December 6, 2007

My Hudson Institute Presentation on the Hispanic Vote

Back on September 26, 2007, I was part of a panel discussion on "The Future Politics of Immigration" with Mickey Kaus, Mark Krikorian, Rosemary Jenks, and Kate O'Beirne at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C. My topic was "The Hispanic Vote: Hysteria v. History."

You can listen to the audio by opening this link in a new window:

When you get to that page, click on the Play arrow under the second group picture down on the right – I’m the big lug in the white shirt. I'm the fourth speaker, after O'Beirne, Krikorian, and Jenks. My spiel starts about 1/3 of the way in.

You can see my Powerpoint slides here:

They look good on an Internet Explorer browser, but look awkward on Firefox for reasons I don't understand. Click on the title of each slide in the vertical tile on the left. My speakers' notes are at the bottom. You'll want to click on the horizontal line and drag it up a little so you can read my pearls of wisdom.

You don't need to listen to my audio narration to make sense of my Powerpoint, but the two work together better than they do separately.

Other speakers that day (audio available at the link above) included: Robert Rector, David Coleman, Nick Eberstadt, Peter Skerry, and Peter Brimelow. And from the Hudson Institute, John Fonte, Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Michael Horowitz, and John O’Sullivan. The Brimelow-Furchgott-Roth debate is pretty funny.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer


Anonymous said...

Alas, I have no bandwidth but the Powerpoint presentation was good. Very effective use of the Hugo Chavez pic, btw. Looking at this man's exterior tells you all you need to know about him - fascist bully!

Audacious Epigone said...


You seemed more comfortable than at the Levitt symposium.

Kate O'Beirne should know that, of the ten closest states in the '04 Presidential election, only two (New Mexico and Nevada) have Hispanic populations above the by-state national average. The other eight are less Hispanic and more white than the nation as a whole.

Top ten:

1. Wisonsin
2. Iowa
3. New Mexico
4. New Hampshire
5. Ohio
6. Pennsylvania
7. Nevada
8. Michigan
9. Minnesota
10. Oregon

Anonymous said...

Steve, no offence, but you need to go on one of those image makeover shows. Else get tough by learning martial arts, like these bad asses.

John S. Bolton said...

I guess some of the displays were supposed to be read off as 'logic this ____ before'

ziel said...

That woman economist who debated Peter (I've forgotten her name already) must have been shell-shocked finding not a single sympathetic ear, and at the Hudson Institute no less, when no doubt during her every waking minute elsewhere everyone thinks just like her.

Anonymous said...

Ethnic nostalgia check, economic obscurantism, check.

Immigration restrictionists need ground pounders that are happy to make the same points over and over in the face of the same vapid criticisms over and over, all in a warm, cooing tone.

Anonymous said...

I think the long term trend line graphs for Republican voters were probably generated before considering the impact of the incompetency, stupidity, and arrogance of the Bush Administration.

The almost total failure of the current Bush Administration has destroy many in the next generation of Republicans. No one who worked for the Bush Administration or on Capital Hill for Hastert or Frist has any future in politics.

Look at how many current Democratic leaders worked in the Clinton White House. Now look to see if anyone who worked for Bush will still be involved in politics in a few years.

The Bush Administraiton also destroyed conservative credibility on many issues that are generally considered conservatives. Can any Republican candidate talk about cutting government spending or limiting government after the Bush Administration?