie9318: In California, it already is a reality. This is the bluest the state has ever been. If we can pick this economy up, it’s going to be noticed in 2012.
@Dennis SGMM: What a surprise to find I said that!
I’m really hoping that if Jerry Brown doesn’t run for a second term or when Feinstein finally retires we get Debra Bowen to either run for senate or Gov. I can’t stand to see Gavin Newsom move on up any more, nor can I stand to see Feinstein get reelected.
Let’s all thank the teabaggers for giving us those wonderful insane candidates who were instrumental in keeping the GOP from running the Senate.
I agree with the commenter above, the GOP bitter old white winner death march has already started in CA. We may have clean sweep in Democratic statewide offices.
I tried to stay away from news last night. Went from door knocking to gym, but heard a little anyway while waiting for traffic report on the radio: Pete Wilson talking up how Whitman was going to win.
And thought, ‘thanks Pete, you’ve done so much for us.”
This blog’s a lot less fun with all the pie-lovers swarming it.
It’s not a damn baking blog!
When Democrats stop screwing around and manage to finally take advantage. Funny thing: deporting Latino immigrants at an equal or higher rate to George Bush has caused Obama’s approval among them to plummet. Who would have thought?
Half of illegal immigrants came here on visas which expired, but how are we supposed to find them? All we have are their names, addresses, and places of employment. So hey let’s send troops to the Mexico border.
@Violet: But what percentage of Latinos (and specifically in Rubio’s case, non-Cuban Latinos) voted for them? And what percentage of Latino politicians nationwide are Republicans? To me, they just look like the exceptions that prove the rule.
No, you didn’t. My point is that we lost those other elections for a lot of reasons and unless we address them we’ll lose again, and again.
Resting our hopes on a long term demographic shift isn’t going to help our nominee in 2012 and it isn’t going to help defend the roughly twenty Democratic Senate seats that will be up for grabs then.
Harry Reid promised to bring DREAM to a vote in the rest of this congressional term.
You want to know why the republicans won big last night? It is because more people voted for them than the democrats. You can analyze the living shit out of that dead duck, as to this or that why, but the only reason is because the American voter is shallow, self interested, and mostly white. They voted for republicans because they are too lazy, or busy, to bother with learning about issues and politics in general, beyond the Sunday talk shows and campaign ads. They voted republican, because republicans are in their white tribe, and they feel more comfortable hearing sweet lies from the familiar, than hard truths from the unfamiliar, especially when they are financially anxious.
Now that the wingers are part of the process again, they can be held responsible, and Obama will need to change tone to be more combative, and he will, because he will be facing a GOP that is now part of the triad of power in this system.
And to answer why democrats don’t have a consistent message that has the fortitude of conviction is because they do not have anything like consensus in their own caucus, not the discipline and patience and loyalty that the wingnuts can muster. You can blame this or that individual elected democrat, but the problem is us. We like our contrary natures, that are antithetical to singleness of purpose. We argue about the arrangement of toothpicks, the other side gets together and clobbers us with a 2 by 4.
I dunno Doug.
You keep saying it is a winning issue but I think a lot of eastern and more urban liberal don’t realize how absolutely toxic it is among working class citizens, white, black and other- especially when they are hurting from the bad economy. It is absolutely decisive, a candidate’s position on other issues just won’t matter if attention is on immigration. This is because it has caused huge real suffering. A citizen simply can’t compete with an illegal immigrant. The employer would have to pay the citizen a great deal less to come out even.
That is why I think the Arizona law was a brilliant move by Republicans- it put Obama in the position of looking like he supported illegal immigrants. ALL the working-class people I know turned against him, many of whom are liberal and voted for him. “Give the rich a tax break? Fine, that won’t hurt me nearly as badly as illegal immigration has.”
@fasteddie9318: 2008? Check out Indiana
@Elizabelle: Sounds to me like a wedge issue to make sure he wins 38 states in 2012 and set the stage for winning Texas in 2016
joe from Lowell
How’s that work in 2006? The Republicans redistricted the crap out of all sorts of states after 2000, attempting to maximize the number of seats they controlled by packing Democrats into a few 70%+ Democratic districts, and giving themselves lots of 55% Republican districts.
Except that those districts didn’t stay Republican, now did they? And that’s largely because of the Republicans’ complete incapacity to relate to the black, Asian, and Latino people moving into those once-lily-white suburbs in such numbers.
@ChrisWWW: That’s my prediction and has been since a November Wednesday in 2008. This was always going to happen (okay, it’s a lot bigger than I thought), but they have to please their base to succeed and their base is full of white people who loath Hispanics. Welcome 50 million new voters to the Democratic coalition
I just checked her Wikipedia page. It says she’ll be the first female Hispanic governor. It says her husband’s name is Chuck Franco, so she doesn’t have his last name.
joe from Lowell
…with the votes of very few Latinos. Not even their Latino candidates can win Latino votes.
