Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I look forward to the day when we quit lumping all people from Central, South America, and Spanish-speaking Caribbean countries into the same demographic.
They lump all the Latinos together as a peer minority group to African Americans.
I look forward to the day when we quit lumping all people from Central, South America, and Spanish-speaking Caribbean countries into the same demographic.
True there is some magical thinking there. I have seen people from the Philippines classed as 'Hispanic.' If you look at census data, they are struggling with the nomenclature. They now have a category 'Latino or Hispanic.' Hispanic used to be 'in' but now Latino seems to be more popular. The Census bureau decided to throw in both. They also have a category 'white alone, not latino or Hispanic.'
If you read from the 19th century, they had many more racial categories such as 'quadroon' and 'octaroon.' It seems we are getting back to that mentality.
Anyway, whatever nomenclature we use, Obama got 71% of their votes, and that is reality.
True there is some magical thinking there. I have seen people from the Philippines classed as 'Hispanic.' If you look at census data, they are struggling with the nomenclature. They now have a category 'Latino or Hispanic.' Hispanic used to be 'in' but now Latino seems to be more popular. The Census bureau decided to throw in both. They also have a category 'white alone, not latino or Hispanic.'
If you read from the 19th century, they had many more racial categories such as 'quadroon' and 'octaroon.' It seems we are getting back to that mentality.
Anyway, whatever nomenclature we use, Obama got 71% of their votes, and that is reality.
When you use Latino, you then include Brazilians and Haitians. Belizians aren't included since they're English speaking
The question is how does the GOP garner more of the Hispanic vote? You know as well as I do that they would have to cave into their amnesty demands and that is not in the best interests of this country.
Not clueless at all about our demographic trends. It is mostly due illegal immigration in the Hispanic community and that is neither lawful nor natural.
What is your plan then? On the current course the GOP gets the white vote only, which declines as a pct. of the electorate by about 2% every 4 years. The Census projects a white minority by about 2043. Under the current modus operandi, the GOP concedes the non-white vote to Dems. Obama won the non-white vote by 80%. If nothing is done, it means a future of Pres. Obamas being elected as far as the eye can see.
If the GOP wins the Senate, I think they have to address immigration prior to 2016. It can be done piecemeal. First address border security and better enforcement. Then come up with some partial amnesty. Someone like an Ayded Reyes gets amnesty. Any of these guys who are illegal immigrants are deported. WSP's Most Wanted - Washington State Patrol
What is your plan then? On the current course the GOP gets the white vote only, which declines as a pct. of the electorate by about 2% every 4 years. The Census projects a white minority by about 2043. Under the current modus operandi, the GOP concedes the non-white vote to Dems. Obama won the non-white vote by 80%. If nothing is done, it means a future of Pres. Obamas being elected as far as the eye can see.
If the GOP wins the Senate, I think they have to address immigration prior to 2016. It can be done piecemeal. First address border security and better enforcement. Then come up with some partial amnesty. Someone like an Ayded Reyes gets amnesty. Any of these guys who are illegal immigrants are deported. WSP's Most Wanted - Washington State Patrol
My plan? I'm not running for office. Neither party should pander for votes by thumbing their noses at any of our laws. It's not true that the GOP only has the white vote. Are you kidding me? So just what do you suggest they do?
I'm all for border security but no way should these illegals gain amnesty. We tried that back in 1986 and now we have quadruple the number of illegal aliens here today. It will just encourage more illegal immigration. We were also promised back then that the border would be secured......didn't happen. Fool me once.... If you think that the GOP would garner much more of the Hispanic vote by granting shamnesty then I'd like to know what you're smoking. It isn't in the best interests of the rest of the nation and Hispanics only make up 50 million both legally and illegally in this country. Does it make sense to pander to such a minority when there are 270 million non-Hispanics in this country? The GOP would be better off trying to gain more of the black vote. At least they aren't demanding that their group be put above our immigration laws and rewarded for breaking them.
My plan? I'm not running for office. Neither party should pander for votes by thumbing their noses at any of our laws. It's not true that the GOP only has the white vote. Are you kidding me? So just what do you suggest they do?
I'm all for border security but no way should these illegals gain amnesty. We tried that back in 1986 and now we have quadruple the number of illegal aliens here today.....
First, it is more or less true that the GOP has only the white vote. Romney got 59% of the white vote and only 20% of the non-white vote. You know 1986 was nearly 30 years ago and we now face different times. You can't base present policy solely on something that took place nearly 30 years ago. Also I believe now that we have much better electronics and things like drones that could make border security possible. We didn't have that in 1986--IIRC the IBM PC had only come out around 1982.
First, it is more or less true that the GOP has only the white vote. Romney got 59% of the white vote and only 20% of the non-white vote. You know 1986 was nearly 30 years ago and we now face different times. You can't base present policy solely on something that took place nearly 30 years ago. Also I believe now that we have much better electronics and things like drones that could make border security possible. We didn't have that in 1986--IIRC the IBM PC had only come out around 1982.
You must have failed at math. Even your percentages show that they don't just have the white vote. Yes, we are at a different time than 1986 there are fewer jobs, higher taxes, we are deeply in debt today and our population has grown immensely. All the more reason not to amnesty millions of illegal aliens and to put Americans back to work at a fair wage and reduce the number of foreigners milking our welfare coffers. Drones, etc. are fine just as long as our government complies by using them to their fullest potential. A good physical barrier along the most porous areas of our southern border would help a lot also but for some strange reason it was approved but wasn't funded. Hmm.
OldGlory, Outside of the white vote, the GOP loses and maintains just a very small percentage of other demographics of every kind. First step first..admit the problem.
Mittens won the same % of the white vote as Reagan 1984. were the results the same?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
