The LA Times reports that Californians were polled on whether or not they agree with Arizona's SB 1070:

California voters are closely divided over the crackdown on illegal immigration in Arizona, with sharp splits along lines of ethnicity and age, according to a new Los Angeles Times/USC poll.

So how did the poll turn out?

Overall, 50% of registered voters surveyed said they support the law.... while 43% oppose it. That level of support is lower than polls have indicated nationwide.

So who tended to be for it, who tended to be against it?

But attitudes among the state's voters are not uniform. Strong majorities of white voters and those over 50 support the Arizona law, while Latinos and those under 30 are heavily opposed.[Californians Split on Arizona's Illegal Immigration Crackdown Seema Mehta, LA Times, May 31st, 2010]

Doesn't this indicate that if you import millions of Mexicans, that they and their children and grandchildren will tend to support the further importation of millions more Mexicans? Doesn't it make sense?

The article also focuses on the the opinions of two Californians, one in favor and one against SB 1070:

Gina Bonecutter, 39, a Republican and fervent supporter of the Arizona measure, said she was frustrated by what she sees as unwillingness by recent immigrants to acclimate to American culture. The Laguna Hills mother and part-time educational therapist said large numbers of illegal immigrants are hurting public schools, one of the reasons she placed her four children in private school.

"What I'm seeing today is immigrants coming here, wanting us to become like Mexico, instead of wanting to become American," she said. "That's never going to work."

Absolutely right. However, although she understands the problem, whom does she support in the gubernatorial primary?

But in the GOP primary, Bonecutter is supporting Meg Whitman, who opposes the Arizona law, instead of Steve Poizner, who supports it. Poizner has made his support of the law a defining issue in the race, but among his supporters only 9% said they chose the candidate because of his immigration stance.

What is it with these California Republican voters?

With the state's finances in dire straits, Bonecutter said Whitman's business background is more important.

OK,  Gina, then why are you complaining about illegal aliens and unassimilated immigrants if it doesn't affect the way you vote?

Then there's this voter:

On the other side of the issue, Daisy Vidal, 23, of Banning said Arizona's law will lead to racial profiling and she would never vote for a politician who supported it. A registered Democrat, Vidal is a first-generation American, born after her family immigrated to the United States legally in the mid-1980s.

So unlike Gina Bonecutter, immigration does affect the way Senorita Vidal votes!

"There should be some type of pathway to citizenship," said the Cal State San Bernardino student. "This whole country was started by immigrants."

Actually, our country wasn't "started by immigrants". It was started by English colonists who set out to construct a society based on English principles.

By the same token, many of today's "immigrants" aren't really "immigrants" either, but colonists, who are colonizing our country and turning it into something different.

America's historical majority needs to understand that, and start voting accordingly.