Tick, tick, tick, Texas

[AmyNation]

Why do you think Democrats have fought so hard against the enforcement of immigration and voter ID laws? If Texas turns blue, it won't be because legitimate citizens registered to vote changed it.

Nonsense.

Just because they are Hispanic, doesn't mean they are illegal.

I didn't say that. But it is clear that Democrats don't view illegal immigrants as illegal. The are undocumented workers. Their preference is to give illegal immigrants amnesty in the hopes that if they scratch their backs, the newly minted citizens will scratch theirs. Texas has the largest border with Mexico. Let people across the border freely, make them citizens and change the voting demographic. Until they can accomplish that, they will work to defeat voter ID laws to get the votes they desire. You are niave if you don't believe that isn't a DNC agenda item.

That is a whole lot of partisan nonsense.

I agree that democratic leaders and republican leaders have very different takes on illegal immigration, and most of their "beliefs" stem from an attempt to sway voters. However the demographics in Texas aren't shifting because of illegals. Nearly 40% of Texas is Hispanic, (less than 15% of all Texans are born outside of the US) add to that that over 70% of Hispanics are catholic and you have an obviously naturally growing population.

 

[kwc57]

Nonsense.

Just because they are Hispanic, doesn't mean they are illegal.

I didn't say that. But it is clear that Democrats don't view illegal immigrants as illegal. The are undocumented workers. Their preference is to give illegal immigrants amnesty in the hopes that if they scratch their backs, the newly minted citizens will scratch theirs. Texas has the largest border with Mexico. Let people across the border freely, make them citizens and change the voting demographic. Until they can accomplish that, they will work to defeat voter ID laws to get the votes they desire. You are niave if you don't believe that isn't a DNC agenda item.

That is a whole lot of partisan nonsense.

I agree that democratic leaders and republican leaders have very different takes on illegal immigration, and most of their "beliefs" stem from an attempt to sway voters. However the demographics in Texas aren't shifting because of illegals. Nearly 40% of Texas is Hispanic, (less than 15% of all Texans are born outside of the US) add to that that over 70% of Hispanics are catholic and you have an obviously naturally growing population.

And what happens if you give amnesty and have a flood of more people coming across the border? How many Democrats do you hear of actually calling illegal aliens, illegal? How many of them actually want to stem the flow of people illegally crossing the border? How many of them are more than happy to absorb them into our nation and provide assistance to boot? Are you honestly niave enough to believe it is out of altruistic leanings as opposed to catering to a demographic for votes and power? Give amnesty and the hispanic population in Texas will swell well beyond its current numbers.......naturally growing population aside. I live in Oklahoma and we catch much of the overflow. This is an issue we are all to familiar with.

 

[rightwinger]

I didn't say that. But it is clear that Democrats don't view illegal immigrants as illegal. The are undocumented workers. Their preference is to give illegal immigrants amnesty in the hopes that if they scratch their backs, the newly minted citizens will scratch theirs. Texas has the largest border with Mexico. Let people across the border freely, make them citizens and change the voting demographic. Until they can accomplish that, they will work to defeat voter ID laws to get the votes they desire. You are niave if you don't believe that isn't a DNC agenda item.

That is a whole lot of partisan nonsense.

I agree that democratic leaders and republican leaders have very different takes on illegal immigration, and most of their "beliefs" stem from an attempt to sway voters. However the demographics in Texas aren't shifting because of illegals. Nearly 40% of Texas is Hispanic, (less than 15% of all Texans are born outside of the US) add to that that over 70% of Hispanics are catholic and you have an obviously naturally growing population.

And what happens if you give amnesty and have a flood of more people coming across the border? How many Democrats do you hear of actually calling illegal aliens, illegal? How many of them actually want to stem the flow of people illegally crossing the border? How many of them are more than happy to absorb them into our nation and provide assistance to boot? Are you honestly niave enough to believe it is out of altruistic leanings as opposed to catering to a demographic for votes and power? Give amnesty and the hispanic population in Texas will swell well beyond its current numbers.......naturally growing population aside. I live in Oklahoma and we catch much of the overflow. This is an issue we are all to familiar with.

Mexicans trying to take Texas back one baby at a time?

 

[AmyNation]

The vast majority of democratic reps are not calling for amnesty.

 

[rightwinger]

Maybe in 15-20 years the Demographics will change to make Texas and Florida blue. If it happens, we will never see another Republican President

That's assuming that the voting blocks stay exactly the same as they are right now, which I can only hope they don't.

Republicans can piss off a lot of people in the next 15-20 years

 

[kwc57]

The vast majority of democratic reps are not calling for amnesty.

No......they are simply looking for a "path to citizenship" for people who entered the country illegally. Amnesty with a few conditions.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If I was a bright, educated, intelligent Hispanic, I would greatly resent a partisan Democrat who would think my vote could be taken for granted or that I march in lockstep with anybody. I would likely even see such an assumption as racist.

Evenmoreso if it was assumed that most Hispanics are dull, uneducated, ignorant, and estúpido and therefore will vote Democrat to get promised freebies.

To Democrats who think that way, shame on you.

And if Hispanics vote Democratic to punish Republicans who want secure borders and immigration laws enforced, and the country can otherwise go to hell in a hand basket, then shame on them.

Excuse me, but what have you to say about the fact that Hispanic American voters overwhelmingly support Democrats now? Have you any assumptions about that?

 

[auditor0007]

In 2008, O won Bexar County, San Antonio 52 percent to 46 percent over JM. In 2012, O had 12,000 fewer votes and won San Antonio 51 to 47 percent. Currently, San Antonio is 58 percent hispanic and 42 percent caucasian. According to the numbers, less are voting for democrats. In 2008, O won Harris County, Houston, 50 to 48 percent. In 2012, the results were tied 49 to 49 percent. Again, we see democrats losing ground. San Antonio and Houston are #4 and #7 respectively in population in the whole US. Basically, the article is basing projections on what ifs and no hard scientific data.

