Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

Texas Sees a Surge in Latino Voters

More than 530,000 Latinos who have registered since 2012 might tip the state toward Clinton.

By Comments

Erich Schlegel/Getty

Throughout this election, I’ve been skeptical that Hillary Clinton could carry Texas, even as polls suggested the gap in support between her and Donald Trump is closing. But there is a wild card that might make it possible: There are 532,000 more registered Hispanic surname voters this year than in 2012.

Over the past week or so, one news story after another has touted the close race between Clinton and Trump in Texas. The gap has closed, but Clinton seems to be stuck at the same level of support that President Obama received in his 2008 and 2012 campaigns. Obama received just under 44 percent of the vote in 2008 and 41 percent in 2012. Clinton received 43 percent in the CBS/YouGov poll; 41 percent in the UPI/CVOTER; 46 percent in Washington Post/Survey Monkey; and 38 percent in the University of Houston poll. All the while, Trump’s numbers have declined in Texas from a solid majority to levels in the mid 40s. Three out of the four recent surveys put the gap between Clinton and Trump within the margin of error. Trump’s gaffes and personal history have led to voters fleeing his campaign.

Still, the formula for a Clinton victory in Texas has always required that somewhere between 950,000 and 1.2 million people who voted for Obama’s Republican opponents either switching to the Democratic candidate or sitting out the race. It’s now looking like at least half those voters may do exactly that by either not voting in the presidential race or by casting a ballot for one of the third-party candidates, Libertarian Gary Johnson or Green Jill Stein. The other half of the gap conceivably could be closed by newly registered Hispanic voters.

Of course, Democrats have long hoped that Latino voters might help make them competitive again in Texas, and so far that hasn’t happened. One issue is that Latino turnout in Texas has lagged (in 2012, 39 percent of eligible Latinos voted versus 48 percent nationwide). There’s also always been a serious problem with thinking of Latino voters in Texas as automatically supporting Democrats. In 1998 Governor George W. Bush received somewhere between 40 percent and half the Hispanic vote, depending on the survey methodology. In 2014 exit polls showed that Republican U.S. Senator John Cornyn got 48 percent of the Latino vote, and Governor Greg Abbott received 44 percent in his victory over Democrat Wendy Davis. In all of those races, the GOP candidates courted Hispanic voters. Even the CBS News 2016 Battleground Tracker Texas found 31 percent of the Hispanic voters surveyed planned to vote for Trump, despite his harsh rhetoric against Mexicans.

Trump has been playing to the worst fears of white voters around the county by demanding the construction of a wall along the border with Mexico and decrying Mexican immigrants as “criminals, drug dealers, rapists,” and “bad hombres” with the caveat that “some, I assume, are good people.” The problem with that rhetoric in Texas is that many of the new registered Hispanic voters here likely are the U.S. born children of undocumented immigrants who arrived in the late 1980s and early 1990s. When Trump talks the way he has, he is talking about their mothers and their fathers.

Texas this year, according to the Secretary of State’s office, has a record 15 million registered voters, an increase of 1.7 million over 2012. Hispanic surname voters account for 30 percent of that increase. In Harris County, the number of Hispanic voters has increased by more than 91,000 in the past eight years; 69,000 in Bexar County; and 46,000 in Dallas County. Statewide, there are 3.5 million registered Hispanic surname voters this year, 23 percent of the total number of registered voters in Texas.

The odds remain low for Clinton to carry Texas. If she does, Republicans can blame Trump, and Democrats can praise the strength of a new Hispanic voting bloc.

Related Content

  • Rules of Blazon

    Fantastic news! Thanks for the info. I hope Hillary wins Texas, but would also be pleased just to see her come close. I’m not Latino, but I voted for Hillary this morning. I hope all Texans with a conscience do the right thing and follow suit.

  • John Bernard Books

    Lining up for the “free stuff”
    “Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That’s sure to stoke another “Obamacare” controversy days before a presidential election.
    Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/62acdd911e4d44a5b855acf25122bd22/obama-administration-confirms-double-digit-premium-hikes

    ‘cept it ain’t free….

  • WUSRPH

    I don’t expect a Clinton win in Texas, but close would be very nice indeed. It could mean the Gallego US House race plus several races for the Texas House and SBOE. It would be particularly notable if the difference were in the number of Hispanic votes. I have hope, but I suspect that the larger part of the shift from the GOP to Clinton will be suburban GOP women….the same vote that elected Ann Richards over Clayton Williams but was not there four years later.

    • Unwound

      shes going to make a better showing than anyone would have thought, but shes not going to win it and i certainly wouldnt count this as a bellweather for the future. texas dems (and dems nationwide) will be massacred in ’18 and ’20

      • WUSRPH

        What happens in 1018 and 2020 will be primarily influenced by what happens in 2017-2018. If Clinton is able to accomplish anything—either because of Democratic gains this year or some GOP finally being willing to work on the nation’s problems, 2018 and 2020 should not be that of a danger to the Democrats. However, if we continue to have stagnation, I agree that 2018 could be a problem, partly because of which US Senate seats are up that year. Like you, I am somewhat pessimistic about GOP cooperation…….especially if Trump is out there chanting his hate and distortions every day…..BUT one has to hope.

        As for in Texas itself…..The road back to some degree of power is not going to depend on the outcome of this election. A strong showing by Clinton will help attract more candidates (and hopefully voters) in the future, but the current districting by itself will make it difficult to pick up more than a few seats in county and state govt. offices. And, we probably cannot expect the districts to be that much more favorable after the next census, because the GOP will be in control when the lines are drawn. However, a revitalized SCOTUS and a sympathetic DOJ may make it easier to overturn at least the most egregious gerrymandering.

