National Numbers and Trends for the Hispanic/Latino Vote

Via William Arnone's Updated Key State Analysis which I reprinted with his permission in March:

Hispanic/Latino voters comprise 6% of the voting population nationwide. This represents an increase of 2% since 2000. With 13% of the total population and 17% of the population under age 18, Hispanics/Latinos are potentially the fastest-growing segment of the electorate.

In 2004, the Democratic ticket nationwide won Hispanic/Latino voters by a margin of 11%. This was a shift to the Republican Party of 25 percentage points from the Democratic Presidential ticket’s margin of 36% in 2000. In 1996, the Democratic ticket nationwide won Hispanic/Latino voters by a margin of 51%.


The 2004 Presidential election represented a continuing trend of Hispanic/Latino voters away from the Democratic ticket. The 44% share of the Hispanic/Latino vote achieved by the 2004 Republican Presidential ticket surpassed the previous high of 37% for the 1984 Republican Presidential ticket (Reagan-Bush).

Although subsequent revisions of the Edison/Mitofsky National Elections Pool (NEP) exit poll reduced this share to 42%, the Republican Presidential ticket in 2004 won a greater share of the Hispanic/Latino vote than any other Republican Presidential ticket since the advent of Presidential election exit polls in 1972.

In the 2006 Congressional elections, Hispanic/Latino voters voted for Democratic candidates by a 19% margin. This represented a shift to the Democratic Party of 8 percentage points from 2004.

There is diversity among Hispanic/Latino voters nationwide. About two-thirds have roots in Mexico. The remainder includes voters with roots in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and other parts of Latin and South America.

One conclusion: The Democrats can't take the Hispanic/Latino vote for granted. They are one of four key groups -- the others being older voters, women voters and Catholics -- that have trended towards Republicans in recent years.

Hillary does better with all four of these groups. It's one more factor the superdelegates should consider this week.

Also check out Mr. Arnone's April analysis (pdf)of the electoral map and the battleground states (summarized here.)

Update: BackfromOhio writes Pew Hispanic.Org has a report on Latinos in the 2008 Election that says Hispanics are now 9% of eligible voters and estimates they will be 6.5% of the voters in the Fall.

< Huge Box Office Stats for "Sex and the City" Opening | The DNC Doesn't Want to Count Michigan's Popular Vote? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    They can't take (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:43:45 PM EST
    women or white working class voters for granted either.

    But they do and they have and they will.  And they'll lose.

    So (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:15:56 PM EST
    How many times did Obama visit Kentucky, WV?  And how many times did he visit Puerto Rico (once for a really quick trip)

    And how many times did he insult the white working class:  they're bitter, clingy, gun-toting archie bunkers, you know.

    And how many times did he have his Donna Brazille on TV saying that the Democrats didn't need white working voters.

    And What about the sweeties?

    Obama is the first Democratic presidential candidate in my recollection who has so severely insulted the core base of his OWN PARTY.

    Me thinks the anger stems from the fact that you know I'm right.

    I'm not angry, myself, just know what I'm going to do.


    the 'egghead' vote... (5.00 / 6) (#36)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:20:14 PM EST
    Since I'm at a research one university, I guess I classify. Whom do I support? I'll give you a hint: a senator from Illinois? Not so much. Same goes for the DNC at this juncture. Just got a fundraising letter from Madalein Albright. It's already in the trash.

    I support the REAL democratic party.


    Ditto! (5.00 / 5) (#47)
    by tek on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:26:20 PM EST
    four degrees here, PhD down.  Hillary '08!

    Eggheads for Hillary! (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Upstart Crow on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:44:14 PM EST

    jeff (none / 0) (#93)
    by sancho on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:27:14 PM EST
    i'm at a research 1 too. everybody (white PhDs all) i know is voting for obama, very proud about it, and utterly contemptuous of the "guns and booze" (just quoting a colleague) hillary and her voters. for them, it is a class issue and liberal guilt issue, imo. they think i'm insane for promoting hillary as the better, more electable candidate. they confidently scoff at the polls i show them.

