home

Latinos to Obama: Put Hillary on the Ticket or Help the Undocumented

Also via the Hill today:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) must commit to helping illegal immigrants achieve citizenship or else risk losing the vital Latino vote in the general election, Hispanic Democratic lawmakers are warning.

If he does not promise so-called comprehensive immigration reform, the lawmakers say, the only other way to win over Hispanic supporters of his erstwhile rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), may be to pick her as his running mate.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus is meeting with Obama's campaign this week. One member says:[ More....]

“Hillary holds the entire Latino community in the palm of her hand,” said. Rep. José Serrano (D-N.Y.), whose district went heavily for Clinton.

A vice president for the National Council of La Raza says:

...whether McCain can win over large enough numbers of Latino voters is “still an open question.” “But Latinos are brand-loyal, and after the Clinton brand, the McCain brand is the second-strongest among Latinos because of his military service and his immigration record,” Munoz said.

The clout of Latino/Hispanic voters is increasing. In California, they are 30% of all voters and in Texas, 32%.

While McCain beat Romney by only 4 points in Florida, he got 54% of the Latino vote in the Republican primary compared to Romney's 14%.

And many Republicans remember that it was in 2004 when 40 percent of Latino voters abandoned the Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), to vote for President Bush, Munoz said.

Munoz called 2004 the Democrats’ “low-water mark” in pulling in Latino support. The “high-water mark,” she said, came in 1996, the last time a Clinton was on the ticket.

Even Obama supporters in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus say Obama needs to step up his outreach:

And even longtime Obama backers in the CHC — including Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) and Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) — said that Obama has a lot of work to do in drumming up support among Latinos who are still fiercely loyal to Clinton.

“I have encouraged the [Obama] campaign for a year now that retail politics is very important to us, but they don’t yet seem to have gotten the message,” Gutierrez said. “We really need to see more of that from him.”

Turnout is key.

“We have a tendency to not go to the polls to vote,” Baca said. “[The CHC] can help get them out to vote, and it’ll make a big difference. But in the end it’s up to him.”

The group wants Obama to commit to putting immigration reform on his agenda for his first 100 days. Sounds pretty easy to me, but apparently Obama doesn't yet have such a plan:

Obama’s campaign coordinator for Spanish-language media, Vince Casillas, said that while Obama has promised to take up immigration reform in his first year in office, he has not yet laid out his detailed plan for comprehensive reform. “As soon as he’s ready and has a plan in place, he’ll announce it,” Casillas said.

< 14 Republicans Who Haven't Endorsed or Backed McCain | Dying in Detention Must End, Support the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The Florida latino vote in the R primary (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:38:59 PM EST
    was almost certainly majority Cuban. I doubt if latinos made up a measurable component of the Republican primary in any other state.  

    Actually, it was in California (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:42:08 PM EST
    That's because Romney is (5.00 / 5) (#101)
    by LatinoVoter on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:50:33 PM EST
    an "anchor baby" and we Mexicans stick up for our own.*

    /snark.

    * Unless your last name ends in Richardson and you stab your friends in the back.

    [ Parent ]

    Richardson doesn't sound like (none / 0) (#172)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:39:24 PM EST
    a Latino name, come to think of it.

    [ Parent ]
    wow, I guess Romney for VP then n/t (none / 0) (#32)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:28:44 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    andgarden (none / 0) (#141)
    by sociallybanned on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:26:48 PM EST
    Andgarden, I can see that the latino votes were for Romney.  Cubans specifically like Romney better.  I just moved from there in Aug 2007.  I was about 20 miles south of Orlando and from the south near Miami, most latin folks do vote Republican.

    I agree!

    [ Parent ]

    Romney's father (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:34:01 PM EST
    the popular Michigan governor was BORN in Mexico (albeit on a Mormon missionary/ranch) but gives Romney some Mexican street cred.  Spanish radio has mentioned this on more than one occasion.

    JS...

    [ Parent ]

    Not going to bed (5.00 / 10) (#3)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:44:36 PM EST
    and being loyal, makes political sense.  Now they can negotiate.  Everyone else, is just letting Obama be Obama, whatever that is.  
    Go Latino voters.  This is politics.  

    Interesting turn of events and verifies all (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:47:53 PM EST
    we have been saying about the latino vote....doesn't sound like Richardson is going to be much help.  CA latinos were definitely for Clinton...FLA has alot of Cubans (older ones more likely to support Repubs), but younger ones are a little more flexible, and there is a growing Puerto Rican community there.  Now this is getting interesting!

    [ Parent ]
    NY Puerto Rican vote (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:54:10 PM EST
    he may also have to work for. Remember, these ARE Hillary's voters.