        • Unwound

          clinton is hated by the right more than obama. if this were any other GOP clown other than trump she’d be in serious trouble this year. all of those republicans shes been courting for votes so far are going to pull out the knives after the election and nothing- nothing will get done. in a way, clinton winning is the worst thing for the long term health of the party.

          good article by chris hooks that goes into tx dems potential gains this year- or rather lack of. dems have been AWFUL the past 8 years and have deservedly taken some massive losses at state and local level.

          https://www.texasobserver.org/hispanic-republicans-bexar-trump/

  • José

    Imagine what Republican politicos could accomplish if they put as much effort into responsible governance as they do voter suppression.
    As for all the new Hispanic voters, gracias Señor Trump! We will thank you for years to come.

  • roadgeek

    Because all those Latinos are going to vote for Hillary. Got it.

    • r.g. ratcliffe

      You’ll note the story talks about how almost half the Latinos voted for Cornyn and Abbott and one of the latest polls shows 31 percent of the Hispanics interviewed said they were for Trump.

      • roadgeek

        It’s the attitude of presumption on the part of progressives regarding the Latino vote that irritates me. The presumption that because they’re brown they must support immigration reform is most prevalent, as though every Latino knows an illegal and will thus vote Democrat. The presumption that all Latinos want the same thing. The presumption that all Latinos vote monolithically. The presumption of it all galls me, and I’m saddened it doesn’t gall more Latinos.

        • WUSRPH

          Anyone who says “All” of any group will do the same thing is a fool…BUT it is possible by polling, etc. to determine what most or many or a sizeable group will do…and that is what the projections of Hispanics voting for Clinton are based upon. Just as not ALL older white males without a college education will not for Trump, not All Hispanics, or All or any group will vote for Clinton. But a majority will and that is good enough.

        • SpiritofPearl

          Your posts to American Renaissance reveal your motives.

        • José

          Well, it’s a fact that Hispanics do vote overwhelmingly for the Dems and it would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But if you want, go ahead make the point that the Dems shouldn’t take those voters for granted. That’s a very valid point and is true for every party and for every constituency. Personally, I think that the Dems are doing a better job of reaching out to their usual supporters than the GOP. Trump sure seems to try to alienate everyone except for racists white guys. And as far as trying to broaden its base, the national GOP can dust off its so-called “autopsy report” from the 2012 debacle because everything that they needed to do then is still left undone.

    • José

      Most polls show that Hispanics plan to vote for Clinton over Trump by about a 2-1 ratio. One expects that Ms. Clinton would be quite satisfied with that kind of margin in a segment that is larger than in past elections and still growing. As to whether those statistics are significant you are free to disagree, of course. And even be disagreeable.

      • roadgeek

        My first comment was simply my way of being sardonic. The Internet really, really needs a sarcasm font. Your name is Jose, so I’ll ask you. Why are all these Latinos voting for Hillary? The immigration thing? Trumps comments about a border wall? Speak, and I’ll listen respectfully.

        • José

          You want to know? Talk with a few Hispanics and find out. They won’t hurt you!

          It’s pretty obvious that Trump is largely ignorant and disrespectful of Hispanic. Maybe that shouldn’t matter so much but it does have an impact. And about the wall, give us a break. Either Trump actually believes what he says so he’s an idiot, or he knows that the wall ain’t going to happen so he’s a liar. And “the immigration thing”, as you call it, has a very real personal effect on a number of citizens who consistently have to put up with suspicion and questioning, and who have relatives and friends enjoying peaceful and productive lives in their communities but are susceptible to being arrested and deported without warning. Trump pledges to make that more extreme,

          But you want to know why Hispanics might vote for Clinton. Let’s give it a try. Perhaps we could agree that government has a legitimate purpose, which includes maintaining some order and fairness in society. Some people might see that as meaning equal protection under the law, fair housing and labor, public education, etc. Many minorities value those policies and they see today’s Democratic Party as the better instrument to push them forward, to make the nation a better place for all. Other people interpret order and fairness as meaning that government should protect the “haves” from the “have nots”. So they want literal barriers to keep away people that they don’t like, and they want figurative barriers to protect themselves from the demands of shared responsibility. And they see the GOP and Trump as a better alternative for their interests.

          Most Texans that I know who are black or brown have ample experience in living in a society where the Anerican ideal of “all men are created equal” is an empty phrase. They know that conservative Republicans don’t give a rat’s patootie about equality now any more than conservative Democrats did fifty years ago.

  • WUSRPH

    Trump said he is a “tremendous believer of the freedom of the press. Nobody believes it strong than me,”

    That’s why he wants to change it to reverse the grounds on which an action is decided. After all, he loves the First Amendment, but just thinks the press has too much protection. The sound you hear is Madison twirling in his grave.

  • Cynthia Bryant

    Texas Monthly must have took some of Clintons money! They sure have been working over time with their agenda! Trump train coming through!

    • José

      I know! Awful, isn’t it? Reporting relevant facts and figures that you don’t want to hear?

      • Wilson James

        Happens a lot this cycle. We may be seeing a real change in Texas as the old, rural, white male guard gets old and dies off and is no longer here to vote for voter suppression candidates. Times they are a-changing.

