There’s a simple reason why the Republicans will probably put Florida Senator Marco Rubio on their ticket as the vice-presidential candidate. It’s not because he’s well-qualified, because he isn’t, or that he’s got a record of moral probity, because he doesn’t. He’s a good-looking guy, which doesn’t hurt, and he’s from Florida, which would definitely help. But the reason that he’ll most likely be on the ticket is because of demographic changes to the country that make it almost impossible for the Republicans to win if Obama repeats his performance of 2008 in winning two-thirds of the Latino vote. Not only will the Latino share of the electorate have grown substantially in the four years between the two elections, but the Republicans have traded in the Latino-friendly attitude of the Bush administration for the strident anti-Latino attitude of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. There is basically zero chance that the Republicans will improve their standing with Latinos over where it stood in 2008. And that’s where things get interesting. National Journal’s Ron Brownstein did some calculations based on past election data and information recently released by the Census Bureau. Assuming that Obama gets the same percentage of minority vote in 2012 that he got in 2008, he found the following:
Obama, for instance, won Florida last time with 42 percent of the white vote; under this scenario, if he maintains his minority support he could win the Sunshine State with just under 40 percent of the white vote. With equal minority support in Nevada, the president could win with only 35 percent of the white vote, down from the 45 percent he garnered in 2008. Likewise, under these conditions, Obama could take Virginia with just 33.5 percent of whites, well down from the 39 percent he captured last time. In New Jersey, his winning number among whites would fall to just over 41 percent (compared with the 52 percent he won in 2008). In Pennsylvania, under these circumstances, 41 percent of white votes would be enough to put the state in Obama’s column, down from the 48 percent he won in 2008.
Several senior Democratic strategists believe that the demographic trends may allow them to expand their target list in 2012. Top analysts on Obama’s team are intrigued by Georgia (where the minority share of the adult population has spiked to 41 percent) and Arizona (where it has nearly hit 37 percent).
The Census data showed a more accelerated browning of America than experts anticipated, which means the Republicans got a nasty surprise. They know they have to drag down Obama’s numbers with whites in order to compensate for the smaller percentage of the electorate that is white. But they may have miscalculated how short their window is for winning elections as the White Persons Party. It can still work in a low turnout midterm where the president is not on the ballot and the economy is in the crapper, but there’s no future in it. Yet, when you see people talking about Obama’s birth certificate and his religious faith and making all kinds of crazy-ass racist statements, now you know why they’re doing it. They can’t let the president get more than 40% of the white vote or they’re finished.
If they can hold him down, though, and peel off a part of the Latino vote by nominating the only elected Republican Latino who has even a remote claim to being a plausible president, they might just beat demographic reality one more time before the window on White Power-campaigning closes forever.
here are some charts.
Does anyone know how Rubio did with Latinos in FL in 2010 vs how Obama did in 2008? Not exactly apples to apples comparison but may give some insight into the question your post raises, which is, well, so what if they put Rubio on the ticket?
The GOP have another trick up their sleeve as well: disenfranchisement. More of our states are now run by reactionary governors who make Jeb Bush circa 2000 look like a real straight shooter when it comes to election shenanigans. The coalition that elected Obama is going to have a harder time getting their vote to count in 2012, the only question is the size of the loss in voters due to disenfranchisement.
Yes, seems I recall seeing
voter IDdisenfranchisement bills being filed by state legislators in several states this year. Isn’t it strange our voter disenfranchisement law here in Indiana did nothing to prevent voter fraud by none other than the chief state election official (R) himself? IOIYAR.Disenfranchisement is one of the cornerstones of their strategy. Here in Ohio, they just voted in the House for requiring a state issued photo I.D. in order to vote.
I like that logic by Mecklenborg. Because no one can prove that vote fraud doesn’t exist, then we have to assume that it does and goes completely unreported. Therefore, we must legislate the shit out of this. It is insane. But it is probably going to be the law in Ohio very soon. No one ever accused Ohio Republicans of being strong in their thinking skills.
When in power, the GOP does whatever it can to maintain or increase its power. That’s not really saying anything insightful, but its important not to lose sight of that. Disenfranchisement efforts are being coordinated and carried out in every swing state where Republicans are in power.
Republicans realize that this is a long term political war. They take advantage at almost every opportunity to move the goalposts in their favor even when the advance appears on the surface to be incrementally insignificant. And the Democratic machine seems to be oblivious to what is going on. That is what they did with the media. They were patient and kept their eyes on the long term goal. Of course, there was a huge advantage already built into the effort by the fact that it represented corporate interests. But you have to give them credit for their perseverance. And today they are enjoying the fruits of that long term labor with a very friendly media environment, including one major network, which is 24-7 Republican megaphone into millions and millions of households and venues.
That is what seems so frustrating about the Democratic Party and Democrats in general around the country. They don’t seem to realize how important this type of thing is over the long haul.
From what I remember of the data, Rubio did slightly better than Republicans normally do among Latinos. However, the only reason for this was because he had the overwhelming support from the Cubans, which are notoriously more Republican than any other Latino demographic.
Since Florida’s has a higher than other state Cuban population, he could tip the scale in Florida…but I doubt it. Rick Scott is evaporating any Republican support.