    Her campaign may not have been run perfectly, but she knew who her voters were (and who the Dems need to win). Her Hispanic ad from PA was spot on. It just "felt" right.

    [ Parent ]

    Florida has very large Dominican population (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:55:41 PM EST
    I have read fl has second largest Dominican populaiton outside of DR.  So, FL Latino pop. not just Cuban any longer.

    [ Parent ]
    I knew that didn't sound right. (none / 0) (#170)
    by Iphie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:30:11 PM EST
    The largest Dominican community in the U.S. is in NYC -- specifically Washington Heights and the Bronx. I live not too far from Washington Heights and the Dominican presence in Upper Manhattan is large and growing.

    [ Parent ]
    When It Comes Obama Winning Over Latinos (5.00 / 6) (#77)
    by talex on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:25:49 PM EST
    No Se Puede

    [ Parent ]
    Just put (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by pie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:46:31 PM EST
    Hillary on the ticket.

    Ot risk pissing off a lot of sem voters.

    Dem voters.  Not republican morons who have come to Obama's light.

    Arrrghh. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by pie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:47:49 PM EST
    or, dem.

    [ Parent ]
    Do you (5.00 / 9) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:51:55 PM EST
    think Obama would deem to do such a thing? Frankly, I'm tired of hearing how she's supposed to solve all his problems. I keep getting back to the fact that if he has so many problems then we are beyond stupid to nominate him.

    [ Parent ]
    Believe me, (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by pie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:53:03 PM EST
    that's where I am right now.

    [ Parent ]
    The real remedy is right in front of him. (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:01:34 PM EST
    He needs to give another historic speech on race, this time on Hispanics.  

    (Do you think that will work?)  ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    I prefer a national conversation, myself n/t (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:52:47 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, his last speech on race got his (4.00 / 1) (#173)
    by magnetics on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:39:28 PM EST
    picture on the cover of teh New York Review of Books, face to face with a picture of Abe Lincoln, and an article inside (passing credulity) by the otherwise sane Gary Wills, conflating Obama's speech on race with Lincoln's Cooper Union Address.

    (I did not cancel my subscription, but I no longer feel any compunction about throwing out back issues. Snark?  I can't tell any more.)

    [ Parent ]

    Wait -- (none / 0) (#171)
    by Iphie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:31:47 PM EST
    did I miss the historic speech about women?

    [ Parent ]
    I don't want Hillary as the VP nominee (4.80 / 5) (#63)
    by mexboy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:00:49 PM EST
    because she WILL deliver the Latino vote and the presidency to Barak and I don't want that to happen.

    If the country is going to continue to be taken back to the dark ages and to a disastrous economy, I want it to be a Republican, not a Democrat who steers in down that road to h*ll.

    If Hillary were to accept the VP nomination, then I'd respect her decision.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama's got all kinds (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Mrwirez on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:48:27 PM EST
    of voter problems. I am still voting NAIP, my new party for working, middle class Americans.

    then you take the (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:52:59 PM EST
    opposing view of TalkLeft.

    [ Parent ]
    I know this is your site...and I respect that, (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by Mrwirez on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:21:36 PM EST
    but you have systematically wiped out my last 4 or 5 posts.
    My only question is, does falling in line for someone who has a "D" in front of their name make them the candidate of choice? This is the same person that was NOT your candidate from the very start? THAT does not make sense. I refuse to be stuck with either the D or the R... someone needs to take a stand at some point. I receive consistent 5 ratings for my posts, so someone at TL agrees with me. Also, I stand for organized labor where Mr Obama nor Mr. McCain show any interest.

    Maybe I should move on to the PUMA site or somewhere where my views are more acceptable. I cannot and will not support Barack Obama. He is the DNC choice not mine or yours, from your previous posts anyway...

    [ Parent ]

    I think the point here is (4.00 / 1) (#145)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:32:06 PM EST
    that if your view opposes this site, which is unabashedly partisan and for the dem noimnee, then that's fine, but you just need to argue your points on topic and constructively. I know I'll slip on occasion I'm sure, but it's a reasonable requirement.

    [ Parent ]
    Another thing (5.00 / 2) (#152)
    by A little night musing on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:42:56 PM EST
    Jeralyn doesn't want this site used to organize votes against the (presumed?) Democratic nominee. Stating that you won't vote for him and why is fine, but she doesn't want to make her blog a platform for organizing against him since that's not her position. [I hope I'm correctly stating your position, Jeralyn!]

    I find that very reasonable. It's her blog. There are other places people can go if they want to do things that don't fit inside those boundaries.

    Jeralyn and BTD have allowed and continue to allow a very vigorous discussion and there are certainly a lot of people who post regularly here who have stated that they do not intend to vote for Obama or who (like me) are reserving judgment.

