Election 2020

Klobuchar Tacks Left on Immigration in Nevada Looking for Hispanic Support

Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) attend a news conference on the East Front lawn to introduce the Voting Rights Advancement Act on June 22, 2017. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images)

Something almost magical happens when relatively moderate Democrats begin to run for president. They forget how to be moderate and become flaming left-wingers.

“Moderate” Democrat Joe Biden once opposed busing kids halfway across his tiny state of Delaware to go to school. Now, despite almost everyone else opposing busing to achieve racial “equality,” he supports it.

“Moderate” Michael Bloomberg was once a law and order mayor of New York. Now, he’s apologizing for being so effective.

Then there’s “moderate” Senator Amy Klobuchar who once cast a vote to make English the “official” language of the United States. Now, she talks up her love of “diversity.”

In Klobuchar’s case, her maverick campaign has hit the wall. It’s a racial and ethnic wall that she’s never had to deal with as a politician before, being from the mostly white state of Minnesota and achieving some success in mostly white Iowa and New Hampshire.

But this is a whole new ballgame in Nevada, where Hispanics and blacks make up a significant part of the Democratic electorate. So, she has to find a way to bury her past embarrassing votes that weren’t left-wing enough and claim allegiance to the “true faith” of Democratic politics: pandering to voters based on the color of their skin.

Associated Press:

Campaigning in Las Vegas, the three-term Minnesota senator said Friday that she has changed her stance since voting for an English-language amendment in 2007 and has “taken a strong position against” it. She also blasted President Donald Trump for using immigrants as “wedges” and said as president she would work with Republicans to achieve comprehensive immigration reform.

Klobuchar’s record on immigration is under scrutiny after her third-place finish in the New Hampshire primary this week revived her campaign and sent her on to Nevada’s Feb. 22 caucuses with fresh momentum. After focusing much of her campaign on the first two voting states — Iowa and New Hampshire, both predominantly white — she’s now navigating a much more diverse electorate, where some of her moderate positions and willingness to vote with her Republican colleagues could be a liability.

Her “apology” for her 2007 vote wasn’t quite groveling, but her excuse — everyone else did it — rings a little hollow.

“I think that when you look at a state like this state, and a country like ours that is so diverse, you don’t want to have that provision in law because then it would be very difficult to have, say, government documents and other things translated into other languages,” she said Friday. “So that is not a position I take. I did vote that way, but way back then, along with many other people.”

Klobuchar is also getting heat for the 2006 vote that increased fencing and other border security measures. So far, she hasn’t apologized for wanting to defend our borders — yet. But after voters see a video of a debate she had over that 2006 vote, she’ll probably be forced to wear sackcloth and ashes and beg forgiveness.

In a recently resurfaced video of the debate, Klobuchar says the U.S. needs more resources at the border. “We need to get order at the border,” including a fence, and she says she would stop giving amnesty to companies that hire immigrants in the country illegally. She also backed giving people in the U.S. illegally the chance to earn citizenship if they are willing to pay taxes, learn English and pay a fine.

She also voted for a 2007 bill that added 370 miles of border fencing and nearly doubled the number of border patrol agents. More apologies should be coming shortly.

While Hispanics in general support tougher immigration enforcement, Hispanics who happen to be Democrats don’t. So Klobuchar is going to spend the last week of her campaign in Nevada apologizing to Democratic interest groups for having too much common sense.