Springfield conspiracy theories underscore the evolution of GOP rhetoric on immigration
Former President George W. Bush said in 2006 that Americans are "going to have to treat" immigrants with "dignity." In 2012, then-GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney said the country should "grow our economy by growing legal immigration." Former President Donald Trump said in 2019 that he wants "people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come in legally."
Party leaders are now singing a different tune.
Trump is promoting the false claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio -- in the country legally -- are eating their neighbors' pets. Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Trump's running mate, has echoed the same rhetoric, saying over the weekend that he'd be willing to "create stories" to get the media to pay more attention to the broader issue of immigration.
To be certain, not all Republicans are singing from the same hymnal. But the growing popularity of conspiracy theories surrounding Springfield underscores a years long shift in rhetoric from underscoring compassionate policies to threatening immigrants in the country legally with deportation.
"I don't think this kind of rhetoric would have ever been accepted other than in the crassest of ranks" in the pre-Trump GOP, said former Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz. "For the good of the party, that kind of rhetoric was really tapped down and made out to be what it was, ludicrous. I think that a lot of the comments that Trump has made have made the rhetoric more and more extreme over time."
Yesteryear's GOP was one where Bush emphasized "compassionate conservatism," John McCain, the former Arizona senator and 2008 presidential nominee, was a bipartisan negotiator on immigration and the party determined in an autopsy after Romney's 2012 loss that it needed to have a more welcoming approach to immigration to expand its base.
Trump turned that thinking on its head in 2015 when he launched his presidential campaign by calling some Mexican immigrants "rapists," vowing to build a border wall and pushing for a ramp up in deportations.
Now, the rhetoric surrounding Springfield is more visceral than in the past -- besides the salacious claims of migrants eating their neighbors' pets, the barbs are targeting migrants in the U.S. who have received Temporary Protected Status, a renewable legal status granted to those who could be endangered if returned to their country of origin. Trump has threatened to deport them to Venezuela, which is not where they're from.
When asked to explain that evolution, Asa Hutchinson, the former Republican governor of Arkansas who briefly challenged Trump for the Republican nomination and whose lengthy political career spanned five administrations, replied, "most significantly is Trump's leadership."
"Trump has redefined the Republican Party, redefined the debate on immigration, and redefined how you communicate on the important issues of the day," he said. "And so, in every question that you're asking, whether you resort to the emotions of fear or thoughtful discussion of the issues, it's all about leaders."
Trump has been particularly keyed into voter concerns about immigration.
His political rise in 2016 was largely credited to a relentless message about the danger of illegal immigration and calls for a border wall which Mexico would supposedly pay for that found a receptive audience. He has since repeatedly highlighted violent crimes purportedly committed by undocumented immigrants, leading him to tout the threat of "migrant crime" in his speeches.
"Immigration is an animating thing for him. It always has been since he first came down the escalator. He believes this is one of those base issues in which not only do we as a party win, but everyone secretly agrees with him," said a former senior Trump administration official. "He has always found these extreme examples and painted a broader brush with them."
Republicans also chalked up the transformation to a bubbling over of frustration with the situation at the border, which has seen fewer undocumented crossings in recent months but saw a surge of migrant encounters for much of President Joe Biden's administration. That frustration has made immigration a top polling issue for Republicans -- and, some operatives said, any conversation bringing the election back to that issue is advantageous.
"I think part of it comes out of frustration that we've been told for the last four years and even longer, 'Don't believe your lying eyes.' We've been told, 'Oh, there's no issue at the border there.' I mean, there clearly is," said GOP strategist Tricia McLaughlin.
"Now we're talking about an issue. I mean, rightly or wrongly framed, we're talking about it, and that's on our turf," she added.
Republicans dismissed the distinction about the Haitians in Springfield having legal status.
The town, population just over 58,000 in 2022, has grappled with the influx of migrants, with the boom stressing local schools and health infrastructure. The protections Haitians enjoy are temporary but often renewed, leaving little light at the end of the tunnel for the town to be able to catch up with its growth -- and meshing perfectly with Trump's messaging.
"They're here legally. OK, then the policy sucks," one Ohio GOP strategist said. "If you can over four years [bring in] 40,000, 45,000 and basically have a 50% increase in population without the accommodating funding for the services, that's bad policy. That policy needs to be changed."
"This example in particular is the exact thing that Donald Trump himself worries about, but also the broader party does in that you've got a very small town that has a very large influx of people. That changes life there," the former senior administration official added. "And we can talk about whether it's good, bad, whatever. Objectively, it changes life there. And it's just something that he's always been concerned with."
Not every Republican is leaning into the same rhetoric as Trump. Ohio GOP Gov. Mike DeWine insisted that the migrants' employers have told him that "They're very happy to have them there, and frankly, that's helped the economy" while noting that "when you go from a population of 58,000 and add 15,000 people onto that, you're going to have some challenges and some problems."
Trump's campaign, for its part, is insisting that its messaging aligns with voters' beliefs.
"The Democrat Party has shifted from anti-illegal immigration to pro-open borders and amnesty for all. President Trump and the Republican Party stand for common sense and putting Americans first," said campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt.
Republican critics of the messaging, meanwhile, warned that the current rhetoric about migrants in Springfield and other places poses severe risks for the party's longevity.
Mike Madrid, a California-based Republican strategist who has been critical of Trump and studied immigration, noted that the state GOP in the Golden State helped message its way into oblivion with hardline policies on abortion and immigration in the 1990s, when the state lost hundreds of thousands of laborers and saw an influx of Latin and Asian immigrants to the Los Angeles area.
"What some of the Republican Party learned then was, if you play with this type of racial fire in a time of transformation instead of speaking about ideas and policy solutions, you will relegate yourself to irrelevancy. That is precisely what is happening nationally at this moment," he said.
In an ever-changing presidential race and news cycle, it's unclear precisely how much longer Springfield will stay in the national spotlight -- but it has already outlived many other news cycles, leaving Republicans speculating when asked how much the rhetoric around the migrants there will escalate.
"I would have never thought we'd be at this point," said Salmon, who saw the immigration debate evolve as a border-state Republican Party chair during the George W. Bush administration and during House stints during the Clinton and Obama administrations. "So, it's hard to say."