    [ Parent ]

    I totally respect that. I will not work against (4.50 / 2) (#175)
    by magnetics on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:43:40 PM EST
    Obama; neither will I vote for him, unless Hillary winds up on the ticket.  I surely will not vote for McCain.

    I consider myself a 'Hillary dead ender lite', but when I want to hang out a bit with the real hard core, I visit other sites.

    [ Parent ]

    You know, (5.00 / 9) (#10)
    by lilburro on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:49:56 PM EST
    he doesn't go into Latinos' homes and beg for votes.  That's just not how he is.  Identity politics are so over.  See you outside...

    Really, that comment defined Obama's campaign for me.  

    New NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:50:58 PM EST
    has Obama crushing McCain among Latinos, winning by 30 or more points.  That might hurt what these lawmakers are trying to push Obama to do.  Thing is, Obama shouldn't have to be pushed to do it regardless.

    NBC/WSJ poll. (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by pie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:54:47 PM EST
    My favorite media outlets!!

    Really!!!

    No, I mean it!

    [ Parent ]

    Those numbers don't sound right (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by stxabuela on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:37:23 PM EST
    Even in the best of times for Democrats, they aren't likely to do better than 30 points among Latinos.  Latinos tend not to vote strictly by party on the national level.  We call ourselves Democrats based on the ties we have to the local party (at least here in TX.)  It's easy to understand--95% of the time, the Latinos on the ballot have Ds behind their names.  On the national level, we consider the person as well as the party.  Latinos have a great deal of respect for veterans.  Some of my relatives said, almost apologetically, that they knew McCain was a veteran but they thought Hillary would be a better choice.  We don't feel the same connection to Obama, so McCain's veteran status is helping him, particularly with older Latinos.  Pushing us to the back burner isn't helping.    

    [ Parent ]
    I think (4.50 / 2) (#45)
    by Makarov on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:45:08 PM EST
    we'll see the polls change once Obama picks a VP that isn't Hillary Clinton. Like some others, I believe picking Clinton for VP is something that will guarantee a Democratic win in the fall.

    In spite of that, I believe Obama will pick someone else. Given the VP-vetter story today, I have to wonder if Obama won't, in fact, have a Thomas Eagleton event in the future. That's the only thing missing to make the McGovern analogy complete at this point.

    [ Parent ]

    No, I think it is going to be the other way (none / 0) (#20)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:59:23 PM EST
    around...bet that poll was taken before this little tidbit came out.

    [ Parent ]
    It just sounds like a faulty poll to me (4.33 / 6) (#24)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:20:40 PM EST
    I've been saying the Hispanics in CA are going to be a problem for Obama.  Regardless of what any poll says.  

    La Opinion endorsed Obama in the primary.  So guess who won?  

    [ Parent ]

    Pew Hispanic's Research Shows (5.00 / 4) (#61)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:59:03 PM EST
    that Latinos went 2:1 for Hillary in the Democratic primaries this year, and she took every demographic -- age group, gender.  


    [ Parent ]
    I agree...that NBC/WSJ poll I think is crap! (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:44:23 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    And the primary race is over (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by tribe643 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:26:37 PM EST
    It's very presumptious that many Hispanics won't support Obama in the general election because a strong majority of them voted for Hillary in the primary.

    Here's a report from Gallup, as reported by the LA Times. It has Obama up 33% among Hispanics against McCain.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-latinos6-2008jun06,0,176151.story

    The numbers definitely seem to coroborate the findings of the NBC poll mentioned in this discussion.

    [ Parent ]

    Haven't you already posted this (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:47:17 PM EST
    entire thing above?

    The WSJ poll you cite to does not make sense to many of us. McCain has been popular among Latinos.  Barack was not popular among them during the primary Although this can certainly change, I'm not convinced by this poll, as it claims Obama leads McCain among Latinos 62-29, but that McCain leads Obama among both Protestants and Catholics.  

    [ Parent ]

    Whether it make sense to you or not (5.00 / 2) (#180)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:58:41 PM EST
    the numbers are the numbers, right now; I trust data way more than I trust anonymous anecdotal accounts.

    I definitely agree that Obama has a lot of outreach work to do in the Hispanic community, but it does seem like some of this hand-wringing is overblown.

    [ Parent ]

    It's also very presumptious (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by stxabuela on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:00:48 PM EST
    to assume that Latinos will automatically gravitate toward Obama, simply because of the D behind his name.  

    Sigh--we Latinos are telling you there is a serious problem, yet you persist in pointing to polls.  Here's my prediction:  Obama by 14 points among Latinos nationwide.  Let's see who's closer in November.  

