Mitt Romney can win the Republican nomination without the South and without Evangelicals, but he can't win the general election without some Latino support.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, is working with senators from other immigrant-heavy states like Jon Kyl of Arizona and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas on their own version of the DREAM Act to help undocumented children. Kyl and Hutchison have held several closed-door meetings with a key Democrat to see whether there’s bipartisan support for a compromise plan. Republicans are also exploring changes in visa rules to attract more high-skilled workers and tourists
But above all, key Republicans are pushing a change in rhetoric, urging Mitt Romney to shift tactics away from the strident comments he’s made during the primary season in hopes of convincing Hispanic voters that Republicans will give immigrants a fair deal.
“He’s going to have to do something to work on that and get that up,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said of Romney’s poll numbers with Latinos. “I think there are ways we need to communicate with the Hispanic community that are not being communicated now.”
While Republicans say they aren’t about to embrace “amnesty” for undocumented immigrants, the ideas being considered on Capitol Hill amount to a recognition that the party needs to appear more friendly to the country’s powerful voting bloc.
“You can’t win without doing well among Hispanic voters, and I don’t think it’s any secret that the primary has not been particularly helpful from the standpoint of the tone,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who is leading GOP efforts to take back the Senate. “I think there is a sense on our side that we need to come forward with a responsible approach that if we don’t define ourselves what that approach is, other people are more than happy to take advantage of the void to try to define us.”
Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.
8 comments:
No, Mitt Romney can not win without the South and there is no reason to believe that the south will not vote for him. So far as I know there are no polls out there showing Obama ahead in any of the southern states with Romney on the top of the ticket.
And Mitt Romney's rhetoric has not been that strident in terms of immigration. If it were, I doubt that Marco Rubio would have endorsed him. BTW, Tancredo endorsed Gingrich, not Romney.
So, I think Romney can win a certain amount of the Latino vote without pandering and I do not think that the fact that some southerners and evangelicals preferred Santorum to Romney means they will not vote for Romney in the general. I certainly hope so because he does need the south.
That might mean that it would be a good idea for people to lay off some of the regional snobbery and name calling where those southerners are concerned, after all if the rest of the country voted the way they did Barack Obama would not be president today..
What am I missing? I wonder if some of these GOP D.C. insiders even listened to Romney's speeches, or are pushing their own agenda to hold/regain certain Congressional seats? Or to kow-tow to big business, which wants a relaxed immigration policy for its own separate reasons?
Didn't Romney win the Hispanic vote in Florida, and wasn't he especially strong among the Hispanic business community? Didn't he recently clobber his GOP rivals in Puerto Rico? He has said all along he wanted to make it easier for highly skilled immigrants to gain legal entry to the U.S. workforce. His stated opposition to the Dream Act (e.g., in Texas) is that it creates a "magnet" for illegal immigrants to move to a state for the purpose of obtaining special financial benefits for their children's education (e.g., scholarships, in-state tuition). If the children are themselves legal immigrants or natural-born citizens, the Dream Act doesn't even apply.
Oh my gosh! The article you're citing, Pablo, is from POLITICO. Those folks can't stand Romney or anyone else in the GOP. Sorry, I can't take POLITICO seriously, except as a window on what the DNC's messaging strategy. BTW, your "Flip Flop" headline plays right into the hands of the ABR crowd.
I really think Romney will do fine amongst the legal citizens of the latino community. I believe all of this hype from the pundits insinuating that Romney will do poorly amongst latinos because he does not support the Dream Act is just hype and propaganda. I strongly believe that the majority of immigrants including latinos,who followed the rules and did the work to become a U.S. citizen would resent having illegal immigrants get a free pass for breaking U.S. law. Just my opinion.
This would be a bad move for Romney. It certainly didn't work for John McCain, who had more credibility on that side of the issue than a post flip-flop Romney would. This would only result in ticking off both sides and set the panderer meme in stone.
Romney's current policy on legal immigration is the right one so there is no need to change his position. Romney's current policy om illegal immigration is also the right one, so there is no need for him to change his position. Romney does not have to alter his policies on either issue. I support Romney's positions to honor and sustain the laws of this great nation. I can't imagine anyone thinking it is good policy to change the rules in favor of those who have have already broken the law.
It probably doesn't hurt Romney to have Obama injecting himself into the Trayvon Martin case, where Mr. Zimmerman is actually hispanic/white. While Zimmerman's name is white, the man himself is not. I wonder if the hispanic community will like Obama less because of his involvement in this issue?
AZ
Romney would LOSE FAR MORE VOTES THAN HE WOULD GAIN by flip-flopping on illegal immigration.
80% of Americans want our borders secured and oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants.
The 20% who support open borders and amnesty are virtually all dyed-in-the-wool Democrats who will never vote for a Republican presidential candidate no matter how much he/she panders to the Latino community(see McCain, John).
BTW, excellent comments preceding mine. I couldn't agree more.
Post a Comment