        • donuthin2

          Hey wait a minute, I am one of those old, rural, white male guards (f–T) and I am good with the change. I am tired of the old Perry, Abbott, Patrick, Miller, and a bunch more. They are a product of those who buy them off, own them, and at the same time control them.

      • Beerman

        “We rarely think people have good sense unless they agree with us.”
        -Francois deLa Rochefoucauld

    • (((GodWatchingYou)))

      Texas Monthly must have took some of Clintons money
      Some of that money should have gone to improving the Texas primary school system if that’s how you write.

    • Unwound

      lol oh for sure

  • John Bernard Books

    Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al laugh at dem voters…
    “Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday.”
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_PREMIUMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-10-24-17-03-27

    How dumb are dems?

    • (((GodWatchingYou)))

      I dunno – how dumb are you that you think need to comment 20 times on one story and expect people to read them all? Dude, find another outlet. Get your own blog.

      • SpiritofPearl

        He had his own blog, but no one read it. You can block him as many regulars already have. Life’s too short . . .

      • Beerman

        Block the troll, I did several months ago, it makes this blog much more enjoyable and realistic.

      • Beerman

        The troll is so disrespected in the state Republican Party that Ted Cruz’s campaign staff blocked him from having his picture taken with the Senator at a Ft. Bend County political rally. That should explain why no one pays attention to his rants.

  • John Bernard Books

    Why would you be a dem….
    “While the federal government puts the squeeze on combat war veterans over these reenlistment bonuses they seem fine overlooking plenty of other examples of fiscal mismanagement.”
    The State Department misplaced and lost some $6 billion due to the improper filing of contracts during the past six years, mainly during the tenure of former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, according to a newly released Inspector General report.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/24/feds-ignore-billions-fraud-squeezing-combat-vets-repay-enlistment-bonuses/

    With Vets day just around the corner one has to wonder just how much does the left hate our vets…..

  • John Bernard Books

    Did Hillary buy off the FBI?
    “Campaign finance records show Mr. McAuliffe’s political-action committee donated $467,500 to the 2015 state Senate campaign of Dr. Jill McCabe, who is married to Andrew McCabe, now the deputy director of the FBI.”
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/24/terry-mcauliffes-superpac-paid-500000-fbi-official-overseeing-hillary-email-investigation/

    It doesn’t seem to matter to dems….how crooked Hillary is….

  • SpiritofPearl

    Clinton has delivered to Texas the first shot across the bow in a long, long time. Stay tuned. More to come . . .

  • BCinBCS

    This is OT but since Erica’s post is about Latinos and since they, along with many others in Texas, work at lower paying jobs, it is somewhat relevant.

    Bloomberg has a good article about raising the minimum wage and how, when the city of Seattle raised it to $15.00 per hour, those on the right predicted doom and gloom. Here are the first four paragraphs of that report:

    In 2014, Seattle passed an ordinance to eventually raise the minimum wage in the city to $15 an hour, giving the Pacific Northwest city the highest pay floor in the U.S.

    The ink wasn’t even dry on the wage legislation when the dire warnings of economic collapse began. Unemployment would skyrocket, economic growth in the state would be hurt, restaurants and small businesses would close en masse. The deserved punishment would be swift and harsh.

    But a funny thing happened on Seattle’s way to economic collapse: the city thrived. Restaurants didn’t close — they actually prospered — and new restaurant openings rose. Unemployment fell, most recently to less than 4 percent, more than a full percentage point lower than the national rate. By all accounts, the city on the Puget Sound is booming.

    How did the doomsayers get it so wrong? As in so many other cases of politically motivated economic analysis, this was what the opponents hoped would happen because it fit with way they think world should work. But given what we know about Seattle (more on that in a bit) higher minimum wages can improve workers’ living standards and stimulate the local economy.

    The article can be found, in full, at:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-21/doomsayers-keep-getting-it-wrong-on-higher-minimum-wages

    • John Bernard Books

      “Hillary Clinton was the star speaker at Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s “Fight for $15” minimum-wage victory rally Monday at the Javits Center. Only one problem: She’s not in favor of a $15 minimum wage.

      Hillary’s actually right on the policy — but that won’t help her on the politics.
      http://nypost.com/2016/04/04/hillary-just-headlined-a-rally-for-a-cause-doesnt-believe-in/

    • José

      We tried that “trickle down” theory of economics a couple of times and it failed badly. This “trickle up” method sounds pretty good.

      • John Bernard Books

        Trickle down doesn’t work for socialists…..

        • BCinBCS

          JBB, I’ll send you $20.00 if you can validly show where trickle-down economics ever worked. If you can’t, you send me $10.00. (That’s how confident that I am.)

          • SpiritofPearl

            He doesn’t have an extra $10 to send. Voodoo economics hasn’t worked so well.

          • BCinBCS

            🙂

          • WUSRPH

            Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man’s sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as
            beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.

            Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength to Love (1963).

          • John Bernard Books

            You’ve been telling your lies so long you have come to believe them….a dem occupational hazard….

          • John Bernard Books

            I don’t believe in doing things for you, I believe in teaching you how to learn. Learn to use google….

          • BCinBCS

            Just as I thought.
            You owe me $10.00.

          • John Bernard Books

            No one owes you anything…democrat

          • Wilson James

            Any reasonable non-partisan economist will agree that trickle down didn’t, doesn’t and won’t. It was a talking point that was not provable in the short term for RR to get elected. We are paying for it now.

        • (((GodWatchingYou)))

          Or anybody else but the rich. And even then it doesn’t because they just put the money in the bank, not the economy, which hurts everyone.