    [ Parent ]

    Do you have (none / 0) (#90)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:39:44 PM EST
    link to that poll?  For some reason I'm having trouble finding it & I'd like to look at the internals; the poll seems way off to me.

    [ Parent ]
    If it's the 62-29 poll (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:07:44 PM EST
    it's not actually an NBC/WSJ poll.  It's a summary of polls by Gallup.  The summary of polls in May have lots of results besides just the Hispanic vote.  There's discussion of it downthread.  Here's the link again.  I think there's been some confusion because for some reason a zillion MSM outlets are reporting on it today, and emphasizing the Hispanic results, although the report came out a week ago.  Other results show much closer numbers for the two on a large number of breakdowns.

    [ Parent ]
    Try this (5.00 / 2) (#166)
    by standingup on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:20:09 PM EST
    The article in the WSJ and the 33 pg PDF with internals.

    [ Parent ]
    Oops sorry, (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:55:12 PM EST
    I assumed it was Gallup bc the numbers were the same.  Thanks, esp for posting link to internals.

    [ Parent ]
    I think it was bjorn who posted that info. (none / 0) (#98)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:50:02 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    they discussed it on Race08 today (none / 0) (#147)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:34:50 PM EST
    but I don't have a link, sorry.

    [ Parent ]
    Seems like everyone is having a hard (none / 0) (#168)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:25:43 PM EST
    time finding the link.

    [ Parent ]
    I posted the link (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by standingup on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:48:39 PM EST
    in a comment below - #166 for a link to the PDF with the internals.  

    [ Parent ]
    I am so mad at all the Dem women in Congress (5.00 / 15) (#13)
    by honora on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 07:52:51 PM EST
    If the Congressional Hispanic Caucus can come out this strongly, why are the women representatives so timid?  I am sure that women are contracting them  and they have to know the anger of women out there.  As a feminist woman Democrat that has gone out of her way to support these women, I am at my wits end.

    with all this work, why the fundies, etc. (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:05:09 PM EST
    With all the work he needs to do to get women, seniors, latinos, blue collar workers, etc., why is he spending so much time on fundies and red states. I keep hearing about all the work he needs to do, even from Obama supporters, but then I see the time on the faith stuff, etc. Perhaps there's time for everything, and perhaps their polls are showing there is no work to do, and maybe their right. Just seems like there are some gapping holes in the electoral map that quite vulnerable.

    He assumes that (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by stillife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:21:16 PM EST
    the women, seniors, blue collar voters, Latinos - all the under-the-bus people - will just fall in line b/c they've got nowhere else to go.  Perhaps he sees an opening with fundies b/c they're not fond of McCain. Time will tell if this proves to be a smart strategy, but in the meantime, I find it amusing that McCain is making overtures to Clinton voters while Obama is wooing Republicans.  It's like walking through the looking-glass.

    [ Parent ]
    yea, it is quite freaky isn't it (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:26:58 PM EST
    It sort of reminds me of the Rudy strategy of going only to FL. Given the result, you'd think Obama wouldn't go for that sort of crazy strategy. But who knows, maybe he and Donna know what they're talking about with their new party and new coalition that doesn't support women or blue collar workers, et al. and doesn't want them. If they pull it off and have redefined the dem party, they'll be geniuses.

    [ Parent ]
    They'll be geniuses (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by stillife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:38:48 PM EST
    and I'll be an Independent.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm already one (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:50:13 PM EST
    and boy, I can't tell you how good it felt mailing in my voter registration change.

    [ Parent ]
    Hooray (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15:18 PM EST
    for the unaffiliated! Woo hoo!

    [ Parent ]
    Wyl E. Coyote considers himself a (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:51:10 PM EST
    genius also.

    [ Parent ]
    Different Perspective (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:12:17 PM EST
    The Obama Campaign reminds me of the movie, "The Candidate."  There, the campaign to elect Robert Redford was so focused on the election, that once he won, no one had a clue what to do.  THe analogy here (to me anyway) is that the Obama campaign was so focused on winning the primaries and the strategy mapped out there, that since Obama was decreed the winner of the primaries, the campaign is sticking to its strategy for the primaries.  I personally believe this is a strategic mistake, and the campaign, to be successful, has to switch gears and devise a strategy basic on election fundamentals rather than primaries.

    [ Parent ]
    Is he gaming the polls? (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by Fabian on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:23:15 PM EST
    Reminds me of some stories about No Child Left Behind.  In order to game the test scores, schools pigeon hole the students into various groups.  

    One group will pass the tests without a problem.  No need to devote resources to them.

    One group will be able to pass the tests with some coaching.  They get extra help to do that.

    One group is unlikely to pass the tests unless the school devotes a LOT of resources for that.  They get almost no help.  Poor return on investment, you see.