    Sancho, I'm lucky to see (none / 0) (#108)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:43:52 PM EST
    a lot of difference here. Younger faculty support Obama, but a majority, fairly substantial, support HRC... there is a significant age division in that support, with some few exceptions. Ahhh, the pleasure of academia.

    jeff, (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by sancho on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:53:00 PM EST
    new assoc. profs and junior faculty are the most agressive obama supporters here too. there may be some quiet hillary supporters since one thing about being senior faculty is, that you've learned when to keep your mouth shut. what has surprised me is not the younger support for obama but how they replicate the attitudes one sees at kos or tpm. their vote for obama is a vote for "diversity" or "difference" but they do not tolerate intellectual diversity that differs from their own. they think only the ignorant or the racist would vote for her. ah, academe indeed. thanks for the reply.

    Again, ditto (none / 0) (#126)
    by Raven15 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:59:23 PM EST
    Sancho and Jeff (none / 0) (#118)
    by Raven15 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:51:43 PM EST
    My experience (at an R-1 in the South) is exactly the same as Sancho's.

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Steve M on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:50:45 PM EST
    So if I don't feel alienated, I am not part of the real core base by definition?  I hope the Dems will always have a spot for latte-drinkers like myself.

    When and how? (none / 0) (#77)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:59:32 PM EST
    you got a 1 for posting false information (none / 0) (#98)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:33:43 PM EST
    about hillary.

    now i gave you a two for personal attacks. (none / 0) (#107)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:40:25 PM EST
    site viotlator, skepti (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:49:42 PM EST
    not true (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by ccpup on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:18:57 PM EST
    in light of a Poll taken around SC that revealed that 80% of AA WOULD support Hillary if she were the Nominee.

    Unlike Obama, she's promised repeatedly to work with AAs when she's the Democratic Nominee for President and earn their votes.  She takes nothing for granted.


    Here's the thing (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:27:50 PM EST
    Obama has thrown a group of people under the bus. Unfortunately, he forgot to take the keys to the White House out of our pockets before he tossed us. I bet you Hillary would have an easier time getting the keys from the African-American voters than Obama is going to have getting them away from us.  I may be wrong, but we'll only know when a nominee is chosen in August and the votes counted in November. It's a bummer, isn't it?

    When has HRC EVER (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by madamab on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:33:08 PM EST
    taken a vote for granted?

    When has she ever insulted Obama's voters?

    It's absolutely ludicrous to pretend that she is not going to get the AA vote. There's no factual basis for it, and moreover, she has actively courted it by positively outreaching to the community - going to events that Obama wouldn't even go to. Just ask Tavis Smiley.


    Tavis got kicked off, or removed himself (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by samtaylor2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:23:12 PM EST
    From the most popular black radio show in the country.  He definitly has his finger on the pulls of AA.

    Plenty of insults to go around from both sides (5.00 / 0) (#96)
    by Knocienz on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:29:14 PM EST
    You think comments about 'latte drinking creative class' voters and those who "don't really need a president but feel like they need a change" is positive outreach?

    It is a very close election and people are going to get tied up in their candidate. Everyone thinks that they are true victims while the other side is full of cheaters.

    Not going to tell you when the time is for people to say 'good game' and work to beat the Republicans, but regardless of who the nominee is, that's got to be the next goal


    good try and no cigar! (none / 0) (#97)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:31:58 PM EST
    Since when (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Raven15 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:33:44 PM EST
    ...was criticizing someone as an elitist "right-wing rhetoric"? Denouncing those who feel they know what's best for others without consulting them or respecting their cultural values is a democratic, left POV if you ask me.