          • John Bernard Books

            lemme revisit for you how dumb dems are about economics….
            Nancy Pelosi, “Let me say that unemployment insurance… is one of the biggest stimuluses (sic) to our economy. Economists will tell you, this money is spent quickly. It injects demand into the economy, and it’s job creating. It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”
            http://dailysignal.com/2010/07/07/pelosi-unemployment-benefits-biggest-stimulus-for-economy/

            what a mental giant…..

          • (((GodWatchingYou)))

            Let me revisit how stupid Republicans who believe in trickle down economics: your comment, which you think sounds really smart (what, are you in high school?)
            Helping the unemployed, by putting money in the pockets of people who badly need it, helps support consumer spending, which raises economic output and employment. That’s why the Congressional Budget Office rates aid to the unemployed as a highly cost-effective form of economic stimulus. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44929

          • dave in texas

            Welcome to Burka Blog; haven’t seen you around before and look forward to reading more of your comments. You should know, though, that you’re wasting your time by introducing facts and logic into a discussion with JBB. His entire worldview revolves around the notion that Democrats, all of them, are not only stupid, but evil. If you’re into banging your head against a brick wall, feel free to engage with him. Most of us just ignore him.

          • WUSRPH

            Anyone who wants evidence that tax cuts do not spur the economy can find it in this study of 65 years of cuts.

            http://tinyurl.com/8q5lsxd

          • BCinBCS

            Also… trickle-downs Siamese twin, austerity, doesn’t work either.

          • WUSRPH

            As you note, the economy does not grows when you cut the flow of cash to the public by cutting govt. spending…..The only thing that has been demonstrated to work most often is stimulus…

          • John Bernard Books

            The CBO…seriously? hahaha another stupid dem.
            Do you think the Federal Reserve is a guv entity?

          • BCinBCS

            Day after day you repeatedly prove how uneducated you are.

          • John Bernard Books

            just because I’m over your head it doesn’t mean what you think it does…..

          • BCinBCS

            The sadist thing, JBB, is that you probably believe that you’re intelligent.

          • SpiritofPearl

            “Saddest.”

          • Too Sweet

            No, I think he had it right.

          • BCinBCS

            Oops, corrected.
            (But, then, JBB is a sad sadist.)

          • BCinBCS

            You just insulted Nancy Pelosi for her saying, essentially, that the sun rises in the east. It doesn’t make her look bad, only you.

          • John Bernard Books

            handouts to the lazy creates dependence on handouts….
            Pavlov’s dog.

          • BCinBCS

            So by that logic we should eliminate banks since loans would make businesses dependent, like Pavlov’s dogs.

      • Beerman

        Republican Bush was the President for the eight years that led into the Great Recession and “trickle down” economics were the policies of those eight years, and failed to “trickle down” to middle America. That is a fact and actual history, no matter what Republicans want people to believe. It set the economic environment that produced the problems that caused the Great Recession.

        How much of the Bush tax cuts “trickled down” to the average American in the way of employment benefits and jobs?

        Historically, over many previous “trickle down” periods, the only result of those policies have been class wars, need to raise taxes to cover stupid tax cuts, massive unemployment, big-wig bailouts, and plenty of other concerns. It creates years of stagnant incomes and widening inequality for the middle-class culminating into every recession in our history. “Trickle down” economics does not provide our middle-class workers enough money to buy what they work hard to produce. Only the wealthy enjoy gains. That is a fact.

        Unless America’s middle-class receives a fair share, it cannot consume nearly what the nation is capable of producing. The inevitable result is slower economic growth and an economy becomes increasingly susceptible to a “Great Recession.” That is plain old economic common sense.

        • BCinBCS

          This.

          • Beerman

            Oops, thanks

          • BCinBCS

            You misunderstood my exuberance for what you wrote.
            I wasn’t correcting your post.

        • ladymissdiva

          I remember listening to a report on NPR a year or so after the Bush tax cuts went into effect. They wanted to know the cuts had led to increased hiring. Not one of the companies they looked at expanded their workforce. Nearly all of them used the tax savings on acquisitions, which of course led to layoffs as they sought to eliminate redundancies.

          • Beerman

            And, the outlandish CEO compensation packages. An example: Bank of America almost collapsed in the early stages of the Great Recession; however, the CEO was paid $100 million in 2008. Unbelievable. To spend it all, he would have had to buy $273,973 worth of goods and services every day for that year, including weekends. If he had devoted twelve waking hours a day to the task, he would have had to spend $22,831 every hour, $380 every minute.

            You can bet, instead of spending it on goods and services, he probably hoarded the majority of those dollars in non-productive savings, or, invested abroad to evade taxes. I am confident that did not spend it in the U.S. Economy. If BofA had hired 2000 new employees paying $50,000 annually, each of those new employees would have spent all of that money on goods and services for living expenses and the money would have gone directly into the U.S. Economy and sustain many existing jobs. And, that is the difference between the responsible capitalism of yesterday versus the greedy capitalism of today’s economy. The present economic problem is not jobs, it is pay. Too much to CEO’s and too little to middle-class Americans workers.

            Unless these trends are reversed, the financially stressed middle-class will not have the purchasing power to keep our economy afloat, and this will eventually hurt those of us that are well-off. Again, this is common-sense economics.

          • WUSRPH

            The figures for the past couple of years show a real increase in pay and purchasing power….Not great, but real….this suggests that we have finally got over the major hump of recovering from the greatest recession.
            HOWEVER, the majority of this growth is in the pay, etc. of those in segments of the economy. It is not having that much effect on those primarily attracted to Trumptarianism.

