2020 Census Can’t Ask Citizenship Question

by Jack

A 2nd federal court judge says a question on census about citizenship is illegal, even though there is past precedence.  The reasoning was because some people that are here illegally might be reluctant to take part in the census.  In that case a lower population number could reduce federal funds to states with large illegal populations.  Also the number of representatives each state is entitled too based on population could be reduced.

So, it’s okay for sanctuary states like CA to receive federal funds for education, welfare and highways based on the number of illegal aliens living here?  This makes no sense to me, they are here illegally, they are not entitled to representation or federal funding for anything except perhaps deportation.

Rep. Joaquin Castro-D TX, Chair of the Hispanic Caucus, said asking such a question is racist and intolerant!  He says Trump is politicizing the census.  So, he agrees with the judges decision.  In effect illegals are coming closer to getting the vote.  Non-citizens would be able to shape our future?   If it was up to CA they would have the vote already and so would 17 year old kids.  But, that’s nutty CA.

Rep. Castro-D is a clown.  He  should have excused himself from comment because of his obvious conflict of interest.  He’s an advocate for Hispanics, legal or otherwise, even though he took an oath to represent ALL the citizens, not just some and certainly not non-citizens.

The last time a citizenship question was asked on the census was in the 1940’s, according to Castro.  Oddly, he tried to connect this 2020 census citizenship question to the segregation issue back in the 40’s.  Segregation was illegal and a completely separate issue.  It also involved democrat controlled southern states, which is ironic.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to 2020 Census Can’t Ask Citizenship Question

  1. Peggy says:

    I believe this will end up in the Supreme Court again. We’ll have to wait to see if only citizens will be represented by our gov’t or if it will be taken over by illegals the Dems need to stay in office.

    Polls showing Trump’s approval rating on the rise for minority voters is an indication that they understand their low unemployment rates are the results of Trump providing them with jobs that they would have to compete for with the constant increase of illegals. One million illegals projected to cross our southern border this year alone, to add to the 22 million already here.

    “Trump’s approval with black voters in May 2017 was 17%, 9 points higher than his actual Election Day vote at 8%. That was still 2 points higher than Mitt Romney received. It hit a high of 21% in July and fell dramatically to a low of 5% during the Charlottesville controversy before, again surprisingly, rising back up to 17% in July two months later.

    The last figure was 16% in May of 2018 with an aggregate across the 12 months of 14%.

    Clearly, if even 14% translated into actual votes on Election Day 2020, then Trump would win in a landslide given the heavy concentration of black voters in swing states. Remember, he won in 2016 with just 8% support nationally among black voters.

    The great imponderable was–yes, taken at face value and coinciding recently with President Trump’s approval rating among an aggregate of likely/registered voters–it is safe to say there has been a concomitant rise in his approval among black voters.”


    The party of hate is now working on losing the Jewish vote with their weak-kneed approach to dealing with the anti-semitic remarks made by members of the House. They’ll have a hard time explaining the difference between a Jew hating white supremacist and a radical Islamist.

    I must say the news of late has been interesting with all of the hatred in the Dem party being exposed. Pelosi losing control of the House by the very hate-filled monsters she and the DNC created is worth popping more popcorn for. Cohen being used for a tool by the Dems to get Trump is worth a trip to Costco for more popcorn. Cohen reading the two statements written by Lanny Davis, to hit every get Trump talking point, dug his own legal grave two feet deeper. Cohen is being used and he’s either too dumb to know it or desperate to keep his wife out of prison.

    Yup, going to be an interesting year. Rumors flying Mueller’s report will be released today or tomorrow. Tensions will rise and leaks will begin as Barr reviews what info. will be released.

    • Chris says:

      “Polls showing Trump’s approval rating on the rise for minority voters is an indication that they understand their low unemployment rates are the results of Trump providing them with jobs that they would have to compete for with the constant increase of illegals.”

      But none of that is true. Not one word. Unemployment has been falling consistently since 2010, and there has been no increase in the rate of the drop under Trump. I have challenged you in the past to show me a single graph that disputes this, and you cannot do it. Crediting drop for a trend that began under Obama, when you gave no credit to Obama for that drop, is partisan hackery, and I’m going to call you out on it every time you do it.

