Saturday, January 16, 2021

Why the Democratic Party needs illegal immigrants

kw: politics, abortion, analytical projects

I have been mulling over a curious phenomenon for about twenty years, since I began to gather threads of this idea after the amnesty for illegal immigrants enacted in 1986. At that time there were three million of them. In the past 34 years a further 11-12 million people have entered the U.S. illegally. That is the curious phenomenon: The Democratic Party has increasingly pushed for a further amnesty, and many, perhaps most of the party's national leaders even call for open borders. Open borders would eliminate national sovereignty! I wondered, "Why?"

I think I know why. The population of Democrats and potential Democrats (children born to parents who are Democrats) has not been growing as rapidly as the population of Republicans and potential Republicans. As I figure it, the primary reason behind that trend is legalized abortion, which began January 22, 1973. From that date until the end of 2001, plus the first ten months of 2002, the number of abortions reported to the CDC was a bit over 34.4 million. That is the number of persons who would nearly all be living today, and eligible to vote.

34.4 million. That is more than 10% of the current U.S. population. That is a lot of "missing Americans," who simply faded into the ashcan of history (This does not take account of any children that could have been born to babies aborted before about 1984, some of whom would also be eligible to vote this year).

Who obtained those abortions? For the entire period of about 47 years, Republicans and some Democrats who are people of faith have decried the Roe vs Wade decision, and legislatures in "red states" have enacted numerous laws to restrict abortions. All that time, Democrats, and a very few Republicans, have loudly supported "abortion on demand", and have either fought restrictive legislation or initiated lawsuits to get such laws struck down.

How many of the women who chose abortion were Democrats and how many were Republican? It is inconceivable that there is an exact 50:50 split. Millions of the women who chose abortion were Republicans, but even more were Democrats, but what is the proportion? It is certain that Democrats were the majority, whether it is a slender majority or a great majority. Republican women have the hurdle of belonging to a political party that is vocally anti-abortion, and usually also belonging to a religious establishment that opposes abortion. Fewer Democrats are religious, so in general there is no such hurdle for a Democratic woman.

Based upon my experience with many people of all political stripes, I think the proportion is between 60:40 and 55:45. It is quite possible that the real ratio is even more skewed, but being a conservative, I'll be conservative in my estimates. This table of "missing" voters shows the implications.


The column "Difference" shows the impact. I estimate that if there had been hardly any abortions, legal or otherwise, since 1973, the number of Democrats eligible to vote would be between 19 million and 20.7 million more than there are today, while the number of such Republicans would be between 13.8 million and 15.5 million. Many "purple states" would have become solidly "blue," as would the country as a whole.

The apparent "loss" of between 3.4 million and almost 7 million Democrat voters over the past forty years is tough to make up. Thus the need for illegal immigrants. It is no surprise that in border states, and to some extent in the tier of "next-to-border" states, illegal immigrants can get more "services" than retired veterans. It is a national shame that homeless veterans are living in the streets not far from nice houses filled with criminals (that's what illegal aliens are).

The cynical Democrats look upon the twelve million illegals as a gold mine. It is worth spending tons of money on them, all the while reminding them that it is the Democrats who are "caring" for them. Whenever they get amnesty, and voting rights soon after that, they will remember. If just five million of them begin to consistently vote Democratic, there will be little chance for anything resembling bipartisan politics to be found anywhere in this country. They will be free to enact whatever they want without effective opposition. This alone has a greater potential to bring an end to liberal Democracy in America than any other factor.

No comments: