RUSH: Mike in Redondo Beach, California. Hi. Great to have you here. Hello.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush. And thank you for keeping me sane during this election. You know, this supposed unidentified Republican operative, if I even believe he exists -- and that's a whole other call, I realize. But this operative is saying Romney can't win if Republicans refuse to subvert US immigration laws by supporting amnesty like Obama's done. I'd like to ask this guy: How big was John McCain's win in 2008, the GOP's chief advocate for amnesty? I mean, McCain won even less of the Hispanic vote than Bush did. And if amnesty is the path to victory, why isn't Obama running away with this election?
RUSH: Excellent point. Excellent points to which I have responses. As to McCain, yes, it is obvious -- very clear -- that McCain was pro-amnesty. He didn't like the word, but McCain was identified with wanting it. A far as the Hispanic community was concerned, McCain was okay. He was all for relaxing immigration law. Whether it was amnesty or not, McCain was all for it. What the establishment guys will tell you is that the conservative wing of the party undermined McCain by making sure that the Republican Party did not succeed in joining the Democrats in that policy. So while the Hispanics...
CALLER: Rush --
RUSH: This is what they would tell you. While the Hispanic voters would look at McCain and say, "Yeah, he's one of us. He's for us," they still couldn't vote for him because the party wasn't. And remember it was the conservatives who finally got a fire lit under the House Republicans in the summer of 2007 to kill it. They were on the road to immigration amnesty. They were on the road, the Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and finally it was brought to a screeching halt. And so the consultants would tell you that McCain could not overcome the fact that his party undermined him. Therefore, it was not worth voting for him. Your point is valid. I'm giving you what they would say as their answer to it. You're exactly right. If amnesty was it, McCain shoulda won big, and Obama should be running away with this by now. You're exactly right.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush.
RUSH: All right. McCain lost the Hispanic vote by 36 points, by the way, in 2008. Would somebody want to try to explain to me...? You know, if I say it, there's nothing left to be said. We all know that. That's why sometimes I hold back, to give you people on the phones a chance to contribute. So let me put it out there. Instead of answering my own question, I'm just gonna put it out there. And over the course of the next day or two, if somebody wants to call in and try to answer it, I'd be more than welcome, appreciative to hear it.
Why is the Republican establishment so invested in amnesty? Why is it, whenever you hear references to Republican establishment types, their gloom (in every presidential race) is we're gonna lose because of our position on immigration, which means we oppose amnesty? Why? Of all the issues out there that the party might unify on, all the issues there are to run a campaign on, why is immigration the number one issue the establishment cares about?
Why are they so obsessed with it to the point of wanting Hispanic voters to believe that we will relax immigration law as the Democrats will do? Why? Why that over the economy? Why that over anything else? Why is it immigration that seems to be the most important -- and one-and-only -- issue the Republican establishment thinks explains our losses, or our defeats? While you think about it, here's Paul in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Great to have you on the program. Hello.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush. I have a question. It kind of delves into what you were talking about there. I want to ask you what your opinion was, your professional opinion of what percentage of the electorate out there is even wavering one way or the other on about who they're going to choose? It's my opinion that whether we go into this party down there and with a D'Souza tone or if we go in there with a Charlie Crist tone -- as it seems like you're telling us that's what they're gonna do --
RUSH: It sounds like it.
CALLER: -- it's not gonna make one difference or the other. I don't think there's a high percentage of the electorate out there that's wavering one way or the other. They know who they're going to vote for.
RUSH: Well, the conventional wisdom on this is that right now there are between three and five percent of the people are gonna vote who don't know yet how they're gonna vote.
RUSH: In other words, 97 to 96% of voters already know how they're gonna vote. So your question is: Why all this rigmarole over so few people?
CALLER: Yes, sir. And not only that, I don't believe that we could win that group in the first place, because they have to nearly be mentally ill.
RUSH: What, the three to four percent that don't yet know?
CALLER: Yeah. In today's technology, the social media and 24-hour news cycles and all this, if you are that far out of the loop, then you're not going to vote for a conservative or a Republican anyway.
CALLER: Why even pander to them? Why?
RUSH: Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm just interested in your thought process. Why would you think that the three to four percent would never vote conservative Republican?
CALLER: Because if they are that out of touch -- with all the available media that's out there -- then obviously they have no education, because they would vote conservative if they did.
RUSH: Ah, okay. Okay. So it's the morons.
CALLER: Why even pander to them? And I also think I have an answer for your last question, and I think that question is "fear." They do not want to be labeled, these establishment types in DC that hang around DC and the Beltway crowd. They do not wish to be labeled as a racist. It's this fear of being called racist. And that's the reason that they put immigration higher than anything else. They're so scared to be called racist.
CALLER: That's the most important thing to them in the entire world. (snorts)
RUSH: So it's no more complicated than that? They want amnesty and they want immigration to be liberalized simply so people won't think of them as bigots?
CALLER: That's it! That's the only reason. That's the only reason.
CALLER: They have no core principles.
RUSH: All right. We'll throw that one in the hopper. And the three to five percent that haven't made up their minds yet, that's it. That's the max. Okay, so why even campaign then?
RUSH: Ginny in Lake Ontario, New York. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: (muffled audio) Hi, Rush. It's so nice to talk to you.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: What a pleasure. Well, my point was if they want to hang the hurricane on Bush and the Republicans and, "Oh, dear, it's all their fault," and everything, some Republicans should stand up and say, "Hey, what about all the fires and the drought out in the Midwest and out on the coast? Isn't that Obama's fault? And look how he's handled it." Look at all the houses that have burned up. We've never had such things happen before.
