Arizonans apparently support tough sanctions on illegal immigration, but not the politicians who back those laws.
On Tuesday, voters overwhelmingly supported denying some state benefits to illegal immigrants, declaring English the state's official language and barring illegals from collecting punitive damages or getting out of jail on bail if they commit serious crimes.
But even so, they found hardline Republican border-security advocates unacceptable at the polls — voting instead for Democrats who oppose those very measures that passed.
Mixed messages? A disconnect? That's what some are saying after an election that was often defined by illegal immigration but didn't end well for the biggest border hawks.
Others say Republicans miscalculated immigration, failing to talk seriously about any other issues.
Democrats Janet Napolitano and Gabrielle Giffords both won Tuesday in races in which Republicans had a party registration advantage, and their opponents — Len Munsil and Randy Graf — seemed unflappable on the immigration issue.
Democrat Harry Mitchell was leading Rep. J.D. Hayworth by 6,000 votes in a Phoenix-area congressional race, with an unknown number yet to be counted.
Hayworth has been a leader of "enforcement first" legislation in the House.
In the governor's race, Na-politano blew away Munsil just months after vetoing the Legislature-approved versions of two of the propositions overwhelmingly approved by voters.
When it came to ballot propositions, the explosive immigration issue definitely, well, exploded. But in races with real people, did it all just fizzle?
From Scottsdale to Douglas, politicians spent the better part of a year fighting to fill voters' appetite for dialogue on immigration.
Even though the candidates disagreed over the specifics of how to address immigration, voters were hard-pressed to find a candidate — Democrat or Republican — who didn't use tough rhetoric when talking about the matter.
Fred Solop, professor of political science at Northern Arizona University, said his polling indicates Arizonans are so desperate for action on illegal immigration that a majority support almost any plan — even those that contradict each other.
"Arizonans will take what they can get," he said. "They want something done on this, and they're not choosy on what they want."
But when push came to shove, voters favored Demo-crats — those who supported a guest-worker plan and a path to citizenship — over such candidates as Graf and Hayworth, who have built their political careers around border security.
Graf was a founding member of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, and Hayworth authored the book "Whatever It Takes," dealing with the immigration issue. At debates, Munsil rarely talked about an issue without bringing it back to immigration.
For the hawks, they could have been done in by the fact that "the candidates need to be able to speak to a broad number of issues," Solop said.
"That was the most important issue," said Republican pollster Margaret Kenski, referring to immigration.
"People agree laws should be obeyed, and you shouldn't benefit when you break a law. But having said that, a candidate isn't supposed to deal with just the border.
"I think that the candidates who lost — J.D., Graf and to a lesser extent Munsil — all focused on the border to the exclusion of other things, and I don't think that works," she said.
Kenski, who was Sen. Jon Kyl's pollster, said it wasn't all bad news for border conservatives. But those who were successful — including Kyl — won because they demonstrated they were knowledgeable on issues other than just immigration.
Despite having a clear voting record in opposition to tough border-security measures, Giffords, a former legislator, didn't shy away from immigration in her bid in Congressional District 8, often declaring "no amnesty" for illegals.
Taking a moderate stance was a political necessity, but it was also uncomfortable sometimes. At a meeting with Democratic activists shortly after the primary, Giffords received a lackluster reception when she focused much of her discussion on illegal immigration.
Shortly after, her failure to take a stance on the immigration-related ballot measures didn't seem to win over a crowd of military retirees.
But it was those in the middle — the moderate Republicans Graf couldn't get — that she ultimately attracted.
On Tuesday, Giffords said passage of the measures spoke to voters' frustration over a lack of action out of Washington.
Meanwhile, Graf said he plans on doing some analysis on his defeat — specifically figuring out why he lost even though issues that were part of his campaign passed as proposition ballot measures.
"This issue isn't a partisan issue," Graf said, adding that Republicans have been criticized for not having done anything on securing the border.
Though the newly passed laws could face court challenges, they also reveal the widespread views of Arizonans.
Napolitano made clear that she doesn't intend to change her views on the border based on the overwhelming support for the propositions.
"I'm going to continue to insist that we get fundamental immigration reform from the U.S. Congress, that we get Washington monies out here as opposed to Arizona taxpayer monies ... to keep the focus on the federal government," she said Wednesday.
And in Napolitano's case, Luis Cabrera, assistant professor of political science at Arizona State University, said, "I don't think Janet Napolitano is associated with those vetoes the way Randy Graf is associated with those hard-line measures."
Kenski added that Munsil didn't have the money and the platform to make the governor's position well-known.
"I suspect that the immigration rhetoric is about to be toned down quite a bit," Cabrera said.
Kenski said that depends on whether Democrats pass immigration reform that satisfies the public's appetite.
● Erica Meltzer, Rob O'Dell and The Associated Press contributed to this story. ● Contact reporter Daniel Scarpinato at 807-7789 or
