Kerry's failure with Latino's

This was a huge success of Bush's (from NJ's Hotline) campaign:Pollster Sergio Bendixen writes, One of the "big" stories of '04 is how well Bush did with Hispanic voters. According to the exit polls, his share with Hispanics went from 35 percent Bush, 62 percent Al Gore in '00 to 44 percent Bush in '04. Bendixen: "And though there was some different poll numbers floating out there that minimize Bush's performance among Hispanics, we have to acknowledge that Bush did make gains with this important group."

Bendixen adds: "It is our conclusion that the Kerry/DNC coordinated campaign never took this vote seriously enough. We now know that there was talk at the highest levels of the campaign that Bush would not make gains from his 2000 number... From what we saw, despite having a determined and talented Hispanic team in place, the [Kerry] campaign did not spend the money or make the commitment needed to win this vote, potentially allowing states like Nevada and New Mexico to slip away."

     
Bendixen concludes: "Give the size, growth rate and distribution of Hispanics it is safe to say that if we do not reverse the gains made by Bush and his team in future elections Democrats will not be able to become the majority party in our lifetimes, and perhaps beyond" (e-mail, 11/17).

Had Kerry merely held even among Latino's with Gore's total, he likely would have won NM, NV, FL, and CO. Rosenberg maintains that the result is more of a Bush-factor among Latinos that it is a party shift. I do have a hard time imagining someone like Sen. Frist capturing such a high margin of the vote.  

Tags: General 2008 (all tags)

Comments

24 Comments

Dodgy polling.
Or so Ruy Teixera would have us believe.
by Teaser 2004-11-18 09:03AM | 0 recs
There is just no way.
If you read Ruy Teixeira's post and then go look at the numbers, you'll see that it is mathematically impossible that Bush got 44% of the Latino vote, given how the hispanic counties voted. Between the inflated Latino vote %, and the strange results in urban/suburban areas (so Bush does BETTER in the cities and WORSE in the rural areas???), I'd take the exit poll results with a grain of salt.

Publius

by thirdestate 2004-11-18 09:14AM | 0 recs
Ruy says he got 39% of Hispanic vote
that is still a 5% swing in favor of Bush.  This could have been the difference in NM (who knows about Florida).  Ironically, Kerry did much better with the Cuban vote because he actually campaigned with Cubans.

I am very glad that it is a 5 point instaead of 10 point swing because that means we're not in huge trouble but it does mean that we're in trouble.  It is good that the powers that be get scared and start working for the Hispanic vote.

by lojo 2004-11-18 10:51AM | 0 recs
Latinos...
not Latino<U>'</u>s. I'm already teaching one dead language, I don't want another one on my conscience....
by Davis X Machina 2004-11-18 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, PLEASE..
PLEASE fix the spelling of Latinos
in your title here by removing the
apostrophe. it verges on disrespect
not to spell it right.
anyone can make a mistake -- then
fix it when someone points it out.
thanks.
by Woody 2004-11-19 11:02AM | 0 recs
Oops...
....I don't teach typing, for obvious reasons....
by Davis X Machina 2004-11-18 09:40AM | 0 recs
two things
According to what I saw, Kerry's percentages (vs. Gore's) among Hispanics went up significantly in Florida — isn't that correct? So he wouldn't have won Florida but lost it worse. Of course, adding New Mexico, Nevada, and Colorado (5+7+9) would have won him the election without Florida anyway.

Also, yes, the plural of Latino is Latinos, not Latino's. . . .

by cgeiger 2004-11-18 09:50AM | 0 recs
Hispanics, Latinos and Americans
There are certainly voters who identify themselves by one or both terms.  I have heard innumerable arguments over which term is more appropriate.  I am mixed Northern/Central European and I have no opinion.

Some experiences over the years make me wonder if a self-concious H/L voting bloc actually exists.

Years ago, I helped manage a state legislative campaign for a Puerto Rican candidate in Cleveland, Ohio.  The H/L community is not large, but was significant in the district.  The candidate was actively opposed by the Cubans, who were Republican, and never connected with Mexican-Americans or with people from Central America, who did not appear to see themselves in the candidate.

