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.
Most latinos outside of Argentina and Uruguay, are a group that is described best as:
Socially conservative
Fiscally liberal
Most U.S. resident latinos are poor, so they are voting where the handouts are. I used to be a Blue Dog most of the time, then briefly dabbled in socialism, and now a right libertarian after finding out who Ron Paul was, and talking to his supporters and opening my mind up and doing my own research (something A_lexus doesn't do based on his biased posts). The Northeast and California take-over of the Democrat Party was the final nail in the coffin for me for voting Democrat.
I'd agree with you that many Latinos are generally pretty culturally conservative and religious, and that should have presented a good opportunity for the GOP to develop their appeal to Hispanic voters.
Unfortunately, the more xenophobic elements in the GOP have taken over, at least in California, and that's pretty much helped to ruin GOP appeal to many Latinos. Certainly in California that's been the case - no thanks to Pete Wilson, who was pretty moderate up to the time he was running for a tough reeelection as governor of CA about 17 years ago, and then he seized on some wedge issues with immigration. He ended up winning the election but lost the electoral war.
For whatever else they did, you can't blame George W. Bush (or Jeb) for this. Dubya and Jeb were pretty smart about appealing to Latino voters - and they got a lot of support from Hispanics and didn't demonize them. Unfortunately the less-enlightened elements like Tancredo or Russell Pearce of Arizona seem to have a bigger voice on this matter.
What I disagree with you is the role of the Democratic Party, whether in CA or nationwide, vis-a-vis Latino voter appeal. They got the votes from Latinos by default because of GOP hostility, rather than so-called "pandering" as you may have said. Senator Harry Reid pretty much capitalized on Sharron Angle's foolish comments, plus he's really well organized statewide in NV, but I'd hardly call him a big friend of Latinos. So the Dems can't and shouldn't take the Latino vote for granted.
I'd agree with you that many Latinos are generally pretty culturally conservative and religious, and that should have presented a good opportunity for the GOP to develop their appeal to Hispanic voters.
Unfortunately, the more xenophobic elements in the GOP have taken over, at least in California, and that's pretty much helped to ruin GOP appeal to many Latinos. Certainly in California that's been the case - no thanks to Pete Wilson, who was pretty moderate up to the time he was running for a tough reeelection as governor of CA about 17 years ago, and then he seized on some wedge issues with immigration. He ended up winning the election but lost the electoral war.
For whatever else they did, you can't blame George W. Bush (or Jeb) for this. Dubya and Jeb were pretty smart about appealing to Latino voters - and they got a lot of support from Hispanics and didn't demonize them. Unfortunately the less-enlightened elements like Tancredo or Russell Pearce of Arizona seem to have a bigger voice on this matter.
What I disagree with you is the role of the Democratic Party, whether in CA or nationwide, vis-a-vis Latino voter appeal. They got the votes from Latinos by default because of GOP hostility, rather than so-called "pandering" as you may have said. Senator Harry Reid pretty much capitalized on Sharron Angle's foolish comments, plus he's really well organized statewide in NV, but I'd hardly call him a big friend of Latinos. So the Dems can't and shouldn't take the Latino vote for granted.
I agree 100% - this post is exactly right.
The GOP - which should have had the majority of the Latino vote wrapped up (as the Bush's did) have pretty much thrown those votes away because the xenophobic crazies in the party have largely become the public FACE of the party (certainly their voices are much louder than the more sane ones).
The fact is, the illegal immigration issue - though a legitimate concern to be sure - is a very blunt instrument, and to a large degree the GOP has been wielding it pretty carelessly - and as a result they are coming off as outright racist. That's a pretty dumb thing to be doing when Latinos are the fastest growing minority group in the country. When and IF the GOP learns to tone down the rhetoric and CLEARLY differential between those who are here illegally and those who are simply Hispanic, THEN they will have a chance at garnering the majority of Latino voters again. Right now however, they are NOT doing that very well AT ALL.
I still don't understand why Latinos would use a French word to describe Obama.
They are probably saying "pinche negro", which just means "damned black man" "pinche" is tex mex slang for "damned" or "fuucking". More common is "mayate" which is unflattering for a black person, as in "pinche mayate"
I don't believe that many are really saying that though. when I was campaigning for Obama in NM, many spanish speaking ppl were raving about Obama and could hardly wait to go cast their votes for him at the polls.
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.
