Liberal Talk Radio

I don’t totally understand Timothy Egan’s guest op-ed in the Times today about (I guess) how Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot about immigration:

He was loud, he was blustery and he was clear: our country is being overrun by Mexicans. To back his bark, he wrote, “Whatever It Takes,” as subtle as a cactus poke. He had money, and he had the power of office, a 12-year incumbency.

In the end, J. D. Hayworth, a Republican, was kicked out of his Congressional seat here last year. In the glossy white suburbs of Phoenix, immigrant-bashing backfired.

Farther south, in a district that is ground zero in the border wars — the seared-over patch of Arizona desert where the Minutemen patrol, more Mayberry than Concord — another Republican took an even harsher stance. The anti-immigration extremist, Randy Graf, was crushed.

For Republicans in Arizona, the result was a net loss of two Congressional seats.

That’s an interesting grand theory but it’s problematic. For starters, during the campaign, Hayworth’s Democratic opponent sounded pretty tough on illegal immigration. And merely mentioning that anti-illegal immigration candidate Randy Graf lost misses the big picture — he won in the primary precisely because of his position on illegal immigration against a more moderate Republican candidate. And even though Graf wasn’t really supported by the Republican Party in Arizona, he still won 42 percent of the vote as basically the sort of yahoo Egan describes in his piece (see for example).

And can you parse this convoluted logic*? I’m afraid I don’t quite get it:

Democrats are laughing all the way to a new Western majority. In 2004, they picked up a Senate and a Congressional seat in Colorado, with two Hispanic brothers in cowboy hats. And they did it with counties where an NPR liberal is hard to find.

“Arizona is in play like never before,” said David Waid, chairman of the state’s Democratic Party. “And the Republicans are literally handing it to us.”

Some Republicans know this. Nationwide, Hispanic support for Republican candidates dropped 10 points from 2004 to 2006 — to about 30 percent of the vote. Yes, this state’s two Republican senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl, favor the comprehensive immigration bill. And yes, President Bush is the bill’s chief proponent.

But pragmatism is being drowned out by the bullies with electronic bullhorns, who’ve got their party leaders running scared.

“If they get their way and the bill dies, so too may Republican electoral prospects for the foreseeable future,” wrote Clint Bolick, a conservative scholar, in The Arizona Republic this week.

Remember that prediction on Election Day 2008.

Hmm . . . but just because the State Democratic Chairman says the state’s in play doesn’t necessarily make it more than wishful thinking. Especially when you try to square that with polls in the state, which seem to toe the yahoo line:

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Arizona voters say that is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.” However, just 14% believe the Senate bill will actually reduce illegal immigration.

Forty-two percent (42%) believe that if the bill is passed, illegal immigration will actually increase. That is very similar to the national reaction.

Just 22% of Arizona voters believe it is Very Important for “the government to legalize the status of illegal aliens already in the United States.” However, 60% would be willing to accept a compromise providing illegal aliens with a path to citizenship provided that it truly reduced levels of illegal immigration.

If Arizona voters had a chance to improve the legislation, 70% would like to “make changes to increase border security measures and reduce illegal immigration.” Just 22% would” make it easier for illegal immigrants to stay in the country and eventually become citizens.”

*I suppose it’s why op-ed writing is so much more difficult than straight-up advocacy reporting.