Hispanic Voters Revisited


Stanley Greenberg’s new survey (PDF) of Hispanic voters addresses a number of interesting points, but two really stand out here. The first is the rather obvious truism that candidates really do matter come election time. George W. Bush, of course, captured a near-historic percentage of the Hispanic vote, 40 percent in 2004. But he did this in part by distancing himself from the negative perceptions that Hispanics had of the Republican Party in general. Only 18 percent of Hispanics consider the GOP to be “accepting of different cultures”—indeed, the Democratic Party has a 40 point lead on the issue—but 30 percent thought the same of Bush himself. 30 percent is nothing to brag about in tolerance contests, but difference came in handy on election day. Unfortunately for the GOP, no other presidential name for 2008 seems to carry a similar personal advantage.

Now as to why Kerry did relatively poorly among Hispanics, some 39 percent claimed that they had no idea “what he stood for.” Yeah, well, so it goes, we’ve heard this ad infinitum and it’s not clear what Democrats can do about this besides, perhaps, run a more comprehensible candidate (Hispanics give Bill Clinton, for instance, an overwhelmingly warm personal rating). Anyway, the second reason—28 percent—had to do with Kerry’s “permissiveness on abortion and gay marriage,” which would appear to give “centrist” Democrats yet another excuse to sacrifice abortion rights in order to reclaim swing voters. But if you look a bit farther down, a pro-life Democrat would run only slightly better than a pro-choice Democrat, and support for stem cell research pretty much swamps any edge an abortion foe could bring. (Obviously a pro-life, pro-stem cell candidate would do best, but Bill Frist’s delusions of the White House aside, there aren’t many presidential contenders who take this view.)

Meanwhile, one should note that Hispanic voters under 30 and Hispanic voters with a college education are overwhelmingly pro-choice (60 and 62 percent respectively). So Bush may have won himself a slight advantage in 2004 on the issue, but over time—given changing demographics and, one would hope, a greater proportion of Hispanics going to college—abortion will turn into a much less successful wedge issue for Republicans to wield. For that matter, read Digby’s weekend post on this very topic—although I’d note that, at least as far as the polls are concerned, the left-liberal position on both the intelligent design debate and the Ten Commandments-in-the-courthouse debate seem to be spectacularly lost causes. But other than that…

OUR NEW CORRUPTION PROJECT

The more we thought about how MoJo's journalism can have the most impact heading into the 2020 election, the more we realized that so many of today's stories come down to corruption: democracy and the rule of law being undermined by the wealthy and powerful for their own gain.

So we're launching a new Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption. We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We'll publish what we find as a major series in the summer of 2020, including a special issue of our magazine, a dedicated online portal, and video and podcast series so it doesn't get lost in the daily deluge of breaking news.

It's unlike anything we've done before and we've got seed funding to get started, but we're asking readers to help crowdfund this new beat with an additional $500,000 so we can go even bigger. You can read why we're taking this approach and what we want to accomplish in "Corruption Isn't Just Another Scandal. It's the Rot Beneath All of Them," and if you like how it sounds, please help fund it with a tax-deductible donation today.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate