Amnesty advocates: It’s time for us to start shaming and punishing these Republicans for holding out

posted at 8:01 pm on February 11, 2014 by Allahpundit

If this sounds familiar, it’s because variations of this story pop up every three months or so. Here’s one from October about amnesty shills turning to more “aggressive” pressure tactics in their despair at GOP recalcitrance. Here’s another from December quoting Kevin McCarthy, currently number three in the House GOP leadership, warning immigration reform fans that showing up outside his district office and screaming makes him less likely to listen to them, not more. You make the call (no peeking): Is this passage from today’s Politico story about reform advocates getting tough or from Politico’s story on December 9th about reform advocates getting tough?

They stormed House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) condo in Arlington, Va. They delivered reams of letters to House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and dozens of other House Republicans from children of immigrant families. They’ve confronted Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) during breakfast at his favorite Capitol Hill diner and prayed on the doorsteps of his suburban Cincinnati home.

But, so far, the in-your-face strategy isn’t working. After the Senate passed the most comprehensive immigration overhaul in a generation in June, the effort has stalled. And the tough tactics are turning off key House GOP lawmakers whose support will be vital if legislation is to clear Congress…

“They are refusing to move on reform; thousands of families every week are broken apart because of the failure to move,” said Kica Matos, a spokeswoman for the Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a coalition behind much of the strategy. “We are determined to see reform passed. So give us reform and we’ll go away.”

That’s from December 9th. Fast forward two months, almost to the day, and here’s Politico again quoting the same spokeswoman in an article co-authored by the same writer who wrote the earlier story. Amnesty activists are mad, and this time they really, really mean it. No fooling, you guys. Super cereal:

A new, more aggressive campaign kicks off Tuesday, when these groups say they will begin confronting Republican lawmakers at public appearances, congressional hearings and events back in home districts. The goal: Shame Republicans in swing districts into taking up the issue — or make them pay at the ballot box in November…

“Obviously, persuasion only got us so far,” Kica Matos, a spokeswoman for the Fair Immigration Reform Movement, said Monday. “What we are now doing is to switch tactics from persuasion to punishment.”

“We will be a thorn in your side, every single day. We will be in your face. Get used to seeing us,” warned Matos for the 18,000th time. It won’t work, especially now that O’s answered Republican criticism about his trustworthiness on enforcement with yet another middle finger from ObamaCare. But these stories are useful, I guess, as pro forma expressions of exasperation from the left to remind the public that they urgently want amnesty. The whiff of violence from the rhetoric — “punishment,” “in your face,” aggressiveness, confrontation — is useful too. Coming from a bunch of conservative groups, that would be cause for a week-long media panic. Coming from a protected group like amnesty shills, it’s just another pressure point. I.e. see how desperate these guys are? Better give them what they want before they really get desperate.

Amnesty super-shill Luis Gutierrez, who once famously said that his only loyalty is to the “immigrant community,” told reporters on a conference call, “You thought the Super Bowl was a blow out? Wait until November 2016 if immigration reform is still hanging out there.” Is that right? Sean Trende, RCP’s ace elections analyst, doesn’t buy it:

Let’s steadily increase the Democrats’ share of the Hispanic vote across the board from 2012, leaving everything else untouched. At 78 percent nationally, North Carolina flips. It isn’t until 86 percent that Arizona flips. At 98 percent nationally, Texas finally flips.

But what about the upside for the GOP? If the GOP reduces the Democrats’ share of the Hispanic vote to 67 percent, Florida goes Republican. At 56 percent, New Mexico flips. Nevada and Colorado flip at 51 percent and 50 percent, respectively. Incidentally, Mitt Romney is still losing the Electoral College, 283 to 255. It isn’t until the Republicans win 63 percent of the Hispanic vote that Pennsylvania finally flips, handing Romney the presidency.

There are very good reasons to pursue the Hispanic vote from both moral and policy perspectives, and of course every vote does help. But from a cold electoral calculus, the Democrats’ gains among Hispanics at this point yield very little fruit. In fact, if the Democrats were to increase their vote share among Hispanics somehow by another 10 percent, Republicans could nevertheless win the presidency by increasing their share among whites by just four points.

What everyone misses in the great demographics debate, says Trende, is that while Democrats are benefiting from an electorate with more minority voters, Republicans have been trending towards winning greater and greater shares of the white vote. And since there are still many more white voters than Latino ones, it’s not true that the GOP’s best move is to pursue Latinos with targeted policies if those same policies cost them votes among whites. The party ideally would run on a platform that appeals to both; amnesty is … probably not part of such a platform. But either way, Gutierrez is kidding himself if he thinks stalling on immigration reform is going to produce some sort of landslide defeat for Republicans in 2016. On the contrary, if the “Obama coalition” doesn’t hold for the next Democratic nominee, the left is in trouble.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Say no to La Raza>. Say no to illegals.

conservative hispanic on February 12, 2014 at 7:58 AM

How, in the name of Beezelbub, is it cheaper to give the residents of mexico, living in OUR country amnesty, than deporting them. Consider all the benefits they receive as guests of Obama, before you fly off on another OMG your just an insane teabagger rant,….weak. Go Join the Dimocraps, already.

