The Rising Hispanic Tide- Latino leaders caution that politicians bash immigrants at their own risk.

[kpete]

Source: National Journal

The Rising Hispanic Tide
Latino leaders caution that politicians bash immigrants at their own risk.

By Cameron Joseph
Friday, March 4, 2011 | 5:45 a.m.

A wave of young Hispanic voters is about to hit the polls, leaders of the community said today.

Of Latinos under age 18 living in the United States, 93 percent are citizens and a half-million of those will reach the legal voting age each year for the next 20 years, said officials of the National Council of La Raza, a leading civil-rights advocacy group for Latinos. That will further enhance the political clout of what is already the largest minority community in the country -- and, NCLR leaders said, produce a backlash against politicians who engage in rhetoric that many Hispanics have come to feel is aimed at them.

“Demonizing immigrants is a losing strategy,” said NCLR chief lobbyist Clarissa Martinez De Castro.

At a roundtable with other Hispanic leaders today, Martinez De Castro said that 42 percent of Hispanics are citizens of voting age, while another third are citizens who have not yet turned 18. The median age of Hispanics in the U.S. is 27, more than a decade younger than that of non-Hispanics.

Read more: http://nationaljournal.com/politics/the-rising-hispanic-tide-20110304

[pampango]

1. Alas, I think the repubs can't help themselves. The base demands immigrant bashing, so they do.

I wonder if they've ever seen that 93% figure. :)

[BenzoDia]

2. Everyone would be doing themselves a huge favor by accepting the growing hispanic populations.

Your kids are going to be playing with them in the parks, one might be your boss, and (omg) your daughter may bring one home to meet you.

I'm anticipating a rising hispanic political star who will coast right into the WH.

[DavidDvorkin]

3. That's why I hope the Republicans keep on doing it.

[No Elephants]

9. I would feel the same, except that incessant bashing of any group

seems to result in deaths of some members of that group, by murder and/or suicide, and other adverse events. Gays, African Americans, immigrants, Jews, 9-11 and on and on.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Atypical Liberal]

6. That fight has already been lost.

The simple fact is that within the next half-century white people are going to be a minority in this country.

The Republican party lost the African-American vote, and they have lost the Latino vote. They are well and truly fucked, and rightly so.

[apnu]

7. I've been saying this for a decade.

Given that the birth rate of Latino's in the US is the only one growing they will be a majority in a generation or two. The Repukes have been pissing on this group for a long time now and they'll wake up, one day, in a world of hurt.

Dems aught to take note: Get behind Latino issues now!

[Bardley]

8. in the debate of pro-race, anti-party

the discussion of the good of the country seems low priority, almost an afterthought

not saying it's not for the good of the country, just doesnt seem to be the main goal

[EFerrari]

10. The good of the country is the good of the people. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

60. A small detail which will be denied by the right until Republicans finally have chins!

http://www.limitstogrowth.org.nyud.net:8090/WEB-Graphics/sessionshandshake.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com.nyud.net:8090/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/TDkCy0JwH5I/AAAAAAAARfw/zJnarhKTfY4/s1600/sen+david-vitter.jpg
http://www.pbs.org.nyud.net:8090/newshour/bb/law/supreme_court/roberts/images/ed-gillespie_sub.jpg

Ed Gillespie, contributed by great chinless winger-spotting D.U. poster T. from Texas

http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif http://www.billionairesforbush.com.nyud.net:8090/card-img/nathansproul.jpg http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif http://www.buttoneddowndisco.com.nyud.net:8090/images/tiny%20star.gif

Nathan Sproul



Walk this way.

http://indiedesign.typepad.com.nyud.net:8090/2009images/ipd2009/file_fotos/mitch-mcconnell-collage.jpg

[amandabeech]

57. Yes, I've noticed. n/t

[Vogon_Glory]

11. Right-Wing Pols Can Shrug Off A Rising Tide Of Non-Voters, BUT

Right-wing reactionary Republicans can shrug off a rising tide of Latino non-voters, as reactionary Texas Republicans found to their delight when Latino Texas non-voters stayed home in droves while the TEAb@ggers turned out in force, but a rising tide of active, participating Latino voters willing to organize, fight for their rights, and actually VOTE is another matter altogether.