          • Beerman

            Valid points.

          • ladymissdiva

            Unfortunately today’s MBAs are extremely short-sighted. They only care about the next quarter, rather than sustainable long-term solutions.

          • Beerman

            The majority of MBA programs today have discontinued emphasis on how to run a Company, and now concentrate on teaching how to negotiate your compensation package. It is a “I got mine, you get yours” business environment.

          • BCinBCS

            They are that way because they are being taught that way and they are being taught that way because business is that way and business is that way due to the resurgence of conservative economics during the Reagan administration.

  • John Bernard Books

    This is on topic and since R. G.’s post is about Latinos here is what we know.
    Those wanting larger government and hand outs will vote dem.
    Those wanting to build a good life for themselves and their families free from the oppressions of socialism will vote for Trump.

    • Unwound

      lol yeah universal health care is super oppressive. you have the crushing burden of having the ability to leave your job to start your own business without having to worry about what will happen to your families care if something happens.

      • John Bernard Books

        risk takers don’t worry about losing…only losers do.

        • Unwound

          too bad single payer health care is still a net positive for everyone but insurers. early detection can keep you from losing your toes to diabetes.

          • John Bernard Books

            don’t worry about me I can take care of myself…worry about your erectile dysfunction….

          • Unwound

            not an issue yet. havent quite hit 40, and unlike you, i can still see mine.

          • John Bernard Books

            As I suspected you’re quite the keyboard warrior……perhaps you can tell us a war story from the great keyboard war…..

          • Unwound

            huh? what are you even talking about now?

  • John Bernard Books

    While the MSM, an extension of the dem party, parrots daily Hillary is winning the facts show…..
    “Early Florida numbers showed about an equal number of Democrats and Republicans had requested a record 3.1 million early ballots, compared with 2008 when Republicans led 49-to-32 percent and President Obama still won the state.
    However, registered Republicans now have a slight lead — 1.8 percentage points — in the nearly 1 million ballots received by Friday.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/25/early-voting-suggests-tight-race-in-key-states-despite-clinton-camp-boast.html

    This just shows how dumb dems are that believe what the media spoon feeds them in daily doses….

  • John Bernard Books

    Can the illegals steal this election for Hillary?
    “In 2012 the Obama Administration granted temporary legal status to close to 750,000 illegal immigrants under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.Now they are going door-to-door campaigning on behalf of Hillary Clinton and other Democrats.”
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/25/theyre-illegal-immigrants-go-door-door-behalf-hillary/

    Can she steal it……

    • BCinBCS

      Now campaigning for Democrats is deemed illegal by conservatives too?

      • John Bernard Books

        “As Democrats scream at the top of their lungs about Russia trying to interfere with the American election it’s ironic to see them actively working with non-citizens to alter the results of that very same election.”

        • BCinBCS

          That’s your logic?

          • John Bernard Books

            liberals have logic?

  • John Bernard Books

    Should dems learn American History?
    “Like the 50 of you non of them were born American but they became Americans….wow!!!!!
    Thomas Jefferson, who wrote up the Declaration of Independence and signed it, was born in Virginia. Benjamin Franklin was born in Pennsylvania, and John Adams was born in Massachusetts.
    In fact, only 8 of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence were not born in this country.
    In her speech, Michelle made another error when she claimed the constitution was signed in Washington D.C. It was actually signed in Philadelphia, Michelle!”

  • donuthin2

    A bit early to be off topic, but I am thinking that if someone is holding something particularly damaging to Clinton, from wikileaks or elsewhere, it will surely surface this week. I suspect there is nothing. On the other hand, I can imagine that additional stuff will come out about Trump. Just too much to try to release without competing with his own crazy things.

    • John Bernard Books

      ” if someone is holding something particularly damaging to Clinton.”
      There is nothing that will stop dems from voting for Hillary….they’ve been told to and like the lapdogs they are…..they will do as told.

  • BCinBCS

    And yet another OT post…

    In the previous article by Erica I asked BB for help with a question that I had about the politics of confirmation of Supreme Court Justices. Assuming the Democrats win a Senate majority I wanted to know if, at the beginning of a session, the Republicans could promise that they would allow a majority vote on a SCOTUS nomination in exchange for the Democrats not changing the rules, then, when the rules are adopted (with the 60 vote requiremed) could they renege on their agreement preventing the Dems from approving their candidate and the Dems would be outmaneuvered for the session.

    I called my congresscritters and, when someone actually answered the phone, got less than complete opinions. So, I called the Office of the Parliamentarian of the Senate and got the straight dope.

    According to the Parliamentarian’s Office, the Rules of the Senate are not voted on each session (as are the House’s rules) because, since Senators serve staggered six year terms, there is always a quorum. When the Senate wants to change the rules, they can do so at any time (not only at the beginning of the session as I assumed) as many times as they want and with a simple majority vote (not 60 votes as I assumed).

    Ah-ha! you might exclaim (or not)…so a simple majority can change any rule (or pass any bill). Well, yes and no. A majority vote can change any rule (or pass any bill) but if the opposition objects they can prevent a vote by debating or delaying it to death. Then the only way that the rule (or bill) can come to a vote is to vote cloture and that take a 2/3 vote.