    Are "latte-drinking elitists" the same (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by LatinoVoter on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:27:45 PM EST
    thing as the "Chablis drinking limo libs" that Barack was talking about on FOX News? If so I have yet to see where Hillary criticized them or diminished their importance in the party. But then again I'm sure you're ready to twist yourself into a pretzel to back up your ridiculous claim.

    skepti was giving 1's yesterday on here (none / 0) (#100)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:35:37 PM EST
    for posters who were disllusioned with the democratic party calling them repub trolls.

    gee and where have you been for the (none / 0) (#103)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:38:07 PM EST
    past months when hillary supporters have been insulted, demonized, and threatened on obama supporting blogs? oh, i guess you were there blogging away. did you defend your fellow democrats? yeah, right, i didn't think so.

    You mean white women age 45 and older? (none / 0) (#86)
    by samtaylor2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:20:02 PM EST
    I don't think you meant women, unless you forgot that Black women are women, and that the latest polls actually have Obama and Hilliary dead even with the women's vote (inclusively speaking).  

    af-ams will (none / 0) (#88)
    by sancho on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:21:44 PM EST
    vote for the dem candidate, regardless. (white) eggheads are neither so smart nor so loyal and may look for the nader button to exercise their CDS.

    historically, since (none / 0) (#104)
    by sancho on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:38:21 PM EST
    1964, though the trend began with fdr, af-ams have voted overwhelmingly for the dem nominee. polls show that af-ams, more than any other democratic group, would like to see hillary as vp so they do like her (and want to win!).

    the stevenson eggheads deserve the credit for the electoral disaster upcoming. or the credit if obama wins. :) given that the eggheads gave us stevenson, humphrey/mccarthy/1968, mcgovern, dukakis, mondale, kerry, and now obama--their political iq "dont" seem to be too high.

    i dont know what to say about gore since his case is more complicated. i'm not sure he was the egghead choice. and i think he won.

    i began by being for obama but as the election unfolded, it became clear to me this was the wrong choice. the fact that the "eggheads" almost always support the loser is a stubborn fact of post-WWII political life.  obama is the classic "elitist" or "limo liberal" candidate. not that there is anything morally wrong with that. except they lose.


    You really know nothing of her early life (none / 0) (#119)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:51:43 PM EST
    do you?  Time spent working for the Children's Defense Fund, staff of the Watergate cmte, working for Legal Services.  Seems to me you're the one who's been spun or doing some spinning.

    And Obama became a (none / 0) (#128)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:01:01 PM EST
    "community organizer" after becoming bored at a financial house in NY.  You got a point?

    Can you name me a full-time job on Obama's resume?  I know he could write it on the back of his driver's license but there must be one.


    Heh (none / 0) (#131)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:06:01 PM EST
    What a horrible story of greed and avarice  :-)

    As a law student, Hillary represented foster children and parents in family court and worked on some of the earliest studies creating legal standards for identifying and protecting abused children. Following graduation, she became a staff attorney for the Children's Defense Fund.

    After serving as only one of two women lawyers on the staff of the House Judiciary Committee considering the impeachment of Richard Nixon, Hillary chose not to pursue offers from major law firms. Instead she followed her heart and a man named Bill Clinton to Arkansas. They married in 1975 and their daughter Chelsea was born in 1980.

    Hillary ran a legal aid clinic for the poor when she first got to Arkansas and handled cases of foster care and child abuse. Years later, she organized a group called Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families. When she was just 30, President Carter appointed her to the board of the United States Legal Services Corporation, a federal nonprofit program that funds legal assistance for the poor.

    actually it is only obama supporters who (none / 0) (#106)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:38:55 PM EST
    do that.

    The way I see it, if obama is the nominee, (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:46:20 PM EST
    there will be an even larger swing of hispanic/latino votes to McCain.  I know obama thinks Richardson will help him, but for those not in the know, whoever heard of a hispanic with the last name Richardson... :)

    McCain can mine it . (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:01:46 PM EST
    Obama's got huge trouble among hispanics here in tucson from my field research.

    Field research? (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:03:18 PM EST
    Are you being literal, or is this like the KUSA cats?  (serious question)

    It's Arizona (none / 0) (#24)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:13:24 PM EST
    so it my be tilted toward McCain anyway.  But I'm hearing a great deal of grumbling from most of my hispanic associates about Obama not playing too well with Tia and Primo.

    McCain is going to pick up (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:21:42 PM EST
    lots of hispanic support here in TX as well.  Well, actually he's gonna kick some major butt here anyway.

    Ditto with California (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:45:59 PM EST
    The polls don't reflect this but I think it's a case of the "Bradley Effect."  

    McCain's immigration stand (none / 0) (#3)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:51:31 PM EST
    could turn the Mexican Americans against him. Obama would be the beneficiary of that.

    Guess we will have to wait and see, but I (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:53:30 PM EST
    also do not think hispanics will fall for obama's pandering.  If I am not mistaken, he is going to try to push an amnesty agenda with Richardson.

    Obama wants to (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:48:07 PM EST
    give them all driver's licenses.  (Remember that from the debates?)  He also wants all Americans to be bilingual.  To me, that was pandering to the immigrants.    

    What is wrong with giving them Licenses? (none / 0) (#92)
    by samtaylor2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:26:59 PM EST
    The Hispanics I know, (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:03:28 PM EST
    including my wife, are very savvy politically. However, they will remind folks that they are not a monolith. There are huge differences among the various categories... I have always wondered why this category is considered monolithic...

    Jeff...I think at one time they might have been (none / 0) (#19)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:08:03 PM EST
    monolithic, but it didn't take long for them to realize the power they have and should use.

    I agree (none / 0) (#94)
    by Jane in CA on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:27:19 PM EST
    and I've written before that women and hispanics typically do not vote in blocs. But neither group has ever been treated so abominably by a candidate, and that candidate's very visible supporters in the past either (I still think that Donna B's casual dismissal of the importance of the latino vote may be an effective GOP tool in the GE).

    It'll be interesting to watch how these groups vote in November if Obama is the dem nominee.


    I don't know if you've noticed, but Hispanics (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by derridog on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:03:33 PM EST
    don't seem to like Obama, judging only from the evidence, of course.

    The "very well known Clinton" (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by Teresa on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:20:39 PM EST
    When are you all going to give that up? If Obama still has problems with being known at this point, he might as well quit while he's ahead.

    Again... (5.00 / 5) (#46)
    by madamab on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:25:56 PM EST
    it's the voters' fault for not getting to know Obama.

    Never mind that he blankets every state and commonwealth with millions of dollars' worth of ads before each vote. No, those ignorant fools just don't know who he is.



    Shep Ferry did those posters (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:28:51 PM EST
    and Urban Outfitter are plastering his face everywhere--Tshirts etc.

    Unknown my Royal Irish Arse.


    odd system you have there. (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:26:56 PM EST
    Hispanics shoudl be flocking to Obama now. He's the presumptive leader now isn't he?

    Ah yes, they are soundly thrashing him and gravitating toward Hillary in all the polls that exist.


    There's (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:03:41 PM EST
    something that Obama supporters like you should realize. It's the fact that not everyone finds the GOP and McCain as offensive as you do. McCain has had a good relationship with hispanics for years much like Hillary. Why would they flock to Obama when they could go to McCain who they already have a good relationship with? The hubris from the Obama campaign that everyone is just going to flock to them in the end is beyond clueless. You have to earn votes. You can't expect them. Obama really hasn't done anything to earn votes in many demographic groups.

    Stands on free trade agreements, for example. (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:18:54 PM EST
    Stands on undocumented amnesty-- this belongs to individual candidates, not parties, since some dems oppose this; aid and development bills, even sending the national guard and reserve soldiers in the past to perform humanitarian missions, such as road-building or vaccinations... these occurred under Reagan, Bush (41), Clinton and Bush (43)...

    policies dor small-business entrepreneurship...

    These types of policies. McCain has supported these types of bills throughout his career. Hispanic voters are probably aware of these stands.


