Asian voter support for the GOP falls to new lows, will Jewish voters be next?

Here’s the Daily News, in 2015:

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump lampooned Asians during a campaign rally in Iowa, mocking them with broken English. . . .

“It wasn’t enough for Jeb Bush to insult Asian Americans with his ‘anchor baby’ slur? Now Donald Trump mocks the way Asians speak after calling for an end to birthright citizenship,” Margaret Fung of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund told the Daily News Wednesday.

“If these offensive remarks continue, no one should be surprised when Asian American voters turn their back on Republican candidates in 2016.”

And a year later:

Asian-American voters headed into the 2016 elections are shifting toward the Democratic Party, according to a report released Monday by APIA Vote, Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, and AAPI Data.

The report — which surveyed 1,212 voters and was conducted in English, Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean, and Vietnamese — also found that a majority of voters disliked Donald Trump, were more enthusiastic about voting compared to earlier elections, and — despite increased enthusiasm — had not been contacted by any political parties or civic engagement nonprofits. . . .

Rhetoric around immigration was a major issue for the Asian-American electorate. Forty percent of surveyed voters said they would vote for someone else if a candidate expressed strong anti-immigrant rhetoric, and 43 percent of voters said they would do the same if a candidate expressed strong anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Matt Yglesias has a chilling post on rising anti-Semitism within the new Trump GOP:

The Republican Jewish Coalition has the mission of attracting votes and fundraising dollars for Republicans from American Jews, a challenge when your party’s nominee has a robust following among the online “alt-right,” which is full of kooky anti-Semites. (Check out the #kikeservative hashtag for some examples.)

Apparently the RJC has dodged the issue, which attracted some tweets from outraged journalists:

Screen Shot 2016-05-24 at 11.16.30 PM

The modern GOP is not a pretty sight.


When the GOP still had some decency (“open the border both ways”)

Here’s a jaw dropping video from the 1980 campaign.  Bush stakes out a very liberal position on immigration, and then Reagan responds from a position even further to the left, almost sounding like Bryan Caplan, or a SJW.

Still think Trump is similar to Reagan? What I find most interesting is not their specific views on the issue, but rather their tone.  Their sense of decency.  The contrast between the language of the 1980 GOP and the crude, selfish, nationalistic language of the modern GOP could not be more stark.  This video even makes Mitt Romney look insensitive by comparison.

HT:  I forget. . . .


What kind of person does Lindsey Graham favor for President?

This kind:

Even Lindsey Graham is reportedly telling Republicans to support Donald Trump

“He’s a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot.”

“He doesn’t represent my party. He doesn’t represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for.”

“I’d rather lose without Donald Trump than try to win with with him. I wish he would leave the party. I don’t care if he runs as an independent. If we lose the 2016 election, so be it.”

“You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell.”

That was Lindsey Graham back in December.

I predicted this turnabout in January (Admittedly not a hard prediction to make.)

So now we live in a world where leading Trump supporters view Trump as “a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot” and yet support him anyway.

More immigration please (Making America Great Again)

This post is not about open borders; it’s about the need for dramatically higher rates of immigration.  Let’s consider three objections:

1.  The impact on US workers.

What impact?  Why should more immigration cost jobs?  The unemployment rate Canada is 7.1% and Australia’s unemployment is 5.7%.  The US has 9 times as many people as Canada, and 14 times as many as Australia.  That’s a huge difference in the number of immigrants we’ve let in, and yet our unemployment rate is only 5.0%.  If we went to having 10 or 11 times as many people as Canada, would we suddenly have lots more unemployment?  I don’t see why.

Another argument is that immigration has disproportionately hurt the wages of low skilled workers.  Hmmm, that must be why so many conservatives object—a sudden concern with the welfare of the poor.  In fairness, this argument may have a bit of merit, which is why we might want to consider adjusting the mix of immigrants so that the average skill level of immigrants is comparable to the current US population.

2.  The groups we are letting in are inferior to the native population.

The largest group of immigrants now come from Asia.  In America, average household income is $49,800.  For Asian Americans it’s $66,000.  Some argue that this is misleading, as only certain Asian groups do well, like Japanese and Chinese Americans.  Actually, both those groups have median family incomes of below $66,000.  Filipinos (the Hispanics of East Asia) and Indians do far better.

Much faster population growth would lead to much more housing construction, as well as infrastructure construction.  More need for Trump Towers, for rich Asians (are you listening Donald?)  More jobs for blue collar workers.  The zero bound on interest rates would probably go away, making recessions less likely.

