Did Jewish GOP Donors Buy Romney's Immigration Wimp-Out?
By Patrick Cleburne on November 12, 2012 at 3:45pm

Back in June in I asked Has Romney Sold Immigration Policy To Sheldon Adelson? Subsequently I took note of a Politico article which directly attributed Romney’s Chick-fil-A wimp out to the influence of a group of pro-gay Jewish donors.

Now corroboration of my fears on immigration policy has appeared: On the morning after, Jewish Republicans advise the party By Ron Kampeas JTA.org November 12, 2012

WASHINGTON (JTA) – Think immigration through -- again. Forget about gay marriage…

The Republican Party as a whole is having the morning-afters…“There will be a lot of very frank conversations between our organization and its leadership and the leadership within the party,” Matt Brooks, the director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said last week in a conference call…

A number of Romney’s financial backers -- including Fred Zeidman of Texas, Mel Sembler of Florida and Sheldon Adelson -- are among the RJC’s leadership, and Brooks made clear that their voices would be heard.

Fred Zeidman is quoted:

Zeidman, the fundraiser, said Jewish Republicans had a special role in making the case for immigration reform.

"The rest of the party has to understand what we as Jews have always understood -- that this is a nation of immigrants and to ignore them is to end up losing," he said. . . .

It seems clear to me that this was the force which also caused Romney’s Israel grovel, repelling the Paul vote and alarming at least some blue collar white women.

Patriots must now consider what role it also played in the 112th Congress fiasco - and Speaker Boehner’s rush to capitulate now.

The GOP is RIP, done deal, given Boehner's recent remark about the GOP being ready to be lead as "americans"...I suspect the GOP political position is going to "evolve" and republicans are going to see the wisdom in a total gun ban, and an amnesty of invaders...

That said, here's some more on Romney's defeat by Steve Sailer:

“Slippery Six” Mid-West States Doom Romney—Because Of Low White Share
By Steve Sailer on November 12, 2012 at 1:09am

Romney could have won the Electoral College in what can be called the Big Ten states (after the college football conference of the Great Lakes and Upper Midwest: remember, Illinois and Michigan each have two teams in the Big Ten). He did win Indiana, and he lost Obama’s home state of Illinois badly. The other six states in this region, however, all slipped through his fingers: Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

In each of these Slippery Six states, Romney won at least 45 percent of the vote. But he still wound up a cumulative 0 for 80 in Electoral Votes. If Romney, rather than Obama, had won all six, he’d be President.

The Slippery Six are states with old-fashioned white and black voting demographics, still with a smattering of old time unionized factory workers. Hispanics, much less Asians, are, for the moment, still a minor matter politically. . . .

Most notably, Romney did terribly among the white working class in these six states. Thus he did only two points worse among whites with college degrees in the Slippery Six than he did nationally. But among the white “some college” component, he came in six points worse than nationally. And among the white “no college” voters, he performed 11 points worse than across the country—finishing tied with Obama.

In fact (although sample sizes are getting small), Romney even appears to have suffered the ignominy of a reverse gender gap among no-college whites in the Slippery Six—winning 51.4 percent of the women, but only 48 percent of the white working class men.

So the hidden story of the 2012 election just might come down to Romney not appealing to blue collar white guys in this swing region. Or you could attribute it to the immensely rich Obama campaign’s relentless negative advertising all summer depicting Romney as an outsourcing zillionaire.

But, how much did Romney offer working class whites in this swing region? Did they have much cause for hope that he’d take a strong stand against legal and illegal immigration? Affirmative Action? How about some public sympathy about their difficulties with influxes of Section 8 renters, whom rich liberals have been evicting from Chicago lakefront housing projects? Is that fair?

No—but mentioning it is divisive!

It’s much less controversial for Republicans just to stick to “economism”…and lose.

The key to White racial politics is first and foremost an appeal to blood and soil, I think some WN's have been watching too much Braveheart with Mel Gibson and think Ron Paulesque appeals to "freedom" will galvanize the White race into political action...

No personal freedom can be vouchsafed until Whites have personal security, and that can only be achieved when national/racial boundaries are enforced, which is the primary duty and responsibility of government, and the only reason for government in the first place.

We'll never know if a GOP that changed but one position, and that position being a hard stance on nonwhite invasion, would win the day, because the jewish GOP "donors" are going to make sure we never find out...look for them to promote more conventional wisdom that the republicans need to reach out to nonwhites. They may even throw a bone or two to Ron Paul, given that Ron Paul is in total agreement with jews on "immigration."