    Not to mention some level of anti-abortion (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:20:15 PM EST
    stands, an issue important to the Catholic latino community, in general.

    your thinking is very limited. (none / 0) (#122)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:53:41 PM EST
    we don't have to vote for obama. we can write in our candidate and then vote dem down the ticket. just because we reject obama doesn't mean we are repub trolls or whatever.

    duh! polls and votes! (none / 0) (#113)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:46:18 PM EST
    The media (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by madamab on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:08:40 PM EST
    has been planting the "maverick" image and associating it with McCain for a long time. And so far, Obama's efforts to take on McCain directly have not been very successful.

    I wouldn't count on the McBush label to be too effective.

    Now, McCaca is what I call him, because I'm waiting on his George Allen "macaca" moment. I hear he has a very fierce temper.


    More nonsense (5.00 / 0) (#30)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:16:32 PM EST
    Obama's more personally insulting most of the time.

    It's like the ice queen image that they built for Clinton. Right, Bil hangs out with her cause she icy.  Riiiiggghhhhhttttt.  She's personally supposed be vry motherly according to everyone that I know who has met her.


    Oh, not really nonsense. (none / 0) (#44)
    by madamab on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:23:37 PM EST
    He's pretty well known for his temper.

    I agree that HRC is nothing like her public image either, and neither is Obama.


    But I've seen him when he's hacked (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:27:48 PM EST
    and he's usually not insulting about it, except to whoever made him angry.  It can be downright charming in fact.

    McCain does not have bad immigration policies (5.00 / 4) (#53)
    by Prabhata on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:30:53 PM EST
    The immigration bill that did not pass because the Republicans hated it, I believe was written by McCain and Kennedy.  I know that the Republicans don't like McCain's immigration policies.

    How does (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by tek on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:31:29 PM EST
    McCain's immigration stand work against him?  He want to let them all come in.

    No (none / 0) (#6)
    by cawaltz on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:57:00 PM EST
    McCain shares the sam stance as Bushwhich is very pro immigration. The base are the ones who would alienate Hispanics, not McCain. Who even went so far as to insinuate that Americans are too soft to do some jobs even if the pay is really good. Think back. I can remember him saying that "Americans couldn't pick lettuce even if they were offered $50 an hour).

    and he'd be free of them too (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:05:09 PM EST
    Tancredo  (the irony of that famous Crusader name) is in teh minority and is likely to stay there for years.

    people often  vote the man not the party in presidential contests too.


    look if the hispanic voter is rejecting (none / 0) (#112)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:45:36 PM EST
    obama right now, don't look or expect a swing back to say lo siento, aqui es mi vote!

    by fly on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:48:11 PM EST
    Or what? that will not be a selling point among latino's...nope..not at all..

    from a lady with a very latin name.


    Richardson is his father's (none / 0) (#125)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:57:19 PM EST
    surname, I'm fairly sure.

    There's nothing strange or odd (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:59:00 PM EST
    about why AAs are so loyal to Democrats. There are various historical reasons, but the main reason today is that Republicans hate them and they know it.

    If the Republican nominee were anyone other than McCain, the same think would essentially be true for Hispanics.

    If a party calls you "welfare queen" (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:02:42 PM EST
    enough times, it's bound to happen.

    One of Reagan's wonderful (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by bjorn on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:03:44 PM EST

    Transformative Ronnie :-) (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:15:46 PM EST
    Yes... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by madamab on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:11:43 PM EST
    and it doesn't help that Republican policies invariably negatively impact minorities in the worst ways.

    And of course who was against civil rights? Republicans.


    There's a funny scene I remember ... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:16:45 PM EST
    from The Mary Tyler Moore Show.  In it a black woman is talking about not voting for some candidate because he has a beard.  And someone says, "So you wouldn't have voted for Abraham Lincoln."

    And she says:

    "Of course, I wouldn't.  He was a Republican."


    Heh (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:20:37 PM EST
    You know what's funny: Lincoln was a liberal. The parties have changed a lot in the last 150 years.

    A complex rogue in some ways. (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:31:44 PM EST
    He suggested that blacks ought to be shipped off to Africa; but he's also the great emancipator.

    Excellent work for the Underground though, all the same.


    He used slavery as a wedge issue (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:32:49 PM EST
    against the Democrats. Brilliantly, I'd say.

    Lately I've wondered (none / 0) (#83)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:16:32 PM EST
    if we aren't about to change again.  

    The Christian Conservatives can't stand McCain but some of them love Obama.  Some bitter gun-loving small town folks can't stand Obama but are okay with McCain.  

    Maybe it's time to swap names?  


    From his past stances (none / 0) (#105)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:38:44 PM EST
    you would think that McCain would love to throw the Christian Right under the bus.  There's certainly no love lost there.  If he's elected I wouldn't be too surprised to see the GOP make some major changes.

    there were Liberal southern democrats (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:22:25 PM EST
    and then there were those like Strom Thurmond...

    I proudly wear the liberal label. Not the 'progressive' brand, since it has no meaning.


    Strom is a fascinating character (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:24:50 PM EST
    He started his political career supporting the New Deal, but by the time Kennedy was assassinated, he said "Good God, Lyndon's President. He's gonna pass a lot of this damn fool stuff."

    This Historical topic you all are discussing (none / 0) (#67)
    by kenosharick on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:43:36 PM EST
    is very interesting to me as it concerns the area I am currently doing my Master's Thesis in. A lot of what has been said is wrong- but still very interesting.

    Anything in particular you'd like to correct? (none / 0) (#73)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:50:35 PM EST
    Not really- but (none / 0) (#136)
    by kenosharick on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 07:29:52 AM EST
    for example, man repubs supported civil rights legislation (someone might have corrcted that); and I would hardly call Lincoln a "liberal." Of course it depends on how you define the word.

    There was a moment at the end of the 1970s (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:22:43 PM EST
    when Jimmy Carter was elected when there were enough white southern democrats who weren't outwardly racist fu*ks that we could get something done. Then voting in much of the south (for national offices) became WAY racially polarized.

    It's a fascinating story.


    Reagan took the Democrats in the South (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Prabhata on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:47:24 PM EST
    That's what happened. I just marked my ballot against Pelosi.  I hope enough of us send her a message.  It would be funny if she lost the primary.  She doesn't even campaign.

    Well, it's not as simple as that (none / 0) (#26)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:14:16 PM EST
    Northern Republicans were largely for civil rights in principle. Nixon ran as a moderate in 1960, for example.

    Then Lyndon Johnson happened (along with a lot of other stuff. . .)


    Nixon really did have some moderate (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by bjorn on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:18:31 PM EST
    social to left social positions on poverty and health care.  He just couldn't get anything of note passed on those issues.  I am ashamed to say I was 10, but I was a Nixon fan.  I remember during the whole watergate thing that I was convinced he had really done nothing wrong!  I didn't wake up from that dream for a long time.  Wow, he was so paranoid and one ugly dude, but I was all about America the great back then.

    lol (none / 0) (#59)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:34:49 PM EST
    Have you read Bob Coover's Public Burning?

    Nixon was taking it up the kyster from Uncle Sam for decades. He was the biggest political crook i've ever seen: John Dean's opinion withstanding.


    yup, but think about this. what have the dems (none / 0) (#132)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:07:01 PM EST
    done for the american people? the answer is not much in recent years. they can't ride of the back of clinton, fdr, truman, kennedy forever. they have to do something now.

    So, (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by tek on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:36:15 PM EST
    they're votes should count double and the DNC calls that democracy?  Whatever.

    For the Dems who think McCain (5.00 / 5) (#18)
    by cawaltz on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:05:29 PM EST
    can't garner hispanics, I'd remind then it was the McCain- Kennedy amnesty bill. The base is not a fan of amnesty but McCain can claim that he has tried on the issue even if it did fail.

    The Dems are self-destructing (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by sotonightthatimightsee on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:12:25 PM EST
    I laugh at  idiotic Obama supporters whose delusion is not only sad, but tragic! They claim Obama has won this primary election in every.. what  a crock! This guy's popularity and appeal have been on the decline for months now. Hillary has not only beat him all the "all important" states (PA, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, WV, NJ and NM, but she's embarrassed him by winning WV, KY and PR by astronomical margins! If this guy has won this election in every way, why is it that he hasn't been able to close the deal since Wisconsin? I'll tell you why- the American people have finally realized what a fake and opportunist Obama is!

    He may continue to fool these college drop-outs and elitists, but he doesn't fool us Hispanic, working class/white, women, catholic and Jewish voters. There's NO WAY this guy is going to win in November and I believe in their hearts of hearts Obama's supporters know it! But you see.. to them it is not about winning the war- it's about winning the battle. They much rather see their messiah get this nomination and claim they've made history (even after a McCain landslide victory), then to give Hillary Clinton (the only democratic candidate with a chance to beat John McCain) the nomination. You see, the powers that be in the democratic party know this guy is incredibly flawed (as evident by all the dirt that has surfaced about Obama) yet, they will not do the right thing for fear of being called racists and angering the AA.

    It is quite clear to me who the Republicans want to run against. It looks like they are getting their wish, even though Hillary will have finished this race with more vote than that opportunistic, inept pretender!

    My party is no longer the party of JFK and Bill Clinton; it is the party of the left-wing, radical nuts. As you cleverly pointed out- Obama's managed to do what no Republican could do: DEVIDE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND DESTROY IT FROM THE INSIDE OUT LIKE A CANCER!

    McCain 2008; Hillary '12!

    Sadly (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by tek on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:35:04 PM EST
    college kids and other young generations don't really remember Reagan, Bush I and Clinton, so they are totally brainwashed by all the propaganda claiming the Clintons are the devil.  We don't even try to talk politics with our college kids anymore.  They open their mouths and all the Obama talking points pour out.  Of course, young people assume they are smarter and more enlightened than everyone else so they love Obama's rag to that effect.

    well time and experience in the real world (none / 0) (#127)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:00:36 PM EST
    will probably do an admireable job of teaching them that life isn't one long commericial you know.

    Mazzy Star fan? (none / 0) (#29)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:16:05 PM EST
    Great album

    My Bloody Valentine? (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:22:46 PM EST
    I do think the Democratoc party might be committing ritual suicide again though.

    D tide (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:26:52 PM EST
    too strong? Sorry but if that was true Obama would be polling 20 pts over McCain. He is not. The trend is good for the house and senate but not for the Presidency. McCain polls better than the generic Republican and Obama polls worse than the generic dem iirc.

    That's because (5.00 / 0) (#62)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:41:56 PM EST
    Dems aren't viewed as strong leaders.  No.  They're not viewed as good executive office holders.

    Great legislators, yes.

    Again, we have republican Governors in very blue states.

    Bloomberg registers as a republican to run for an Executive office when by all other measures he's far more to the left than Landrieu, our good senator from LA.

    I would categorize Executive offices as:


    How have Dems done in the last 50 years in those offices?

    Maybe not awful.  Anyone want to take the time to do all the research and provide a tally.

    I mean I do know in some cities like Atlanta you'll get a consistently Dem Mayor even though they sometimes have their own scandals to contend with.

    So it's not cut and dry, but I think the overall assessment is correct.

    Just seems like we have a Grey Davis and it's the example that proves the rule and Bill Clinton was the exception to the rule.

    How does all this play in the minds of swing voters?


    a very real concern i have is with what i (none / 0) (#130)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:05:14 PM EST
    consider the lack of leadership by reid and pelosi in congress. you know their poll numbers are lower than bush? that says to me that the repubs are planning a return to power in the mid terms. if these two don't get off their backsides and go to work for the american people, expect a lot more anger.