Offhanded on February 12, 2014 at 8:09 AM

Good grief these people have nerve. Go home the lot of you. The citizens of this country have decided your needs are not a priority for us.

We should move to punishment as well. If an illegal is carrying on outside any legal citizens home they should be arrested and deported immediately.

magicbeans on February 12, 2014 at 10:57 AM

All of this analysis assumes that GOP members of Congress are primarily driven to win votes. I don’t think this is true. They are primarily trying to appease the big-dollar corporate lobby.

Clark1 on February 12, 2014 at 11:13 AM

Hey, news flash!! If you’re in the US ILLEGALLY then get way back in the line for citizenship! That is NOT racist. That is protecting this great land and the laws of this nation which King Obama refuses to do. I have no problem with kicking you out.

karlinsync on February 12, 2014 at 11:32 AM

There’s something behind this immigration reform push that we’re not seeing. Something that Republicans are not being honest about, that they’re restricted from saying aloud. Perhaps we “need” this “amnesty” for the country to survive. I wish they would just be honest with us. I don’t understand it. I always thought the broken system and the crisis was the fact that the illegals are here. If the borders are secure, and VISA overstays are policed, then the crisis goes away in a generation or two. Problem solved.

ceruleanblue on February 12, 2014 at 11:45 AM

All of this analysis assumes that GOP members of Congress are primarily driven to win votes. I don’t think this is true. They are primarily trying to appease the big-dollar corporate lobby.

Clark1 on February 12, 2014 at 11:13 AM

That’s true. Most politicians wind up millionaires despite having nothing to sell but their votes, so that is what they care about.

But from a votes point of view, the GOP needs to do two things.

(1) Go for the white vote explicitly, like the Democratic Party goes for the non-white and anti-white vote. (Review Jeremiah Wright’s sermons if you’re vague on what “anti-white” is.)

(2) Govern, or use what power is available, to favor the white share of electorate, exactly like the way the Democratic party increases the non-white share of the electorate as much as it can.

Fantasies of winning the black vote should be out of the window for the GOP by now. The Democrats can always bribe non-whites with more free stuff at whitey’s expense.

That leaves the GOP with a white strategy, or no strategy.

David Blue on February 12, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Amnesty is coming. Make no doubt about that

Brock Robamney on February 12, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Amnesty is coming. Make no doubt about that

Brock Robamney on February 12, 2014 at 12:10 PM

It’s like a shark circling a swimmer, and every time it comes in to test, bump and bite the swimmer thrashes and punches and shouts and gets the shark to back off a little, temporarily.

This game can’t go on forever.

It’s amazing it has gone on for as long as it has.

David Blue on February 12, 2014 at 12:45 PM

The party ideally would run on a platform that appeals to both; amnesty is … probably not part of such a platform.

Amnesty was clearly ruled out in the 2012 GOP platform, but only 3 weeks after the 2012 election, GOP leadership started taking political advice from Chuck Schumer (“You will never win another national election unless you try to out-pander us Democrats!)

So the GOP proved that promises in platforms mean squat.

We recognize that for most of those seeking entry into this country, the lack of respect for the rule of law in their homelands has meant economic exploitation and political oppression by corrupt elites. In this country, the rule of law guarantees equal treatment to every individual, including more than one million immigrants to whom we grant permanent residence every year. That is why we oppose any form of amnesty for those who, by intentionally violating the law, disadvantage those who have obeyed it. Granting amnesty only rewards and encourages more law breaking.

fred5678 on February 12, 2014 at 2:02 PM

I love Latinos, by the way. They are a natural constituency for a conservative political party.

ddrintn

That must be why most Latino countries embrace conservative policies so strongly, lol.

xblade on February 11, 2014 at 10:35 PM

That’s like saying that since the Ulster Scots came from Ireland, they were in tune with “traditionally” Irish collectivist, leftish tendencies. We’re talking about “Latinos” (not to offend by the use of the term “Latino”) who are not in those countries any longer.

I choose not to generalize when it comes to whom I like. I love good and patriotic people, regardless of race or ethnicity.

And let’s not forget that there is plenty of anti-white racism and Latino supremacist undertones in illegal alien advocacy. “La Raza” wasn’t named “La Raza” for no reason.

bluegill on February 11, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Not all “Latinos” are sympathetic with La Raza any more than all Americans of German descent were in sympathy with the Bund.

Also, the issue isn’t that they are “Latino” but that most of these illegal aliens are poor, unskilled people who often see the government as always needing to be there to help.

bluegill on February 11, 2014 at 11:02 PM

Poor and unskilled, yeah, but the ones I’ve known also work very, very hard. You condemn generalization in speaking about whom one “loves” or “likes” and then dip into generalization yourself.

ddrintn on February 12, 2014 at 5:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2