      And there is no “constant increase of illegals.” Illegal immigration has also been falling for years. You do not live in reality.

    • Chris says:

      “The party of hate is now working on losing the Jewish vote with their weak-kneed approach to dealing with the anti-semitic remarks made by members of the House. They’ll have a hard time explaining the difference between a Jew hating white supremacist and a radical Islamist.”

      And this is ridiculous. Ilhan Omar’s comments have been widely condemned by Democrats. Trump engaged in the exact same use of anti-Jewish stereotypes during the campaign. Where was the Republican resolution condemning that? And what about Trump’s many, many Islamophobic comments? Omar, last I checked, has never suggested we ban all Jewish immigrants from coming to the US, as Trump proposed we do for Muslims during the campaign.

      See, Peggy, people who actually don’t tolerate bigotry don’t tolerate it whether it comes from the left or the right, which is why I have condemned Omar’s use of anti-Semitic tropes. But since you have never condemned Trump’s use of the very same, nor his bigotry toward many other groups, we can all tell that you are just pretending. Lucky for you, you’ve got plenty of others here who will happily join you in the LARP.

      • Peggy says:

        Chris, love it when you show your own ignorance. Wish you’d take the time to learn the truth instead of relying on your biased sources. I’ve stated here several times I didn’t vote for Trump, because I didn’t like him. Still don’t personally, but have to give him credit for what he’s accomplished. Your selective memory forgot when I said he had a communication problem and I had to learn to listen to what he said, not how he said it, like I did with the non-English speaking students I dealt with. If/when he screws up I’ll have no problem saying so. I wish he could speak like Obama, but then I remember all of the lies Obama told us and we believe because he was soooooo good at lying.

        For now, here’s some of Trump’s accomplishments and personal information I’ve based my opinions on:

        Being the president who moved our embassy to Jerusalem, that every president before him said they would but didn’t, is not an indication he’s a racist/bigot. Having a Jewish son-in-law, daughter and grandchildren shows his acceptance of different religious beliefs.

        He’s also the president who reversed the prison incarceration, enacted under Clinton, that put a disappropriate number of minorities behind bars for decades for minor crimes.

        The biased media has labeled him a white supremacy supporter or even one himself, mostly because of what they accused him of saying after Charlottesville. The lying media has promoted the lie and you obvious believed them. Your just a good little sheep who mindlessly follows your shepard with a border collie nipping at your heels. As Thomas Jefferson advised his nephew in a letter to seek the truth from the original source, not from the opinions of others. I strongly advise you read the transcript of what Trump said, as I did, to form your own opinion and stop parroting the lies of others.

        Read the complete transcript of President Trump’s remarks at Trump Tower on Charlottesville:


        I see David Duke is supporting Omar now, which supports my original comment. Do you now condime Omar for her hateful words or will you continue with your group-think instead of individual thought? Will you label Omar a racist, bigot and white supremist like you did Trump? Or, will you defend her like Pelosi is doing by saying she didn’t understand what she was saying?

        Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke heaps praise on Rep. Ilhan Omar:

        • Chris says:

          Peggy, I’ve already condemned Omar’s anti-Semitic statements. So have a majority of congressional Democrats. My point was that calling the Dem response “weak-kneed” is hypocritical if you do not call for a similar response from Republicans regarding Trump’s similarly bigoted statements. I know you didn’t vote for him, but simply saying you don’t like him or the way he speaks is not the same as condemning his bigoted remarks, as you have asked me to do for Omar and as I have clearly done. You are imagining a double standard on my side while engaging in one on your own.

          For context, here is what Trump said about Ilhan Omar:

          “Anti-Semitism has no place in the United States Congress. Congressman Omar is terrible, what she said. And I think she should either resign from Congress or she should certainly resign from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.”

          This was in response to a few different comments Omar has made, including the following:

          “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

          She also tweeted recently that American support for Israel was ““all about the Benjamins.”

          In 2012, she wrote, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”

          Omar has apologized for that last comment, tweeting, ““I heard from Jewish orgs. that my use of the word ‘hypnotize’ and the ugly sentiment it holds was offensive. I spent … little energy [in] disavowing the anti-Semitic trope I unknowingly used, which is unfortunate and offensive.”

          While criticizing Israel and our reltationship with the country is not in itself anti-Semitic, the problem here is that she is using long-held stereotypes about Jews in order to do so. The ideas of Jews being greedy, having dual loyalty, and controlling the world are common talking points among anti-Semites of all stripes. Whether she knew she was using such tropes or not, the point is that she should have known, and should apologize for causing harm.

          Note that this is a more common argument about racism and bigotry from the left than it is from the right. If the right can understand that bigotry can be subtle and masked behind stereotypes in this instance, one would hope they’d be able to call out Trump, who has also relied on anti-Semitic tropes before:

          “I promise you that I’m much smarter than Jonathan Leibowitz – I mean Jon Stewart @TheDailyShow. Who, by the way, is totally overrated.”

          Using Jon’s birth name here is a dogwhistle of the type usually utilized to paint someone as a scary, sinister foreigner who is hiding something.

          In 2015, Mr. Trump told members of the Republican Jewish Coalition: “You’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money. You want to control your politicians, that’s fine.” He added with admiration that it was a roomful of “negotiators,” leading some to object afterward that he was engaging in Jewish stereotypes.


          Rabbis and other Jewish community leaders point to a moment of reckoning following a Wednesday night appearance in which Trump, with his voice raised, defended the use of a six-point star, which resembled the Star of David, mounted over a pile of $100 bills as part of an attack against Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The image previously appeared on a website popular with white supremacists.”That was a turning point for many,” said Lisa Spies, a veteran Republican fundraising consultant and former staffer of the Republican Jewish Coalition. “It forced people to say, ‘I’m going to hold off right now,’ or to say, ‘I just can’t vote for this guy.’ ”
          Added Bethany Mandel, a conservative writer who has gained attention for past criticisms of the ties between some Trump supporters and hate groups: “This past week has been really scary as a Jew in America.”The concern expressed by many Jews is that Trump, who earlier this year was slow to condemn former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and has on several occasions retweeted messages from white supremacists, is bringing into the mainstream a sentiment that has largely been relegated to the dark underworld of the Internet.
          The latest controversy has been roiling since Saturday, when the image first appeared in Trump’s personal Twitter feed, along with his message, “Crooked Hillary – Makes History!” Soon thereafter, amid criticisms from some Jewish groups, Trump’s campaign deleted the tweet and issued a new image featuring a red circle instead of the star.But then Wednesday night, in a free-wheeling speech to thousands of supporters in Cincinnati, Trump expressed regret that the image had been changed.”I said: ‘Too bad. You should have left it up,’ ” Trump said. “I would have rather defended it — just leave it up and say: No, that’s not a Star of David. That’s just a star.”

          Trump compared the image to stars his young son draws at school and accused the media of using racial profiling to interpret the image as anti-Semitic. Later in the evening, he tweeted a photograph of a book from the popular animated movie “Frozen” that features a six-pointed star, asking, “Where is the outrage for this Disney book?”Trump’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment.To some Jewish clergy, the disregard for their feelings demonstrated by a presumptive major-party presidential nominee, combined with online messages from hate groups cheering him on, was a shocking development.”He was defending it with such passion. Shouting and screaming and regretting the fact that it was taken off and replaced,” said Philip Scheim, a Toronto rabbi who is president of the Rabbinical Assembly, the New York-based international association of rabbis from Judaism’s Conservative movement. “Before, there was this subtle tinge of anti-Semitism. Once it’s pointed out clearly — somebody took it off his account and replaced it — even then, to still stand up for it, is kind of mindboggling.”


          None of these attacks are clearly worse than anything Omar said, but none of them are clearly better either. The differences? Omar has apologized, and Trump has not. And congressional Dems helped pass a resolution condemning bigotry in response to Omar’s comments, while Republicans have not taken similar measures in response to Trump’s.

