An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Canadian ‘Health-Care Socialism’: When Will Americans Learn?

Ayatollah Prayer Rug »

Sotomayor Shaping Up As Major Liability — For Republicans

Posted by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief in Politics, Society.
Jun 23rd, 2009 | Comments

Have we ever seen a case in recent history of a party taking such careful aim and shooting itself in the foot? This one perhaps is one for the political ages:

New poll numbers really seem to bear out the fears of some Republicans: The GOP’s quasi-opposition to Sotomayor seems to be hurting the party among Latinos in a big way.

The latest numbers from the nonpartisan Research 2000 for Daily Kos find that only eight percent of Latinos view the party favorably, while an astonishing 86 percent view it unfavorably.

That’s a real shift from what were already pretty bad numbers from before the Sotomayor nomination, when 11% of Latinos viewed the GOP favorably, and 79% viewed it unfavorably.

One of the big stories today is that Republicans are realizing that there’s no political percentage in fighting the Sotomayor nomination. It’s striking that Latino opinion about the GOP is dropping so fast, even at a moment when GOP opposition to Sotomayor appears to be flagging, as opposed to intensifying.

There are several implications in this for the GOP.

The obvious one is the steady loss of a Latino vote that many GOPers had hope to start to increase.

Next, there are the issues still on the table that could do further damage to the GOP such as immigration reform (which may not be a prize winner for the Democrats, but it is likely to hurt the GOP more with Latin voters).

But the most significant implication is this: Hispanic voters are a growing force and potential swing voters in some key states. This means that even if the Obama rose has started to wilt so that a few months from now his approval ratings go south and he loses a good chunk of support, he will have been gaining support among a key voting block that has clout now in key states and will more clout in years have more in years to come. In several ways these numbers are bad news for the GOP.

Reversible? Yes.

But there’s no sign of any effort to try and reverse this trend just yet.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

superdestroyer

Republicans cannot lose something that it never had. Hispanics at the high point vote for Republicans at about a 35% rate and at the lowest they vote vote Republicans at about a 20% rate.

Hispanics are a very liberal voting block that overwhelmingly support big government, high taxes, a nanny state government, and race based governance.

The idea that the Republicans should be pandering to a group that overwhelmingly supports 8a contracting, quotas, affirmative action, set asides, and government sponsored discrimination is idiotic.

The Republicans should oppose a Supreme Court justice that believes that anit-white discrimination is legal but that anti-black discrimination is illegal.

CACTUSPRICK

The woman is a racist and believes in legislating from the bench. She is anti 2nd amendment, and should be disqualified already.

Excito sursum

Alibicaff

Glad to see reality is still a no-go area for republican supporters. During Bush's tenure the number of Hispanics voting republican grew and grew, mostly because the republican party went out of its way to 'pander' as per Rove's 'Permanent majority' roller coaster ride to oblivion.

As a democrat I can't tell you how encouraging it is to hear SD add his own little chime to the ongoing death knell of a once respectable party.

jchem

The Repubs were just doing the natural thing either party does when the President nominates a SC Justice; they line up against the pick. It's high time they just let this go because lining up against Sotomayer isn't helping them any.

Have we ever seen a case in recent history of a party taking such careful aim and shooting itself in the foot?

When every single misstep, mistake, or any other stupid thing this party does or says is highlighted in a constant news cycle, it isn't all that hard to believe. With every thing else going on right now, it seems a bit strange that the Repub troubles are worthy of being discussed at all.

tidbits

While I oppose the confirmation of Sotomayor to the Supreme Court for reasons not germain to this discussion, the political implications of Republicans/Conservatives burying their heads in the sand about America's changing demographics are, at best, strange for a sophisticated major political party.

The Latino vote, contrary to SD's assertion, is not, or need not be, a monolithic "liberal" voting bloc. Bush II got nearly 40% of this demographic vote just five years ago. Latinos have a base of strong family values and work ethic and tend to be culturally and socially conservative.