Hispanics make up 38% of the population, but only account for 22% of the vote. If that changes and Hispanics begin to actually go out and vote, it changes everything, because no matter what you may want to believe, Hispanics vote Democrat over Republican by a fairly wide margin.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If our GOP reaches out sincerely to Hispanics (the immigration bill this summer is a good start), a good chance exists to keep Texas.

If not, despite what the political spear holders on the right want to huff and puff, the demographics are against the Repubicans.

 

[Foxfyre]

Huffo Puffo Fluffo

Deflection aside, look down the road.

Increasing Hispanic population, immigration reform, etc.

I assume you're saying this can't happen? Is that opinion based on any demographic data?

.

Those reasons right there are why it could happen.

And to call it "reform" is being generous. While it falls short of outright amnesty, it is a shortcut of which criminals are undeserving.

May as well call it what it really is... A voter registration drive for Democrats...

And just so we're clear, the Republicans have no one to blame but themselves for their lack of appeal to the majority of minority voters...

But what do we gain if Republicans become just another name for Democrat in order to appeal to that majority of minority voters? We know that progressive liberalism is destroying the republic the Founders gave us, so if appealing to minorities is the key to getting elected, and the only way to do that is via the nanny state or projecting progressive liberalism, don't you think we're pretty well screwed?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Deflection aside, look down the road.

Increasing Hispanic population, immigration reform, etc.

I assume you're saying this can't happen? Is that opinion based on any demographic data?

.

Those reasons right there are why it could happen.

And to call it "reform" is being generous. While it falls short of outright amnesty, it is a shortcut of which criminals are undeserving.

May as well call it what it really is... A voter registration drive for Democrats...

And just so we're clear, the Republicans have no one to blame but themselves for their lack of appeal to the majority of minority voters...

But what do we gain if Republicans become just another name for Democrat in order to appeal to that majority of minority voters? We know that progressive liberalism is destroying the republic the Founders gave us, so if appealing to minorities is the key to getting elected, and the only way to do that is via the nanny state or projecting progressive liberalism, don't you think we're pretty well screwed?

No. We don't know that. That is you trying to slip in a crazy claim as though it were a known fact. Nutters do that all the time. It helps perpetuate your fantasy.

 

[OKTexas]

Sounds to me like it may be getting close to time to proportion electoral votes. There is no reason 6 metro areas should control the whole state.

 

[Mac1958]

But what do we gain if Republicans become just another name for Democrat in order to appeal to that majority of minority voters?

That's the corner into which the party has painted itself.

So now what?

.

 

[AmyNation]

Sounds to me like it may be getting close to time to proportion electoral votes. There is no reason 6 metro areas should control the whole state.

Why should a few people spread over a large area have more say than those in metro areas?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Deflection aside, look down the road.

Increasing Hispanic population, immigration reform, etc.

I assume you're saying this can't happen? Is that opinion based on any demographic data?

.

Those reasons right there are why it could happen.

And to call it "reform" is being generous. While it falls short of outright amnesty, it is a shortcut of which criminals are undeserving.

May as well call it what it really is... A voter registration drive for Democrats...

And just so we're clear, the Republicans have no one to blame but themselves for their lack of appeal to the majority of minority voters...

But what do we gain if Republicans become just another name for Democrat in order to appeal to that majority of minority voters? We know that progressive liberalism is destroying the republic the Founders gave us, so if appealing to minorities is the key to getting elected, and the only way to do that is via the nanny state or projecting progressive liberalism, don't you think we're pretty well screwed?

That won't happen, but if it does you can create your own Libertarian Party, foxfyre, to represent yourinterests.

 

[rightwinger]

If our GOP reaches out sincerely to Hispanics (the immigration bill this summer is a good start), a good chance exists to keep Texas.

If not, despite what the political spear holders on the right want to huff and puff, the demographics are against the Repubicans.

Republicans have a chance to act responsibly

They will cave to their fringe and fuck it up

 

[OKTexas]

Sounds to me like it may be getting close to time to proportion electoral votes. There is no reason 6 metro areas should control the whole state.

Why should a few people spread over a large area have more say than those in metro areas?

Not more, just equal if the lines are drawn by congressional districts. The metro areas have more congresscritters by land area.

 

[aaronleland]

My point is that you assume hardworking business and home owners will vote overwhelmingly for a Republican. The Democrat's success with the Asian and Jewish population kinda shoots that theory down, doesn't it?

You do realize the thread is about hispanics in Texas?? ..

And what about them starting a business, owning a home, and seeing to their children's education would make them vote Republican? Especially if they want to send their kids to one of those "evil liberal indoctrination centers" called college.

Good job addressing my question. Oh wait.... all you did was neg rep me, and send an insulting PM... Well good job dogding my question, anyways....

 

[rightwinger]

Sounds to me like it may be getting close to time to proportion electoral votes. There is no reason 6 metro areas should control the whole state.

Why should a few people spread over a large area have more say than those in metro areas?

Not more, just equal if the lines are drawn by congressional districts. The metro areas have more congresscritters by land area.

People vote....not land

 

[AmyNation]

Sounds to me like it may be getting close to time to proportion electoral votes. There is no reason 6 metro areas should control the whole state.

Why should a few people spread over a large area have more say than those in metro areas?

Not more, just equal if the lines are drawn by congressional districts. The metro areas have more congresscritters by land area.

How are they unequal? Why should land be a factor?