          No, the fact that Trump has Jewish relatives does not inoculate him against being criticized for anti-Semitic statements. Nor does his choice to move the embassy to Israel. That was a move to appease his Evangelical base, many of whom are very anti-Semitic, and want the embassy moved to Israel because they believe it is necessary for their end-time prophecies. I know this because I grew up Evangelical.

          This doesn’t even cover Trump’s anti-Muslim bigotry.

          So my point stands: Dems are far more likely to call out bigotry from their side of the aisle than Republicans are to call out their own.

          • Peggy says:

            Chris, it’s obvious you didn’t read the transcript of what Trump said about Charlettsville, so I’m not going to waste my time to respond to your anti-Trump biased remarks. He could cure all cancers and you’d still find fault with him.

            You didn’t respond about David Duke supporting Omar and the lack of attacks against her while Trump was viciously attacked and was even accused of being a friend and supporter of Duke. That’s the double standard and the biased media I’m referring to.

            And that Star of David thing was debunked. Law enforcement badges also have the same number of points. But, you’ll never believe the truth because your hate for the man overwhelms the facts. You somehow believe you know what’s in his heart. I think what YOU believe is a reflection of your own.

            Have a good day. We’re done.

          • Chris says:

            Chris, it’s obvious you didn’t read the transcript of what Trump said about Charlettsville, so I’m not going to waste my time to respond to your anti-Trump biased remarks.

            Because I forgot to address one point that didn’t affect my argument at all, you won’t address my other points? That is cowardly, Peggy. I said nothing about his remarks in Charlottesville, and did not use it as evidence of Trump’s anti-Semitic comments and tweets. I didn’t need to; there were plenty of better ones to choose from.

            I have read the full context of his Charlottesville remarks before. I think they are less bad than a lot of liberals do, but still pretty bad. But again, that has nothing to do with the anti-Semitic comments and tweets I pointed out, which employed stereotypes about Jews similar to the comments by Omar.

            He could cure all cancers and you’d still find fault with him.

            Trump: “”You know what else they say about my people? The polls, they say I have the most loyal people. Did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s like incredible.”

            You didn’t respond about David Duke supporting Omar and the lack of attacks against her while Trump was viciously attacked and was even accused of being a friend and supporter of Duke. That’s the double standard and the biased media I’m referring to.

            Can you tell me which of Omar’s policy proposals align with the policy goals of David Duke? I don’t think you can. Meanwhile, Trump’s major policy priority is reducing both illegal and legal immigration. That’s been the case since he started his campaign with his “Murderers and rapists” speech. This is identical to the main priority of Duke and his ilk. The tactics may not be exactly the same, and Trump, while an extremist on immigration, is not as extreme as David Duke. But the fact that Duke, and white nationalists more generally, was such a vocal supporter of Trump mattered because they shared a clear policy goal. Therefore, it was valid to ask Trump to denounce Duke–something he took a while to do, and went back and forth on.

            Meanwhile, anyone who believes Duke–whose bigotry against Muslims is almost as strong as his bigotry against Jews–is genuine in supporting Ilhan Omar is a gullible idiot who should never discuss politics again. He is doing this as a distraction tactic. He shares no policy goals with Omar. He is trying to hurt her with Democrats by associating his name with her.

            And that Star of David thing was debunked. Law enforcement badges also have the same number of points.

            Peggy. This doesn’t even make any sense. The meme we are talking about originated on a white supremacist site.


            The meme portrays Hillary Clinton as a greedy tool of wealthy banking interests. The Star of David makes sense when you realize the meme was made by a white supremacist for white supremacists.

            Can you explain what relevance a “sherrif star” would have to such a meme? Of course you can’t. So why on earth would you bring up the irrelevant fact that it can kind of look like a sherrif star? If Ilhan Omar posts a meme with a swastika on it, can I expect you to say that doesn’t matter because that symbol originated in India, and thus we should just forget the Nazi connotations? Of course you wouldn’t say that. But your partisan loyalty is causing you to make incredibly dumb, impossibly naive arguments to defend Trump.

            Note that I am not saying this meme proves that Trump is a white nationalist or an anti-Semite. I’m saying that sharing it is exactly as anti-Semitic as Omar’s comments. But you only have a problem with Omar’s, and not Trump’s. I, on the other hand, have condemned both. Clearly and repeatedly. So for you to pretend that I am somehow being the irrational partisan one here is just sheer projection.

            But, you’ll never believe the truth because your hate for the man overwhelms the facts. You somehow believe you know what’s in his heart. I think what YOU believe is a reflection of your own.

            Have a good day. We’re done

            See above. You are describing what you see in the mirror and applying it to me. I have not said one word about what is in President Trump’s “heart.” I have pointed out that his actions and statements are anti-Semitic in similar ways that Ilhan Omar’s are anti-Semitic. For this to be motivated by “hate,” you’d have to believe I hate Ilhan Omar almost as much. That doesn’t make any sense, Peggy. Your arguments fundamentally do not make sense. So you should reconsider them.

  2. Libby says:

    “In effect illegals are coming closer to getting the vote. Non-citizens would be able to shape our future?”

    THIS is paranoid idiocy. No one advocates suffrage for non-citizens. I mean, seriously, you BELIEVE this?

    ” Segregation was illegal and a completely separate issue.”

    AND THIS also evidences one MONGO break with reality. Jim Crow laws were in full force and effect during the 40s, i.e., racial segregation was entirely legal.

    You are in a bad way, mister.

    The census is supposed to be an entirely non-political, fact-finding project. Adding the citizenship question is a disgustingly partisan effort to politicize the results.

    Think about this: what if it turned out that the percentage of illegals in the country was statistically insignificant? What would that do to your handlers efforts to demonize these people, and distract you from other things? Like the degree to which they is robbing you blind:


  3. Post Scripts says:

    We can fund an illegal alien’s education, medical, housing and we can give him a driver license and more, but we can’t ask people living in the United States if they are a legal citizen or not?

    Does anyone here really think that illegal aliens, that are already taking advantage of our entitlements, would never cast a vote because its against the law? And given the 14-15 million illegal aliens living here, is anyone so naïve to think that not one election in America has ever been decided because of their illegal voting?

    • Chris says:

      Illegal aliens are people, and people sometimes do stupid things, like vote when they aren’t supposed to. Sometimes they even get away with it. But there is zero evidence of any coordinated effort to get illegal immigrants to vote, and zero evidence that any election has ever been decided by illegal immigrants. I tend not to believe things that seem outlandish and are not supported with evidence. I realize that isn’t as fun as believing outlandish things about my enemies because it nourishes my hatred, but you do you.

      • Post Scripts says:

        Chris it might surprise you, but I don’t believe there is a coordinated effort to get illegals to vote! So we agree. But, and here’s where we differ, I do believe that democrats understand it is to their advantage to have illegals come here so they can become voters. They understand that 90% of them are going to vote democrat once they can and that’s all the incentive they need to obstruct tough border control methods and slow deportations. So, democrats don’t need a coordinated effort! They got a good thing going just like it is, without any need to openly admit their true objectives. There’s also the incentive of cheap labor, which really isn’t, but it does advantage a few in both parties.

        • Chris says:

          The number of illegal immigrants who eventually become legalized is probably too small for that to be a viable strategy, Jack. Now, if you want to argue that our stance on illegal immigration is to court Hispanic voters more generally, you probably have a point. But there’s nothing all that sinister about trying to court a legitimate voting bloc. If Republicans want to compete when it comes to minority outreach, they shouldn’t have voted for President They’re-Coming-To-Rape-You.

          • Post Scripts says:

            Chris, 30+ years ago the GOP in CA recognized the shift in demographics and at the time we knew it was critical to court the Hispanic vote. From a family values perspective and on the abortion issue, Hispanics were rock solid conservative,. It looked like all we needed was to do an effective outreach and it was tried. But, we failed because we could not compete against the democrats who forming a populist movement, vilifying the rich, causing social unrest and then offering “free stuff” via wealth shifting. Hispanics remained solidly in the democrat camp. And if they had just stayed there, we could have still had a fair competition between the two main party’s. Except, for one thing. The Hispanic voting numbers increased exponentially thanks to a number of things caused by the left that led to mass migration into CA, by both illegal and legal persons. Now the democrats crushed the GOP and they rule everything. Their plan worked! And the Hispanics are the now the dominant demographic, the power shift has been tremendous and prfound. The GOP is worthless here, they are but a footnote in CA history.

            Other states watched CA tank and they are worried about that same thing happening to them. This is a very rational fear for Nevada, Az., New Mexico and Tx., they are at risk for liberal socialists guiding the Hispanic vote. They have an effective model created in CA to follow and so far I see nothing to stop them. Keeping the borders open to mass, unchecked, immigration will only hasten this populist movement and socialist oriented change.

            Chris, be forewarned, socialism and its battle cry, “a war on the rich” is a powerful force. Your generation will have to pick up those pieces when it comes crashing down.

          • Chris says:

            Jack, Hispanics didn’t flee the Republican party because they want free stuff, they did it because the Republican party constantly accuses them, as an ethnicity, of wanting free stuff, and of various other social ills articulated by our current President in his famous “They’re coming to rape you” address. “Why won’t these lazy ingrates vote for us?” is not a marketable strategy, as Hillary discovered in 2016.

          • Post Scripts says:

            No Chris, you are wrong. You really don’t know anything about the GOP, but I do. I was a County Chair and on the state board. I had a very long and intimate relationship with the CA-GOP, I knew their strengths and weaknesses. Ok, I would like to send some truth your way, in the faint hope it will turn on that light bulb above your head?

            Hispanics never fled the GOP, that’s just silly. The Hispanics within the GOP were and still are, steadfast, but not enough in number to counter the numbers on the other side. The GOP Hispanic caucus gets it. They know which party is better for the State and for the Nation and they remain true to the party platform.

            However, I admit that the GOP did have trouble recruiting new Hispanic voters because of democrat’s rhetoric and the GOP inability to fight effectively against it. The democrats have since the 1920’s had the reputation as the party of the little guy. But, times have changed and I don’t think that’s true anymore. What I see is a party that says, “Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you!”

            Giving people free stuff makes recruiting low information voters so much easier than being fiscally prudent and pushing for a limited government. That’s not nearly as sexy as promising more entitlements. It’s kind of like two parents in a divorce, one says, kids come with me and I’ll give you all the candy and soda pop you want. The other says, come with me and I will give you veggies, fruit and salad. Which one do you think kids will choose?

            The majority of voters are like those kids…they want the candy. And the democrats are always eager to exploit that. By comparison the GOP is boring…who gets excited over cost cutting? But, hey you mention a free program to a voter and you got a friend! That’s an easy sell, especially to low information voters like the dems go after.

            Hispanics have been sold a ton of BS by the democratic party. Sadly, it’s near impossible to reverse that damage. They believe, probably just like you, that the GOP is made up of racists that they want dirty air and dirty water, so corporations can make more money. The big lie continues, the GOP is all about exploiting the poor and downtrodden, cutting school lunches, letting the old folks die of starvation, etc. Its total BS of course, but look at the number of people who believe it!

            Years of indoctrination and class warfare has done that to our society and it was the perfect vehicle to build up a an unstoppable populist movement that took over CA. It could happen again in other states if we don’t stop the dems and their big gov machine.

            It’s so bad now, that when they come cross the border its just expected they will join the democratic party – there’s no question about it. All thanks to that rotten, lying propaganda that was so expertly crafted to exploit ignorance.

            I’ve seen it happening for the last 30 plus years and it was always aimed at tearing down the so-called rich and vilifying white people. CA is screwed.

          • Peggy says:

            Also Jack, remember during the 1990s the increase in Hispanic activist groups like LaRaza?

            “Two years ago, California Republican Gov. Pete Wilson campaigned hard for Proposition 187, the measure cutting off public services to illegal immigrants. The measure passed easily and helped Wilson get re-elected. Ever since then, Republicans have claimed the anti-immigration issue. And sure enough, it had a big payoff this year — for the Democrats.

