Are Latinos the New Swing Voters?

Republicans hope a shift to the right among Latino voters will continue in the midterms.

By
13
US Republican congressional candidate Monica De La Cruz, left, and Rep. Mayra Flores, right, of Texas, who is running for reelection, attend a campaign event in McAllen, Texas. (Photo by Allison Dinner/AFP via Getty Images)

Mayra Flores’ nearly 8-point win in a June special election made her the first Republican to represent her south Texas congressional district in more than 150 years. The first Mexican-born woman elected to Congress, Flores campaigned as a Donald Trump-supporting hardcore conservative, touting her hawkish stances on law enforcement and her husband’s work as a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

She’s up for election again in November, competing against Democrat Vicente Gonzalez in Texas’ redrawn (and now bluer) 34th District after Gonzalez—who has represented the nearby 15th District since 2017—opted to run in a new jurisdiction after the 2020 redistricting cycle. The Cook Political Report rates the race as a toss-up.

A Flores win in November would be “a sure sign that the gains Republicans made among Latino voters in 2020 are more durable and less Trump-specific than Democrats had hoped,” Jacob Rubashkin wrote for Inside Elections, a nonpartisan political analysis newsletter.

Though political pundits often lump them together in one bucket, Latino voters in the United States are far from monolithic, running the gamut in terms of socioeconomic status, geographic location, and political persuasion. And with control of Congress hanging in the balance, Republicans hope to dispel the notion that Latinos are a reliably Democratic voting bloc.

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
13
By
Comments (13)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Retired Prosecutor

    If Hispanics move to the GOP in any measurable way, the Democrat path to election success gets significantly more difficult.

    Collapse
  2. Nickson

    What’s a “Latino”?

    Collapse
  3. Raincheck

    I agree on the use of the term, and grouping, “Latino.” The most offensive part of it is either:

    Assuming that Cubans and Mexicans and Venezuelans and Puerto Ricans all share a common set of political values. Or even that all Mexicans do, regardless of age,gender, rural or country backgrounds, etc. Just because they are a certain color?

    Or

    Treating the grandchildren of Mexican immigrants, people who were born US citizens, attended US schools, and live and work here just like the grandchildren of German immigrants, as though they are part of some political bloc based purely on where their ancestors were born. They are Americans, just like anyone else.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Gibby

    2009 prediction made by me: This is about voters. If the hispanic vote suddenly shifted right suddenly you would see republicans talking about us being a nation of immigrants and democrats questioning whether or not our infrastructure was capable of sustaining such a strong influx of people who would tax our entitlements.

    We are beginning the quickening roll to making that prediction reality.

    Collapse
  5. BWSmith

    All talk of "Latinos" is meaningless, and a little racist.

    Cuban-Americans are largely affluent refugees and asylum-seekers from the Castro regime (and virulently anti-communist). They have little in common politically or socially with Puerto-Rican-Americans, who have collectively been US citizens since 1917. They in turn, have little in common politically or socially with Mexican-Americans, and/or Central & South Americans.

    And yet, "because they or their parents/grandparents speak Spanish", all of the above are bundled together and analyzed as a monolithic voting bloc?

    Do Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and Brits all "vote the same" because we speak the same language?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      RightWithReason

      I can understand the value of analytics when prognosticating voter behavior, and separating people into groups on this basis--i.e. women, college graduates, etc.--makes sense. But I doggedly continue to hope that we reach a point in our society when we're able to classify people simply as *Americans*, and we don't react to things like this by crying, "Look! The brown people are doing something different!"

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Earl King

      At a minimum it is bigoted thinking by Democrats. Tejano's are different than Cuban refugees who are different than Mexican males that come to work the farms in CA.

      I have largely championed the idea that "hispanics" are generally more aligned the GOP with there cultural support for families and religion. Hispanics do not think "hard work" represents institutional racism or white supremacy. Most come here for the same reason everyone else in the world wants to come. Economic success and social mobility. Much of the world is built on class. America is built on merit. Our education system has made it possible for the poorest of the poor to attain success. Which is why it should concern all Americans that we seemingly are going backwards in public education.

      I attribute that slippage to two things. Kids don't read anymore and the education system (in some instances) has become more interested in molding society and culture rather than simply teaching STEM classes.

      Collapse
      1. Kroneborge

        I listened to a really interesting podcast this week. Econ Talk interview with Roland Fryer. Well worth a listen

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Mudskipper

        So, in the first paragraph, Democrats are bigoted when they generalize about Hispanics.

        Having made his case for Democratic bigotry, G4advertising then generalizes freely about Hispanics.

        Collapse
    3. DTruitt

      While I agree with you generally about not lumping all Hispanics into one pot of voters, even you generalized too much. First of all, the first wave of Cuban immigrants in the early 1960s were largely the affluent business owners, land owners, "whites", and professional class fleeting Castro's communist revolution. But the 1980 Mariel refugees were not like that at all - much more lower education levels, non-wealthy, and a good number of them were the result of Castro emptying his prisons of criminals conveniently for him, of course. They had little in common with the first wave of Cuban immigrants.

      Then lumping Central and South Americans together as a voting bloc is also not accurate, as there are large differences between each of those nations and their respective cultures, and even within those nations and their respective cultures. Urban Venezuelans have as much in common with rural Dominicans has Appalachian mountain dwellers have in common with New Yorkers or urban Californians.

      What doe unite voters are interests ... first and foremost, pocket book issues (jobs, inflation, recession vs. growth, etc.), cultural issues (respect, and access to the American dream), and such.

      Democrats, of course, have always built their coalition out of a combination of big labor, recent immigrants (even going back to the Tammany Hall days in the mid 19th century), social "outsiders" (like LGBLT, etc), and socialists ... so they always try to accentuate a grievance culture of haves vs. have nots, and outsiders trying to become insiders.

      The weakness politically of the Dems has been that once outsiders become insiders, or at least once they become fully integrated into society and want to protect their social and economic gains, they no longer perceive themselves to be outsiders. Which is why Dems love immigration - as it gives them a constant source of new voters once they become legal. We've seen it over and over and over again in America. It used to be described as a "melting pot".

      Collapse
      1. BWSmith

        "even you generalized too much"

        Obviously, yes. My intent was not to say, "this is the correct way to lump people together".

        Collapse
    4. BWSmith

      https://time.com/5907525/latino-vote-2020-election/

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Wilhelm

    If Flores wins what amounts to a tossup race, then calling it a “a sure sign that the gains Republicans made among Latino voters in 2020 are more durable and less Trump-specific than Democrats had hoped,” is like calling me a handicapping wizard if I win one NFL game against the spread.
    The totality of the Latino votes in Texas might show a trend. As would a similar examination of Latinos in Florida.
    But it's important to remember that while there is no true Generic Republican, there is also neither a true Generic Hispanic Republican.
    Interesting piece, Harvest.

    Collapse