RUSH: Well, but see, here's the problem with that. And you're exactly right. But the problem with it is that there's 50 years of theme making that we're dealing with, and there are overall themes. One of the themes is, "Republicans kill people." Another theme is, "Republicans poison the air and water." Another theme is, "Republicans want to cut Social Security." Another one is, "Republicans want to cut Medicare." Another one is, "Republicans only want the rich to have money."
Another one is, "the Republicans hate poor people and will take everything they've got." And that's been out there for 50 years. So a hurricane shows up and devastates a Democrat town with a Republican president. "Well, it's obvious! The Republican president doesn't care. The poor people are Democrats in there, and that Republican didn't stop the hurricane. Nobody tried to stop it, and then when it came time to bring FEMA in there, the trailers got in there late and Bush was strumming the guitar. See? He doesn't care."
But, along with that 50-year theme that Republicans hate people is the theme that Democrats love people and want to give them everything. So when genuine Democrat destruction takes place, it's just not believable that the Democrats would do that. It's like Howard Dean said on TV recently to the Republicans, (paraphrasing) "You go ahead. Every day, you go ahead and tell people Obama cut $716 billion from Medicare. Nobody's gonna believe it. Nobody's gonna believe Democrats would cut Medicare."
But, Howard, they did. It's right there. The CBO, everybody says it. We could read from the bill. We could read from Obama's speeches: $716 billion in Medicare. Yeah, he said, go ahead, you and I both know that Obama cut $700 billion in Medicare, but the people aren't gonna believe it. Nobody's gonna believe the Democrats cut anything. But everybody will believe that you did. And that's, what do you call, branding, PR, image? I mean that stuff's gonna have to change or else you do one other thing. You sit there and wait for people to realize it on their own. Which is what the Republicans do.
I had people at the Bush White House tell me that the reason they didn't respond is because they didn't want to make the story last any longer than it otherwise would, and they figured by responding it gives life to the story. And the second thing is, people aren't gonna believe that. They're not gonna believe that we want people to get harmed, nobody's gonna believe that. They think that at some point, and they've thought this for 30 years, that average Americans are gonna finally stand up, and say, "Come on, who are you kidding, Republicans want old people to lose their social security?" Even after 30 years of allegations that Republicans want to cut Social Security -- and there have never been any -- no senior citizens ever lost Social Security.
The Democrats still make the charge, the Republicans still deny it, and to a certain extent, by the way, in Florida, I think the emptiness of the Democrat position finally is known now. I don't think the charge is as effective as it used to be. But the problem is that the Republicans are just waiting for time to take care of this. It would be like if you had a retail business or a product, and it was thought of in a certain way, it was characterized by your competitors as a product that kills people, except it doesn't. You just say, "Well, I'm gonna keep making the product and I'm gonna keep selling the product and I'm gonna rely on people realizing that people aren't dying from using it. And eventually people will realize that my competitors are lying." That's the Republican strategy, is to leave it up to the people to figure out that the Democrats are making it all up. Admit it. Isn't that another reason why you get frustrated? You don't want to spend the 150 years it will take.
Oh, reminds me. I meant to weigh in on this undecided business. The caller right before the end of the half hour, who wanted know why, if there's only three to five percent of people who are gonna vote who haven't made up their minds yet, his theory is they're obviously morons, because as easy as it is to know what Obama is and what Romney is, if there are three to five percent of people who gonna vote who haven't made up their mind yet, they have to be morons, so why even try for 'em? Okay, if you believe that number, three to five percent, and Gallup, by the way, in their polling data says it's between eight and ten percent, but what's interesting, it's not the 20% that everybody usually uses. The standard operating theory is 40% vote Republican automatically, 40% vote Democrat automatically, 20% wait to make up their mind. Those are the independents.
Oh, yeah. The 20%. And that's who the consultants tell the candidates they can get the votes from. "I'm a consultant. I'm the best guy at getting votes of the independents. I know how to do it." So the candidates hire them, and every campaign is oriented toward that 20%. Everybody else is taken for granted. Now the number is, depending on where you look, anywhere between four and ten percent undecided. But if you believe that whatever the number is, that it's impossible to be undecided with as much media, social media, 24-hour media as there is, why bother even campaigning? 'Cause if you haven't got 'em by now, you don't have a prayer. Well, by definition, the Democrats don't have 'em either. But if you believe that, why even campaign?
What's the point of a campaign if it's not to persuade? Well, I know you want to affirm your base, I mean you gotta turn them out. But really, what's the purpose of the campaign if the undecided are unwinnable, if that's your attitude. I, by the way, am not sure that that three to five percent number is accurate. What do you think, Snerdley? What do you think the percentage is of people who have not made up their minds? This election, right now, on August 27th, of the people that are gonna vote? Just 5%? You think it is small, it's just 5%? See, I think it's a lot higher than that. I think it's a lot higher. And it's not that people can't stand Obama. I think it's that people can't stand politics, period.
I think the people that haven't made up their minds, the people that aren't paying attention aren't because they don't like it. It ticks them off. They don't think the people in it are honest or it bores them or -- pick your reason, it doesn't interest them, everybody in it's a liar, everybody in it's a crook. Their vote doesn't matter. Whatever the reason is, I think it's a lot higher than 5% haven't made up their minds. Just my gut instinct. I think it's a lot higher. And whatever the number is, it directly correlates to the number of people who aren't paying attention. And so the question then becomes, "Well, if they're not paying attention, how the hell do you reach 'em?" And therein lies the key to victory.