Poll: Tea Party, Anti-Amnesty Voters Ousted Eric Cantor

Tony Lee, Breitbart, June 18, 2014

A post-election survey found that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) support for amnesty legislation influenced a majority of voters who ousted him last week in Virginia’s seventh congressional district primary that blindsided the mainstream media and rocked establishment Washington.

A Silver Bullet survey found that 52% of primary voters said that Cantor’s position on immigration was either the “main reason” they voted for his opponent David Brat or had a “significant part” in influencing their vote.

In addition, Tea Party voters, who made up 55% of the electorate, powered Dave Brat to the shocking upset. The Silver Bullet survey found that Brat won 71% of Tea Party voters while losing among “those who oppose the Tea Party or who have no opinion about it.”

Many Tea Party and conservative voters, who were also upset with George W. Bush’s expansion of the federal government, do not think of themselves as belonging to a party, and 24% of the electorate said they were “unaffiliated.” Brat got 71% of those voters, while Cantor received 29%. Republicans made up 70% of the electorate, and Cantor received 51% of those voters to Brat’s 49%.

Critics like Jeb Bush adviser Mike Murphy have falsely asserted that immigration did not play a significant role in Cantor’s loss and have even suggested that Democrats may have powered Brat to the victory. The survey proved Murphy wrong. It found that since “Democrats made up just 3% of the electorate . . . it is not possible that they were a driving factor in the results.”

Furthermore, “26% of voters changed from Cantor to Brat in the final two weeks,” which was when Brat, with the help of conservative talk radio hosts Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, hammered Cantor for supporting amnesty.

{snip}

According to the poll, 22% of Brat voters said immigration/amnesty was the primary reason they voted for him. Other issues that influenced Brat’s voters included: leadership (20%), government spending (23%), and privacy and government surveillance (2%). Thirty-three percent cited “other.”

{snip}

Laura Ingraham, who hammered Cantor over the amnesty issue, campaigned for Brat during the final week of the campaign at a mid-week event which nearly 700 people attended. Breitbart News reporter Michael Patrick Leahy was there, and he reported that Ingraham told attendees that President Barack Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wanted Cantor to win the primary so they could  partner with him on amnesty legislation after the primary.

“I have this crazy idea, as does Dave Brat, that coming to our country, respecting our way of life, our laws, is a condition precedent to your becoming an American citizen,” Ingraham said at the event. Cantor made things worse when he told a local television station on the Friday before the election that he would be willing to work with Obama to give citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants, which confirmed the attacks against him from Brat and his allies.

{snip}

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Oil Can Harry

    Will this finally put an end to lying by neocons who are claiming the voters ousted cantor because they’re raging anti-semites who just now noticed Cantor’s religion after re-elcting him for 14 years?

    • I believe I read on the Daily Stormer that Dave Brat is also a Jew. If so, that’s some way to be anti-semitic–throw out one Jew in favor of another.

      • Brat is at least nominally Catholic, and at least in my superficial research, (i.e. Google), I can’t find any evidence that he’s ethnically Jewish.

      • Medizin

        David Brat is German, Christian. Master’s degree in Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1990.

  • The only kind of people who are saying that it wasn’t about immigration are the zillionaires that directly benefit from cheap alien labor, the consultants and talking heads and operatives that live hand to mouth from the crumbs those zillionaires throw out, the directly invested racial front groups and their activists, and the politicians that the zillionaires bribe influence.

  • Jesse James

    Time to push harder and start talking about a ten year halt to ALL non-white immigration. The majority white population has the right to maintain its demographic dominance of the US, it is our literal birthright and it doesn’t belong to a bunch of billionaire globalists.

    • D.B. Cooper

      Your idea will NOT work Jesse. The first step in “Pushing harder” is to get rid of all whites in position of power, yet encourage illegal immigration. You should know who they are by now.

      • Jesse James

        Ha thanks D.B. I was just wondering who these SOBs are and what they look like.

      • AndrewInterrupted

        This is the new threat: Kevin McCarthy.
        He makes Chris Matthews look like a white supremacist.
        .

        • Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. In fact, K-Mac is worse because he’s even more open borders than Eric Cantor and more publicly obnoxious about it.

          But I agree with James Kirkpatrick’s take. If not K-Mac, it would have gone to Raul Labrador, open borders Mormon from Idaho, but more sly about it. With K-Mac getting the nod, it’s going to keep the grassroots and the treacherous leadership separated and standoffish, and the grassroots are going to realize eventually that they’re their own team with interests separate from and often in conflict with the leadership team.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            The Silicon Valley/H-1B component is the most troubling. That’s a big race-replacement machine. He’s up to his ears in that one.

        • Olorin

          Still not as scary as the Photoshop Disasters official portrait of Boehner.

      • Nancy Thomas

        Schumer was the father of the Gang of Eight Bill.

    • Shadow

      “…ten year halt to ALL non-white immigration”…

      I would go much further in demanding a multi-decade moratorium on ALL immigration (non-white AND White) lasting 50-60 years,at least.

      • kjh64

        I would say put an end to all non-White immigration forever, only allowing it in the event that someone marries a non-White or in some rare situation where one has some special skill that is needed. However, we should have a moratorium on White immigration until the economy picks up, unless it is a special circumstance.

        • AndrewInterrupted

          I would even ban it from marriage. Too many people get into this country from phony marriages. The Cambodians in Lowell, Mass. get paid to engage in phony marriages.

      • AndrewInterrupted

        And a moratorium is color-blind, which would defuse the blizzard of race cards falling from the sky. Technology is going to wipe out more American jobs at a rapid rate. A moratorium makes good political sense.

      • M.

        If you want to gain back your 85%-majority, a 1920’s-type immigration policy would be the way to go.

        • AndrewInterrupted

          Multiple secessions resolves the white percentage issue. Then we can get back to good nation-making again. Nation-makers know to only have sustainable families.

    • Zaporizhian Sich

      Nothing less than a PERMANENT ban non-white, non-Christian immigration will do. Then it’s time to round up and expel tens of millions of thugs, terrorists, and freeloaders at gunpoint. No more birthright citizenship, illegal parents also mean their kids are here illegally too. At the same time, social policies must be enacted to encourage whites to marry and have children, including the repeal of no-fault divorce.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Do not miss the May 28 — 13 days before the June 10 election — “Dave Brat Press Conference on Immigration” on YouTube (6 minute statement, 6 minute Q&A with press; 12 minutes total). Sample:

    “The Chamber [of Commerce] wants low-skilled cheap labor. Mark Zuckerberg wants high-skilled cheap labor. But at the end of the day what they all have in common is that they want cheap labor, and Eric Cantor wants to give it to them.

    “That is why I am calling today for Eric Cantor to make public the names of all the corporate executives and lobbyists he and his staff have met with to discuss immigration. What are the names of all the corporate donors, lobbyists, and CEOs who have lobbied Eric Cantor for cheap labor.

    “Congressman Cantor, whom have you met with? Make this information public. Tell us who has been lobbying you. What do you have to hide?”

    • AndrewInterrupted

      The Republicans should up the ante–call their bluff. The Left uses “immigration reform” words, and that “amnesty” should be included in “immigration reform”. Republicans should agree to have discussions about “amnesty” if the Democrats agree to have discussion about “secession”. If McCarthy the race traitor gets the amnesty for the lettuce pickers, then Jefferson County, CA (for example) should also be allowed to vote themselves out of the union. “Immigration reform” with “amnesty” and “secession” components. That’s political compromise. And you can bet Jefferson County would bug-out at the first opportunity. Those folks want out. And when they get out–I want in.

      • AndrewInterrupted

  • John R

    This is where we race realists must part company from the “conservatives.” We must get away from this idea that “whatever is good for business is good for America.” There is more to a nation than the total size of it’s GNP.

    • Truth, beauty, honor, culture–none of these and much more is captured by GDP.

    • 1stworlder

      The only reason they think its good for business is they think they are equals for lower price instead of white employees having to spend at least 1/2 hour a day fixing an affirmative action co workers mistakes.