3.  The groups we are letting in support big government.

How do we know this?  Again, Asians are now the biggest immigrant group (in flow terms, not stock), and in almost all Asian countries the government’s share of GDP is smaller than in the US, often far smaller.  In fairness, that’s partly because developing countries normally have low G/GDP ratios.  But what makes Asia unique is that even the wealthy East Asian countries have low G/GDP ratios.  In most US states, the top income tax rate is higher than in Communist China.

And why do we assume their views are carved in stone?  Didn’t lots of the white immigrant groups switch from Democrat to Republican during the 1970s and 1980s?  Things change.  I know “red Chinese” who have become “red-voting Americans.”

I’m not saying that our current system is perfect, far from it.  I’d like much higher rates of immigration (3 million a year is a good start) and a better balance of skilled and unskilled, so that the people at the bottom in America are not bearing the brunt of the competition for jobs.  As a practical matter, my proposal would skew the immigrant mix even more towards Asia.  However, I’m perfectly happy with immigrants from other areas as well; ethnicity should not be the criterion we use to decide who gets in.  And certainly not religion.

PS.  Here’s the IMF data on government spending as a share of GDP, for 2014 (we don’t get many immigrants from Japan):

Japan  39.8%

USA  35.6%

China  29.3%

Malaysia  26.5%

S. Korea  20.7%

Taiwan 18.3%

Singapore 18.1%

Hong Kong  17.3%

PPS.  If we allowed immigration at levels equal to 1% of the US population, it would allow the US to surpass China in total popuation in about 100 years, when their population is expected to have fallen back to 750 million.  We would again become the world’s largest economy.  Let’s make America’s economy a great big one again.

India?  No chance of passing them; in 2116 India will have vastly more people than either the US or China.  And a bigger GDP.

The believers

In the 2001 film “The Believer“, a character named Daniel Balint joins a neo-Nazi group.  The other members of the group are pretty dumb, as you’d expect.  But Daniel (played by Ryan Gosling) is brilliant, and also Jewish.  At one point in the film, the other neo-Nazi’s are denying the truth of the Holocaust, and Daniel fires back at them:

If Hitler didn’t kill six million Jews, why in the hell is he a hero?

That’s the irony at the center of the film; the only true neo-Nazi turns out to be a Jew.  I’m often reminded of that scene when I read the comment section.  Lots of Trump people (in my comment section) seem to believe that whites are a superior race.  They constantly tell me how awful other groups are.  And yet when I point to all the racist dog whistles put out by Trump, they use arguments that are too clever by half to insist that I’m delusional.  I almost want to grab them by the shoulders and scream, “If you don’t think Trump’s a racist, why in the hell do you like him so much?”

Mike Sax directed me to the following, from Business Insider:

According to a 1990 Vanity Fair interview, Ivana Trump once told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that her husband, real-estate mogul Donald Trump, now a leading Republican presidential candidate, kept a book of Hitler’s speeches near his bed.

“Last April, perhaps in a surge of Czech nationalism, Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler’s collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed …

When Brenner asked Trump about how he came to possess Hitler’s speeches, “Trump hesitated” and then said, “Who told you that?”

“I don’t remember,” Brenner reportedly replied.

Trump then recalled, “Actually, it was my friend Marty Davis from Paramount who gave me a copy of ‘Mein Kampf,’ and he’s a Jew.”

Brenner added that Davis did acknowledge that he gave Trump a book about Hitler.

“But it was ‘My New Order,’ Hitler’s speeches, not ‘Mein Kampf,'” Davis reportedly said. “I thought he would find it interesting. I am his friend, but I’m not Jewish.”

After Trump and Brenner changed topics, Trump returned to the subject and reportedly said, “If, I had these speeches, and I am not saying that I do, I would never read them.”

In the Vanity Fair article, Ivana Trump told a friend that her husband’s cousin, John Walter “clicks his heels and says, ‘Heil Hitler,” when visiting Trump’s office.

The Weekly Standard comments:

Now lots of ordinary people read Hitler for valid reasons, such as innocent historical fascination. But it seems particularly strange in light of Trump’s bizarre refusal to denounce David Duke, even as he apparently lies about knowing about the former KKK grand wizard.

And if you’re inclined to cruise down parts of the information superhighway where it’s a good idea not to roll down the window, you’ll see that Stormfront and lots of other racists think this detail is pretty significant.

I think it’s fair to say Trump’s got the the neo-Nazi and KKK vote locked up, time to go after the much bigger anti-Muslim vote.  Then the anti-Mexican vote.  There are so many people in the world that are not like us.  So many people to hate.

I’ve been pretty critical of Trump—even called him a moron.  But I do need to give him credit on this.  When he decides to learn something—like how to be a demagogue—he knows who the world class experts are.  And he’s a quick learner.