            Vice President Al Gore’s “Citizenship USA” program aimed at clearing the backlog of citizenship applications from legal aliens. The result was that more than 1 million new citizens were naturalized in 1996, twice as many as in any year in the nation’s history. Republicans saw a partisan motive behind it, and Bob Dole lambasted it during the campaign.

            “Rush them through so they could be ready for the election even if they had criminal records,” Dole said. “Don’t do any background checks. That is an outrage. That is an outrage.”

            Not only were there more Hispanic voters, but they voted more Democratic than ever. Ronald Reagan won almost 40 percent of the Hispanic vote in 1984. That dropped to just over 20 percent for Dole this year.

            In Texas, Clinton got 58 percent of the Hispanic vote in 1992, jumping to 75 percent this year. Florida Hispanics include a lot of Cuban Americans, a strongly Republican constituency. In 1992, Florida Hispanics voted almost 2 to 1 for George Bush over Clinton.

            But this year, they split their vote almost equally between Clinton (42 percent) and Dole (46 percent) and helped make Florida one of only two states that switched from Bush in ’92 to Clinton in ’96.”

            The Largest U.S. Latino Advocacy Group Changes Its Name, Sparking Debate:

          • Chris says:

            “Ronald Reagan won almost 40 percent of the Hispanic vote in 1984. That dropped to just over 20 percent for Dole this year.”

            Reagan’s stance on immigration was also far more liberal than any Republican candidate could get away with today.

    • Libby says:

      Yes, we know all about your seething resentment, but, I’m sorry, it is not a basis for sound social policy.

      We need to know how many of these people we are doing this for … and:

      What if it turned out that the percentage of illegals in the country was statistically insignificant? What would that do to your handlers’ efforts to demonize these people, and distract you from other things? Like the degree to which they is robbing you blind.

  4. Chris says:

    Told you so.

    WASHINGTON — Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering, the architect of partisan political maps that cemented the party’s dominance across the country.

    But after he died last summer, his estranged daughter discovered hard drives in her father’s home that revealed something else: Mr. Hofeller had played a crucial role in the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

    Files on those drives showed that he wrote a study in 2015 concluding that adding a citizenship question to the census would allow Republicans to draft even more extreme gerrymandered maps to stymie Democrats. And months after urging President Trump’s transition team to tack the question onto the census, he wrote the key portion of a draft Justice Department letter claiming the question was needed to enforce the 1965 Voting Rights Act — the rationale the administration later used to justify its decision.

    Those documents, cited in a federal court filing Thursday by opponents seeking to block the citizenship question, have emerged only weeks before the Supreme Court is expected to rule on the legality of the citizenship question. Critics say adding the question would deter many immigrants from being counted and shift political power to Republican areas.

    The disclosures represent the most explicit evidence to date that the Trump administration added the question to the 2020 census to advance Republican Party interests.


    • Post Scripts says:

      I don’t like gerrymandering. It’s ultimately a fools errand. Look, if some cities or counties go to one side or the other, big deal. In the grand scheme of things it all works out. We know this is true because both side engage in gerrymandering and the result ultimately stays the same. The people have the vote and they should be trusted to succeed or fail as human beings will. But, eventually people will overcome and then the right thing gets done, this is how a democracy works.

      If we didn’t have just two dominate political parties we would probably be a lot better off. George Washington thought so.

      As for being afraid to ask the census question, “Are you an American citizen?” We should never fear that question…never! This is fake-fear and it’s really coming from partisan politics. If we had been paying more attention to illegal border crossings a long time ago this question would not bother anyone.

      The truth is, both dems and reps worry way too much about what is good for their self-serving interests and not what is good for the nation and that is not fake-fear, its a legitimate concern. Remember, partisan politics was a danger foreseen by our founders and we were duly warned to be careful.

      • Peggy says:

        So, not asking the citizenship question advantages democrats. Since only citizens, by law, are the only ones allowed to vote in national elections, why not ask if they are?

        Agree Jack, everything is political partisanship and gaining or retaining power.

        • Post Scripts says:

          Peggy, I don’t know if asking or not asking that question to illegals will result in much difference on the census count, but if it does, I say so what?

          The only reason we have a census is determine our growth and the future needs of our population based strictly on [legal] citizenship. Illegal aliens were not invited, they crashed the party and they have a NO right to claim any of our taxpayer entitlements. And we shouldn’t be providing for their needs, except for possibly a ride back to their home country. If that bothers democrats then that’s their problem. They can fork out the money to pay for illegals if they want, but as a nation, we owe no such obligation.

          The liberals forget, this nation exists to protect and preserve our democracy and to our take care of our citizens first.

          • Peggy says:

            My brother was a Census Bureau area director in Nevada for years. His job was to make sure every legal and illegal person was counted. If that meant banging on doors he and his team did it. The estimates for illegals in our country ranges from 12 million to over 20 million. Since we’ve been told 12 million for the last 10 years at least I’ll bet it’s way over 20 million now. Two thousand crossed at El Paseo yesterday alone.

            House reps are based on population. Take out the illegal count from the census and we have less reps. Sounds good to me.

            Also, did you hear Trump is going to enforce Clinton’s bill from 1996 that requires the illegals’ sponsors to reimburse the gov’t for any cost incurred? I know of two US citizens the gov’t came after them to pay for a family members health care cost.


          • Post Scripts says:

            I think that is great (reimbursement) since we have a fair number of illegals going into our rest homes now. We (taxpayers) pay about $3000 plus a mo. to keep them there. They are difficult to care for because of language problems, but also in some cases they can get pretty mean according to the CNA’s I know. Not all of course, but enough to make that job tough on the girls. Their family more or less dumped them there, that’s not right.

      • Chris says:

        I’m sure you’re right that both sides do it, Jack, but I don’t think both sides do it to the same extent. Democrats haven’t tried to change something like the census in order to gain an electoral (and racial) advantage. We also haven’t tried to change voting laws to accomplish the same.

        On a related note, Laura Ingraham’s promotion of an actual neo-Nazi, among other weirdos, on last night’s show really has me thinking about how extreme the right has become and how few guardrails remain that separate the extremists from the mainstream (a worry I saw echoed by many conservatives I follow on Twitter). I have a lot to say about what happened on her show last night and what it means for our culture more generally, but I don’t think I can fit it all in a comment. Would you be interested in publishing an article like this if I wrote one, Jack?

        • Post Scripts says:

          Chris, you said, “Democrats haven’t tried to change something like the census in order to gain an electoral (and racial) advantage. We also haven’t tried to change voting laws to accomplish the same.” That’s a matter for debate Chris. Historically, the democratic party was the party of slavery and racial discrimination during the civil war, surely you remember that, right? The KKK had their roots in the democratic party too and further the dems opposed women’s suffrage. I’m not saying this is what they stand for today, but then neither does the GOP. We may have isolated incidents like this law in Mississippi where an old state law to elect the governor may have undesirable consequences. But, I won’t hold the dems responsible for it, because like I said it is an old law and if it does actually discriminate then I have every confidence it will not stand a legal challenge. So, it’s going to be ok.

          • Chris says:

            Jack, I am clearly talking about the modern iterations of the Republican and Democratic parties which are very different than what they were even at the beginning of the civil rights era. Yes, of course prior to the realignment Democrats led efforts to stop black people from voting. But now those efforts are led by Republicans.

          • Post Scripts says:

            Chris as much as I loath the two party system, I can’t believe either the GOP or the Dems would be so foolish as to try to deny people of color the right to a fair election. That’s a very serious charge and I would like to see some evidence before going any further. Mississippi law says, it requires the winning candidate to have a majority of the vote — or, more than 50 percent of the counted ballots. So far so good? However, the victor must also pick up a majority of the state’s 122 House districts — or, at least 62 of them. I don’t see where race is mentioned? In CA we use the popular vote and we use districts to decide representation, so I would like to see how Holder does in his lawsuit to overturn this old law.

        • Post Scripts says:

          Chris you write a good article for us and I will publish it. We don’t mind opposing opinions here one bit. This is a free speech area!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.