WRNHA Home Page   Washington State Republican
   National Hispanic Assembly




Hasta la vista Democrats
Raoul Lowery Contreras
November 11, 2004

Available online at http://www.calnews.com/archives/contreras227.htm

In a San Diego daily newspaper five days before the Presidential election, we find this report:

"Raoul Lowery Contreras, a Latino Republican activist from Del Mar (and former U.S. Marine)…said he expects Latinos will vote in record numbers for President Bush, because of the president's stance on abortion, the economy and national security matters.

"Given the close race, just a few votes will make a huge difference, he said.

"The goal is to get 40 percent (of the Latino vote)," Lowery Contreras said. Latinos "are going to agree with the president, because the economy is pretty good. I don't care what anybody says."

In the New York Times we find this report after the election:

"But in the end, Mr. Bush won 44 percent of the Hispanic vote, more than any Republican presidential candidate in at least three decades. That tally, more than 10 percentage points higher than he received in 2000, shattered the Democrats' hopes that a growing Hispanic population would help Mr. Kerry in Colorado or New Mexico, or perhaps even Florida."

Contreras’ national security theory is validated by the Times with: "Hispanics are heavily represented in the Marines, for example, and according to some national polls are about as patriotic as Americans get; both factors could have increased support for a sitting president in wartime.

President Bush reached out, according to the Times, with advertisements that read: "Nos conocemos…We know each other." Kerry, on the other hand, doesn’t know what a Hispanic is or he might have had some in his campaign that we could see.

Michael Gonzalez writes in the Wall Street Journal: "Democrats are rubbing their eyes in disbelief not just at President Bush's success across America, but also about the fact that a major group they thought would stay on the liberal plantation forever is making a getaway. As they escape out the back door, members of this group are saying "hasta la vista, baby." This was the election when Hispanics came of age."

He continues: "…22% of Hispanics told pollsters they were voting for the first time. Of these, the party split was even.

This might be the most ominous number for Democrats, since party loyalties are cemented early. Conversely, the emergence of the Hispanic Republican disproves apocalyptic warnings that it could never happen from nativists like Pat Buchanan (and Steve Sailer}."

Who is Steve Sailer? A former United Press International writer, Sailer disparages the "Hispanic vote" at every opportunity. He has attacked the President’s strategist Karl Rove incessantly for several years. Why, Rove’s goal of 40% of the Hispanic vote for the President seems to Sailer to have been out of reach and marginally important in any event.

He manifests huge ignorance of today’s Hispanic body politic by writing, "…two non-partisan polls of Hispanics just before the election predicted almost 2-1 Kerry victories. The Washington Post poll found Kerry up 59-30, and the Miami Herald poll found Kerry up 61-33…Third, an independent exit poll of Hispanics conducted by the Velasquez Institute found Bush with only 31 percent of the Hispanic vote." Sailer’s reliance on these polls indicates he has no clue about Hispanics or predetermined and prejudiced polling.

The Post Poll, for example, headlined that a "substantial" number of Hispanics thought Hispanics were disproportionately taking casualties in Iraq as against other whites and blacks. That was a false headline. Actually, a small minority of three in ten Hispanics expressed that view while double that number, six in ten did not. Prejudiced headlines mean prejudice. Sailer relies on an obviously prejudiced survey. His quoting the Velasquez poll is even funnier than his over-all negativity.

In the North County Times we find this report: "A poll taken by the William C. Velasquez Institute in late September indicated that Latinos favor Sen. John Kerry in the race against President Bush by a margin of 56 percent to 36 percent. The poll was taken in the battleground states of Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado." Later polls by the Latino Coalition concluded that President Bush was getting 45% of the pending Hispanic vote. Obviously the Coalition was far more accurate on the Bush vote than the Velasquez Institute, though Velasquez was correct on the Kerry percentage. Sailer ignores the widely publicized Coalition poll.

The Velasquez Institute, though a non-profit, is not a reliable source of information in any event. It was founded with East Coast foundation money to promote the Chicano radical street Mexican viewpoint that has little currency in the Mexican American community. This Institute simply does not recognize any Mexican Americans other than its poverty-level and blue-collar base. News to Velasquez: 75% of Mexican Americans live above the poverty line, many at least two or three times the poverty level but most live above the American median income level.

Fact: Kerry continuously lost Hispanic, mostly Mexican and Cuban votes during the entire campaign. And though most media outlets like the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post acknowledge the 44% Hispanic vote for Bush, that 44% may be a large understatement of the real Hispanic vote for the President.

On Election Day, semi-official media exit polls indicated that Senator Kerry would win the election. The polls were inaccurate and heavily overstated Kerry’s actual election day vote support. That being the case, the 44% Hispanic vote the exit polls credited President Bush with must, logically, be understated, heavily understated.

Sailer and other critics are not only wrong about how many Hispanic votes the President received, but evidence indicates that President Bush actually received a higher percentage of the Hispanic vote than everyone thinks he did just as Kerry received fewer Hispanic or other votes than was expected.

The 50-50 split among new Hispanic voters is probably the most accurate gauge of Hispanic votes for President Bush. Yes, I think 50% may be more accurate than the 44% used in the major media.

In any event, Hispanics sure made this writer look good in his pre-election predictions and comments made in daily newspapers, radio/television and books written long before the election of 2004. In the process, Hispanics made themselves look really important and made their critics look really silly.

Post election question: Do Hispanic Bush voters have any effect on policy?

Six days after the election we find this report in the New York Times: "President Bush will make a renewed push during his second term for a temporary worker program to give legal status to some of the millions of (Hispanic) immigrants currently living illegally in the United States," said Secretary of State Colin L. Powell…"


Send mail to webmaster@wrnha.org with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright 2004 Washington Republican National Hispanic Assembly
Last modified: 03/05/05