"Republicans have acted as if higher levels of immigration effectively condemned them to a status of permanent disempowerment—but the 2024 election is the best evidence to date that more immigration doesn’t guarantee Democratic victory."
I'd rephrase this as "Democrats in online spaces picked up a vulgar folk version of Teixeira/Judis's The Emerging Democratic Majority and spoke for a decade about how old, white voters would be replaced by a rainbow coalition that would vote Democratic forever, and ambitious Republicans ran with it and made it sound like a plan Democrats were executing rather than a general demographic argument."
Still bad faith action on the part of Republicans, but it wasn't like they dreamed up the "lots of immigration forever = permanent Democratic majority" idea, they took that from what Democrats were saying.
My explanation for why immigrants, especially Hispanics, trended toward Republicans in 2024. Just like white people voters who are doing economically well don't really care what happens to anyone else as long as it doesn't happen to them. Also a huge portion of Hispanics perceive themselves as white and therefore tend toward whatever is trending in the rest of the white community.
In Florida the Hispanic communities have earned real power through the Republican Party. Also unaddressed is that racism is alive and well among Hispanics. Joining the White Party makes more sense than trying to compete within the Black Party for power.
Arabs, who might be concerned about Gaza, also understood that both candidates are tied to a policy toward Israel that will not change regardless of who is President, therefore voting for the party of perceived favorable economic policies was more powerful in getting their vote. Arab communities have always tended Republican--- at least among older generations of Arab immigrants.
Working class immigrants and blacks are found usually working side by side with working class whites. I suspect that the attitudes of working class whites has a greater influence on them than the elite "leaders" in their communities.
The fact is that for almost 100 years the two parties have done nothing that really effects the day to day lives of most Americans except at the margins. Economic ups and downs happen when either party is in power. Wars happen. We get to keep or give a few tax dollars regardless of who wins the election. Those who live paycheck to paycheck are voting for the one they feel good about and not because of his or her policies. They liked Clinton, Obama and Trump because of how they felt about them on the basic "gut" level. It is baked in that politicians are going to over-promise and under-deliver so policies are not a motivator. They felt sorry for Clinton being persecuted for lying about getting a blowjob in the Oval Office and they felt sorry for Trump's many legal woes. They don't understand, and have even been victims of, the "rule of law"--- and see the "rule of the jungle" at work on a daily basis.
Although most people who enter illegally still make a contribution to the economy, it's small enough that little is lost if Democrats support excluding marginally positive people in return for larger numbers of smart young high-potential immigrants.
The DNC immigration policy is to use immigration to dilute the political and demographic power and influence of people of European ancestry in the USA (fact check: TRUE). Fewer people in the country is better for ecology, biodiversity and the conservation of natural resources; you are not conscious enough to understand this idea.
The DNC ought to be indifferent to ancestry if the voter can be persuaded to support its way of promoting growth with equity. Immigration to places the immigrants make a bigger contribution to Growth World Product ough to be positive for net CO2 reductions
"Republicans have acted as if higher levels of immigration effectively condemned them to a status of permanent disempowerment—but the 2024 election is the best evidence to date that more immigration doesn’t guarantee Democratic victory."
I'd rephrase this as "Democrats in online spaces picked up a vulgar folk version of Teixeira/Judis's The Emerging Democratic Majority and spoke for a decade about how old, white voters would be replaced by a rainbow coalition that would vote Democratic forever, and ambitious Republicans ran with it and made it sound like a plan Democrats were executing rather than a general demographic argument."
Still bad faith action on the part of Republicans, but it wasn't like they dreamed up the "lots of immigration forever = permanent Democratic majority" idea, they took that from what Democrats were saying.
My explanation for why immigrants, especially Hispanics, trended toward Republicans in 2024. Just like white people voters who are doing economically well don't really care what happens to anyone else as long as it doesn't happen to them. Also a huge portion of Hispanics perceive themselves as white and therefore tend toward whatever is trending in the rest of the white community.
In Florida the Hispanic communities have earned real power through the Republican Party. Also unaddressed is that racism is alive and well among Hispanics. Joining the White Party makes more sense than trying to compete within the Black Party for power.
Arabs, who might be concerned about Gaza, also understood that both candidates are tied to a policy toward Israel that will not change regardless of who is President, therefore voting for the party of perceived favorable economic policies was more powerful in getting their vote. Arab communities have always tended Republican--- at least among older generations of Arab immigrants.
Working class immigrants and blacks are found usually working side by side with working class whites. I suspect that the attitudes of working class whites has a greater influence on them than the elite "leaders" in their communities.
The fact is that for almost 100 years the two parties have done nothing that really effects the day to day lives of most Americans except at the margins. Economic ups and downs happen when either party is in power. Wars happen. We get to keep or give a few tax dollars regardless of who wins the election. Those who live paycheck to paycheck are voting for the one they feel good about and not because of his or her policies. They liked Clinton, Obama and Trump because of how they felt about them on the basic "gut" level. It is baked in that politicians are going to over-promise and under-deliver so policies are not a motivator. They felt sorry for Clinton being persecuted for lying about getting a blowjob in the Oval Office and they felt sorry for Trump's many legal woes. They don't understand, and have even been victims of, the "rule of law"--- and see the "rule of the jungle" at work on a daily basis.
"Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss." Pete Townsend
Although most people who enter illegally still make a contribution to the economy, it's small enough that little is lost if Democrats support excluding marginally positive people in return for larger numbers of smart young high-potential immigrants.
Facts don’t matter. Only feelings. Right-wing media is a feeling frenzy.
The DNC immigration policy is to use immigration to dilute the political and demographic power and influence of people of European ancestry in the USA (fact check: TRUE). Fewer people in the country is better for ecology, biodiversity and the conservation of natural resources; you are not conscious enough to understand this idea.
The DNC ought to be indifferent to ancestry if the voter can be persuaded to support its way of promoting growth with equity. Immigration to places the immigrants make a bigger contribution to Growth World Product ough to be positive for net CO2 reductions