Thursday, April 14, 2011

California Republicans and Demography

California's Republicans have gotten the negative notice of The Economist, no small feat, considering that the magazine covers the world and only runs eight or so articles on the whole of the United States in a week. Titled Dead, or just resting? the main thrust is that California Republicans are so deeply unpopular with Hispanics and Asians who are an increasing percentage of the state's population, that they are in danger of becoming extinct. The meat:
For although the Democrats have their crazies—largely of the green or unionised sort—they have also picked up most of the rising Latino and Asian political talent. And they tend to be moderate, or even conservative. This may help explain why independent voters in California lean Democratic in elections.

Mr Hoffenblum minces no words about what caused this loss for Republicans. It is the “shrillness” of their rhetoric against illegal immigrants, which has “totally turned off Latinos and Asians in this state,” even those who are citizens or legal immigrants. In effect, he says, the Republicans have made themselves “the white man’s party” and “alienated the fastest growing voting block.”

As an angry white man myself, it's hard for me to assess the truth of this matter directly. But I know this, all of the statewide were won by Democrats in 2010, in a year where Republicans did well throughout the rest of the country. I also notice that Hispanics and Asians tend to be much more culturally conservative than the mainstream of Democrat politicians.

What's to be done? Certainly getting the border problem fixed and off the table might help. For whatever reason, the conventional wisdom is that emphasis on border enforcement is perceived as "racist." I know it is not, but changing the perception seems difficult. Border enforcement is actually a more humane policy than what is currently in place, but why the bad perception? Perhaps we should show our support for a rational policy that allows guest workers into America so that our opposition to lax border enforcement won't be viewed as based on the desire to keep out a particular ethnicity. For more on this topic see polls by Bob Moore and Marty Wilson that tends to support this view.

I think that we should also look to recruit conservative Hispanic and Asian Democrats who have already been elected to local office into the Republican party. Perhaps, some who are frustrated with their ability to make progress on their issues within the Democrat party. Without a concerted effort to reach out, we will not be able to offer our superior ideas for governing California, because we will be shut out of the political process. In Texas and Florida, Hispanics seem to vote Republican in much greater percentages than in California, so this problem need not be permanent.

California needs a two party system. The failure of the Governor to offer any kind of meaningful pension reform for state employees is proof that one party rule will be a disaster.

Some notes from the poll I cited above:

• There is a way for GOP candidates to talk about immigration. More than seven-in-ten voters will consider a candidate who says, "secure the border first, stop illegal immigration, then find a way to address the status of people already here illegally" (73 percent favorable reaction).
• More than six-in-ten Latino voters are likely to consider voting for a GOP candidate who would "ensure all children had a chance at a first rate education" (69 percent), who they agreed with on improving the economy and creating jobs (65 percent) and with whom they agree on protecting America from terrorists (63 percent).
• Latino voters are more pro-life on abortion (45 percent say they are pro-choice, 45 percent pro-life) than voters are statewide (56 percent of voters statewide say they are pro-choice and 36 percent pro-life).


  1. From talking to "Asian" folks who vote Dem (largely tilted to Philipino), part of why they vote Dem is because they see no problem with soaking "the system" for everything you can get from it, and Dems make that easier. It's a sort of game.

    Same goes for those that grew up on welfare and didn't view it as a shameful necessity.

    As much as the Dems want it to be all about how racist the Repubs are... I think it has more to do with how much money they give away.

  2. You want shrill talk on immigration, try talking to the legal Mexican immigrants and their descendants.
    "Stupid Mexicans" is the nicest thing I've heard illegals called, and the folks usually self-censor since I'm female. (The traditional f-bomb gets a lot of use, as well as various racial slurs.)

    Of course, guess who's a prime target for illegal criminals who assume that other illegals won't dare go to the police? Successful folks that look like themselves... who they assume are illegal, but are not.

  3. In spite of being rather... eccentric, this guy finds some decent information, and the CIS is using publicly available data.

  4. You people just want to play more politics on issues. Politics and ignorance of the law got us into this mess. It is not about republicans vs democrats or immigration vs border control. The root of the problem here is that you people are almost completely ignorant of law and history. Tea party people claim to want less taxes and more freedom but you fail on the border issue. Our tyrannical psychopathic barbaric Corporate government is completely unlawful in its current form. Common law is the basis for our form of laws and the basis for individual liberty. If you understand the true meaning of liberty, our form of laws, and where we came from AND you respect them you would drop the border issue completely. Liberty = ownership of property. Your time is your property. If anyone takes your time without your permission then they are stealing and can be brought before a court for stealing your property. Government's are instituted among mankind to secure the right of liberty and the just powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed. If we truly respect liberty of each and every individual then we will respect their time as long as they respect ours. ANY alleged of breach of this understanding is settled formally by the courts. The consent comes from each individual for each individual moment NOT a blanket consent for anything goes as long as the government is the one doing. The consent is in each criminal action formally taken against another. Looking at the fact that nearly everyone in this country came from somewhere else then I say those who want border control in its current want to live in lawless prisonplanet where you have ID and permission from a NAZI style fascist government just to pursue happiness. Originally in this country Citizenship was one who participates in government. NOW we are under duress and forced to be a citizen or at least have your papers just to survive. If you have a problem with someone accuse them of a crime and haul their ass into court. But don't force me into your prison planet of NAZI style fascist checking my papers just to travel.

    You FAIL

  5. Anon, you are completely incoherent. Please remain anonymous.

    B-Daddy, allow me to "assess the truth" for you: the fruits of a horrible education system, continued reliance on statist policies and a media complex unwilling to do the 4th estate watch-dogging duties for which it is charged are being harvested as California falls towards failed state status.

    F-it...I'm not sure a whole lot can be done when us "sovereignty" types are assumed as the bad guys in the face of virulently hateful anti-American, anti-free market, pro-third world socialist "compassionate" types.

    I'm not saying we give up the fight, it's just that I don't see a whole lotta hope for California, right now.

    (One of my favorite bartenders, Josh, is moving his wife and new baby to Texas. Get this: his wife owns an environmental consulting firm but can't make the business pay here in Cali. Let me rephrase that: things here are so hosed, a business which serves to navigate you through this state's environmental regulatory regime can't even pay its own way here.)

  6. Foxfier,
    I agree in principle with your comments, but it doesn't change the electoral math. We need a different way to describe our issues while sticking to our principles.

    Until Mexico and Saudi Arabia allow us to reach into their territory to extradite and prosecute criminals that enter our country, your policy is unworkable. You are advocating a form of anarchy, as I believe you are aware. Anarchy and liberty are not synonymous. Rule of law is required to ensure liberty. If you had a contract to perform work, using your time, and you were stiffed on payment, I have no doubt that you would use the courts to enforce your claim. The problem with open borders is that we are giving a class of persons, the ability to thumb their noses at our laws, because they can leave our country. This leads to a loss of liberty for the citizens of this country. I sympathize with your libertarian view point, but it doesn't work in a world of failed and terrorist states.
    As an aside, saying "you people" and FAIL to someone who is a former libertarian and generally sympathetic to that viewpoint does not advance the cause of persuading others to your point of view, nor does anonymous commenting.
    The time to plot our resurgence is now, when no one else seems to have any good ideas. The Freedom Coalition agenda was born out of the same thinking, and it appears that like minded folks got the Tea Party started.

    All, thanks for commenting on a difficult subject.