As one Congressman illustrated in a display in the House floor where he showed photos of Hispanic looking celebrities and notables who were U.S. citizens in contrast to others who were "white" looking immigrants and/or not citizens, picking who is the immigrant and possibly illegally in the country is often little more than racial profiling. And candidly, Arizona's immigration statute was all about racism at its base. Thus, a bold response condemning racist immigration policy was needed. Yet Mitt Romney failed the test. Most likely because his party's base is increasingly made up of racists and bigots. In the Washington Post, Michael Gerson - a conservative - slams Romney's failed leadership and boldness on the immigration issue that simply is not going to go away and which as the nation's demographics change will increasingly hurt the GOP's electoral chances. Here are highlights:
[T]he [Supreme] court’s immigration decision — and Mitt Romney’s positioning on the issue — that throws the brightest light on the presidential race. And the glare is not kind to the challenger.
Romney is being careful and reasonable on immigration in the midst of a five-alarm political fire. Latino support for Republicans has been dropping since conservatives blocked President George W. Bush’s attempt at comprehensive immigration reform. Romney accelerated the descent by pledging to veto the Dream Act as president. His polling among Hispanics now bumps along at about 25 percent — a level that seems inconsistent with winning Colorado, Nevada or perhaps even Florida.
On immigration, President Obama’s boldness of late has been Napoleonic. The French emperor is hardly a model for a democratic statesman, given the coup of 18 Brumaire and all that. But he knew how to throw his strength at an opponent’s weak point at a decisive moment — which Obama did with his mini-Dream Act. It was a questionable use of executive power. But after weeks of political stumbles, Obama proved capable of an audacious stroke. And it is not likely to be his last. A campaign proud of its micro-targeting has plenty of demographic groups left to motivate.
The contrast is instructive. The Obama campaign is often tactically weak — an exercise in endless speeches, overmatched spokesmen, blame-shifting and expectations-lowering. But the president is capable of ambitious repositioning.
[I]t should concern Republicans that the Romney campaign has shown little appetite for strategic boldness — the ability to shift an argument, exploit a weakness or appeal to an unexpected audience. Immigration is the most urgent example, but there are others. What innovative policy has Romney announced to reassure suburban women? Or to drive home his appeal to Catholic voters, whom Obama seems intent on alienating? Or to persuade working-class voters that he is committed not just to economic freedom but also to upward mobility?
This absence of strategic ambition may reflect a strategy — that the election should be only a referendum on the Obama economy. If so, it is a serious mistake. Very few coast to the presidency based on the failures of others.
Admittedly, Romney's problem is the extremism of today's GOP. In order to win other voters, Romney will have to take positions that are anathema to the prejudice and bigotry filled GOP base. So far, Romney has pandered to that base rather than expand his appeal. Hopefully, it will be a fatal mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment