As a cohort, Latinos mattered as much or more than almost any other cohort to Dems retaining the Senate and minimizing losses in the House and that's important to recognize. It isn't enough to say that Latino voter X helped Dems win just as much as young voter Y or suburban lady Z. Individually true, but each cohort deserves recognition for their cumulative contribution to victory.
As to your larger argument, you set up two straw man arguments and credited them to each party. There are people on both sides that frame outcomes in incomplete ways but the idea that there are 2 equally true truths and the Repubs and Dems both had good nights isn't reflected in the outcomes. Repubs made some slight gains outside of Florida but nowhere near what the underlying fundamentals in the economy and a any midterm would suggest for an incumbent party. The truth is that Dems overperformed expectations and Repubs did not, even though they made some slight gains. Doesn't mean Repubs can't win Latinos (see FL,TX), just that Dems had a good night with Latinos.
Hey Danny, thanks so much for writing, and I'm sorry for my slow response! This is all fair. I do think you've selected the places that were more favorable for Democrats. And I'd throw Nevada into the conversation as well. I also don't know that these numbers disprove the idea that other groups were also "decisive." I'd want to know the margins of the victory, and the numbers/percentages of young people, women, and Republicans who crossed party lines (and many from these groups are, of course, Latino). In tight races especially, I think these other groups could also rightfully claim to have been decisive this year. And I honestly don't understand, unless you're a partisan consultant, what's at stake in saying that Latinos were THE decisive factor, instead of saying that Latinos are critical Democratic constituents, which feels more honest to me. I am not calling into question whether a majority or a supermajority of Latinos vote for Democrats. But I also don't think I was creating the straw man. I think the partisans on both sides who argue either that the election outcome was either a loss or a victory have created the straw man. I would like them to complicate their stories a bit. And I actually do believe that it is equally true to say that Latino Democrats and Latino Republicans had good nights, even if one Party had a better night than the other. Races all over Texas, California, Arizona (Juan Ciscomani), Oregon, where Latino Republicans won. Again, I really appreciate your engagement. I'm always eager for conversation.
Thank you Geraldo, I appreciate it. The way to determine whether any given cohort of voters was decisive is too run the numbers without that cohort present. The tighter the race and the wider the margin, the more likely any one cohort could be considered determinative. In NV, no question Latinos were the decisive factor because the batch that put the Senator over the top came from Latino communities. That's just one example and if that state goes the other way, we would all be sweating Georgia right now. If you could point to Repubs winning Latinos in blue states in blue districts, you might have an argument, but if there are any, I'd be surprised. You certainly can't do that in any Senate race and I can point to a bunch of Senate races in either purple or lean red states where Dems carried Latinos decisively. Given the headwinds, given the impact of inflation on Latino households and working class households, given that midterms push folks toward the opposition party, given the impact COVID had on the hospitality industry, and a number of other variables, it is simply not credible to argue that both parties had a close to good night. But I am actually ready to move beyond how Latinos voted in the midterms to why and how they should force politicians to address their concerns between elections and in the next one. By way of background, I spent 20 years in public service with Boxer, Obama, and Kerry in the Senate and in the Obama Admin. I am a gov relations consultant but I advise on legislative and regulatory process, not politics, and my clients don't care that I'm Latino either way.
I still have some questions or quibbles, but I am absolutely here for this: "I am actually ready to move beyond how Latinos voted in the midterms to why and how they should force politicians to address their concerns between elections and in the next one." Your background sounds fascinating, and I hope to learn more some day. Have a good one, Danny!
Methinks LindseyGraham deserves the credit for screwing up GOP this election. His moronic and ill-timed call for a national abortion ban—which majority does not want—scared the heck out of a lot of people into voting. Establishment politicians are disgusting and the current GOP is a shitshow. Problem is that Democrats are equally screwed up. So we all suffer. The one beacon of hope is Florida but the unknown quantity in the political calculus is Trump. Waiting to see what happens
Loved your very nuanced and balanced analysis of what happened. It is natural for us, Hispanic/Latinos to understand and see the differences among ourselves and our motivations (putting in the same bag an Argentinean, a Cuban and a Guatemalan - to name three nationalities is madness), but it is through this intelligent dialogue that (hopefully) the parties will be able to tailor their messages the right way.
Thanks
As a cohort, Latinos mattered as much or more than almost any other cohort to Dems retaining the Senate and minimizing losses in the House and that's important to recognize. It isn't enough to say that Latino voter X helped Dems win just as much as young voter Y or suburban lady Z. Individually true, but each cohort deserves recognition for their cumulative contribution to victory.
Democratic support among Latinos in the critical states of Michigan (74%), Pennsylvania (73%) and Colorado (71%) proved vital in Senate and governors races. Similarly, although Latinos in Colorado were more balanced in their voting behavior in 2022, the solid 71% Democratic support among Latinos in Colorado helped make this a big night for Democrats in the state. (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2022/11/11/latinos-support-democrats-over-republicans-2-1-in-house-and-senate-elections/).
As to your larger argument, you set up two straw man arguments and credited them to each party. There are people on both sides that frame outcomes in incomplete ways but the idea that there are 2 equally true truths and the Repubs and Dems both had good nights isn't reflected in the outcomes. Repubs made some slight gains outside of Florida but nowhere near what the underlying fundamentals in the economy and a any midterm would suggest for an incumbent party. The truth is that Dems overperformed expectations and Repubs did not, even though they made some slight gains. Doesn't mean Repubs can't win Latinos (see FL,TX), just that Dems had a good night with Latinos.
Hey Danny, thanks so much for writing, and I'm sorry for my slow response! This is all fair. I do think you've selected the places that were more favorable for Democrats. And I'd throw Nevada into the conversation as well. I also don't know that these numbers disprove the idea that other groups were also "decisive." I'd want to know the margins of the victory, and the numbers/percentages of young people, women, and Republicans who crossed party lines (and many from these groups are, of course, Latino). In tight races especially, I think these other groups could also rightfully claim to have been decisive this year. And I honestly don't understand, unless you're a partisan consultant, what's at stake in saying that Latinos were THE decisive factor, instead of saying that Latinos are critical Democratic constituents, which feels more honest to me. I am not calling into question whether a majority or a supermajority of Latinos vote for Democrats. But I also don't think I was creating the straw man. I think the partisans on both sides who argue either that the election outcome was either a loss or a victory have created the straw man. I would like them to complicate their stories a bit. And I actually do believe that it is equally true to say that Latino Democrats and Latino Republicans had good nights, even if one Party had a better night than the other. Races all over Texas, California, Arizona (Juan Ciscomani), Oregon, where Latino Republicans won. Again, I really appreciate your engagement. I'm always eager for conversation.
Thank you Geraldo, I appreciate it. The way to determine whether any given cohort of voters was decisive is too run the numbers without that cohort present. The tighter the race and the wider the margin, the more likely any one cohort could be considered determinative. In NV, no question Latinos were the decisive factor because the batch that put the Senator over the top came from Latino communities. That's just one example and if that state goes the other way, we would all be sweating Georgia right now. If you could point to Repubs winning Latinos in blue states in blue districts, you might have an argument, but if there are any, I'd be surprised. You certainly can't do that in any Senate race and I can point to a bunch of Senate races in either purple or lean red states where Dems carried Latinos decisively. Given the headwinds, given the impact of inflation on Latino households and working class households, given that midterms push folks toward the opposition party, given the impact COVID had on the hospitality industry, and a number of other variables, it is simply not credible to argue that both parties had a close to good night. But I am actually ready to move beyond how Latinos voted in the midterms to why and how they should force politicians to address their concerns between elections and in the next one. By way of background, I spent 20 years in public service with Boxer, Obama, and Kerry in the Senate and in the Obama Admin. I am a gov relations consultant but I advise on legislative and regulatory process, not politics, and my clients don't care that I'm Latino either way.
I still have some questions or quibbles, but I am absolutely here for this: "I am actually ready to move beyond how Latinos voted in the midterms to why and how they should force politicians to address their concerns between elections and in the next one." Your background sounds fascinating, and I hope to learn more some day. Have a good one, Danny!
If you are interested, I wrote a thing about it here -- https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/platinum-perspective-post-midterm-analysis-latino-vote-sepulveda/?trackingId=vHAiq6TiQguiPfje90XL%2Bg%3D%3D
And I was interviewed on SXM - https://www.siriusxm.com/clips/clip/65cfb29a-195e-4b44-91fb-9e855ad51e03/75448a7c-ff32-4b4b-b30b-fa98d68599a7
YES!
Methinks LindseyGraham deserves the credit for screwing up GOP this election. His moronic and ill-timed call for a national abortion ban—which majority does not want—scared the heck out of a lot of people into voting. Establishment politicians are disgusting and the current GOP is a shitshow. Problem is that Democrats are equally screwed up. So we all suffer. The one beacon of hope is Florida but the unknown quantity in the political calculus is Trump. Waiting to see what happens
Loved your very nuanced and balanced analysis of what happened. It is natural for us, Hispanic/Latinos to understand and see the differences among ourselves and our motivations (putting in the same bag an Argentinean, a Cuban and a Guatemalan - to name three nationalities is madness), but it is through this intelligent dialogue that (hopefully) the parties will be able to tailor their messages the right way.