As results from the New Hampshire primaries rolled in, I called my father Ramon, a prideful 85-year-old "Democrata por vida" (Democrat for life). I asked what McCain's presence in the general election might mean for the fast-growing and ever-fluid Latino vote.
"My main candidate is Clinton," he affirmed in that defensive tone I know all too well, the tone that says 'leave my opinions alone'. But I persisted. I asked him who would get his vote if Clinton conceded before he and the rest of California cast their votes.
"Obama" he answered in that deep, sometimes forbidding voice, an early first target to my youthful will to fight the power. But before I could let out a deep familial sigh of political relief, he interjected "But I could vote for McCain, too."
McCain's entree into the general election could put the Latino vote in play far more than any of the other GOP candidates. The Arizona senator is one of the few who could erect a Latino barrier to the Democrat's wave of inevitability.
How my father votes, and the nine percent of the electorate that is Latino concerns me, but it should be of paramount concern to electoral strategists, especially as the primaries move to the Latino-packed West. My father's and other Latino's fluid vote is neither indecisiveness nor anti-black racism. The flux of the Latino voter reflects how history, culture and the candidate's equivocations around immigration politics continue to influence the protean Latino electorate. Either an Obama-McCain or a Clinton-McCain race would highlight how the votes of racially ambiguous Latinos bounce between red and blue in current American politics.
Unlike the black vote, which is consistently among the most reliably liberal -- especially black youth who polls find are the most progressive voters in the country, the Latino vote has proven to be more fluid. Their voting goes hand in hand with both their interests and their culture. During the 2004 presidential election, George W. Bush's Spanish language appeals and promises of immigration reform won him somewhere between 37-44 percent of the Latino vote, a major increase from what he got in 2000. Latino voters like my father, had never had their vote courted as it was in 2004.
McCain's unique challenge to Democrats for the Latino vote comes down to simple math: his GOP rival's zeal to win white votes with anti-immigrant appeals is perceived by my father ("I'll be below the earth before voting for ANY of them") and other Latinos, as severely anti-immigrant, anti-Latino, if not racist. McCain's calls to treat immigrants "humanely" during the Spanish language GOP debate contrasted strikingly with the smiley 'get tough' talk of his shrill opponents.
My father and other voters heard the mantra of "McCain" alongside the hallowed "Kennedy" name during daily Spanish language media reports about "reforma migratoria" (immigration reform) for nearly two years. That still echoes in the Latino electorate. McCain's recent about face on immigration and his new "border security first" approach will only guarantee that my father embraces his inclination to vote Democrat. He also wants to vote to overcome the divisive legacy of racism.
For my father, Obama and Clinton's appeal is rooted in memories of the Civil Rights era, which the telegenic Illinois Senator so eloquently invokes. When Obama waxes King-like about the inequities of our racial past or when Clinton marches with black leaders, I see my father, a former union shop steward, remembering when he had to listen to white union reps at Southern Pacific railroad start meetings by greeting him and other Latino and African American workers in the audience with "Ladies and gentlemen -- and you colored folks, too." Obama's youthful message of moral clarity about the past, his political poetry of "reconciliation" reverberates as loudly with my father as do the echoes of the Clinton years.
But when Democrats are evasive -- as in Clinton's driver's license flip-flops or when Obama vacillated after being asked by Univision anchors about his vote for the border wall -- I see the moral and political opening exploited by Bush in 2004, and McCain before 2008. My father and most Latinos reject the wall as a "Muro de la Muerte" (Wall of Death). That the immigration debate merits neither Clinton's attention nor Obama's abundant rhetorical powers explains the hatred felt by Latinos (and documented in polls like the recent Pew Hispanic poll) and leaves many of us outside the wave of Obamania.
Obama and Clinton's Latino aspirations are further complicated by some of the more negative reports in Spanish language media of what my father and other, mostly immigrant, Latinos perceive as anti-Latino racism -- and violence -- among some African Americans and whites. Failure to denounce the racial divisiveness proffered by Republicans -- and many Democrats -- creates not confusion, but apathy for Democrat-leaning Latinos like my father.