    So the groups that get the majority of the resources are the ones that are close, borderline.  Max return on investment.  

    So where are these religious voters?  Which states do they live in?  Which states could be shifted blue for the presidential election by this strategy?

    Rust Belt?  Don't think so.  The South?

    Or maybe, Mike Huckabee for VP?


    [ Parent ]

    For Obama's VP? (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by stillife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:25:57 PM EST
    That's the ticket!  

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah. (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by Fabian on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:30:37 PM EST
    Almost as many exploding heads as putting Bill Clinton on the ticket.  But Huckabee does well in some of Obama's weakest demos.

    I'd never vote for that ticket.  Ever.

    [ Parent ]

    Actually (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by stillife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:40:33 PM EST
    my mother would definitely vote for that ticket.  She's a huge Obama supporter who thinks that Huckabee is likable.  So that's one vote right there!

    [ Parent ]
    Stilllife...I think it is time for an intervention (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:53:10 PM EST
    for your mom... :)

    [ Parent ]
    They just expect everyone else to (5.00 / 5) (#33)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:28:55 PM EST
    show up and vote for the Democrat.  We've been voting Democrat for so long, they think it's just in our blood to vote Democrat.  

    So, they'll work hard to attract Fundies and religious types while the rest of us bleed out...  

    It ticks me off too.  Way to take your base for granted.    

    [ Parent ]

    On the bright side (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by roadburdened on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 08:47:56 PM EST
    According to Gallup, Obama leads McCain 62% to 29% among Latinos nationwide.

    http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/06/hispanics-moving-to-obama/

    dang, i'm getting my bridge contracts (5.00 / 0) (#114)
    by hellothere on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:57:47 PM EST
    for the brooklyn bridge back out. gallup you say? i'll give the gent a call. i'll have that contract signed before the sun sets tomorrow. hehehe (snark)

    [ Parent ]
    Obama needs Hispanic votes but I never (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by thereyougo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:10:33 PM EST
    even heard him speak even broken spanish. Its not much, but as awful a presiden as GWB was, he at least garbled a few words in Spanish. It means a lot to them.

    But Obama has more bridges to build and time is running out, he's got so many fences to mend, he really has no time to hem and haw like he's good for.

    He needs to work on the women's vote. I haven't heard anything from his sweetieness.

    Drudge also said he's got an army of bloggers or Obots who are going to flood the internet like in the primary and talk down any negativity that the opposition is planning. I think we saw one already here on TL on another thread talking about lies.

    Oh the ironies that are now playing out. In a way I'm glad Hillary is not the Pnominee. To have to put up with all the BS from the  gen X and Y ners. Its not worth it to save them from themselves. Lets see what an inexperienced newbie in th e oval office does about the huge pile of steaming manure left by the current occupant in the WH.

    I'm still stung by the process that took it away from Hillary. Its sure going to be an interesting summer.

    Actually he did. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by indy in sc on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:26:27 PM EST
    I don't have the link, but he spoke pretty fluently in spanish in an ad that ran in Puerto Rico before that primary. I don't think he actually speaks spanish--I just think he did a very good job at pronunciation of the words in the spot. I'm sure it's on his website and elswhere on the internets.

    [ Parent ]
    That would be the ad that (3.00 / 2) (#169)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:28:56 PM EST
    called Clinton a colloqualism that means f*cking whore.  It was not a wise ad by Obama. . . .

    [ Parent ]
    I thought that was the Nevada ad? (5.00 / 0) (#176)
    by Esme on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:46:25 PM EST
    Anytime I am reminded of that ad, any inclination I had to vote for him promptly flies out the window.

    [ Parent ]
    He said (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:26:37 PM EST
    Si se puede a few time when he was campaigning in the Southwest. I want to say Nevada but it might've been somewhere else like Arizona or New Mexico or California...where he didn't win.

    [ Parent ]
    "Si se puede" (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:41:57 PM EST
    I wonder how that "flys" in the west since it's from the farm workers, who supported Hillary? Aside from the fact she did much better than him, I just wonder what folks were thinking when they heard him using it.

    [ Parent ]
    They were probably thinking...first he (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:58:20 PM EST
    copies her policies, and now her tagline...

    [ Parent ]
    Heh heh (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:10:05 PM EST
    I just thought it was ridiculous -- it wasn't quite as bad as Dubya's Very Bad Spanish.

    I also remember there was some kind of bizarre parsing of whether he'd written "Sí, se puede" (yes, we can) or "Si se puede" (if we can) on his signs.

    Didn't the original slogan come from Caesar Chavez, whose son endorsed Hillary?