The 2010 election was a disaster here in Texas for Progressives. To be sure, the reactionaries went to the polls and voted, but the Mexican-American voters most likely to get it in the neck from Rick Perry and the reactionary Texas Republican Party's budget cuts sat on their backsides. The Texas Republican Party is currently running rampant. While I blame the reactionaries who voted for them, I think the non-voters deserve to be considered responsible for what is happening right now and will continue to happen well into 2012.

[EFerrari]

12. The Latino vote is suppressed all over the south west

just as the black vote is still suppressed in some areas. So before you blame the victims, maybe we should figure out a way to secure those votes.

[Vogon_Glory]

30. It's Voter Apathy, Not Vote Suppression

I disagree. It's Latino voter apathy here in Texas, not vote suppression, that has kept right-wing code-word race-baiting Republicans in power here in Texas.

I don't doubt that the reactionaries try to discourage voter registration. The destruction of ACORN was one such move; sending fake registrants to get would-be voters to fill out voter registration forms, then throw the forms away is another right-wing dirty trick.

But voter discouragement is a very different beast from vote suppression. I strongly believe that if they were riled and angry enough, Mexican-American and other minority voters COULD get voter registration forms, they COULD fill them out, and they COULD have voter registration cards in hand and be ready to kick the Senile Elephant Party to the curb. But far, far too many Mexican-American voters apparently didn't choose to go to the polls in this last election.

I strongly believe it's voter apathy in large part caused by poor voter information and in part by disappointed expectations.. Many of the voters who voted Democratic in 2008 expected the economy to turn around between November, 2008 and November, 2010. Of course it didn't; the US economy is a big beastie and there's a LOT of inertia built into the system. Recovery takes AT LEAST 2 years.

Add to that continuous right-wing sabotage. All too many voters weren't paying attention to the fact that many of President Obama's and the Democrats' economic proposals never got off the ground and very few voters seemed to bother to take note that it was the reactionary right that was doing the sabotage. The march to Zion gets stalled, the disappointed stay home, and the reactionary Philistines come down from the hills.

Voter discouragement is NOT voter suppression. I believe that with enough voter anger and enough cussedness, anything short of a Selma, ALA goon show would have failed to stop a Mexican-American counter-wave that would have smashed the TEAb@ggers to bits--if enough Mexican Americans had bothered to vote.

I believe that the non-voters helped create this situation. The non-voters most likely to be affected by what the Repugs have done thus far and are getting ready to do have in effect taped big "Kick Me" signs to their backs. And they're getting kicked. And they will continue to get kicked until they decide to do something about it. Unfortunately, the politically-angry and politically-active are likely to get kicked along with them.

[No Elephants]

33. Why can't it be both? We KNOW vote suppression exists.

[amandabeech]

58. I understand that Mexican-American demographics in Texas skew very young.

Younger voters don't go to the polls with the regularity of older voters.

It's been that way for a long time and I don't recall seeing anything that suggests that the pattern doesn't apply to Mexican-Americans.

Also, I don't recall that you folks in Texas had a charasmatic candidate at the top of the ticket. That helps GOTV with younger people especially. Also, no one is talking about the draft, which got a lot of younger people out during the Vietnam War.

I would expect turnout to be better in 2012, but losing the house is really, really a problem nationally.

[blogslut]

61. We had a very good candidate in Bill White

He received 42% of the vote compared to Perry's 51%. The Democrat in 2006, Chris Bell, got 29% of the vote. Bill White did very well in 2010 and frankly, I'm still kind of surprised he was defeated.

However, the 2010 election brought roughly 600,000 more people to the polls than in 2006 and each party saw a million more voters in the gubernatorial election in 2010 than 2006. The Texas populace was very enthused this last election and the race for governor was one of the most hopeful for Democrats I've seen since Ann Richards.

[amandabeech]

64. We'll it looks like it turned out better than I recalled.

I lived in Texas in '81-'82 during an internship. It was one of the more interesting years of my life.

Texas politics was more fun than anything I'd seen, and I still try to follow it a little.