As the primary wagon heads to Latino-heavy states like Florida, California and other mostly southwestern states, the nuances and quirks of Latino voters will take on unprecedented import. "Al fin de todo" (In the end), reflects my father as he awaits his turn to vote, "puede que sean la misma cosa los dos partidos. Vamos a ver." (It may be that both parties are the same thing. We'll see.)
Follow Roberto Lovato on Twitter: www.twitter.com/robvato
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/01/09/politics/p161025S90.DTL
Anti Immigrant? John McCain? Really?
Would anti-ILLEGAL-Immigrant be more accurate? Or even better, Pro-Secure Borders! Or, Pro-Legal Immigrant! How about Pro-American Jobs?
Nah...none of that plays the divisive race card quite so well, and ooops, there goes any reason to write this drivil.
So by "Latino," if the author means Mexican-American, there still is not a unified group. On the issue of immigration, for example, there have been efforts by the corporate controlled media to convince Mexican-Americans that they should support unrestricted immigration into the U.S. But the efforts have not always been successful. Too many Mexican-Americans have lost their jobs, and have seen their wages and working conditions plummet while employers hire illegal immigrants for a fraction of the pay.
You've also got terrible problems of overcrowding in traditional Mexican-American communities with horrendous demands on the schools to provide Spanish-language instruction which completely ignores the English-language students whose families have been here for generations.
Where I live, there are gangs of second- or further generation Mexican-American kids who are at constant war with gangs of recent Mexican immigrants. And we all know the conflict between blacks and Mexicans certainly reflected in gang violence, but also mirrored among adults.
I would think that those of us who are progressive could support progressive policies and avoid pandering to the simplistic interest-groups who are only out for themselves. Unrestricted immigration is bad for working people in this country. Period. No exceptions. The only people who profit from it are businesses and Hispanics with political ambitions.
But, this article, and others that threaten the Democrats to coerce them into supporting amnesty and unrestricted immigration will cause further deterioration for the working people of this country.
As a Mexican American myself I and many other Latinos are well aware of the xenophobic and especially anti Mexican flavor of much of this immigration discussion.
The ugly racist spillover one hears from the conservatives won't soon be forgotten by many Mexican Americans.
The staff called a janitor to sweep up the mess and then they called the police because Rodriguez's moans and death-cries were causing a "disturbance."
People are still waiting to see if the triage nurse Linda Ruttlen will be charged. (I won't hold my breath.) Maxine Waters defended the staff's deplorable behavior by saying that Linda Ruttlen thought the patient was "faking pain." Was she faking all the blood and vomit too?
LA County took so long to close this hospital, despite decades of deadly mistakes, because of the racial politics involved. The hospital was a source of jobs for African-Americans in South LA, and Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Supervisor Yvonne Braithwaite Burke thought this was more important than the hospital's misson to save lives.
And other than Supervisor Gloria Molina and Mayor Villaraigosa, not a single politician was willing to stand up to Waters and Burke for fear of being called racist.
There is surveillance tape of the whole incident and that was the leverage needed to close the hospital.
If Obama appears on stage with Maxine Waters, or Yvonne Braithwaite Burke or with any South LA politician remotely connected to this fiasco, he will lose.
Are you saying there is not an equal measure of innate rascism in the Latino population? Here in SoCal we have examples of it's existence, at it's worst it has manifested itself as ethnic cleansing.
I know it's similar to the Obama-Hilary thing for black voters, that is, that people shouldn't assume anyone will vote one way or the other due to their background, but I'm just surprised if Richardson truly isn't pulling in more of the Latino vote, and wish this was addressed in the article above. Cheers.
In brief, many or most Hispanics support our laws, and the best public policy is to reach out to them, not to those who oppose our laws due to racial solidarity.
P.S. For more on a Univision anchor, see this:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjU5MjExZDQ1NzExZWFjMDg5MDA4MjU2N2JkNTdhMDU=