No they won't. Immigration has provided an enormous electoral advantage to Dems, and that never motivated Republicans to fix it. I see no reason that the Dems would behave any differently. Also, I see a lot of recent media coverage about Latinos becoming more Republican, but it's far from a forgone conclusion that they will become a reliably Republican voting bloc. They're still majority Dem. The lead is just shrinking, in part because Dems are in power and are failing to do anything good with it.
LOL I just love how American lefties will never get that the majority of Latin America's poor masses holds quite conservative values. They don't understand that latinos in the US may vote democrat out of convenience, simply because of the immigration policy stuff.
"God, family, country" doesn't sound too far from Bolsonaro's own campaign slogan, it's most definitely something that resonates with Latin American voters.
College educated liberals in the US think Latin Americans are like their 3rd generation Mexican American friend from work who grew up in Sacramento and can barely speak a word of Spanish.
The democrats did not lose to her. You have to campaign to lose to someone.
What happened was the dems thought it a safe seat and unworthy of the resources because they can easily take it back in November, when her term as a replacement is up. There is only so much money to go around because their real financial base has shrunk so much. Texas seats aren't battle ground seats anymore thanks to the redistricting, which means the dark money donors, the shadow owners of the democrat party, know it's no longer a safe investment.
No one -- NO ONE likes additional immigration. Everyone wants to be the last family in the door. Of course people want to maintain the right to import their own family members, and they want to legalize those here illegally, but as soon as they climb the windows, it's kick down the ladder.
Which makes sense.
So prepare to see far right Indians and far right Chinese, globalists.
I'm surprised it was mentioned as a debate at all. Normally, they just brand the conservative claim as an 'unsubstantiated conspiracy theory' or something.
In this case, shoving an 8-year-old kid while you're doing a photo-op seems such a weird thing to do that I doubt it was intentional.
Just in case anyone wants le "based far-right latina gf"
This and la chancla will be in your future ooOoooOoo
Yeah, well that's what they get for not insisting on a castiza or better.
As Hispanics start switching party allegiance, the left is getting ready to position them as the new white supremacist MAGA neo nazis.
And then, for no reason in particular, Democrats will suddenly be in favor of securing the border.
No they won't. Immigration has provided an enormous electoral advantage to Dems, and that never motivated Republicans to fix it. I see no reason that the Dems would behave any differently. Also, I see a lot of recent media coverage about Latinos becoming more Republican, but it's far from a forgone conclusion that they will become a reliably Republican voting bloc. They're still majority Dem. The lead is just shrinking, in part because Dems are in power and are failing to do anything good with it.
It never motivated Republicans to fix it because most of the Republican party is just the other side of the globalist coin.
Mass immigration is a key element of their strategy.
Yes, and Dems are the other side so they won't fix it either, assuming it even starts hurting them electorally, which is a big assumption.
Indeed, "doing nothing" would be an improvement. They actually made things worse.
Affirmative action preferences for Latinos will suddenly disappear. In fact, they may get discriminated against like Asians.
LOL I just love how American lefties will never get that the majority of Latin America's poor masses holds quite conservative values. They don't understand that latinos in the US may vote democrat out of convenience, simply because of the immigration policy stuff.
"God, family, country" doesn't sound too far from Bolsonaro's own campaign slogan, it's most definitely something that resonates with Latin American voters.
College educated liberals in the US think Latin Americans are like their 3rd generation Mexican American friend from work who grew up in Sacramento and can barely speak a word of Spanish.
A better statement would be "Why Latina's won't tolerate being called Latinx nor will they allow you to castrate their sons and why its problematic".
by Humongous Cunt
The democrats did not lose to her. You have to campaign to lose to someone.
What happened was the dems thought it a safe seat and unworthy of the resources because they can easily take it back in November, when her term as a replacement is up. There is only so much money to go around because their real financial base has shrunk so much. Texas seats aren't battle ground seats anymore thanks to the redistricting, which means the dark money donors, the shadow owners of the democrat party, know it's no longer a safe investment.
Latino cultures are largely based on what American culture valued about 50-80 years ago.
They are very religious/superstitious, family is of the utmost importance and you're a failure if you don't start one before like 25 lmao.
Yes they are beginning to do away with machismo culture which is good imo, but the rest is here to stay (for now)
Democrat was an an easy vote with them being the only ones to promise citizenship and protection for crossing the border.
Do they still try to claim that they are unbiased? Weren’t they the ones who called non whites who voted Republican multiracial whites?
No one -- NO ONE likes additional immigration. Everyone wants to be the last family in the door. Of course people want to maintain the right to import their own family members, and they want to legalize those here illegally, but as soon as they climb the windows, it's kick down the ladder.
Which makes sense.
So prepare to see far right Indians and far right Chinese, globalists.
I'm surprised it was mentioned as a debate at all. Normally, they just brand the conservative claim as an 'unsubstantiated conspiracy theory' or something.
In this case, shoving an 8-year-old kid while you're doing a photo-op seems such a weird thing to do that I doubt it was intentional.
They've portrayed situations far less ambiguous than this one as completely unambiguous (always in their own favor, of course).
Ironically, this very article was intended to vilify this woman who just defeated their party.
It is a NYT headline so I wouldn't expect it to backed by data or trends or anything except retard fee-fees.