(MintPress) – In the aftermath of the election, Republicans have looked to where the party went wrong. Hispanics largely favored President Barack Obama over Mitt Romney and his policies — and helped the president attain the ultimate goal: a second term.
Ten percent of voters in this presidential race identify as Hispanic — and 71 percent of the demographic voted for Obama. Had the votes shifted the other direction, Americans would be preparing to usher in a new president.
The question now is how the Republican Party will respond, by either shifting its policies to favor such demographics, or continue on in the hopes more Americans will come to see things their way.
If Sean Hannity’s most recent comments regarding immigration reform are any clue, the party has some changing to do — and they’re taking it upon themselves to make it happen. If they don’t, they risk losing the Hispanic vote forever.
Making a move on immigration
In a move that shocked people on both sides of the political aisle, Hannity announced on his conservative radio show that Republicans’ policies on illegal immigration should change away from a no-nonsense approach to one that is more sensitive and realistic.
While still acknowledging it as an issue for America, Hannity stepped down to claim that a pathway to citizenship should be created — one that offers attainability.
“We’ve gotta get rid of the immigration issue altogether. It’s simple for me to fix it. I think you control the border first, you create a pathway for those people that are here, you don’t say you have got to go home,” he said.
That’s a complete turnaround from the position he’s spouted in the past. And while he’s not a politician, he’s an authority for the Republican Party. He is the voice for listeners who are undeniable cheerleaders for the conservative movement. When leaders change their position, it’s reasonable to assume their fan club will, at some point, do the same.
“And that is a position that I’ve evolved on. Because you know what — it just — it’s gotta be resolved. The majority of people here — if some people have criminal records you can send’ em home — but if people are here, law-abiding, participating, for years, their kids are born here … first secure the border, pathway to citizenship … then it’s done. But you can’t let the problem continue. It’s gotta stop,” he said.
Hannity isn’t the only conservative to take a second look at immigration. America saw Romney change his position on immigration policies. He initially criticized the president when he implemented the two-year visa program for young, undocumented workers. During the Commission of Presidential debate series, however, Romney changed his tune, telling viewers he would not overturn that policy.
From a strategy standpoint, that was a good move — but it wasn’t enough to convince Latino voters that he would be a champion for those seeking a pathway to citizenship. His debate comments came after a hidden video from a private fundraiser hit the mainstream media. The video captured him discussing the Hispanic vote and the need for Republicans to win it over — but he didn’t exactly do it in a compassionate way.
“We’re having a much harder time with Hispanic voters. And, if the Hispanic voting bloc becomes as committed to the Democrats as the African-American voting bloc has, in the past, why we’re in trouble as a party and, I think, as a nation,” Romney said.
It seems that’s the standpoint point he and fellow conservatives are now taking. But the switch isn’t going to happen overnight. Hispanics have seen the Republican Party support people like Arizona Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has been sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination and has been a champion of such practices. He was also directly tied to SB 1070, the legislation that allowed “show me your papers” provisions that require law enforcement to question the legal status of anyone they deem to be, well, Hispanic.
The challenge for the party will be separating themselves from figures like that — people who are in their party, but have not jumped on the political strategy wagon.
And the same point goes to issues relating to women’s rights and the dialogue surrounding sensitive topics like rape.
The women vote
Most American women likely remember when Missouri Congressman Todd Akin made the public distinction between “legitimate” rape and, well, rape. In the same televised interview, Akin claimed that a woman’s body has a way to “shut that whole thing down,” claiming pregnancies did not result from rape.
This even caused outrage among the most conservative of women, Ann Coulter included, who acknowledged that his comments were going to hurt the Republican Party in the long run. She also referred to him as a “selfish swine.”
And it seems it did. Akin wasn’t re-elected, and his comments became paired with a Republican mindset and their so called “war on women.”
But it didn’t stop with Akin.
The issue of abortion — when and if it’s acceptable — was one tackled by many male conservatives. And, over and over again, their comments generated outrage and concern among women. Abortions warranted in the case of rape and incest were hotly contested.
Even Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan had a history of not supporting abortion in cases of rape or incest — instead, he made exceptions only for when the life of a mother is compromised.
That didn’t sit well among women, and not just those who consider themselves radical feminists. Instead, it was viewed as a representation of the white, male-dominated political world and its out-of-touch nature.
The issue of abortion, however, is not one Republicans are likely going to change. The religious right vote is too large for conservatives to sacrifice. Yet any male, conservative politician will likely learn a lesson from the Akin race and perhaps choose their words wisely before discussing the topic.
As for the immigration debate, the wheels of change are in motion. The challenge now — and for the next four years — will be convincing Hispanic voters that Republicans are doing it out of compassion and concern, and not solely for strategic purposes.