@beltane: This is very true. Indianapolis, Cincinnati, and all the little cities I travel between are dead or dying
Here is a fact that should set everyone back on their ass: Crazy Carl Paladino lost the governor’s race by FOUR POINTS among white male voters. Even my co-worker who voted for Paladino couldn’t believe that. Try to believe that our all-knowing founding fathers thought that these were the only people who deserved the franchise!
It used to be that the white male zeitgeist pretty much defined the American zeitgeist. The unsettled question of the last few election cycles is whether that’s really changed.
Not national, perhaps, but we do need to be watching redistricting efforts very, very carefully. A lot of state legislatures went GOP last night. They are well aware of the coming tide of Hispanic Democrats and they are drawing lines accordingly.
joe from Lowell
Yeah, right. All of those Obama voters turning out, Scott Brown on the ballot, and you think you have a prayer? You’re dreaming.
Actually, it’s a gross misstatement of the facts. See 2008.
@change: Sure he can. Illinois and Michigan will be reliably Democratic. Indiana couldn’t be more rust-belted and backwards and you should bet your butt, Obama didn’t win it in 2008 with a majority of white folks. There are enough of us, though.
I don’t know the answer to that. All I can say is that I think the Latino vote is still up for grabs, although it’s been trending Dem. Many Latinos are socially conservative, which is a natural fit with the current GOP. I think there’s an opportunity there for the GOP but they have to figure out how to get past the racism they’re currently using to get votes.
I just don’t think it’s cut and dry as to where the Latinos will generally end up. And indeed, in a better country party affiliation wouldn’t be so blatantly tied to race and ethnic background. Ideas would rule and people would make their decisions that way. We are not that country.
@joe from Lowell:
Worked pretty well, since it took four years for you to get 60 seats while we wiped out all that (and added more) in one night.
All that hard work, right down the drain.
joe from Lowell
I love love love love love seeing Republicans talking this way. The absolutely are going to draw the wrong lessons from this election. Anyone who pushes back against this delusion that America really wants obstruction and radical-right ideologues is going to get drummed out of the party.
@joe from Lowell:
Obama won the rustbelt in 2008 by getting just enough white, working class support. He just lost it this year. It was a total massacre, an utter wipeout for Democrats.
2008 was a fluke. Just look at what this country does when it goes Republican–it goes Republican BIG. 60-70 seats. When it goes Democrat it gives them 30-35 seats.
@joe from Lowell: Investigate Tony Reszko! Investigate Obama’s connections with ACORN and Bill Ayers! Find the burf certifat! Find out who all Obama bowed to! We won’t stop until justice is served!
@change: stupidest thing you’ve written yet. Only once since 1988 has the Republican party been able to win a majority in a Presidential election and 2004 was by 3 points.
Republicans do not have a majority coalition and it’s why they try to keep people from voting and have such hatred for organizations who do register people to vote. How can you not know this?
So? Democrats have only won a majority once since 1980. Republicans won it four times.
And I’ll add that Perot was very much a center-right candidate and if you add his votes to Dole and Bush, it’s very clear liberals are a small, dwindling minority confined to the bigest cities, New England, and college towns.
joe from Lowell
Since the question was, “How’d that work in 2006,” you FAIL at fourth-grade reading.
The correct answer is, “It failed miserably. Many of the seats the Republicans thought were solidly Republican turned out to be swing seats, at best.”
Gee, you won House swing seats during the first off-year election of a new president’s term, when there was high unemployment? Wow, that really is a rock-solid foundation. There’s no way the effort to gerrymander a lot of Republican seats in 2002 failed, just because they went on to lose them to the Democrats in a few years. After all, just as long as we have unemployment at almost 10%, they can win elections in those districts!
Please, don’t ever change. If Republicans can win an election in 2010, then goshdarnit, that means that district is solid Republican right down the line! You betcha.
In fact, Democrats really only consist of, like, a dozen people a couple who hang out in Starbucks reading the New York Times and sneering out the window at pickup trucks, a black guy on the sidewalk demanding handouts and intimidating voters, a couple of Mexicans with fake ID’s who get paid $100 a vote, a woman trying to get an abortion because she didn’t understand the value of marriage, and a few more gay vegetarians in San Francisco.
By 2012 they’ll have one member of Congress and that’s only because ACORN will steal all the votes.
Well, when you put it like that it’s obvious that a 60+ seat Republican majority is larger than a 77-seat Democratic majority.