      • Usually Much Calmer

        Exactly. Its a false economy. Some of the businesses have been suckered by the egalitarian lie, some unequivocally gain from it, and for some the net is yet to be seen.

      • AndrewInterrupted

        You almost sound like you’ve worked at a federal contractor?? I have. It took 3 diversity darlings to replace me (that I know of). They’ve all since butchered the product since: triggering recalls, etc. It doesn’t matter. It’s gummint money–white people’s money. The product and the performance, to them, is replacing white people.

        • 1stworlder

          Sorry I meant 1/2 hour a day per affirmative action. Yea I have had someone ask me before why sometimes one person shows up to do the same thing 3 people show up to at other times. I just said to watch how the 3 work.

      • Olorin

        But look on the bright side: all those juicy tax breaks and special federal programs (i.e., more wage taxes) that those employers get to harvest because we productive workers (paying those taxes) are fixing what Eboliesha and Juanaconda broke…while also doing the work of the 15 productive workers let go for economic reasons over the past decades.

        It’s efficiency!

  • Speaking of what didn’t cause this, this is the first paragraph of an official statement on Dave Brat beating Eric Cantor from a kiddie libertarian organization called “Students for Liberty.”

    Unless you’re living under a rock, you’ve likely heard about House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s defeat by underdog Dave Brat. Frankly, it’s all the rage. Criticisms of Cantor include some harsh claims of crony capitalism, or as I like to say, favors for friends. Conversely, Brat represents a stoic belief in “Free Markets, Constitution, Liberty” and “No more Crony Capitalism!” However, while Cantor’s defeat was certainly a shock to the system, Brat’s victory is hardly a win for libertarianism.

    Now, as some of you might know, I recently made a lateral move in my career track into a job that is partially public relations. Even though I have no real formal training in PR (my degree is in accounting), it turns out that I have a natural knack for it, certain life and business circumstances have given it the opportunity to come out.

    If I was doing PR for some official libertarian organization or known libertarian-(ish) political figure, I would be pulling my increasingly graying hair out of my head after reading that first paragraph and then blowing my top. I’m going to see if any of you are at least as good or better than I am at my own newfound career, and as you why I would be doing that. If you already know the answer, because you read a certain someone’s snarky blog, then don’t answer.

    • 1stworlder

      Why would you downplay your own victory in the last sentence?

      • You’re almost there, but not quite. Close enough for an up vote.

        • Usually Much Calmer

          Never put what you are for in quotations because of the ‘scare quote’ factor- it unconsciously calls the concepts into question in the mind of the reader.

          I don’t read your blog, in case I’m right (but I very much enjoy your posts here).

          • I like what you noticed, and now that you called my attention to it, it does have relevance to what I’m going to say about this matter after either someone gets the right answer or I come right out with it.

            But for now, compared to the answer I’m looking for, you’re getting colder.

          • jane johnson

            Probably not what you’re after, but why no mention of immigration/amnesty? That was THE issue.

          • Kenner

            Jackpot. A dogmatic libertarian supports the ‘free movement’ of labor.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            And free joints for everyone!

          • jane johnson

            Give me your tired, your poor, your muddled hasses yearning to smoke free medicinal marijuana.

          • I’ll get to that. If you happened to read this article, which I found in James Kirkpatrick’s second most recent V-Dare column, then you know the rest of the story. If not, I’ll link to it soon.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            Can you find the one linked recently to a “no labor shortage” article?
            I couldn’t find it.

          • Pro_Whitey

            what’s your web site address?

          • Usually Much Calmer

            Mouse over his icon. When the window opens, click on his name.

    • Evette Coutier

      I am a physicist by training. However, I’ll cast my two cents into the pot. The libertarians are losers. They don’t know how to win and are not interested in winning elections. They are trying to educate the public in hopes that we will all see the light and convert. The first problem is that there is no perceived value in their product. Second, they try to sell all the accoutrements of their libertarian faith, but never articulate any tangible benefits.

      Another thing they do is to segment themselves into an extremist position that violates both Median Voter Theorem, and they exclude potential “customers” because it violates their need to see themselves as part of an exclusive club. In effect, they don’t market themselves effectively as a political party because they are not a political party, they are a social club centered around their need to feel superior to others. Thus, they alienate others who could be potential libertarian consumers because they are in the business of stroking their egos, and not in the business of winning elections.

      Last, they are boring and uninspiring. Nothing they say sells to the needs of the typical political consumer. They preach perceived crackpot philosophy that is not inspiring, has no benefit to most people, and is associated with outcast losers.

      • You hit the bullseye, albeit the very fringe edge of the bullseye, but enough for me to call you the winner.

        It’s a simple as this:

        The author of that paragraph, in saying that the most astounding political upset of our lifetimes, something that has never happened to a House Majority Leader before, by far the biggest takedown in the era of Tea Party-ish activism (even though the national TPM orgs blew it off, the local TPM/ish groups in Richmond deserve a lot of credit), is “hardly a win for libertarianism,” is communicating the message that winning and libertarianism are diametrically opposing concepts. IOW, she says that her own ideology is a political loser.

        Now, a lot of people reading these words agree that it is, and I’m one of them. But you’d think that someone who actually believes in it wouldn’t say or think or write this, and would have more confidence in her worldview than to think that.

        A few loose ends to tie up before I award you your gold star:

        1. Here is the whole article:

        studentsforliberty (dot) org/blog/2014/06/12/a-libertarian-response-to-eric-cantors-defeat/

        As you can see, after that first paragraph, it goes on about blah blah blah immigration somethin’ somethin’ humanity and compassion and injustice. I’m surprised it didn’t break Godwin’s Law before the final punctuation mark.

        What this proves is that there is no doubt about it: Open borders and race denial are the costs of the ticket to ride the modern libertarian train. Full stop.

        2. Going back the point made by Usually Much Calmer above, something that I didn’t notice at first, the point that the author of this article puts what one would think are bedrock keynote flagship libertarian principles in quotation marks is psychologically indicative of something, that she is putting some psychological distance between herself and “free markets, Constitution, liberty, repudiate crony capitalism,” because she doesn’t really believe those things. And I don’t think most modern libertarians, especially the younger ones, really do either, or they don’t care that much about them. It’s just talk talk talk, rhetoric, that they think sounds good to people to get people to pay attention to them. But as you can see in the rest of her article, that’s not what gets her going. Proving again the point I just made above, that it’s all about the open borders, the no borders, the universalism, the race denial.

        3. Another big problem is that the author, like a lot of young ideologies, is just a plain ole out and out right ideological cultist.

        • jane johnson

          Reminds me of the story about the dog that didn’t bark because he recognized his master, thus revealing the culprit. Sometimes it’s about what you DON’T say. I’ve been to the Official Website of the Libertarian Party which, among other things, enumerates the “legitimate” functions of government. Key among them is the defense of national borders. So what gives? I’m really confused by this.

        • Evette Coutier

          Very well stated. Thank you for the insight and analysis. Most libertarians I’ve met were intelligent and highly educated people. However, they lacked an understanding of what it takes to win. It’s as if they never matured past the fantasy world of playing dungeons and dragons in high school. They have transferred their need for fantasy to politics. That and libertarians seem to attract social misfits. I am not anti-misfit. But politics in practice is very much a social activity, and to be in the game you need strong social skills and a very practical mind. It’s a tough dirty business. It’s not a place for the naive

      • AndrewInterrupted

        The Libertarians have been infiltrated and diluted so as not to exist.

  • Let the MSM analysts and oped guys lie all they want. As one pro-amnesty puke after another is ousted over time, they media will have to make up a new story about why each one lost. Let them waste their time that way. It keeps them out of other mischief.

    • Usually Much Calmer

      Seconded. Let them say what they want, the more preposterous the better.

  • dd121

    I know how the left tried to steer the narrative about the “upset”. Truth is, according to the reports, immigration was the only issue Brat brought up during the primary run. Talk radio seemed to help him too.

    • Oh no! Not talk radio!

      • dd121

        It has had a positive effect in some elections.

        • Very positive. As I recall, the Cultural Marxists were absolutely infuriated by talk radio’s apparent influence on the 1994 mid-term election. Anything that gives those folks a great, big bellyache is good.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    I did not know that about Ted Cruz. That is troubling. I don’t take Cruz seriously anyway. He’s like Sara Palin as an Elvis impersonator. Palin and Cruz are circus freaks.

    Do you have any links concerning his H-1B treasonous views?

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Yes, phony marriages are a huge scam for all the reasons you give. It’s actually a cottage industry amongst the minorities in New England. I know a Cambodian woman from Lowell, MA (past child-bearing age) who was paid $10,000 to “marry” a Cambodian man’s brother in Cambodia. Then wait the 3 year grace period. Done. U.S. citizen. It’s standard operating procedure amongst the southeast Asians. It must be their “high IQ”. Not.

    And the ‘…minority occupation government…’ knows all about it.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Whether Brat is a member of the tribe or not, he ran on one issue: anti-amnesty. It would be difficult to waffle with only one piece of plywood as a political platform.

  • Robert11110

    In my opinion there are a great deal of phonies out there in the conservative movement. Marc Rubio with his amnesty, black “conservatives” that support affirmative action, Rand Paul with his medical marijuana and reality TV stars like Sarah Palin who trash traditionalists. These people would not have been considered conservatives 30 years ago and it just goes to show how our society is changing. I’m not going to get excited about Brat because there have been disappointments in the past but I am hoping he is for real.

    • jayvbellis

      Medical marijuana ain’t exactly a life threatening issue as we face cultural genocide and ethnic cleansing from our cities and now suburbs.

      Brat defeated Eric Cantor, the Neo Conservatives, Sheldon Adelson, Rupert Murdoch, the US Camber of Commerce by focusing on the issues and personalities that matter to regular White voters.

      Everyone, please study this successful , overwhelming victory in Virginia.

      Study what works.

      Understand, we won a crushing victory. We won as opposed to losing,

      Always losing.

      Stop enabling losers.

      • I’ll cut to the chase so that nobody else has to study the matter:

        Dave Brat focused on the crucial meat and potatoes issue and brought it home to people’s kitchen tables, and contrasted that to his clear on the other side opponent. He’s relatively young (49), is good looking enough in the opinion of enough women, has a fairly full head of hair, and while he’s a college professor, and has enough published literature to show you that he can think his way out of a paper bag, his nose is not so high in the sky that he forgot how to, as George Wallace (who could have been a law professor in his own right) said, put the crumbs down to where the ducks can get to them.

        One other thing he did was buy himself a lot of political capital, which is just a fancy way of saying “trust.” If you can earn the trust of enough people and enough voters, then they’ll trust you if you ever have to push some obscure fringe niche interest issue in ways that would ordinarily be unpopular with people and voters.

        One is not going to earn any political capital by coming out for unlimited non-white immigration and insinuating that Medicare is bad.

  • People who don’t want to believe the truth (your first sentence) will believe even the most easily refutable nonsense (VA-7-R voters are “anti-Semitic.”). There are some people who are reading these words who think that Cantor lost because he’s Jewish because they want that to be true, because some of our people are too obsessed with Jews for their own good.

    If Eric Cantor lost because he is Jewish, then that must mean some time between June 2012 and June 2014, a whole lot of people in that district all of a sudden woke up and realized that he is Jewish when they did not know it before.

    Similarly, when Obama’s approval ratings were plunging at one point last year, his shills tried to trot out the excuse that it’s because white people hate black people. In order for that to be true, the people who approved of him before but changed their minds and disapproved of him must not have known that Barack H. Obama II is black but all of a sudden found out that he was black.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Wow! That is political suicide! He’s a goner.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Yeah, I think AmRen linked it, too. Thx.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Yet another tactic by the Cultural Marxists to replace the best and the brightest. Pretty soon we’ll have to pretend we’re taxi drivers like in The Killing Fields.