After reading your earlier comment, I visited the CIS website. It is an advocacy group with a very anti-immigration cant. A little Googling reveals it is generally considered disreputable as a source of information.
I looked at your WP link, but am not sure what point you’re making with it.
by whom is it considered disreputable? Their source data is given, yet no one has actually refuted their analysis.
Are you suggesting people of Hispanic heritage should be denied entry because of their political outlook? If you are, let’s put that shoe on the other foot. Suppose Obama suggested limiting the immigration of white Europeans because they might be more likely to vote Republican. You would have been outraged (and rightly so), would you not?
(Note: I actually have no idea whether white Europeans would be more likely to vote Republican; I was just using that as a hypothetical.)
[quote=“EyeDentist, post:1068, topic:223365, full:true”]
Are you suggesting people of Hispanic heritage should be denied entry because of their political outlook? [/quote]
You mean do I want immigrants who are culturally compatible to come to the US?
I dunno, if you want monogamy and your wife wants polygamy do you still get married?
I’m for a general moratorium on immigration, white or otherwise.
And last but not least, if the above sources are too lefty for your taste, this from the decidedly un-left Cato Institute:
“The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) released a new report this morning on immigrant welfare use. CIS found that immigrants use far more welfare than natives do. CIS’ methodology, parts of which are suspect, is what produced this result – as we’ve pointed out to CIS multiple times. They also omitted a lot of information that would make for a better comparison between immigrants and natives. Simply put, the CIS study does not compare apples to apples but rather apples to elephants.”
https://www.cato.org/blog/center-immigration-studies-exaggerates-immigrant-welfare-use
Your comment above implied (to me) that you equate “culturally compatible” with ‘supporting the Republican platform.’
The original article was posted on the Wall Street Journal, but it required a subscription to read the full article. Let me guess, the WSJ is racist too. Facts don’t care about your feelings.
You are slamming CIS as a credible source yet cite the Daily Beast ? Nice 
This is why I offered corroboration from several sources, including the Cato Institute.
wait - you consider SPLC an unbiased source? You’re kidding right?
Again, this is why I offered corroboration from several sources, including the Cato Institute.
they are the mainstream party on the right pushing the original founding principles of a limited government.
The Democrats couldn’t convince Europeans to vote left so they pushed for 1965 immigration act which shifted immigration from Europeans to mostly 3rd world immigrants. 3rd world immigrants overwhelmingly vote for left wing policies. Essentially they’ve been importing voters for well over 40-50 years.
So that would be a ‘yes,’ then–you do equate ‘culturally compatible’ with ‘supports the GOP platform.’
If the choice is binary - Republican or Democrat yes.
Are these the same Europeans who implemented the quasi-socialist politico-economic systems that are ubiquitous in Western Europe?
How about we simply refrain from making immigration policy on the basis of which political party a potential immigrant supports?
The same Europeans who created the concept of a limited government. America’s founding principles are European derived.
The second portion of your post - it really depends on what sort of country do you want to live in. Do you want to live in a latino socialist country? Then continue the current course.
BTW - if you doubt the high usage of welfare among hispanics here’s some added evidence. 44% of them above the age of 16 do not have basic English skills. Do you think a population that can barely speak English is going to want more welfare programs or less?
That seems to be ducking my point. Apparently, immigrants from Europe voted for leftist programs in their countries of origin; why would they be unwilling to do so here?
What does ‘Latino’ have to do with it?
I don’t follow your logic here at all. Welfare rates among Hispanics can be/has been measured directly; why would anyone need to infer it from literacy data?
There are lots of non-Hispanic immigrant groups with poor English skills. Are you suggesting they all want more welfare programs? Or is this (as I am beginning to suspect from your comments) somehow a uniquely Latino trait in your eyes?
This is made up nonsense, belied by the fact that white majorities in America - homegrown ones at that - started voting “left” beginning with FDR.
All these Euro-derived (white) people voting for liberal candidates, all throughout the 20th century.
And plenty of European migrants have voted Democrat prior to and after 1965. Irish, Italian, Hispanic, and Jewish. Where’s your evidence they didn’t and Democrats had to change tact and import dark-skinned peoples?
Not at the rate non white populations do. We have decades of election data to support this.