[defendandprotect]

52. Obviously, the non-voting had something to do with Obama and Democrats ....

why ignore that?



Koch Bros. funded DLC --
http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

I don't agree with anyone staying home and not voting --

though evidently political science professors have told

students it's an effective message! Contrary to all we've seen.

Rather, it should be an effective message -- but it's too easy to ignore.

RW will also always suggest, voters stayed home cause they were happy with

current situation! And, those who want to move to the right, will use it

as an excuse to do so!

[No Elephants]

13. As Karl Rove correctly recognized years ago, COURTING (not

merely "not bashing") EVERY group has become vital to winning elections, esp. Presidential elections. Most Presidential elections nowadays are won or lost on very small percentages of the popular vote, esp. in battleground states. But sure, bashing the larger groups is even more perilous. Unfortunately, bigots are also a large voting group--and no, not solely on the Rethug side.




Imagine if all bigotry ended--people of color, immigrants, gays, women, religious and/or ethnic groups, hair or eye color, whatever--and polititians had to compete solely on the superiority of their ideas for improving things in the world. (Sorry for daydreaming.)

[WatsonT]

14. There's a difference between bashing immigrants

and opposing illegal immigration.

A great many latinos here legally resent illegals as much as anyone.

[EFerrari]

15. When you talk to racists, they insist that they only object to the "illegal" part

in the same way that "law and order" was code for segregation in the 50s and 60s.

[WatsonT]

16. No doubt there are racists who say that

just as there are anti-semites who are only 'anti-zionist'. And gun control was founded in racism (for example).


However that doesn't negate the legitimacy of the argument when used by the vast majority of opponents who are not racist.

Illegals are by definition breaking the law. They are lowering wages for American workers and only really benefit big business owners.

[EFerrari]

22. The present dysfunctional system lowers EVERYONE's wages.

But if it makes you feel better to demonize other working people, go for it.

[WatsonT]

31. Importing millions of cheap labor that is not bound by minimum wage laws

does what, do you think, to labor costs particularly to folks near the bottom already?

[No Elephants]

35. "the vast majority of opponents who are not racist" Source for

the proposition that "the vast majority" of those who rant about "illegals" are not racist?

"Illegals are by definition breaking the law." No, lawbreakers and scofflaws are, by definition, breaking the law.

"Illegals" is a made up term, a RW dog whistle.

[WatsonT]

38. You think the burden of proof is on the people being accused of racism

to clear their own names rather than on the accusers to prove their assertions?

Ok, prove you aren't a racist first.

""Illegals are by definition breaking the law." No, lawbreakers and scofflaws are, by definition, breaking the law."

It's in the name No El. I-l-l-e-g-a-l immigrant.

""Illegals" is a made up term, a RW dog whistle."

Well if you say so . . . I'll call webster, you deal with the Oxford people.

[No Elephants]

44. No, the burden of proof is on a poster to support a sweeping generalization he or she posted.

How does saying the vast majority of people who oppose xyz prove anything about any given individual? And who accused you of being a racist anywway? I read the whole thread and never saw that.


"It's in the name No El. I-l-l-e-g-a-l immigrant."

First, you posted "illegals" not illegal immigrants. Second, who said that is "the" name? (Whose name?) IMO, using "illegal immigrant" is still calling a person "illegal." "Illegal immigrants" is not much less insulting (or less nonsense) than simply "illegals." Both are incorrect--and demeaning and de-humanizing.


""Illegals" is a made up term, a RW dog whistle."

Well if you say so . . . I'll call webster, you deal with the Oxford people.

No need. You just need to realize that dictionaries simply record what people do in fact say. Inclusion in a dictionary is not some kind of imprimatur of correctness, or "ain't" would not have been included lo these many years.

[WatsonT]

56. It was strongly implied

that the anti-illegal immigrant stance is based on racism.

I would consider that an accusation, pretty harsh one at that. And as such it should be substantiated.

I don't believe in guilty until proven innocent. So to say someone is a racist you must back that claim up and failing to do so admit it is false. Rather than the other way around.
Seems fair to me, you?