Most people vote their own interests, and Latino voters are no different. When one candidate, or one party, consistently takes positions against those interests or appears to be anti-Hispanic as the R's have done, that vote will be lost notwithstanidng potential natural alignment on certain issues. If any one factor will send the Republican Party to permanent minority status it will be the Party's failure recognize the role of Latinos in America's changing demography and the Party's failure to address that changing demography in a positive manner.

casualobserver

Joe likes to focus on what-if elections years off because the ones actually coming up this year with actual candidates don't support his prognostications.

DLS

"Republicans/Conservatives burying their heads in the sand about America's changing demographics "

I would look at the more obvious, blunt fact of the past several decades -- the Democrats are the party that preaches "inclusion" (and distorts what the GOP is like) and more importantly, buys votes with social-spending programs and entitlements, aimed in a number of cases at non-citizens. The left-wing Dems are also the "multi-culturalist" fanatics who make even liberals like the late Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., upset.

DLS

"The woman is a racist and believes in legislating from the bench."

Her statements are somewhat disturbing, but she appears less of an activist threat (even if she jokes openly about the reality of decades of leftist judicial activism) than others Obama could have chosen instead, so people who are concerned about rule of law and attacks on it are relatively relieved that "only" Sotomayor was chosen this time. Her experience (her record) qualifies her and the GOP will be attacked mercilessly for whatever opposition they present, even valid and good opposition, as "racist," anyway.

shannonlee

tbs comment:

"The Latino vote, contrary to SD's assertion, is not, or need not be, a monolithic "liberal" voting bloc. Bush II got nearly 40% of this demographic vote just five years ago. Latinos have a base of strong family values and work ethic and tend to be culturally and socially conservative."

Reps need to read and understand this paragraph. Latinos would naturally move towards a moderate conservative party. I think the Reps lost generations of Latinos when they passed the House immigration bill. They haven't done much to bring them back since then.

Rudi

"The Latino vote, contrary to SD's assertion, is not, or need not be, a monolithic "liberal" voting bloc. Bush II got nearly 40% of this demographic vote just five years ago. Latinos have a base of strong family values and work ethic and tend to be culturally and socially conservative."
While that was true in 2004, the following years showed big declines in Latino support for the Republican party. The party of Steve Sailor and Pat Buchanan won't win the diversity vote.

http://www.workingimmigrants.com/2009/02/surge_...

DLS

"I think the Reps lost generations of Latinos when they passed the House immigration bill. "

In fact, that is more illuminating about the Latinos in question than about the Republican Party.

tidbits

DLS - Appreciated both of your comments. You have not convinced me to support Sotomayor's nomination, though my rationale is neither her statements or any perception of activist/non-activist status. My beef is that she is a process-over-principle, form-over-substance judicial thinker. In this respect she is like Roberts (right) and Breyer (left), and unlike Scalia (right) and Ginsberg (left). Just my bias, but I prefer judges with Constitutional principal like Scalia or Ginsberg, as opposed to process driven drones.

I understand why R's would not oppose her vehemently because she is less bad than other potential choices. But, we should get better than"less bad" for the Supreme Court.

superdestroyer

Alibicaff

The problem with the more conservative party is that is can't appeal to Hispanics while remaining or even pretending to be conservative. The idea that Hispanics are conservative is not supported by any evidence. Hispanics in the Republican Party are more liberal than any other group in the Republican Party. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus is the second most liberal group in congress. Hispanics politicains at the state and local level are overwhelmingly liberal.

The idea that a demographic group that does not value education, that commits crimes at much higher rate than whites, that has a 50% illegitimate rate, and is trying to isolate itself in the U.S. is either moderate or conservative is laughable. The best you can argue is that Hispanics do not like gay white guys any more than social conservatives do.

Hispanics overwhelmingly support high taxes, big government, race based programs, nanny state. There is no conservative issue that will attract such a liberal group to the more conservative party.

blog comments powered by Disqus