This will just be a quick note illustrating one of the very many reasons why Walter Ewing of the American Immigration Council can't and shouldn't be taken seriously. See his name for longer discussions.
Ewing offers "Nativist Group Trivializes the 2012 Latino Vote" ( peekURL.com/zPNPsdP ), a reference to the non-"nativist" Center for Immigration Studies (CIS). Discussing their report "Projecting the 2012 Hispanic Vote" (link), Ewing says (bolding added):
The (Center for Immigration Studies) argument is simple - or perhaps simplistic is a more accurate characterization. According to CIS, there really aren’t that many Latino voters in the first place. In fact, they comprise just 8.9% of the national electorate, whereas non-Latino whites are 73.4% and non-Latino blacks are 12.2%. Since non-Latino whites outnumber Latinos by such a wide margin, says the report, "if a candidate increased his share of the Hispanic vote by 5 percentage points, but in doing so lost 0.7 percentage points of the white vote, the candidate would be worse off." In other words, racial might makes right.
Needless to say, groups like the American Immigration Council and all others who seek to gain the Hispanic vote are seeking "racial might". As are Hispanic politicians such as Antonio Villaraigosa, Gil Cedillo, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and countless others. As are countless commentators, reporters, and pundits.
If those like Ewing don't want different races to compete for who gets to set policy, then perhaps they shouldn't divide the electorate by race in the first place.
Wed, 09/12/2012 - 15:35 · Importance: 3