David Frum has an interesting post up responding to allegations of nativism and calling his arguments "too true for journalism." His original post, which kicked up a bit of a furor, fretted that Hispanic youth overwhelmingly support the Democrats, and that Bush's inability or unwillingness to close the borders has allowed the migration of an eventual voting bloc that is is not rich enough and not mindlessly patriotic enough to be effectively courted by the GOP -- and thus might destroy them. This, Frum suggested, will be Bush's legacy to his party.
My initial thought was that this said worrying things about the basis for the GOP's appeal, but others found Frum's points a bit racist. Thus, Frum's rejoinder. In it, he says that "I did not say or imply that the children and grandchildren of Mexican migrants 'couldn't possibly develop a deep attachment to the American nation.' I trust and hope that they can and will. But it would be blind and unwise to ignore the evidence that these hopes are coming to fruition far more slowly than one would wish." But his evidence is, to put it mildly, unconvincing.
Frum draws on a set of polls from PublicAgenda.org that measured the attitudes of Hispanic immigrants. His first piece of evidence is that "Mexican immigrants are significantly less likely than other immigrants to cite "freedom" as something they value in the United States - or as a reason for their desire to migrate." But that's not what the poll shows:
