Since the Montana State University library already has a copy, I may borrow it and report back several months from now on the book's content.
Amazon's summary of the book includes this paragraph:
Abrajano and Hajnal demonstrate that this political backlash has disquieting implications for the future of race relations in America. White Americans’ concerns about Latinos and immigration have led to support for policies that are less generous and more punitive and that conflict with the preferences of much of the immigrant population. America’s growing racial and ethnic diversity is leading to a greater racial divide in politics. As whites move to the right of the political spectrum, racial and ethnic minorities generally support the left. Racial divisions in partisanship and voting, as the authors indicate, now outweigh divisions by class, age, gender, and other demographic measures. [emphasis added and link inserted]Skimming the concluding chapter via Amazon's "Look Inside!" feature suggests to me that the book's language is measured and scholarly and that its content is consistent with a theme Peter Brimelow has been writing about here at VDARE.com for a long time.
The passage boldfaced in the Amazon blurb above strikes me as annoying—of course, it may be Amazon's doing, not the book authors'—because of its implication that U.S. immigration policy should rest on the preferences of immigrants and aspiring immigrants.
But the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution is clear in declaring the Constitution's aim to "... secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ...," which isn't an invitation for the rest of the world to move here (and then complain about the facilities!). Or in Brenda Walker's words, the U.S. wasn't established to be "the welfare agency and flophouse for the world."