A political scientist friend takes issue with my post yesterday mocking the pro-amnesty crowd’s attempt to claim that they got Harry Reid reelected:

I’m not sure this is a question that can ever be decided. Exit polls aren’t perfect, I suppose. And their results do depend on where they are placing their questionnaires (Latino vs. non-Latino areas), but in the end, this argument is totally a waste of time because the exit pollsters aren’t going to allow you inside to examine their strategic choices. I don’t think I would even indulge it further.
Moreover, I would say that if Barreto and company are right, it actually helps the CIS case immeasurably.
Here you have THE MOST REPUBLICAN election in a number of years, and the most Republican mid-term in even longer. And yet the % of Latinos voting Democratic is higher than it has ever been! Wow!

I actually think the goal of this phony polling is to argue that Harry Reid got lots of Hispanic votes because he talked up amnesty (even though he knew all along there was no chance it was going anywhere). But one reporter I spoke with (not one who’s like-minded on the immigration issue, BTW) scoffed at the whole story line of the pro-amnesty groups, where a high share of the Hispanic vote for Democrats would mean that voters were repaying them for championing amnesty and a low share would mean they were dissatisfied with their inability to pass amnesty. Heads I win, tails you lose.

But in that same spirit, my correspondent has a point: if the Latino Decisions poll were correct, it would just reinforce the argument that pandering on amnesty is pointless for Republicans!