    D-Tide (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:43:14 PM EST
    RIP Tide really. Kerry was knocked down from a 15% lead. We have no room for error with our candidate polling in the mid 40s.

    Oh (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:06:42 PM EST
    I agree. Obama is definitely not looking likely to win and is actually more likely to lose.

    There is one problem with looking at Hispanics (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:42:49 PM EST
    on a national basis.  While they only make up 6% of the voting population nationwide, they make up a much higher percentage in California (20+%), Florida, etc. and there are other states that have hardly any Hispanics.  

    Since elections are won on a state by state basis, I think this is a voting population that needs to be examined in detail, not on a nationwide scale.  

    It is a controlling bloc in the southwest. (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by Salo on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:45:00 PM EST
    and Florida has its Cubans.

    You know your demographics (none / 0) (#72)
    by Prabhata on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:48:57 PM EST
    The same with AA's.  They have big blocks in some states, but not others.

    Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Lil on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:03:12 PM EST
    you continue to make great case to SD's. Are they listening? It is actually scary that Obama's base is AA's and young people, while Clinton's base is extroadinarily dependable votes. I'm worried about Nov.

    THAT IS OFFENSIVE (none / 0) (#102)
    by samtaylor2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:37:53 PM EST
    AA are the most consistent voting block of the democratic party.  

    Easily offended? (none / 0) (#111)
    by RalphB on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:45:26 PM EST
    what are you so offended about? wondering! (none / 0) (#114)
    by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:47:26 PM EST
    With the exception of Cubans (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by facta non verba on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:15:55 PM EST
    Hispanics tend to need to be given a reason not to vote Democratic. Unfortunately Obama gives them plenty.

    FL is gone. NJ probably. TX was never going for either Clinton or Obama. CA will be tighter than expected. NV and NM, they say there are toss ups but I doubt both will break Obama's way. NM is more likely than NV.

    McCain does not have to win a plurality of Hispanic votes, he just has to eat in the normal numbers that have been voting Democratic. And McCain is seen as an immigrantion sensitive Republican. That bodes well for him right there.

    Being Chicano/Hispanic (5.00 / 4) (#85)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:19:25 PM EST
    AND having the experience of working on a national campaign (worked as an Latinos outreach director for 11 states for Howard Dean's campaign)
    Let me be the first to tell you from my experience on the ground and in my own community (ethnically speaking not geographically).

    Latinos remember that Clinton made a path to citizenship EASIER in the 1990s.

    Those of Mexican descent remember Clinton loaning Mexico money (when the GOP was FIRMLY against it) and he did it anyway, being the good neighbor and all.

    Latinos also had the same kind of connection blacks did with the Clintons in the 1990s.  We liked what Clinton represented and how he had that "common touch".

    I can tell you right now that MANY, MANY Latinos are going to the McCain camp if HRC is not the nominee.  In my family alone, there are at least 27 votes that will go to McCain because of the animosity that Obama created by his tactics.

    Bingo, txpolitico (none / 0) (#133)
    by stxabuela on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:49:05 PM EST
    Latinos feel a real connection to the Clintons, and many have a positive impression of McCain, due to his military service and stance on immigration.  MANY Latinos in S Texas will gladly vote for McCain over Obama.  

    I will not vote for McCain nor Obama.  And before anyone jumps on me, my state will be red no matter how I vote.  


    HOW TO THANK PUERTO RICO? (none / 0) (#124)
    by Upstart Crow on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:55:41 PM EST
    Someone on another thread suggested buying stuff from Puerto Rico this week, and letting the store know (s/he has PR grocery stores in the neighborhood) why they are buying.

    This may be corny, but I'd like to do this, too. But what does Puerto Rico make???

    Bacardi? (none / 0) (#134)
    by stxabuela on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:59:09 PM EST
    Surely some brand of rum must be made in Puerto Rico.