You do not fear alienating the democrats most loyal voting block of African-Americans? I posted a diary about how a democrat simply cannot win without 80% or more of the AA support. This includes new latino voters and white working class voters. I thought you were a democrat.
Why would latino voters refuse to vote for Obama if he is the nominee? He's not latino but then neither is Hillary. I think the Clinton supporters claims of such a thing are baseless unless they are trying to drive a wedge between two ethnic groups, in which case their claims are divisive.
Clinton will always have an edge with women, Obama will always have an edge with AA voters. That's all I'm willing to stipulate to.
So when Obama supporters claim that African American's won't vote for Hillary thats okay. But when a Clinton supporter states Latino's won't vote for Obama then they're driving a wedge between the races?
That makes no sense.
It's not the same comparison. Clinton is not a latina
She isn't Latino, but she receives support from the Latino community as though she is. Maybe that should tell you something about her appeal.
Maybe that should tell you that the Latino community tends to line up behind the endorsements of its leaders. If those leaders endors Obama they will line up behind him.
It will be interesting to see what impact Richardson's endorsement will have.
She's getting the support of Latinos and endorsements for a reason -- a long history of support for and relationships with the Latino community.
(But unlike you, I don't see the Latino community as a monolithic bloc that lines up behind its "leaders".)
Richardson couldn't get the Latino vote himself, I highly doubt his endorsement will have much impact.
Disculpa me. No estoy seguro que usted sabe nada de lo communidad hispana.
Vivia por un ano en el Peru, y aprendi hablar Espanol aya.
I don't know if you, with all your insight into the Hispanic community, can speak Spanish.
The reality is that HRC is doing well with older Hispanics and with naturalized immigrants precisely because many are somewhat cut off by language. They know the Clintons from BC Presidency and they are not familiar enough to be comfortable with Obama. As they get to know him better his numbers will improve. It will be interesting to see if Richardson makes a difference in the short run.
Obviously you speak speak Spanish. Why would you state it when you're writing in Spanish?
I'm a Californian. Speaking spanish doesn't impress me.
Thanks for explaining why so many Latinos support Senora Clinton, although we already know that since that's the way they overhwhelmingly voted. The groundswell of Latinos becoming comfortable with Obama hasn't happened yet, so you're just theorizing. You think Richardson will make a big difference, I doubt it because he hasn't gotten that support yet. I'm dealing with the facts that have actually occurred, you're speculating.
The reason I used a little Spanish was your statement about lumping all Hispanics together. I'm afraid it struck me as pretty condescending and I wanted to indicate that I do have some knowledge having travelled across much of Latin America.
I think it is a process. My point is not to denigrate the substantial support that Clinton has, but to put it in some context. Immigrant voters, particularly those whose first language is something other than English are somewhat cut off from the MSM. They tend to be more reliant on leaders within their community to give them direction about which candidates to support.
I am not trying to suggest that Obama is going to get a huge bump from Richardson. I am saying that if Obama wins the nomination and the endorsements of a large spectrum of Hispanic leaders, he is positioned to do well in the fall.
I do not think that Hispanics have a deep emotional tie with Hillary in the same way that many women have a tie to HRC and many AAs have a tie to Obama. I don't think Hispanics are going to stay home if Obama gets the nomination.
Nice try, but I never lumped all Latinos together, nor was I condescending. In fact, I was the one who disputed that they would "follow their leaders". I think Latinos don't vote as a bloc, but in general they are more loyal to Clinton than they are to the Democratic party. And because they are the fastest growing demographic in the nation, we can't take their votes for granted or they will vote Republican. Schwarzenegger had huge Latino support in our gubernatorial election.
Not sure why you question the loyalty of Latinos for Hillary so much. If you look at the coverage of her campaigning in CA, TX and NV, I think you'll discover there's a lot of love for her in the Latino community.
Here's one good example: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me- lopez10feb10,1,6474408,full.column
And while it's great that you've travelled and speak spanish, there are plenty of fluent spanish speakers that don't know jack about Latinos in the U.S. There's a huge lack of understanding about Latinos, especially by people who don't live in the west and don't understand that many Latinos are not immigrants at all, are not outsiders in their communities, and already know how to wield political power.
Certainly I agree with you that Latinos are not a block. There are differences based on county of origin; generational differences; and length of time in the US. Obviously Latinos in New Mexico who have lived in the same community for generations have a different take that someone who is recently naturalized.
