@AP_Politics Trump seems to be oblivious to the fact that Latinos are going to be majority and driving force in this country
— samuel (@sambone76) September 3, 2015
Donald Trump cannonballed into the 2016 presidential race by taking a stand on illegal immigration during his candidacy announcement. Illegal immigration and the changing demographic nature has become the most-discussed topic of the GOP primary season and Trump has drawn the ire of Hispanic media, candidates, celebs and residents for his comments.
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush recently appeared on Univision and criticized Trump claiming — in Spanish — that Trump was not a true Conservative. He also answered questions in Spanish during a speech at a bi-lingual school in Miami.
Trump responded by saying: “I like Jeb, he’s a nice man. But he should really set the example by speaking English while in the United States.”
As expected, Trump’s decision to insinuate that English should be the official language of the United States rankled many in the politically-correct crowd and the GOP, which desperately seeks voting approval from Hispanics.
“[T]hese young beautiful kids all speak English but also speak Spanish and one of them asked me a question in Spanish and I answered it,” Bush said on Good Morning America. “That’s the reality of America, that’s the goodness of America. That’s the kind of America we want.”
Trump, who has taken a stand against illegal immigration will point to the lack of enforcement as the reason why Jeb’s statement — “that’s the reality in America” — rings essentially true.
But the question for Jeb is: If a kid had asked him a question in Chinese or Vietnamese or Hindi or French, would he have answered back in their language? If you’re going to go multi-cultural, then why focus on one group over another? If signs are in English and Spanish, how does that help immigrants from countries that don’t speak either of those languages?
Is it all-or-nothing?
Some Interesting Facts to Consider
Immigrants Get More Government Assistance: USA Today published a story Thursday detailing how immigrant households are more likely to be on government assistance.
About 51% of immigrant-led households receive at least one kind of welfare benefit, including Medicaid, food stamps, school lunches and housing assistance, compared to 30% for native-led households, according to the report from the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for lower levels of immigration.
Those numbers increase for households with children, with 76% of immigrant-led households receiving welfare, compared to 52% for the native-born.
82% of illegal immigrants women in los Angeles are on government assistance according to LA times!!
— Hamilton (@db580c9031f64fc) August 28, 2015
Immigration-to-Welfare Policy Societal Death Sentence: Famed economist Milton Friedman explains the difference between planned immigration and free immigration into a society with a welfare system.
GOP Chasing Ghosts: The GOP continues its deluded fantasy that by passing “amnesty” they will cutoff the Democrat’s plan to control the Hispanic voting block in the United States. Pew Research released data on Hispanic voting results from presidential elections dating back to 1980.
Even in landslide elections — Reagan vs. Carter, Reagan vs. Mondale and George H. W. Bush vs. Dukakis — the GOP failed to win the Hispanic vote. The only GOP candidate to come close was George W. Bush, who won 40% against Kerry. But 40% in election terms is considered a landslide defeat.
| Year | Democrat | % Hispanic | Republican | % Hispanic | Difference | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980 | Carter | 56% | Reagan | 37% | Carter +21 | Reagan |
| 1984 | Mondale | 61% | Reagan | 37% | Mondale +24 | Reagan |
| 1988 | Dukakis | 69% | G.H.W. Bush | 39% | Dukakis +39 | Bush |
| 1992 | Clinton | 61% | G.H.W. Bush | 25% | Clinton +35 | Clinton |
| 1996 | Clinton | 72% | Dole | 21% | Clinton +51 | Clinton |
| 2000 | Gore | 62% | G.W. Bush | 35% | Gore +27 | Bush |
| 2004 | Kerry | 58% | G.W. Bush | 40% | Kerry + 18 | Bush |
| 2008 | Obama | 67% | McCain | 31% | Obama +36 | Obama |
| 2012 | Obama | 71% | Romney | 27% | Obama + 44 | Obama |
Is Language a Divider? What happens when a country favors one non-traditional language over others? In other words, English is the unofficial language of the United States, but Spanish often accompanies English on packaging, signage and customer service calls. What does that say about immigrants from other lands who don’t speak English or Spanish?
From the Washington Post in 1998: (by the way, great old-fashioned web-layout here for you internet archaeologists).
But in the current immigration wave, something markedly different is happening here in the middle of the great American “melting pot.”
Not only are the demographics of the United States changing in profound and unprecedented ways, but so too are the very notions of assimilation and the melting pot that have been articles of faith in the American self-image for generations. E Pluribus Unum (From Many, One) remains the national motto, but there no longer seems to be a consensus about what that should mean.
There is a sense that, especially as immigrant populations reach a critical mass in many communities, it is no longer the melting pot that is transforming them, but they who are transforming American society.
Where are we heading as a nation?
What do you think about America quietly becoming a bi-lingual country?
