Re: Brenda Walker’s blog post New Mexico Republican Discusses Diverse Outreach (aka Visiting His Constituents)

From: An Anonymous Reader [Email him]

I have a different take on the WSJ article concerning Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) and the “success” of his outreach efforts with the Hispanic electorate in New Mexico's second congressional district. [One GOP Lawmaker Shows How to Woo Latino Voters, By Neil King, Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2013 |PDF]

Specifically: it takes a bit of Orwellian logic to interpret achieving 42% of the Hispanic vote as winning.

More accurately, it should interpreted as winning in spite of the Hispanic vote. Even with Rep. Steve Pearce’s extraordinary and laudable efforts, he still does not crack the magic 50% threshold that would positively contribute to his winning margin.

When Rep. Pearce was interviewed on the Laura Ingraham show last week [Audio], he stated his congressional office even helps his constituents with their immigration issues! Some gratitude he gets!

Instead, Rep. Pearce’s Hispanic vote of 42% is just another data point that falls into the high twenty percent to low forty percent range that has historically been achieved by Republican candidates.

If the Hispanic proportion of the electorate in Rep. Pearce’s congressional district increases beyond a certain point, then the hard, cold numbers dictate his inevitable loss. If a version of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" passes that results in many new immigrant-citizen voters, that day could come much sooner.

And a quibble with the statement in the article concerning Rep. Pearce’s Hispanic vote percentage:

In November, he nabbed around 42% of the Hispanic vote, or nearly twice what Mitt Romney received nationally

Well, Mitt Romney received 27% of the Hispanic vote. So double that equals 54%. Rep. Pearce’s result is not even close to being double Romney’s.

Of course, such tortured calculations and pervasive hyperbole are to be expected in a Wall Street Journal immigration article.

James Fulford writes: I always point out that even if Bush had got 44 percent of the Hispanic vote (which he didn’t) it would amount to a landslide the other way.