My point about Hillary is that while she has won their support by large margins, I do not see that as a reflection of hostility towards Obama. I see it more as a matter of unfamiliarity, and that gives me hope that, if he is the nominee, he will be able to win over a large percentage of Latinos. McCain is certainly a threat to take a good chunk of the Hispanic vote. OTOH, he is now pretty tied to the Repubs on immigration and on economic policy. I think most expect whomever is the Dem nominee to do better than Kerry did in 04.
I don't know how Kerry did with Latinos in 2004, but I can't imagine that he would be an attractive candidate to them.
You think that Latinos do not support Obama because of unfamiliarity. I think Latinos support Clinton because of familiarity and true affection. With any luck (as far as I'm concerned) we won't ever find out how Latinos feel about Obama v. McCain.
What are your thoughts on how Hillary has run her campaign? In particular, are you comfortable with the volume and intensity of her attacks on Obama?
I think the attacks have been of similar volume and intensity on both sides and I am totally comfortable with it. I expect politicians to lie, cheat and steal to win elections, and no one has failed to live up to these expectations.
(FWIW...I don't feel this way about all people. I expect/demand honesty and integrity from people around me. I just think politics is a dirty game that should only be played by people who want to roll around in the mud.)
You are correct. I noticed my error right after I posted.
I'm voting for whomever the democratic nominee is. However, I cannot say that for all AA's which is a problem. They will support whomever is the nominee unless it looks like it was "stolen" from Barack. If there is a sense that it was stolen when he played by all the rules, then there is going to be a major problem. I do not doubt that latinos would vote for Barack. Eva Longoria made very clear that although she supports HRC that she is a democrat first and that she will be voting democrat in the fall. I think it is important that everyone realizes that. I would also like for the negative tone of the campaign to go away.
You do understand that Eva Longoria is not a typical Latina voter, right?
Don't you think it makes a difference that one has more elected delegates (and more votes) and the other has less of both? Everybody is happy (or should be happy) to vote for the legitimate winner. But to give the nomination to the person who got beat in the electoral contests will spur a backlash, period, irrespective of race. Which is why its not going to happen.
I mean, haven't you found it strange that the Clinton backers criticize the notion that superdelegates should support the winner of the pledged delegates, and to a lesser extent the popular vote, claiming that such SD voting would undermine "the rules," yet never suggest any alternative criteria by which superdelegates should exercise their judgment? Its because they haven't thought of an alternative criteria, yet. I mean, what should the SD's do, flip a coin? (I'm sure the Clintonistas would be fine with that, so long as there was a picture of Hillary on both sides of the coin...)
You're missing part of the equation. HRC is very popular with the Latinos. Obama is not. But JOHN MCCAIN can also get Latino votes. Translation - very big problem for Obama.
I don't disagree with you that Obama needs to reach out to the Latin American community. It will be easier to do when he is the nominee since he won't have another candidate attempting to undermine any gains he makes.
That's not a Clinton bash, the same would be true in the AA community with her if Obama wasn't in the race.
Marjorie Cohn
Marjorie Cohn became president of the National Lawyers Guild in October 2006. She also was recently recognized as one of San Diego's Top Attorneys in Academics for 2006. She lectures throughout the world on international human rights and U.S. foreign policy.
A news consultant for CBS News, and a legal analyst for Court TV, she also provides legal and political commentary on BBC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NPR and Pacifica Radio. Co-author of the book Cameras in the Courtroom: Television and the Pursuit of Justice, Professor Cohn has published numerous articles in such journals as Fordham Law Review, Hastings Law Journal and Virginia Journal of International Law, as well as The National Law Journal, Christian Science Monitor and Chicago Tribune.
Professor Cohn is a contributing editor to Jurist, MWC News and Guild Practitioner. She has been a criminal defense attorney at the trial and appellate levels for many years, and was staff counsel to the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board. Professor Cohn is the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. The recipient of the San Diego County Bar Association's 2005 Service to Legal Education Award, she sits on the Advisory Board for the Haywood Burns Memorial Fellowships for Social and Economic Justice, and serves on the Roster of Experts at the Institute for Public Accuracy. Professor Cohn was a legal observer in Iran on behalf of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers in 1978 and she has participated in delegations to Cuba, China and Yugoslavia. She lived in Mexico and is fluent in Spanish. Professor Cohn has taught at Thomas Jefferson since 1991.
Posted November 23, 2007 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marjorie-c ohn/preventing-the-impending-_b_73927.ht ml
Preventing the Impending War on Iran
Marjorie Cohn was on radio this morning again saying Cheney/administration is planning war with Iran