    [ Parent ]

    I believe you are correct (none / 0) (#167)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:24:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Hill staffer told me Delores Huerta furious (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by catfish on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:13:40 PM EST
    about si, se puede.

    [ Parent ]
    Seriously....obama is not the nominee, (none / 0) (#111)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:55:51 PM EST
    which is based on pledged delegates, not SD's who might vote for you, if necessary.  He could be considered the selectee that was foisted upon the democratic party.

    [ Parent ]
    Hillary did! (none / 0) (#151)
    by sociallybanned on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:42:47 PM EST
    She said  te quiero puerto rico.

    [ Parent ]
    Hispanic Gallup poll (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:10:47 PM EST
    Does anyone have a link to the actual poll?  I just googled the heck out of and checked Gallup's site but can't find the poll itself.  A million articles, no links to the poll.

    Although, as I was googling, I did come across a 2004 CNN poll showing Kerry up by 30% with 'minority voters'.  Maybe Obama should put him on the ticket.

    Link to Gallup Poll (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by joanneleon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:23:13 PM EST
    I think this is the Gallup poll they're talking about.  It is from last week, has a breakdown by race, gender, etc. and it has the 62-29 number within it.

    Gallup McCain v Obama June 5

    [ Parent ]

    joanneleon (none / 0) (#95)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:45:11 PM EST
    Thanks thanks thanks!

    So the poll is registered Democrats (not likely voters) and is dated June 5.  Funny that the MSM is just now noticing it, but whatever.

    The really interesting thing is that while yes, it does report the 62-29% among Hispanic voters, it also has McCain up 53-38% among non-Hispanic white voters.  Was that little bit of data featured on MSNBC, I wonder?  Braver souls than I will have to answer that question, bc I can't stand to watch.

    It also has the two of them tied overall, and tied among independents.

    There's lots more at Gallup.


    [ Parent ]

    Most interesting thing about Gallup poll (none / 0) (#121)
    by tree on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:08:12 PM EST
    is that it was taken over the whole month of May.(1-31 according to Gallup). Before the FL/Mi decision, before the Obama "victory" speech as the presumptive nominee, before Clinton's suspension and endorsement. I would think that things might have changed one way or the other a bit since then. Why is this the big news now, nearly two weeks after the last day of the survey, and 6 weeks from the start of it. It would be interesting to see if there were any trends one way or the other.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, (none / 0) (#137)
    by A little night musing on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:25:49 PM EST
    I somehow missed your comment before making my own comment on this poll. But I do agree that there is a question how these responses might be different now that the situation has changed. And it's by no means clear to me whether that would mean a better or a worse showing for Obama in the various subgroups.

    [ Parent ]
    And I agree with you... (none / 0) (#149)
    by tree on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:38:46 PM EST
    I'm not sure which way it would trend now. All I've got is anecdotal evidence and I wouldn't bet anything on that at this point in the campaign.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't just look at the bars (none / 0) (#135)
    by A little night musing on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:22:24 PM EST
    They have not given a bar for the undecided (or whatever) voters.

    For example, among women, the bars show 42%/48%. That leaves out 10% not represented.

    Only non-Hispanic blacks seem to have less than about a 10% undecided (or whatever) rate in my quick skimming of the poll.

    Some technical points:

    The 1% margin of error reported is due to the extremely large sample size. The margin of error will be smaller in subgroups because the margin of error is inversely proportional to the (square root of the) size of the sample.

    They apparently got such a huge sample by combining the results of daily tracking polls over the month of May. Recall that during that month, the primaries were still ongoing and Clinton had not yet suspended her campaign. So the questions were asked in that context. (We're also combining a lot of presumably changing, over time, group opinions.) I wonder how or if the answers would be different now, given how things have played out. [Noting that I, for one, am much more angry at Obama now than I was on 1 May, for example. I'm not sure how I think the overall mood may have changed.]

    [ Parent ]

    CNN story (none / 0) (#69)
    by joanneleon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:15:08 PM EST
    Pundits, columnists and bloggers agreed and offered outlandish explanations mentioning everything from the turf wars between Latino and African-American gangs in U.S. cities to the fact that Latin America is full of countries where race and skin color can determine social mobility.

    Well, what do you know? Now, it seems Latinos will support Obama after all -- meaning that everything you've heard to the contrary up to now is rubbish.

    A new Gallup Poll summary of surveys taken in May shows Obama winning 62 percent of Latino voters nationwide, compared with 29 percent for McCain. The pro-Democratic group Democracy Corps compiled surveys from March through May that showed Obama with a 19-point lead among Latinos. And a Los Angeles Times poll last month showed Obama leading McCain by 14 points among Latinos in California.
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/08/navarrette/

    On MSNBC tonight they were crowing about how Obama doesn't have to worry about women or Latinos, based on polls just released.


    [ Parent ]

    Who reported it? Olbermann? AKA (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by rooge04 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:23:32 PM EST
    The Greatest Propagandist Of Our Time (as per Somersby!)

    [ Parent ]
    Several shows (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by joanneleon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:31:56 PM EST
    I watched MSNBC tonight (unusual of late) and I think it was mentioned by Matthews, Olbermann and Abrams.  Olbermann was the most obnoxious though.  He also went on about how Katie Couric's assertion that there was misogyny toward Hillary during the primary was a ridiculous claim.

    He's become like a caricature.  I can't believe I ever had any respect for him.  I should have trusted my very first instinct about him, years ago, when I first watched him and he was bragging about some award he won (beating Anderson Cooper) for being the best looking newsman, or something like that.  

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks (5.00 / 0) (#81)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:29:06 PM EST
    But since it's a summary of polls, I'm just not getting the math here.

    The two polls they quoted are 14 points up and 19 points up, which doesn't = 62 to 29%.

    Sigh.  This is why I like to look at the polls themselves.  I think the LA Times polling of Hispanics ended up being badly off in the Ca. primary, SUSA was obviously way off in PR, and I remember an extensive discussion from BTD a few weeks back on the flaws of minority polling (sample sizes too small, usually).

    [ Parent ]

    Polling of Latinos (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:52:09 PM EST
    One of the major reasons the polls were off as to the California primary was they underrepresented Latinos & Asians.

    The WSJ/NBC poll makes no sense to me; it has Obama leading McCain among Latinos 62% to 29%, but has McCain ahead among both Protestants and Catholics.  There seems to be a disconnect here.


    [ Parent ]

    The bar chart (none / 0) (#113)
    by joanneleon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:57:16 PM EST
    under the "Race" subtitle shows the 62-29 numbers.

    I'm not sure about the underlying data though, or how to get it.

    [ Parent ]

    I couldn't figure that out either (none / 0) (#122)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:08:40 PM EST
    There's a blurb on the bottom of the second page which says that the margin of error is +/-1%, but goes on to say that the margin in subgroups might be larger.  But not how much larger.

    Overall except for the Hispanic, McCain is shown as close, tied or ahead in almost all their breakdowns.  Which I'm fairly skeptical of.

    I'm no polling or stats expert, so I can't say anything productive about the quality, but I do find it interesting that the Hispanic numbers were all over MSM but not any others.  Not surprising, mind, but interesting.

    [ Parent ]

    See my comment (none / 0) (#158)
    by A little night musing on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:52:00 PM EST
    #135

    In order to know how much larger the margin of error would be, we'd need to know the sizes of the subgroups in their sample, which is not in the report as far as I could see.

    If a subgroup were 1/4 of the total sample, its margin of error would be twice as big (i.e. about 2%): if it were 1/16 of the sample its margin of error would be 4 times as big (about 4%).

    [ Parent ]

    A little night music (none / 0) (#164)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:10:30 PM EST
    thank you very much for that info, that's good stuff to know.

    [ Parent ]
    I've been trying (none / 0) (#76)
    by roadburdened on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:25:46 PM EST
    to find it myself. The Gallup search engine is awful. Apparently, it can't handle 'Obama' and 'hispanic.'

    [ Parent ]
    Search engine (none / 0) (#82)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:30:15 PM EST
    yeeks, it couldn't even handle 'hispanics' plural.

    [ Parent ]
    He's pretty much said (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:31:31 PM EST
    he finds any group that asks something of him to be inconsequential to his success.

    He'll be capturing people through religion. Plenty of seniors, working class, Latinos, and women there.


    Don't you guys know? (5.00 / 4) (#89)
    by Monda on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:39:27 PM EST
    Nobody has done more for the Hispanic community than Obama.
    Who's next?  On the "nobody has done more" list?  

    LOL (5.00 / 5) (#99)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:50:11 PM EST
    And of course add, Florida, counting votes, etc. on that list.

    My new favorite Rachel Maddow quote was from a couple of days ago where she said Obama should be out in Florida reminding those voters about 2000 and how he's for counting all the votes. And then she said she doesn't understand why he isn't doing that. She's my favorite. Every time I see her I end up rolling on the floor laughing. She is single handedly making me healthier. Thank you Rachel.

    [ Parent ]

    God good (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:11:56 PM EST
    I used to think Rachel was intelligent. Apparently I was completely duped until about 6 months ago.

