Ms Unhinged Malkin is using data of the white supremacist organization NumbersUSA, to prove that Latinos who voted for Hillary Clinton were "corruptly" naturalized under her husband's administration.

Is that really so? How can she be so certain that all of those who voted for Clinton are naturalized immigrants as opposed to old American Latino families with no links to their countries of origin?

This is the untold story of Super Tuesday. For all the talk from Democrats and Republicans about whether immigration is or is not a wedge issue in 2008, the fact of the matter is nobody is exit polling and on the look out for recently naturalized citizen voters.

More to the point for pundits who are scrambling to feign to know all things latino, nobody is going out of their way to define demographically what "Latino voter" means.

• Is a Latino a recent immigrant?
• Is a Latino a native Northern Mexican who never immigrated to the US?
• Is it Nuyoricans only or does it include also Puerto Ricans born in the island?
• When confusing Hispanic and Latino, are we also including people born in Spain and Portugal but naturalized in the United States?
• And how many generations does it take before you loose the identity politics moniker and become a "full American"?
• Too many people are tossing around the "Latinos only vote for white Democrats or the Clintons" without qualifying the term Latino or Hispanic and that's a problem.
• Who has been doing exit polling across the primaries?

How are pollsters and/or pundits corroborating these percentages. And more importantly, what questions are they asking in order to corroborate a Latino's or Hispanic's identity?

We just don't know.

So the big story about Super Tuesday and all the primaries is this : NOBODY IS MEASURING HOW MANY OF YESTERDAY'S VOTING LATINOS ARE ACTUALLY IMMIGRANTS.

With that in mind, there is no evidence to explanations on how a group that is incorrectly defined as 100% immigrant, would vote for a candidate who is not only pro-NAFTA, but one who has made no excuses for her "hard stance" at insisting the US needs to criminalize migrancy and use immigration as the next military horizon.

In the end, that's a huge tactical mistake by the pro-immigration movement. In politics, numbers are a weapon of mass propaganda.

No wonder white supremacists fund NumbersUSA [1]. Yeah. That's the same organization dark-skinned Filipina Michelle Malkin vets as an immigrations source.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

[2] | [3] | [4] | [5] | [6] | [7]