More recently, reading about New Mexico, it appears that there are several different self-identities and community-identities within the larger group that White Americans and the mass media refer to as H/L.

So I can't help but wonder if there is such a thing as a Hispanic or Latino vote?  

If so, what issues or political ideas are shared by persons who came from or whose ancestors came from countries where Spanish is spoken?

by James Earl 2004-11-18 10:00AM | 0 recs
Texas Latinos
I read somewhere this week that it was Bush's huge margin among Texas Latinos that inflate the 44% percentage.

Nonetheless, this is another glaring example of the arrogance and incompetence of John Kerry and his team.

by ck 2004-11-18 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Texas Latinos
The exit polls numbers don't add up, both nationally and, especially, for Texas. See Ruy Teixeria for details:  http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000951.php

I don't think we should be basing strategy on BS exit poll data.

The short answer is that Bush (probably) did about 3-4% better amongst Latinos this time than last time.  That's about the same as his improvement in the population as a whole.

These are the numbers, if any, we should be basing strategy on.

by pmbryant 2004-11-18 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Texas Latinos
ck--Are you enraged at Kerry 1) because he "lost?"
2) because you supported another candidate in the primaries? or 3)because you really should be on Free Republic?
by Baltimore 2004-11-19 03:34AM | 0 recs
Should've Picked Richardson
I saw Univision's Tom Brokaw - Jorge Ramos - on Charlie Rose shortly after Kerry picked Edwards as his VP in July.  He immediately lamented that Kerry had made a big mistake, that had he picked Bill Richardson, the Gov of NM, who is half-Mexican and completely fluent in Spanish, he would have increased Gore's spread of the Latino vote significantly nationwide, with obvious positive repercussions in the swing states NM, NV, AZ  and FL.  Ramos flatly said that if Kerry did not get 65% of the Latino vote he was toast.  And of course, he was right.

Latinos are not a real voting block per se, but generally I believe that they are socially conservative and economically progressive.  Economic justice and opportunity are huge, but so are social acceptance and religion.   Repubs targeted them by speaking to them on religious and faith grounds, peeling off voters the Dems took for granted.

by geech 2004-11-18 10:24AM | 0 recs
Jorge Ramos
I also saw that interview.  Ramos had some very interesting things to say.  He confirmed some of the widespread beliefs about the H/L vote, and rebutted some others.  One thing he did stress was that, outside of various local/regional connections, the H/L vote was not bonded to either political party.

I thought the word on Richardson was that he didn't want to be VP.  I do recall that he said that Dick Gephardt would be the best choice.

We will never know.

But there does seem to be general agreement that John Edwards didn't bring much to the campaign.  This is based on the fact that he could not deliver his home state, and could not decrease the Republican dominance in the south.

I thought he did a damned good job in the VP debate, but other than that, I have no idea what impact he had, if any.

by James Earl 2004-11-18 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Jorge Ramos
Yeah, I heard that Richardson didn't want it, but who knows if it was really on the table.  As for Edwards, I think that he was chosen not for the south or for his home state, really, but because he was the number 2 guy out of the primaries based on a dynamic stump speech with great charm and charisma.  On the ticket, the goal for him was not to help win states in the south, but to help win the rural and working man vote throughout the country - particularly in the midwest.  Obviously, this was a bust.
by geech 2004-11-18 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Jorge Ramos
I'm sick of hearing "It's all John Kerry's fault," "It's all John Edwards' fault."  I loved both those guys.  It's the crooked Republicans' fault!!
by Baltimore 2004-11-19 03:41AM | 0 recs
Well, to be precise
It's 51% of the voting population's fault (assuming we weren't Diebolded, which I actually don't think we were).
by Geotpf 2004-11-19 11:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Should've Picked Richardson
I heard some pretty consistent rumblings that Richardson wouldn't take it. He wanted to be Governor for longer either because he promised he would or he though it'd be better for his future ambitions (I'd take "b").
by BriVT 2004-11-18 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Should've Picked Richardson
we kept hearing whispers that he was
too much like Clinton is his, er, ah,
human failings. we didn't need that
coming up -- and neither did he!
by Woody 2004-11-19 11:05AM | 0 recs
This is a myth
The exit poll numbers are internally inconsistent.  They simply are not believable.  Ruy Teixeira presents the full case against them, but anyone can see it if you just look slightly under the covers.

Please don't help propagate this myth, as building strategy around a flawed concept of what the electorate is doing is not likely to be a winning strategy.

by pmbryant 2004-11-18 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: This is a myth
I'll grant Ruy his space, but look, Sergio Bendixen was in the field polling this data, he's the guy who did NDN's outreach campaign. I'll see if I can followup to get his source of the results.
by Jerome Armstrong 2004-11-18 11:16AM | 0 recs
Latino question marks
There were other places besides Latinos where the ex.poll numbers didn't quite jell, either.

In my analysis, I left out states where Latinos made up 5% or less of the state's voters and focused on the predominant ones.

Why did TX (+16), NM (+12), AZ (+9), NJ (+8) and FL (+7) supposedly shift more than the others, like CA (+4), CO (+5) and IL (+6)?

And why, even post-shift, did Kerry pull in 68%-80% in CO, NY, CT, IL and MA, but only pulled 56%in NJ, NV, AZ, NM, pulled 63% in CA, and lost FL 44-56 and TX 41-59 and OK 26-74? (Note: I hadn't previously included OK, with a 5% Latino voting base)

These wide divergences can't be explained away by Mexicans vs. Cubans vs Puerto Ricans either.

It's significant enough not to just say the exit polling's off, but esp in TX, NM, AZ, NJ, FL, OK, I think it warrants further investigation to see what campaign efforts Rove made in each. Republicans are the majority in most of those, but NJ and NM had more registered Dems voting, so it's not just ideological surroundings, either.

Dismissing the exit polls is too easy. Getting a fuller picture is essential to longterm election strategy, so I hope there's wayyyy more followup.

by Kevin Hayden 2004-11-19 12:19AM | 0 recs
Another aberration
This isn't related to Latinos, but another aberation - perhaps the one that cost the election was the voters aged over 65. In most swing states, Bush carried the over-60 crowd by narrow margins, but Kerry carried over-65.

The standout different one was Ohio, where under 65 produced a 50-50 tie and over 65 produced a whopping 58-42 for Bush! This was a 12% shift in this demographic over the 2000 election, and the group represents 12% of Ohio's voters.

If the numbers are close to correct, it means the ultimate deciders of the 2004 election were Ohio retirees. Did gay marriage swing that group? It's the other place where serious followup is needed to understand what happened.

by Kevin Hayden 2004-11-19 12:28AM | 0 recs
Cong Jose Serrano
(NYTimes, 11/16/04)
(reprinted without permission)

To the Editor:

Desperate for new angles to
explain President Bush's razor-
thin victory, pundits are now
suggesting that the Hispanic
community is drifting to the right.

While one much-ballyhooed
exit poll shows modest gains for
Mr. Bush among Hispanic voters,
the William C. Velasquez Institute,
a respected nonpartisan think
tank, released comprehensive
exit polling data showing that
Hispanic voters overwhelmingly
supported John Kerry, 67.7
percent to 31 percent.

Such numbers actually indicate
a Democratic gain from 2000,
when Al Gore won the Hispanic
vote 65 percent to 35 percent.

A Puerto Rico Federal Affairs
Administration poll found
that Puerto Ricans voted an
overwhelming 82 percent
for Mr. Kerry.

Hispanics know that familes can
flourish only in communities
that value jobs, education,
environmental justice, and
broad access to health care.
These are the causes that
Democrats have long championed
and will continue to fight for.

Jose E. Serrano
Member of Congress
16th District, New York

(that's in the South Bronx, fyi)

by Woody 2004-11-19 10:52AM | 0 recs
Re: poll results
someone with more skills than me
can link to the William C Vasquez
Institute's press release with details
of their exit polls. this outfit was once
known as Southwest Voter Research.
by Woody 2004-11-19 11:12AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads