Rove's calculations make no sense. Romney would have needed nearly three-quarters of the Latino vote to beat Obama last year (NO WAY that would have ever happened).
As I say last October/November, the key for Romney winning (since early voting was indeed down for Obama) was to match McCain's tally from last year on election day. He didn't; he got beat.
I made a thread specifically stating that it was ALL ABOUT THE WHITE VOTE. At least 3 million white voters stayed home; that is why Romney lost.
Quite frankly, the Latino vote is greatly exaggerated. Per the 2010 census, 72% of this nation's 300 million+ people are white. That number is HIGHER, when you get the "White Hispanics" (i.e. George Zimmerman) into the fray. That means less than a quarter of our country citizens are "non-white".
Reagan and Bush 41 won in landslides with less than 35% of the Latino vote each (with much smaller populations than we have now). Conversely. Bush 43 got 40% of the Latino vote but beat Kerry by an electoral field goal in 2004.
More white votes will save the GOP. They're still, far and away (despite the left's claims), the majority of this country. What will save the GOP is going far right, period.
Twice the GOP put moderates against Obama and twice those moderates got beat. Despite what the beltway Republicans thing, THEY CANNOT WIN withou the social conservatives, bottom line. And (to somewhat echo a Limbaugh sentiment), if you think the Dems are going to cede any "brown" voters to the GOP, you're smoking more crack than Marion Berry in his heyday.
The man who can get the social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and independents on his side will win the presidency for the GOP. And, the stats say most of them are in the white category.
