GOP consultant Mike Murphy offers "The Ice Age Cometh" (link), which highlights the demographic problems the GOP has and offers his incredibly bad solutions. The fact that his solutions are incredibly bad shouldn't be a surprise, since people like him were the ones who got the GOP into its current precarious state. Two of the main ways that the Democrats have been able to gain power are through identity politics and massive immigration; Murphy buys into the first and people like him have supported the latter (mostly because they were paid to do so). He writes:
Latinos need to see a quick end to the Republican congressional jihad on immigration. That shouldn't be a hard lesson for the GOP to learn; every 2008 presidential-primary candidate who went for the cheap applause of the anti-immigration right couldn't win even the Iowa caucus, let alone the nomination. Instead, the GOP should support practical immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship. Republicans should differentiate themselves from the left by heating up the lukewarm American melting pot with a firm insistence on learning English and a rejection of the silly excesses of identity politics. A smart GOP would be deeply in the microloan and free-English-lessons business in immigrant communities. Illegal immigrants can't vote. Their children will.
1. There's nothing approaching a "jihad" on immigration, even from the GOP in the House. They just know more than Murphy does, and/or they aren't as corrupt as he is.
2. He's confusing how those candidates handled the issue with how the issue could be handled. A smart, aggressive, and non-corrupt candidate could use the issue to eviscerate the Democratic Party; Murphy for some reason can't figure that out. The Democrats take every chance they can to support massive illegal activity, and practically every national Democratic politician is completely corrupt. They support something that most Americans oppose and, if they knew more about the issue, would very strong oppose. The Democrats even support anti-American bills like the DREAM Act. They are completely, absolutely vulnerable on this issue.
3. Murphy's discussion of candidates oddly fails to note that John McCain lost the last election. Dem talking points to the contrary, McCain fully supported comprehensive immigration reform all throughout his campaign. He simply modified his tactics to a small extent, saying he wanted to secure the border first (just as Obama is now doing). But, that was simply a tactic to achieve his goal of an amnesty. Did his position help him or hurt him?
4. He opposes the "excesses" of identity politics, but he doesn't oppose identity politics in general as shown by his assumption that all Latinos think alike. As mentioned above, that's one of the major ways the Dems succeed. Murphy would not take them on on that issue but would simply validate that far-left ideology.
5. He falsely assumes that "reform" is a salient issue for Latinos, when in fact other issues are of more concern.
6. The GOP is hardly capable of a "firm insistence" on much of anything. They're constantly cowed by the Dems, especially on race-related matters. Any "firm insistence" would fade into a muted request.
6. Those Latinos who support "reform" would give most of the credit to the Democrats. Democratic leaders or proxies would, no matter how McCainish the GOP was, portray the GOP as the opposition to the plan. No matter how much the GOP pandered, the Dems would be able to out-pander them as they have always done before. On the other hand, the GOP base would put most of the blame on the GOP leadership. The GOP would gain very little support from Hispanics and would lose support from their base.
7. "Reform" would give a great deal of power to those groups that currently oppose assimilation and that currently support massive immigration, legal and illegal: the far-left, racial power groups (like the National Council of La Raza), the Democrats, the Mexican government, and so on. Those groups would use that increased power to push for more immigration, to oppose immigration enforcement, to push for still more amnesties, and to oppose any "firm insistence" from the GOP. And - not that it's of any interest to someone like Murphy - giving the Mexican government even more political power inside the U.S. is not in our national interest.
My goal with this post is to show that Mike Murphy's advice is horribly bad and that the GOP should ignore him. If, for one reason or another, you aren't convinced leave a comment with your specific concerns and I'll add to this post.
UPDATE: "hoipolloi" thinks most Americans would support the DREAM Act because of a sense of "fairness". However, most Americans probably have no clue about what that bill would do, partially because of what are called around here PIIPPs. If what the bill would do - take educations from U.S. citizens in order to give them to amnestied illegal aliens - was accurately described to most Americans, the great majority would oppose it.
In an ideal world, an attack dog would really go after a nationally-known supporter over that aspect of the bill on cable TV or on a video for Youtube, with the goal of discrediting that supporter and having an impact on their political career. I could do something like that, because I've done similar things in other contexts. Unfortunately, the intersection between those who are concerned about these issues and those who have experience with "cross-examining" people appears to be very small and is almost non-existent in any form of media.
Fri, 06/12/2009 - 13:45 · Importance: 6