Hillary’s Chief Strategist: Illegal Immigrants And Their Relatives May be ‘Most Powerful Political Force’ in America
From National Review
Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, told a British magazine last week that illegal immigrants “may be the most powerful political force in the country.”In an interview with The Spectator magazine, Penn said, “The most powerful political force in [America], and the most important voting bloc in the upcoming elections, may not even be able to vote — but their cousins can. And that may make all the difference.’Interviewer Matthew d’Ancona also noted, ‘the radicalisation of illegal migrants to America, Penn thinks, could determine the next presidential election because their grievances will encourage their legally settled relatives to register and vote.”
In his recent book, Microtrends, Penn wrote:
Just look at what has happened in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. A few years ago, they were the forgotten Americans, hiding from daylight and the authorities. Today they are holding political rallies, and given where they and their legal, voting relatives live, they may turn out to be the new Soccer Moms. Militant immigrants fed up with a broken immigration system just may be the most important voters in the next presidential election, distributed in the key Southwest states that are becoming the new battleground areas.
Sphere: Related ContentPenn’s client, Hillary Clinton, has courted this demographic since the beginning of her campaign. In a recent interview with Hispanic Trending, Clinton said, “when I’m President, I will work to pass immigration reform that honors our history as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws, and that includes a path to legalization.”As a senator, Clinton denounced past efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.
In 2006, she criticized a House Republican bill that would have imposed harsher penalties for undocumented workers, charging that some Republicans were trying to create a “police state” to round up illegal immigrants. She later charged that the bill would “criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself,” using that line again in a debate sponsored by the Spanish-language channel Univision in September.
In that debate, she said, “[the issue] is being demagogued, and I believe that it is being used to bash immigrants, and that must stop. The Republican candidates need to understand that they are doing a great disservice to our country.” A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton told the New York Times after the debate that she was referring to the CNN anchor Lou Dobbs and the radio host Rush Limbaugh, among others.
She also said she supports “border security” and “in some cases a physical border.”
Mark Kirkorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group which staunchly opposes illegal immigration, has some doubts about the political potency of illegal immigrants’ relatives. He pointed to the short-lived impact of marches in the past two years, and two separate mobilizations this year against comprehensive immigration plans that opponents said amounted to amnesty.
As to the presidential election being determined by the political mobilization of Hispanic citizens, Kirkorian says, “it could happen if the electoral vote count is close enough, but it can only make a difference at the margins, since all Hispanics, of recent immigrant origin or not, will account for only a little more than 6 percent of the vote. The problem for Penn is that meeting the demands of the elites who claim to speak for immigrants —amnesty for illegals, ever-looser enforcement, increased legal immigration — holds the real potential to radicalize Americans, making immigration a much higher-saliency issue than it usually is — and that’s not a micro-trend.”
The Clinton campaign has not replied to a Friday request for elaboration on Penn’s remark.
![[Valid RSS]](http://politicalpartypoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")