"First, you posted "illegals" not illegal immigrants. Second, who said that is "the" name? (Whose name?) IMO, using "illegal immigrant" is still calling a person "illegal." "Illegal immigrants" is not much less insulting (or less nonsense) than simply "illegals." Both are incorrect--and demeaning and de-humanizing."

So are you asserting they aren't here illegally, or that we should ignore our laws to avoid hurting their feelings? What do you call people who have been convicted of a felony? Felon would hurt their feelings, so just call them a regular person no different from any other?


"No need. You just need to realize that dictionaries simply record what people do in fact say. Inclusion in a dictionary is not some kind of imprimatur of correctness, or "ain't" would not have been included lo these many years. "

So you are putting your own opinion on the validity of a word over that of the two most respected dictionaries ever printed? That's some arrogance.

Did you argue with your textbooks in school? Gravity isn't a kind of acceleration, nonsense. Let me re-write this physics book, I am the expert!

[Bardley]

17. you're pretty good with that 'guilt by association' card

too bad you werent born 60 years earlier, when that was in style

[EFerrari]

20. Racists haven't changed at all in the last 60 years. n/t

[Bardley]

23. hard to argue with that, because there's nothing there but 'ad hominem';

which is usually a good sign that someone has no valid arguement

[EFerrari]

24. Are you defending racists now?

Here's where the "illegals" and "I'm against it because it's illegal" line continues what Richard Nixon so conveniently stared:


Southern strategy

snip

"With the aid of Harry Dent and South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, who had switched parties in 1964, Richard Nixon ran his 1968 campaign on states' rights and "law and order." Many liberals accused Nixon of pandering to Southern whites, especially with regard to his "states' rights" and "law and order" stands.<28>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

[Bardley]

25. now you go for the 'straw man'

knocking down an arguement i never made, also known as 'begging the question' for example 'are you still beating your wife'?

i have no respect for people who hurl fallacies at others, it's the most dishonest form of debate

[EFerrari]

26. You know, when you accuse other people of logical fallacies

it's a good idea to have some notion of what each one means.

I haven't attacked anyone in this thread but pointed out that racist code (and racists) haven't change very much in the last sixty years. And that the language used to talk about Mexican immigrants is virtually the same as the language Nixon used at his clan rallies.

[Bardley]

27. you asked if i was 'defending racists', a not so subtle suggestion that i was

(and of course, only a racist would do so) even though i hadn't ANYWHERE

(here's your post, just in case you have 'difficulty' finding or remembering it)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4757172&mesg_id=4757502

i will say, you do seem experienced at this

[EFerrari]

28. Yes, you accused me of an ad hom when I was describing racist code.

The logical extension is that you were defending racists. So, was that or was that not your intention?

[Bardley]

29. ad hominem was a resonable interpretation of your remark, in the context that you made it

you're like a little dog tugging on a sock, you know that?

that is an observation of your debating style, as well as a bit of ad hominem

[No Elephants]

37. Not what eferrari did, at all.

[No Elephants]

36. Which statement about racists is NOT "ad hominem?"

[Throd]

19. How about non-racists who are opposed to illegal immigration?

Or does opposition to illegal immigration make one racist by definition?

[EFerrari]

21. People who talk seriously about our present immigration problems

tend not to blame immigrants, let alone, one group of immigrants. That seems to be the parting of ways.

[MikeW]

42. not necessarily

I blame anyone who breaks the law.

You know the rules, you break them there are consequences in life.

Thats the bottom line.

We have a process in the US some people dont like it but IT MUST WORK in some capacity because there are immigrants that

are here LEGALLY.

Personally I think illegals just dont care, they dont care about the US, its laws or values and they dont care about becoming citizens and integrating into American society.

For some reason here on DU there are those that think we as Americans need to bend over backwards, bend or ignore our laws just

to accommodate a specific group of people.

[No Elephants]

46. "You know the rules, you break them there are consequences in life."

So, what are the consequences in this instance--being hated? Few are being deported.

"For some reason here on DU there are those that think we as Americans need to bend over backwards, bend or ignore our laws just to accommodate a specific group of people."

What specific group?