@joe from Lowell:
And we’ll still have +/- 10% unemployment in 2012, especially if BO lets the tax cuts expire. Means more Republican gains, a Republican Senate, and, yes, a Republican President.
Obama isn’t Clinton. Obama doesn’t have any man-sack. Weak-kneed p*ssy like Carter we’ll have no problem steamrolling.
joe from Lowell
You really didn’t follow Doug J’s point about changing demographics, did you?
Don’t look at me to explain it to you. I want you people to stay stupid.
Sort of like 2006, I guess. Yes, that’s it. There’s no way the results of the first off-year election of a president’s term, with unemployment near 10%, are the fluke. No, the fluke is clearly the presidential election year. eyeroll.
Democrats have won the popular vote in 4 out of 5 of the last presidential elections. If this is a center-right nation, then the Republicans need to stop being such extremists.
Gave up on the whole “common sense solutions to fix the economy” thing, huh? I’m shocked.
We cant so long as the Democrats control the Senate and the Presidency. They’ll stonewall anything we do.
joe from Lowell
Three of those were 1980, 1084, and 1988. This was a center-right nation, when that was happening.
But it’s not 1988 anymore. Didn’t you figure that out when the Seekrit Muslim from Reverend Wright’s church beat the living snot out of the most popular Republican in America?
@joe from Lowell:
An outsider gets elected during an economic crisis with a big assist from an infatuated media and slick marketing campaign against a senile RINO. Color me impressed!
Sure, but that’s a big if and a long time from now. If this crop of Republicans can figure out how to win (OK, tie, but even so) women, then a decade from now I see no reason why they won’t have figured out how to con the Hispanic vote as well.
And what shortstop said above, also too. Redistricting has the potential to completely wipe this effect out.
joe from Lowell
I appreciate your acknowledgment that Republicans can only win a national majority anymore when Democrats are the incumbents during an extended economic crisis.
It’s good to see you walking back from that silly “But what about a quarter century ago! Back then, people liked the Republicans, so that means they still do!” nonsense you were claiming earlier.
@joe from Lowell:
Glad to see you admit BO is toast in two years.
J sub D
Passing a comprehensive immigration reform bill seems like a no-brainer for both parties to a thinking person. It would be good for the economy (if the GOP still cares about that), good for human rights (if the Dems still care about that), it would be pragmatic (keeping 10 -14 million shadow people is surely a bad idea, deporting them a worse one) and it would simply be the human thing to do. The present policies are untenable in the long run and we all know it.
Will it happen in the next two years? I doubt it. Bush the Lesser made a half-hearted try and was shot down by his own party, Obama didn’t even try to sell it when he had overwhelming majorities. Stitch in time logic notwithstanding, congress will let the problem fester for a long while (at least two years) and then try to address the gaping rip.
I’ve not been a very optimistic person lately, yesterday didn’t change that.
@J sub D:
Try to pass amnesty for illegals, and BO will not only lose but lose by Carter-like margins in 2012.
You could be wrong about that.
I’m looking forward to Republican-on-Republican governance in the coming two years. Should set up some good contrasts.
the change troll has many thing backwards:
actually, it seems to me that Republicans need “historic wins” to close the gap and eke out their majorities. when congress swings D you get these supermajorities. the center of gravity in the House (more representative than any of the state-based entities) is clearly left of center (in the sense of the the center between the two parties).
The Devil is in the details. No one knows what “comprehensive immigration reform” means. Anything that even faintly smells like amnesty will never pass, and will also lose Democrats more working class voters.
And even though candidates like Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina were kicked to the curb in California in part because of their hard-line stance on immigration, you can count on the Tea Party representatives and their camp followers to either push for anti-Latino extremes or at best argue for exploitive guest worker programs.
@wrb: Agreed. But let’s not talk about that perception. Liberal Dems univerally support the path to citizenship because it will secure Latino votes. Of course, supporting that only in the context of very strict enforcement makes one a what? Someone who doesn’t care about the long-term future of the party? A lot of libs don’t like to talk about the fact that a lot of people are still going to be deported and since they don’t like to talk about enforcement, they will lose on this issue. You can’t just go discounting all of those voters. Not to mention, this is an actual economic issue, and continuing to polticize it the way both sides do isn’t going to do very much.
Many Latinos I know actually identify as white.
This is especially true in Florida.
J sub D
And people who seek power, crave power. Giving up what is their heart’s desire, that which they define themselves with, is almost unthinkable.
I don’t expect Obama to fall on his sword over this any more than I expected Bush the Lesser to. He will, as all politicians do when confronted with politics vs. morality, justify punting this as a trade-off for the greater, all things considered, good.
In a representative demopcracy, politicians don’t lead the people, they lag. Right or wrong, that’s reality.
I don’t think you realize how much you’re boosting morale here among the Democratic supporters. If your party actually had a platform to run on that would help you achieve what you want, you’d be telling us about it.
They don’t, and so you don’t.
Your 1500 or so posts here the last few days are the equivalent of an Eagles fan spamming a Dallas Cowboys board about their lousy record and how much worse it will get with Romo being injured. Do you actually have a reason for supporting the Republicans aside from the fact that you don’t like the Democrats?
The difference between 1994 and now is that Gingrich had a platform that he was ready to start ramming through as soon as he took the gavel. Boehner doesn’t, and he’s going to have trouble making one, seeing as he picked up votes for saving Medicare and Social Security and he picked up votes for abolishing them. I suppose it doesn’t matter to you which he does provided “Hopey McChangey” gets the blame either way and a Republican takes the White House in 2012? I ask you the same question they asked Ted Kennedy back in 1980: what do you really want it for?
You better hope Latinos fit in with the current GOP, an assertion you make with zero evidence.
When those Republican majorities you like to brag about occurred, like in 1980, the electorate was 86% white. When Obama was elected in 2008, the electorate was 68% white and falling.
Democrats have a problem. Their voters don’t show up for mid-terms. They are not as reliable as the old white people that vote Republican, but they are out there and they will show up in presidential election years. Republicans also have a problem. Latinos, who make up a rapidly growing proportion of the electorate, can’t stand them. Neither can blacks.
Regardless of what happened yesterday, Republicans still have a huge demographic problem. California used to be a solid Republican state not that long ago. Look at Nevada and Colorado already. Next come Arizona and New Mexico and, eventually, even Texas.
We want the Bush tax cuts made permanent. We want to repeal Obamacare. We want the corporate tax rate cut, since ours is the highest in the industrialized world. We want a ban on any future bailouts of any kind. We want to take a weed whacker to government rules and regulations that strangle our small businesses. We want to follow the Constitution.
Pug. Here is some news for you from Texas. Several Hispanic Republicans replaced Hispanic Democrats in Congress and the Legislature. Two of the three incumbent
Democrats who lost were Hispanics in predominantly
Want a clue as to why? In races for the Texas House the highest turnout was 60,000 in a race between Anglos.
In the lowest it was 10,000 in a race between Hispanics.
I want there to be no taxes on the rich whatsoever. In order to help American business, we need to stop all the corporate taxes and eliminate all regulations, as well as stopping all this environmental nonsense because the e-mails showed that it was all a hoax.
If we finally get serious about guarding the border and authorize shoot on sight laws, then it should be no trouble to protect the 2,000 mile border. And with a Republican President we’ll finally be able to round up the 11 million illegal immigrants and throw them somewhere.
This and a few other things will fix the economy and make this country great again and Democrats will never win a single election ever any where in the country.
joe from Lowell
You know those Democrats: absolutely fierce in the opposition. Why, I hear Tom Daschle might come to Washington and start whimpering about “comfort zones” again.
joe from Lowell
@change: You people need to stop whimpering about the media. Especially to people who lived in this country under George Bush.
Seriously, it’s unmanly. You sound like Tom Daschle.
What are you talking about? I haven’t agreed with your sick-o wishful thinking that the economy won’t recover. Of course it will. It is already, and if this election had been held six months from now, it would have gone totally differently.
“The Democrats support amnesty!” was the Republicans’ big rallying cry in the 2006 elections. How’d that work out again?
Once upon a time, I believed the wingnuts when they crowed about what a great issue immigrant-bashing was for them. Then they actually started polling comprehensive immigration reform, and the 2006 elections happened.
joe from Lowell
That’s not an agenda for governing. That’s just list of things you don’t like.
You don’t even know the difference. A lot of Republicans don’t. That’s the problem Spitting Image was trying to explain to you.
Bad idea. Latinos have no one else to vote for and it alienates everyone that is not latino. Besides, there aren’t any jobs for citizens, let alone immigrants.
Wow, I wasn’t expecting the “tax cuts create jobs” gambit from a spoof like you.
That’s kind of a tell. Nobody actually believes that tax cuts create jobs. For such a silly reason: They don’t.
Well, I could be wrong. Got data?
Progressivism may have its flaws, but at least it’s an idea set. What is the alternative? Voodoo economic theories, gays are the devil, fetuses can go to college, masturbation is a sin, God is a Republican?
You overlook the simple fact: We have you guys out there doing and saying crazy shit and driving voters to our side. That’s the biggest advantage in politics, it’s why registration is running away from you.