GOP tones down its harsh talk on immigration, but is the damage already done?

[pampango]

The Republican Party on display at this week’s national convention was notable for its absences: George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, and, most significantly, seemingly any mention of a border fence, Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants, or the need to round up an estimated 12 million undocumented workers. These latter omissions are the most significant, and perhaps the most lasting.

It’s quite possible that what happened this week was not a cosmetic cover-up, but rather an actual shift in tone and, perhaps, policy: Illegal immigrants are no longer playing the scapegoat role once played by welfare queens and gay-marriage activists.

Is this shift for real? Democrats are entitled to be skeptical. During the Republican primaries, the issue of illegal immigration was a weekly debate staple, a source of competition among potential nominees to express ever-greater disgust over the supposedly unstoppable parade of workers coming across the border from Mexico, amid demands for a security fence, repudiation of guest-worker plans, and even condemnation of universities that educate the sons and daughters of immigrants.

... the costs of that harshness proved to be great, too. Many Hispanics perceived a sense of intolerance behind those statements, and their skepticism now jeopardizes Mitt Romney’s electoral chances in states like New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, and even Arizona. Declining Hispanic support for Republicans could easily prevent Romney’s election. So the convention organizers stocked up on at least 10 Hispanic speakers over three days, culminating in Florida Senator Marco Rubio’s introduction of Romney on Thursday night, which included some snippets of Spanish.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/blogs/the_angle/2012/08/gop_tones_down.html

"Skeptical" would be putting it mildly. romney has to try to appear to be the mild, moderate alternative for the anybody-but-Obama crowd. Acting and talking like a teabagger (at least until he gets into office) is probably not good for his prospects. However, romeny's ability to stick to plan and to his principles (whatever those are) has not been proven to say the least.

[Vogon_Glory]

1. And The Big Question Concerning Latino Voters Is...

Last edited Sat Sep 1, 2012, 10:01 AM - Edit history (1)

And the big question concerning Latino voters is whether or not they have the same sort of long-term memory-retention problems that most Euro-American voters do? Euro-American voters seem to have this incredible (and incredibly distressing) tendency to forget what politicians and their parties have said about issues as recently as six weeks ago and to take at face value whatever politicians are saying in the here-and-now.

If that were the case in Texas, that would mean that a voter of Mexican-American heritage would forget the charges and counter-charges Tea-publican Ted Cruz and Republican David Dewhurst were hurling concerning so-called "amnesty" and their arm-wrestling as to which one was more firmly opposed to the DREAM Act and how fast they could deport children who grew up in the US but who were brought here illegally as children.

Right-wing politicians and the corporate lamestream news media take it for granted that progressives and independent voters forget what is being said from one minute to the next while hard-right political activists have grudge lists detailing votes and behavior going back for decades. As I grow older, I have come to believe even more strongly than when I was younger that a voter's civic duty should include keeping tabs on how politicians acted and voted since they first bobbed over the political horizon, and that Democrats and progressives have every right to keep tabs on right-wing pols and corporate tools.