Republicans need to pay attention to the real lessons of the 2008 election. Open borders propagandists like Grover Norquist are trying to tell Republicans that they must support another amnesty for illegal aliens or "lose the Hispanic vote for two generations." The facts tell a different story.

Yes and No. Hispanics do not vote as a bloc and their pattern of voting did not change radically in 2008. What changed was the number of Hispanic citizens who went to the polls, not their party allegiances. The voting habits of Hispanic citizens change over time with changes in income, marital status, relocation from urban to suburban neighborhoods, educational attainment, and business ownership. For immigrants who have become naturalized citizens and are now registered to vote, their country of origin affects voting behavior. For example, Hispanic citizens who were born in Cuba are almost twice as likely to be registered Republican as those born in Mexico, and native-born Hispanics are more likely to vote Republican than recent immigrants.

No, not relative to historical patterns of the past 20 years. According to the Pew Hispanic Center report on the 2008 election, Hispanic voters were 9% of the electorate in 2008, compared to 8% in 2004, but the percentage of Hispanic votes that went to Obama was within the norm for presidential elections since 1988. Bill Clinton got 72% in 1996 and Al Gore 62% in 2000. Thus, Obama’s 67% was not a departure from historical levels.

No, not unless you use only 2004 as a comparison and ignore the trends of the past 20 years. The decline in Republican vote by Hispanics from 2004 to 2008 was less significant than McCain's losses vis-à-vis Bush in other demographic groups --- such as among voters age 18-29, Catholics, evangelical Christians, and women of all ages. Obama even got 20% of the vote among self-identified conservatives, compared to John Kerry's 8% in 2004. McCain’s 31% was close to the 30% earned by Republican congressional candidates in 2006.

No, the evidence suggests exactly the opposite. The same issues and perceptions that hurt McCain among all voters hurt him among Hispanics:

• A poll of likely voters sponsored by Univision showed that only 11% of Hispanic voters considered immigration to be the most important issue of the election --- compared to 54% who ranked jobs the number one issue.
• An exit poll conducted for CNN showed that Hispanic voters ranked immigration seventh in importance among all issues. The idea that Hispanic voters care mainly about immigration policy ahead of all other issues is a myth created by advocacy groups.
• A July 2008 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center showed Obama's margin of support over McCain on the immigration issue --- 59% to 19% -- was nearly identical to his margin on other issues: health care (64%to 19%), education (66% to 18%) and jobs (65% to 19%). Thus, McCain's efforts to win Hispanic votes through support of amnesty for illegal aliens earned him no additional support from that group.

First-time Hispanic voters have been registering predominantly Democratic for many decades. All Democratic presidential candidates since 1988 got more than 60% of Hispanic votes except when John Kerry got "only" 58%. Nonetheless, considering the growth of the Hispanic population, the increased rate of naturalization among immigrants, and the Democratic Party's registration advantage among new Hispanic voters, the Republican Party faces a serious challenge. Republican Party registration among Hispanic voters is now only 16% nationally compared to 51% Democrat. A new amnesty will make that ratio worse, not better.

No. In Colorado John McCain actually received a higher percentage of Hispanic votes — 38% --- than George Bush did in 2004—31%, but still lost the state. McCain's loss was due mainly to receiving less support than Bush across a wide spectrum of groups and cannot be attributed to any one factor or demographic. McCain’s gains among Hispanic voters in Colorado—a 7% increase among 13% of the voters translates to less than 1% gain in overall vote ---was offset by his huge losses in other demographic groups, such as a 9% decline in support vis-à-vis Bush among non-Hispanic whites.

The real number for Bush in 2004 was 40%. Exit polls suggest that in 2008 John McCain received almost the same percentage of native-born Hispanic votes as Bush did in 2004, but the mobilization of large numbers of new Hispanic voters who were immigrants and children of immigrants drove his overall numbers down. Hispanic voters did not rate McCain high on his immigration policies despite his sponsorship of amnesty legislation in the U.S. Senate.

Yes. Foreign-born (naturalized) Hispanic voters are 50% more likely to register as Democrats than native-born Hispanic voters, and the foreign-born (immigrant) segment is now 33% of all Hispanic voters. If Congress passes a new amnesty program for fifteen million illegal aliens, we can expect to see that figure rise to 50% by 2016.

Not as a whole. For decades immigrants have tended to register and vote as Democrats initially, but their political party affiliation changes over time with education, income and geographic location. The primary factor determining political party registration for immigrants who become naturalized citizens is income and job skills. The continued influx of millions of uneducated and low-skilled individuals – legal and illegal-- who can work only at low-wage jobs translates into millions of new Democrats when they join the voter rolls.

The issues that mattered most to Hispanics in 2008 --- the economy, health care, education – played to the advantage of Obama and the Democrat Party. McCain lost support relative to Bush’s 2004 levels among a wide spectrum of demographic groups, not just Hispanics. The Republican Party needs a comprehensive strategy to appeal to Hispanics on a broad range of issues and should not look upon Hispanics as a special interest group interested only in immigration policy.