    [ Parent ]
    Oops (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:12:19 PM EST
    and I'm clearly not very smart either. I meant "Good god!" ::headdesk::

    [ Parent ]
    just a quick Maddow item (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by shannon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 11:59:41 PM EST
    On David Gregory's program today, she explained that the Republicans better not try to go after Michelle Obama, because that would be sure to drive women (especially Hillary supporters) to Obama. I thought that was pretty funny. I guess she was one of those that thought the reason women voted for Hillary was simply because she was a woman. She doesn'get it.

    [ Parent ]
    She really has become a (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by LoisInCo on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 12:06:08 AM EST
    nannering twit.

    [ Parent ]
    Rachel was part of MSNBC's Hillary bashing (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by sallywally on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:25:57 PM EST
    straight through. Has she now developed a sense of humor about Obama that wasn't there a week ago? How could she fit in with the others if she did that?

    [ Parent ]
    OK, duh (none / 0) (#143)
    by sallywally on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:27:19 PM EST
    I think I missed the funny there.

    Oh well....

    [ Parent ]

    Women?! (none / 0) (#110)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:54:39 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    The polls suggest that Obama is gaining support (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Rigelian on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:43:22 PM EST
    It seems that recent polling suggests that Obama is ahead of McCain among blue collar voters, women, and latinos...all groups that many in here have doubted he could capture.  It appears that he's capturing these voters effectively at this point.  Things can of course change, but right now the prediction that Obama can not count on these types of voters in the General Election is being diminished.  

    Part of it I believe is due to the fact that McCain is a rather unappealing candidate and the GOP is a extremely unappealing party at this point in time.

    Hillary's heartful endorsement Saturday (4.00 / 1) (#133)
    by catfish on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:21:35 PM EST
    has to be a big part of this uptick. A big part. I was even thinking of voting Obama myself for a couple days.

    [ Parent ]
    And while I hate to quote Karl Rove (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:27:16 PM EST
    since the number went up so quickly in certain demographics (i.e. white women), that means it's pretty much static. He just got the people who defected from HRC now that she's not in the race, but he's not really gaining anyone new.

    I also personally wonder how long he'll keep them.

    [ Parent ]

    Actually it's not a big uptick, McCain was never (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Rigelian on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 12:46:43 AM EST
    close.  Obama has always had a more favorable rating than McCain with Latino voters.  Way back in February the numbers looked like this...

    Opinions of Obama, Clinton

    Some pundits claim that the Democratic candidates, particularly Barack Obama, have not made a real connection with Latino voters, but the data suggest that Latino voters are supportive of both Hillary Clinton and Obama.

    Among all Latino voters, 76 percent have a favorable view of Clinton, and 66 percent have a favorable view of Obama, compared with 48 percent for McCain.

     http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/26/latinos.commentary/index.html

    Now the lead has expanded by quite a bit recently, but an 18 point advantage earlier was nothing to sneeze at.  

    [ Parent ]

    Actually it's not a big uptick, McCain was never (none / 0) (#190)
    by Rigelian on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 12:58:19 AM EST
    close.  Obama has always had a more favorable rating than McCain with Latino voters.  Way back in February the numbers looked like this...

    Opinions of Obama, Clinton

    Some pundits claim that the Democratic candidates, particularly Barack Obama, have not made a real connection with Latino voters, but the data suggest that Latino voters are supportive of both Hillary Clinton and Obama.

    Among all Latino voters, 76 percent have a favorable view of Clinton, and 66 percent have a favorable view of Obama, compared with 48 percent for McCain.

     http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/26/latinos.commentary/index.html

    Now the lead has expanded by quite a bit recently, but an 18 point advantage earlier was nothing to sneeze at.  

    [ Parent ]

    WTF? (5.00 / 0) (#93)
    by kaleidescope on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:44:05 PM EST
    You mean they'd trade helping the undocumented for putting Ms. Clinton on the ticket?

    If people succeed in pressuring Barack Obama against his wishes and better judgment to put Senator Clinton on the ticket, and if he gets elected, does anyone think Obama would give her serious responsibility or anything approaching the portfolio given to Cheney or Gore?

    Forcing Obama to put Clinton on the ticket would give Clinton some face but it wouldn't give her any real influence of power.  Certainly nothing like she already has in the Senate.

    So why would anyone who cares about the undocumented be willing to trade helping those poor desperate oppressed people for a meaningless job "on the ticket" for Hillary Clinton?

    Are these Latino leaders simply responding to pressure put on them from someone else?  Why would they do something like that?

    Maybe they think (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:50:32 PM EST
    there's no way she goes on the ticket so the real warning is to pony up (no pun intended, well, ok, a little bit intended) on immigration reform.  With more than just a promise to come up with a plan when Obama can get around to it.

    [ Parent ]
    promises are made to be broken! (5.00 / 0) (#117)
    by hellothere on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:00:48 PM EST


    [ Parent ]