Skip Navigation
Matthew Yglesias

Matthew Yglesias - Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
More

Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress. His first book, with the working title Heads in the Sand: Iraq and the Strange Death of Liberal Internationalism, scheduled to be published next spring by John Wiley and co., deals with the Democratic Party's struggle to find a post-9/11 foreign policy, focusing primarily on the rise and (hopefully) fall of the liberal hawk movement.

Previously, he was a staff writer at The American Prospect and an Associate Editor at TPM Media, where he contributed to the group blogs Tapped and TPMCafe. His main blog, now at The Atlantic, has existed in various forms since the dark ages of the blogosphere in January 2002.

His writing has appeared in The Guardian, Slate, The New Republic, and The Washington Monthly, and he is a regular on BloggingHeads.tv and makes the occasional radio or television appearance.

Desperately out of touch with the American mainstream, Yglesias was born and raised in Manhattan and studied philosophy at Harvard where he was editor in chief of The Harvard Independent, a campus alternative weekly.

His latest writings can be found on the Matthew Yglesias blog.

Sometimes They Screw-Up

By Matthew Yglesias
Dec 20 2007, 2:18 PM ET Comment

As another note on the immigration issue, I should note that some of the fear of this topic in progressive circles seems to me to reflect an undue Fear of Republicans. Basically, the thinking seems to be that if Republicans are all talking about how tough talk on immigration is going to be a great issue for them it must be right because, after all, the GOP is great at this stuff.

It's worth keeping in mind, however, that when the ship was being steered by hardened political strategists, the Republican Party was adhering to a firmly pro-immigrant line. It was always known that Bush's immigration policy wasn't popular with his base, but he thought it was vital to his strategy in the 2000 election, and the pro-immigration version of the Republican Party did quite well in 2002 and 2004. The turn in Republican rhetoric came because the base revolted against the political strategy that had been outlined by the party's strategists. Then, as it became clear that Republicans were facing big losses in 2006, a lot of them turned to anti-immigration rhetoric to try to preserve control, but they lost anyway. Similarly, in 2007 those of us in the DC area were inundated with anti-immigrant ads from Virginia Republicans running in local races and the Virginia GOP did terribly.

Basically, immigrant-bashing doesn't have a great track record as an electoral issue, and it doesn't seem to be the case that this is actually a cause the Republicans started espousing because of it's political utility. If anything, it's the reverse, something the political hacks didn't want to take on, but that the base has pushed them into.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Adulthood, Delayed: What Has the Recession Done to Millennials? Adulthood, Delayed: What's the Recession Done to Millennials?
10 of the Greatest Kisses in Literature The Greatest Kisses in Literature
The 10 Best and 10 Worst States for High-Tech Business The Top High-Tech Business States
In Memphis Classrooms, the Ghost of Segregation Lingers On In Memphis Classrooms, the Ghost of Segregation Lingers On
Politics Q&A: Senator Rand Paul Q&A: Senator Rand Paul on His Father

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Beyond the BRICs Reuters Beyond the BRICs
A look at the next big global economies—and the rise of a global middle class. Read more ›

Just In

View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Valentine's Day 2012

Feb 14, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)