    Now if the wheels in your head are turning you realize that it will always take a 2/3 vote in the Senate to confirm a SCOTUS nominee if there is any opposition (and 60 votes to nominate without a filibuster, etc.). And if they turn a little bit more, you might want to know how the rule allowing Federal Judges to be nominated by a majority vote rather than 60 votes was changed by the Democrats since the Republicans opposed the change. Here it gets really interesting. According to Terry in the Parliamentarians Office, the Democrats did not change the rule (that would take a 2/3 vote) they simply re-interpreted it to mean that only a simple majority was necessary. Terry very diplomatically declined to elaborate how that can be done and if it could be done in the case of Supreme Court nominations.

    So, you now know more than you ever wanted about rules changes in the Senate.

    • BCinBCS

      In a bit of good timing, I found this over at Talking Points Memo:

      Outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said he is confident that he has laid the groundwork for Democrats to nuke the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees if they win back the Senate in November.

      Envisioning Hillary Clinton in the White House and Democrats controlling the Senate, Reid warned that if a Senate Republican minority block her Supreme Court nominee, he is confident the party won’t hesitate to change the filibuster rules again.

      Such a move would be an extension of what Reid did in 2013 when he was still majority leader, eliminating filibusters (with a simple majority vote) on the President’s nominees. There was only one exception: the Supreme Court. As it stands now, Democrats still need 60 votes to move forward with a Supreme Court nominee.

      Reid said, however, that could change.

      “I really do believe that I have set the Senate so when I leave, we’re going to be able to get judges done with a majority. It takes only a simple majority anymore. And, it’s clear to me that if the Republicans try to filibuster another circuit court judge, but especially a Supreme Court justice, I’ve told ’em how and I’ve done it, not just talking about it. I did it in changing the rules of the Senate. It’ll have to be done again,” Reid told TPM in a wide-ranging interview about his time in the Senate and his legacy.

      “They mess with the Supreme Court, it’ll be changed just like that in my opinion,” Reid said, snapping his fingers together. “So I’ve set that up. I feel very comfortable with that.”

      • WUSRPH

        The FIRST RULE of a legislative body is that if the leadership and a majority want to do something, they will find a way. It make take time and several efforts, but, eventually, it happens.

  • BCinBCS

    O….K…!?
    Can you pronounce his last name?

    • Beerman

      Some times, after a couple of beers………

      • BCinBCS

        I still think it’s some sort of cheese. 🙂

  • WUSRPH

    “Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”

    Winston Churchill
    The greatest evil—and it is an evil—of Trumptarianism is that it has fed the belief of people like JJ and the Troll that nothing is true….that all “facts” are statements of opinion….and no one—other than themselves of course—-can be trusted or relied upon. If we have no standard…no way of measuring what is valid, what is real and what is false or misinformed, society cannot function.

    • Jed

      my brother has come to think this way.

      i blame is time in the military.

      he also gravitates t the fear-mongering nonsense at breitbart, etc.

      funny how those who have come to trust no one nevertheless listen exclusively to the least trusthworthy among us.

      • Wilson James

        That is an interesting take. I wonder if it has to do with the ability to compete economically and socially….that if you are unsuccessful at work (govts fault), finding insurance (govts fault) losing a job (govt fault/immigrants), no one is commiserating (medias fault) and you don’t get your way (rigged) you naturally go to a place that expresses your impotence with rage, not intellect or fact.

      • SpiritofPearl

        With the elimination of the draft, our military has lost the ability to act as a unifying force in society.

      • Beerman

        The fear, conspiracy theories and hate being preached by Brietbart, Fox News, Drudge, etc has brainwashed many Americans. The rhetoric reminds me of the many propaganda articles in the Das Schwarze Korps newspapers of the 1930’s and 1940’s, a newspaper created and run by the Third Reich SS. It brainwashed millions of good German citizens into a nightmare.

        Sinclair Lewis reacted to the success of the [email protected] propaganda machine pitch on fascism by remarking that: “When fascism comes to America that it will be wrapped in the flag, sing the national anthem, carry a cross and be called Americanism.” He said that in the 1930’s; however, it could well apply in today’s political environment very easily.

        • Jed

          that’s only part of it, though.

          my brother and JJ both exhibit this tendency to assume it’s *all* lies. everything the media says is a lie, for example.

          and then they turn around and believe what they read on breitbart.

          so it’s this weird thing where pure unadulerated skepticism is confused for critical thought, and then the skepticism has to be abandoned (because in the real world we have to operate on some belief or another), and so they settle on the absolute last thing they should trust. and then they adopt those beliefs rigidly, and defend them aggressively, as if they were the product of some superior analysis, and not just the noisiest signal.

          that’s the part i can’t figure out. it’s like if you took critical thinking and flipped it inside out.

    • WUSRPH

      I had the privilege and honor of standing at the foot of his grave is a quiet, almost isolated small churchyard in England during my trip in September. He was a man of many faults, but still a great one.

  • John Bernard Books

    Republicans shouldn’t cast bait before Latinos….leave that to the bottom trollers the dems. Republicans win every time their message is smaller government and lower taxes.

  • John Bernard Books

    Huma said “she is still not perfect in the head.” Lemme translate “she ain’t right.”
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-25/huma-abedin-hillary-she-still-not-perfect-her-head

    now you dems don’t worry your pretty little haids, yawl just do what you are told…..

  • John Bernard Books

    and yes she is a lawyer…..omg
    “She was reported as saying that the results were predominantly leaning towards “homicide” as being the primary cause for the murders. The congresswoman was quoted as saying,

    “Datas (sic) uncover (sic) today give us a clearer portrait of a couple of possible cause (sic) for murder, but let’s be clear.. Changes in the atmospheres (sic) and combustibles (sic) also play a roles (sic) in how peoples (sic) are behave (sic). By continuing homicide (sic) and climate changes (sic) we are ascend (sic) ourselves to vulnables (sic), and we cannot deny that, Nor shall we, Nor shall I, Nor shall we all, So say we all (sic). End homicide and end climate change, and we end murder. THIS, we know.””
    http://thehabanerooftexas.com/2015/12/04/congresswoman-identifies-homicide-as-leading-cause-of-most-murders-in-america/

    did I mention she’s a dem…..wow

    • BCinBCS

      At last you’ve met your soul mate.

      • John Bernard Books

        oh lookie another dem….

        • BCinBCS

          Lapdog? Sherman, just call me Mr. Peabody.

  • John Bernard Books

    Your new Obamacare Plan could be a POS 5500….
    “Mr. Wells liked his health care plan – but because of ObamaCare he won’t be able to keep his healthcare plan.
    “In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year,” he said.
    But thanks to ObamaCare, the Wells family’s premiums will increase by $13,200 per year.
    Instead of delivering on his promises to the Wells family, the president handed them and the American people a wheel barrel full of Grade-A fertilizer.
    That could be why the policy selected for Mr. Wells is called the “POS 5500.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/10/25/meet-man-whose-obamacare-health-insurance-premium-more-than-doubled.html

    if it looks like a POS…it probably is….

  • John Bernard Books

    Repeat after Nancy….

  • John Bernard Books

    Hillary was asked by a reporter about her emails……and she replied “Si quieres el perro … acepta las pulgas”

  • Dave Mann

    Approve.

    • Beerman

      Does does it have to be resubmitted?

      • BCinBCS

        Beerman, if you spell it [email protected], it will get past the computer censor.

        • Beerman

          Thanks, I assume it finally got posted as written?

          • WUSRPH

            Don’t assume anything about the censor. The fact that you may have used a word it finds offensive will set it off…but sometimes you can follow all the apparent rules and still get zinged. I had one on a prior post that was hung up for more than 3 days. I still do not know it if ever got posted. I just went on my way.

          • BCinBCS

            Yes, it is now visible.

  • SpiritofPearl
    • WUSRPH

      Voter suppression was and is the way of political life in Texas. The conservative Democrats did it when they were in power (e.g did you know that a person serving in the military in Texas was effectively barred from voting here for many, many years?). There was a brief period in the early 70s—when I was fortunate enough to be involved in the process—where the Legislature actually tried to expand the right to vote….with semi-permanent voter registration, the repeal of the signed ballot stub, public funding of the primaries and opening up absentee voting to “early voting” for all among other step….but all of that ended when the GOP took power. Since then it has been back to the worse days of the past with restrictions on registration, curtailment of early voting and voter ID, among other changes. The difference is, of course, that they firmly believe that you only have right to vote if you vote Right. Failing in that, you need to be kept as far away from the polls as possible.

      • SpiritofPearl

        If the only way the GOP can win is by suppressing the vote, it speaks volumes about an intellectual failure on the right.

        • WUSRPH

          True….but it also tells us something also about the difference between how they view the nature of man. They view him as a mortally corrupt, grabbing, evil creature infected by original sin…who must be kept from gaining power over his fellow man lest he rob and pillage all that has been accumulated by others. Of course, this definition applies only to other as, individually, they have risen above this evil state…

          • SpiritofPearl

            Hobbesian.

  • WUSRPH

    http://tinyurl.com/jny7xub

     Now that we’ve heard from the “experts” about the worthlessness of political polls—with Trump telling us they are all frauds designed to suppress his vote and JJ telling us they all do not know what they are doing and not counting the right people—it might be time to take a look at what some informed sources have to say….In this case The Economist. It has analyzed the polls and the history of polling to find among other things that at this point in the process historically the polls have been no more than an average of 1.8 points off the final outcome. (Sorry about that Donald and JJ)…..

    • John Johnson

      You turn to a British poll to predict a US election? I find that funny.

      • WUSRPH

        Not a British poll, but a objective observer of the American scene and of American polls. It helps when you read the story before you attack…….

        • John Johnson

          Oh, I thought we all understood that the polling process has changed so much, that looking back at “history” is goofy, as the average Brexit polling attests.

          • WUSRPH

            The average Brexit polling showed it being virtually tied, within the margin of error. That’s the way it turned out. Sorry you won’t accept the facts…guess that is because only you know the facts of all things.

          • John Johnson

            Well, just a few days ago,I gave you links to all sorts of post-Brexit pieces in major UK newspapers asking the question about why the polls had it so wrong? I also gave you the link to a Forbes piece on how long standing polling techniques were now unreliable and new ones being tried, unproven. You must have ignored them. The Economist did call Brexit a toss-up, but for you to put store in a comment about margins of error in past elections as it relates to this one is goofy. Polls and unproven new techniques are all over the place. Hang your hat on them if you want to. We’ll discuss on the 9th.

          • WUSRPH

            I will be very happy to discuss it on the 9th or any day thereafter…but, based on your past behavior, I expect you will be kind of hiding out for a few days after your defeat.

            No one I know is so over-confident to go to sleep based on the current polls. The Clinton campaign is working full-time and over-time to insure that the polls are correct just as they have been in the past.

          • John Johnson

            I have never hidden from anything, and certainly not you. I can admit my mistakes and wrong guess, unlike you. Besides, my prognostications over the years have been much better than yours.

          • WUSRPH

            Again, you make up things about what I have said or predicted…..My choices in candidates have not always won (especially in recent years)….but when I have made predictions they have been fairly constantly correct,,,,,Because I support someone does not mean that I expect them to win….only that they, in my view, are the better candidate..

    • José

      Enough with the elitist experts and the RWNJ blowhards. Let’s hear from the boy genius himself. What does Karl Rove say about the polls? His instinct is legendary!

      • WUSRPH

        I have not now, in the past and I am sure in the future will have nothing good to say about Karl…….He is less than a detestable being……However, he says no chance for Trump. He will, hopefully, never live down that Ohio outburst from 2012…got caught in his margin of error.

  • WUSRPH

    The fear of a Hillary with long coattails is spreading. I have received 3 e-mails in two days from Mario Rubio begging for money as he sees Florida slipping away from the GOP. I’m getting four or five from Clinton sources asking for money to make that possible. But my best one to date is the one I just got from the Trump campaign promising me a “personal gift from Donald Trump” if I give them a contribution before midnight…..A “gift” you have to pay for!

  • WUSRPH

    http://tinyurl.com/hpk4uxr

    Many of us fear the continuation of Trumptarianism after his defeat but we finally have a pundit who says that won’t happen. Let us hope he is correct.

  • John Johnson

    R.G., you mentioned that 31% of Latinos in Texas, in a CBS poll, had indicated they were voting for Trump. This seems to be lost on the Minah birds posting here. These lemmings think that all Hispanics support open borders, a broken healthcare system, government mismanagement and the like. Dem’s are the ones who truly classify people and divide them into groups. Economic classes are not determined by color, but by income. There are many US Hispanics in the “middle” class and not associated with trying to encourage cousins and nieces and nephews south of the border to find their way up here to them. They can’t afford insurance, and they know what constitutes gross lies by a senior public official.
    Hide and watch.

    • WUSRPH

      No one of any intelligence says, expects or predicts that Texas Hispanics will ALL vote Democratic. No one but you and Roadgeek have even suggested that it a possibility. Create your little straw men and then knock them down….but it will make no difference to the outcome. We can all hope that on election dayYou will find—but not admit—that your little group of “America is a decadent, dying third world nation” folks is a lot smaller than thought.

    • John Bernard Books

      JJ you have to realize discussing politics here is like me playing golf with an amateur. While it can be amusing it is usually a waste of time.
      If you noticed no issue has been discussed or debated this election its been about did the candidate touch someone’s whohoo….really juvenile stuff. They hope the low information voter does as instructed and pulls the D lever.

  • WUSRPH

    You are about as much of an economic materialist as I have ever run across……(Your boy Donald is the one who calls us a “third world nation”.)

    • John Johnson

      I don’t like Donald Trump, nor everything he says…nor, do, I imagine, the 40+% of voters who will vote for him…that minor little group you refer to as insignificant. That’s just more of the spinmeister bullshit that defines you after decades of making your living in that position. Trump has Pierson; Hillary has you. I’m not sure which of you is worse.

      • WUSRPH

        It will be interesting to see after the election results have been fully analyzed just how big your group of radical right populists really was in Trump’s vote. I suspect that when you take into account the regular GOPers, many of them who held their noses in party loyalty, the “Business Republicans”, the Evangelicals and the racial/ethnic bigots your group will be a relatively small segment, less than even a plurality.

        • John Johnson

          You are the one that referred to my “little group”, and my response was that 40%+ of the popular vote is not a little or minor group. The country is divided. You seem to think the points that brought us together are somehow going to be forgotten with a Trump loss and that we will all turn into Hillary lovers and put the blinders on.

          • WUSRPH

            Again, you make up things I am supposed to believe. I do not think you will go away…I think you will continue to howl your anguish and fear of the future…..but the question is how much influence will that influence the future?

          • John Johnson

            You can’t help yourself. You are all over the place. Word after word after word after disconnected word after disconnected thought. You now invision yourself an expert prognosticator as well as a worldclass historian. Why don’t you just wait and see what happens instead of making declarations? Your history of prognosticating here on Burka Blog sucks.

          • WUSRPH

            P.S. The country has been “divided” in every election since 1800….that’s what two parties do…..

  • John Bernard Books

    Dems want to drag us down to their level. The quickest to do that is to continue with Obama’s fiscal policies. Hillary plans more of the same old taxNspend grow the government democrat policies.
    “If America continues on this path of unsustainable debt, we likely will face negative consequences such as higher interest costs, slower economic growth, and a greater chance of a fiscal crisis.
    According to the CBO, “a large amount of federal debt will reduce the nation’s output and income below what would occur if the debt was smaller.””
    http://dailysignal.com/2016/10/23/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-national-debt-in-2-charts/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=thf-fb
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e733d214712ca46ec3dc550152e2840b7a183b2210eab22de8c9f8e2c492753b.jpg

  • John Bernard Books

    Alright dems it is tike to put up or shut up….I’ve armed you with the facts…the Clinton aides have told us “she’s still not right in the head and this…
    “Tanden responded, “Almost no one knows better [than] me that her instincts can be terrible.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/her-instincts-can-be-terrible-wikileaks-reveals-fears-and-frustrations-inside-clinton-world/2016/10/25/a6ceefdc-9ae0-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html

    If one has logic and the ability to think, then one doesn’t vote for someone who simply doesn’t realize you don’t put your hand in a pot of boiling water without consequences. Dems that isn’t a snark that is logic. Hillary is a terrible candidate and will be even worse as a leader.

    • Gunslinger

      And she will be your president.