[defendandprotect]

50. No -- it's elites who "don't care" what they do to the country -- and gimmicking

classes of employment -- from engineering to computers -- in order to bring immigrants

into the country to accept lower wages and break established salary levels/benefits is

what they do -- well, they do it by buying our elected officials who do the dirty work

for them!

And this is one of the ways they've done it ...

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

[WatsonT]

55. Saying they're here illegally

when that is 100% true, is blaming them and racist?

I'm curious about that logic.

Is is likewise racist to acknowledge that the earth revolves around the sun? Or that today is saturday?

BTW: I'm glad you don't live near the border and do not work in a job field affected by illegal immigration. But that doesn't mean others don't.

Try to be more understanding towards those who actually are affected by this.

[MikeW]

63. only in the posters little world which represents 0.0000000001% of the population

[No Elephants]

32. True, but that qualification is not always disingenuous. I know what

my ancestors had to go through in the days of quotas to get their entire nuclear family into the U.S. legally--how many years it took to get both parents and all siblings in, how many family resentments resulted--taken to the grave and "inherited" by succeeding generations, how many prejudices they endured as totally legal immigrants, etc.

As a result, I've had to grapple with my visceral resentments, which have nothing to do with race (or ethnicity) and everything to do with my family's struggle to become legal immigrants and poignantly proud American citizens and what it cost my family. I'm sure I'm not the only who received an oral history of that sort.

Also, I think widespread breaking of laws that goes on for decades is bad for a society and for the rule of law. Granted, the
solution in this case is to change the laws. But, meanwhile....

Edit fr 2 typos (and I probably missed 5 more).

[No Elephants]

34. "illegals?" No such thing as an illegal human being.

[WatsonT]

39. They aren't illegal for being human beings

they're illegal for being here illegally.

[No Elephants]

40. Wrong. As I said, no such thing as "an illegal" or "illegals."

Breaking a law--any law-- does not make anyone "illegal," even a serial killer. As I said, it's a RW falsehood/dog whistle.

[Upton]

41. As far as I'm concerned..,.

someone who enters this country illegally is most definitely an ILLEGAL

[No Elephants]

47. IOW, you're mistaken and desirous of so being.

[MikeW]

43. in your own mind maybe

But if you enter the country without documentation or permission you are here ILLEGALLY.

[No Elephants]

48. Saying "you are here illegally" is very different from calling a human being "an illegal."

Eta quotation marks.

[Throd]

49. Distinction without a difference

I call them "illegal aliens" to avoid your tedious argument. It is a good enough term for the U.S. government.

[defendandprotect]

51. No -- rw has gotten a lot of mileage using "labels" -- not to be ignored ...

from "Welfare Queen" to "Partial Birth Abortion" --

Remember "illegitimate" for a child born "out of wedlock" -- ??

Of course we all remember those labels and many more!

[WatsonT]

54. You seem to think that merely by repeating something often enough

it becomes true.

Does this usually work for you?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

45. how can a population largely indigenous to North America be "illegal"

[WatsonT]

53. I'm sorry but I don't believe in racial ownership

my white skin entitles me to nothing in Europe.

[bullwinkle428]

18. DU should start a pool to guess how soon Tom Tancredo will

respond to this with something incredibly ugly and ignorant!

(Bonus points for Steve King's response time as well)

[defendandprotect]

59. So are Latinos saying they have "SOMEPLACE TO GO" ... ?

Several panel members noted that while Hispanics are not enamored with the Democratic Party, Republicans have continued to alienate them. “Latinos continue to say they’re not being communicated with by both parties,” said Martinez De Castro. “Democrats do a better job, but it’s still not good.

Voting for the lesser of the two evils starts to wear thin after a while.”

Isn't that the huge security blanket Dems wrap themselves in -- ?

Don't worry, liberals have no where to go?

Maybe Latinos know something we don't know?




Not only were we all sold out by Obama on single payer/government run health care in his

private deals with Big Pharma and the PRIVATE health care industry -- all of which Rahm

Emmanuel "crowed" about -- but LATINOS were also sold out along with us. They wanted

single payer/government run health care -- or even private health care -- to cover most

reproductive care -- including abortion!!

[pettypace]

62. 93 percent are citizens

Care to guess out of that 93 what percentage have American parents?