I believe this is true. We are having local elections here in Illinois. My sister, who has voted at her current address in Republican DuPage County and is even a registered Republican(!) was hassled at early voting. She was required to show her driver’s license and the “judge” made a big show of comparing it with her signature and the signature in the registration book. She then was subjected to a series of questions regarding her residency. None of the other voters had to do this. She thinks it was because of our Hispanic surname. BTW, we are not Hispanic and do not even look Hispanic. Our surname derives from Spain’s 400 year rule of southern Italy. Oh yeah, the Teabaggers are in control. Next we will be asked for our naturalization papers. (We are native born, but there’s that surname written in scarlet letters.)
Quick edit. “who has voted at her current address for some forty years“.
There is a lot of hostility toward Cubans. There are 50 different types of Latinos, and Cubans are the only ones who are lunatic conservatives. Rubio will lose a LOT of Latins.
Rubio would be a fool to allow himself to be used like that.
I don’t think he will be the VP. This isn’t your father’s Republican party (no offense to your father) and I’m not so sure the wingnuts will allow an illegal alien on the ticket. Because you know, they think all Latinos are illegal and should speak English and should stop having terror babies.
I don’t think we can really think in terms of how things have been done in the past, we are dealing with a whole new set of conservatives. These people are nuts and I have a feeling the primaries are going to be a blood bath in the GOP. I’m popping some popcorn and kicking back in my Lazyboy just waiting for the fun to begin.
But, but, but, both his first and last names end with, :::gasp:::, vowels!
Oh, its ok, a lot of guys in Jersey probably fit that category as well;-)
Help me out. Brownstein’s (generally excellent) article leads off referring to the “modest 43 percent of white voters [Obama] captured in 2008”.
Haven’t Democratic presidential candidates been getting around 40% of the white vote for over 30 years?
As for Rubio, I agree with Booman that he’s likely on every serious Republican presidential candidate’s short list for VP. Look at the 2008 electoral college map.
With the changes in electoral votes due to the 2010 census, Obama starts with 359 (down from 365) votes, based on states he won in 2008. As things stand now, using Brownstein’s analysis, Republicans have virtually no chance of winning back the former swing states of VA, CO, NV, and NM.
Rust Belt states like PA, MI, IL, WI, MN and IA because of the demographic changes, look to be very tough pickups for Republicans in 2012. (They’d need to pick off 5+ percentage points of white voters. Keep in mind that 4 years of older, more Republican white voters will have died off, and 4 years of younger, more Democratic white voters will have turned 18.)
That leaves OH (18 electoral votes), IN (11), NH (4), and NC (15). If Republicans pick off all four of those states, plus the 1 electoral vote Obama won in NE, then by winning FL (29), they reduce Obama’s electoral vote total to 282. If the race is that close, then by picking off a couple more states (say ME (4) and MN (10)), they have a path to victory.
Without Florida, I don’t see how they do it. That alone would put Rubio on the short list—let alone the need to get more Latino votes.
P.S. January 2012 might be a very good time to introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the Senate.
Indiana and Ohio have already gone Teabagger.
Don’t write off Ohio yet. First of all, the teabaggers were barely able to push Kasich into power during a Republican wave year – and Kasich and his Republican cronies have been doing everything they can to make people regret letting them have power. (Seriously – pissing off COPS? They’re not thinking about how that’s going to impact the elections in two years).
Two years of living under Prince John here in Ohio is going to have a lot of folks looking for a Robin Hood – and Republican presidential candidates aren’t going to be looking that attractive.
There are some heavy pockets of teabaggers here, but don’t underestimate the negative backlash to Kasich’s heavy-handed moves.
There are a lot of disillusioned people right now who voted for Kasich. The buyers remorse is real.
Liberman and McCain Article:
In Libya, Regime Change Should Be The Goal
thinking more about the GOP war on the working class, does anybody know what percentage of people on medicaid vote in federal elections? I can’t imagine that the GOP is going to essentially defund medicaid without knowing what this number is and getting comfortable with it.
They believe that everybody on Medicaid is a black Democrat or an illegal alien of some type. That’s not true, but when did the facts matter to them?
I believe the GOP will come to Rubio with hat in hand and beg him to be the VP. And Rubio will staunchly declare that he was elected to serve 6 years and reluctantly refuse. This is because he understands the GOP has no chance of winning in 2012. However, his actions will position him as a front-runner for 2016. He’s showing every sign of understanding the political dynamics at work here. He used the Tea Party, then cut himself loose as soon as he landed in DC. He will play the role of “wish I could help, but I already have this job” because he understands being on the losing ticket in 2012 could make him the next Sarah Palin. No, he’s a planner. He’s going to hold out for 2016 and quietly work at making himself appear more centrist than he really is and work behind the scenes so he can be “not that bad a guy” to the ever critical independent voters in 2016. After all, Obama’s a lock for 2012, but just who will the Dems have for 2016? I’m not really seeing any front-runners right now. There won’t be an incumbent, the natural dementia of the American public will have set in, and by 2016 they’ll be receptive to another swing of the pendulum. He’s counting on that. Too bad, because I can’t stand the slimy son of a bitch. But that pretty face and his reasonable sounding talk will position him nicely in the next few years.
Senator ANCHOR BABY Rubio?
after all the bullshyt they talk about immigration and they’ll pick Senator ANCHOR BABY Rubio?
uh huh.