That's Like So 2008.

The left side of the Republic editorial board has come completely unhinged over the press conference held by Russell Pearce, JD Hayworth, Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas.  They are proposing a voter initiative that would add subpoena power to the employer sanctions law, prevent cities from blocking federal enforcement measures and classify illegal aliens as trespassers. 

Naturally, the Republic thinks that these are horrible ideas brought forth by horrible people.  No surprises there, but the editorial had an interesting twist--the proposals should be rejected because they are bad for THE REPUBLICAN PARTY--as if the author cares about Republicans. 

But they go far toward assuring that the Republican Party will further diminish its national standing, further reduce its abilities to win elections (beyond, we grant, county sheriff), and further stuff the party into a corner reserved for losers.

Ouch*.

I always find it funny when an author who hates Republicans expresses concern that part of the platform will damage the long term interests of the party. 

However, I was most surprised by how out of touch the author (presumably Kathleen Ingley) is about national trends.

"Further diminish national standing"? "Stuff the party into a corner reserved for losers?"  Dude, that is so 2008.  Earth to Kathleen...have you seen the recent poll numbers?

No. I'm not talking about the Obama face plant--falling faster than any President of the last 50 years, I'm talking about the standard "Who do you trust more on this issue" question. Republicans now lead every issue.  That's astonishing. 

Republicans used to own National Security, while the Dems owned the Economy.  The standard tactic has been for the parties to try to focus the election on their strength.  That's why Bill Clinton did so well with "it's the Economy Stupid."  If the Issue would have been Iraq, the first President Bush would have defeated Clinton handily.  But now, the main issue is the economy, and guess what--Republicans own it. 

Not only is the Republic's current "party of losers" perspective way off, but the "Driving off Hispanics" meme is getting stale.  Ingley is reciting the well worn Democratic Shibboleth that most illegal immigrants are Hispanic, so Hispanic Americans must be personally offended by efforts to curb illegal immigration. 

Ok, let me shock you with a statement...When it comes to immigration, Pearce, Hayworth, Arpaio and Thomas are MAINSTREAM.  In the past, when Pearce and company  put their proposals on the ballot, they passed overwhelmingly.  Their English Only initiative passed by 2 to 1 in PIMA COUNTY. That means there are a lot of liberal Democrats--and a lot of Hispanics--voting for stronger sanctions against illegal immigrants. In fact, I've seen polling indicating that the immigration reforms enjoy majority support among Hispanics. 

Frankly, that shouldn't be too surprising.  After all, the guy who has been here legally for several generations, pays his taxes, lives by the rules and speaks English as a native language doesn't necessarily consider the crowd of day laborers at Home Depot to be kindred spirits. 

I would argue that the Democratic Party has more risk of alienating Hispanics.  After all, the Hispanic population tends to be socially conservative and entrepreneurial.  The Democratic Party has become the party of the poor, the ultra rich and the cultural elite.  As more and more Hispanics move into the middle class, the party of Goldman Sachs and Roman Polanski will have less appeal for them.

So thanks for the advice Kathleen, but Republicans are doing just fine. And if you are worried that the Party is going to turn off Hispanic voters, maybe you should talk to a couple of my friends...here's a good place to start.  Then check this out.

*Footnote

...further stuff the party into a corner reserved for losers. 

Republicans dominate Maricopoa County.  How many of them are offended by the characterization that they are a member of a Party of losers?  Sure, the Republic likes to criticize candidates and ideas, but saying that the Republican Party is "stuffed into a corner reserved for losers" strikes me as poor business decision. 

The Audit Bureau of Circulation numbers come out later today.  Obviously, they haven't taken Kathleen's screed into account...yet.  But my guess is that the numbers will show that the Republic's disdain of members of the Republican party is reciprocated.

Comments

[Ann]

Good call, Greg.

But what will it take for the party to have some discipline? If we can just stop pointing out the splinter in each other's eyes long enough to convince the electorate we are the party that most fits their ideals...we will be successful. The vicious attacks on Nancy Barto et al, over the Pearce legislation is a prime example of why the message gets so muddied.

It was not the meat of the issue it was the fat that kept it from passing. So instead of looking for ways to come together, let's just discredit the perceived opposition...even if she is the most productive member of the legislature on pro-life issues.

Two great legislators at odds with the county chairman chiming in for good measure.
Penny wise and pound foolish.

[Hugo Chaveskowitz]

After all, the guy who has been here legally for several generations, pays his taxes, lives by the rules and speaks English as a native language doesn't necessarily consider the crowd of day laborers at Home Depot to be kindred spirits.

well said!

[Jim Torgeson]

What she misses is Americans vote from the pocketbook. Illegal Aliens cost us money, jobs and contribute to crime. We need not be distracted by people who shouldn't be here.

I've said this before; the Chandler Rapist stole innocence from a half dozen young teen girls. He was deported twice for crimes before his last spree. If immigration was tougher, they would not have been victims.

My grandparents immgrated here. They passed English literacy tests, pledged to love their country and proudly paid their taxes (even through the Depression). They didn't send money to Norway, but they did talk abunch of other hard working people to immigrate legally.

In the end, my grandmother taught English to immigrants. She loved her job and the kids. It's just about doing it right.

[Rick Banter]

Americans overwhelmingly wants tougher laws against illegal immigration. Even in the bluest states, these laws pass overwhelmingly when they're on the ballot.

Had McCain made an issue of Obama's support of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, he would have won the election, but instead he was so afraid he was going to offend illegal immigrants.

In the end, McCain support for amnesty and lax enforcement didn't help him with Hispanics, as they overwhelmingly voted for Obama. This drives a stake through the heart of liberal/MSM meme that the way for Republicans to win over the Hispanic vote is to pander to illegal immigrants. It never works, instead go for the 70%+ of the public that wants tougher laws cracking down on illegal immigration.

Whenever the mainstream media gives advice to Republicans, Republicans should run in the other direction.

[RonB]

When the Republican Party espouses conservative ideals they win--locally and nationally (see Ronald Reagan). When they espouse liberal, wishy-washy ideals they lose (see John McCain). The Arizona Republic is a joke.

[Democratic PC]

I think this misses half the picture in terms of Hispanic Democrats. Hispanic Democrats do have waaaay more sympathy for conservative border-control measures than Democrats give them credit for, and its to the Democrats peril that they too often lump Hispanics into one category, and fail to recognize the nuance.

At the same time, Hispanics also favor a relaxed path to legalization. It is this piece that is missing in the Republican rhetoric, and the "either/or" vs. "both/and" approach on the part of Republicans is why so many Hispanics end up in the Democratic column at the end of the day.

Although your point about the failure of Democrats to be sensitive to Hispanic cultural conservatism is spot, spot on.

[Thane Eichenauer]

RonB, how does President Amnesty (Reagan) differ from John 'Amnesty' McCain?

I'll chime in that I don't think that most people really oppose immigration, they oppose government welfare and they believe that undocumented workers (illegal immigrants) use school services and other government benefits more than citizens and legal residents.

Hey, I could be wrong.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Let+Them+In+by+Jason+L.+Riley

[Bill]

I bet the Arizona Republic will be mighty disappointed when Andrew Thomas becomes Attorney General.

(FYI - If anyone thinks Tom Horne or Sam Crump has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the GOP primary for AG, they're mistaken. The issues and circumstances of the race totally favor Thomas. Thomas will easily get over 55% of the vote in a three-way race against Horne and Crump. Of course, the biggest embarrassment will be for Crump, an otherwise good guy who will come in a very distance third and never be heard from again politically.)