As media and pundits continue to dissect the results of November's midterm election, one clear theme has emerged: Latinos in 2010 affirmed their influential role in American politics, as voters and as candidates, and this will only be magnified in the 2012 election. And while 2010 showed that political leaders and parties that demonize or take Latino voters for granted are taking a great risk, this election also showed that effective outreach to the Hispanic electorate continues to be spotty, both in terms of actual contact and in candidates defining themselves on the issues that matter.
Let's recap. Latino voters proved pivotal in several contested races, more notably in U.S. Senate contests in Nevada, Colorado, California, and Washington. They also made their mark in gubernatorial races in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Oregon, New Mexico, and Florida, helping elect Democratic candidates in the first four, and Republicans in the last two. Once the dust settled, Latino voters emerged as the wild card that numerous polls miscalculated (see Latino Decisions and Nate Silver on this), increasing their share of the vote in several states and helping Democrats retain their majority in the Senate.
On the candidate front, Latinos also made some important gains. This cycle saw several firsts, including the historic election of the first Latina governor in the United States, New Mexico's Susana Martinez; Brian Sandoval will become the first Latino governor of Nevada; and Washington and Idaho will both have a Latino in their House Congressional Delegation for the first time. Marco Rubio will take the Florida Senate seat once occupied by Mel Martinez, and he will be joined in Congress by another five new Republican House members, increasing the GOP Latino members to eight.
This crop of Latino Republicans revealed the GOP's strategy for going after Latino votes: Nominate Hispanic candidates. While the success of these candidates marks a welcome step toward the Republican Party coming to reflect the country's make-up, simply nominating Hispanic candidates, without abandoning immigrant-bashing rhetoric, will not solve the party's challenge with Latino voters. Of the three most notable races--Martinez, Sandoval, and Rubio--only Rubio captured a majority of the Latino vote. He did so at a lower level than Senator Martinez in 2004 (55% compared with 60%) and in a state where the Hispanic electorate routinely has supported Republicans in greater numbers than Latinos elsewhere. If the hope was that Latinos would simply flock to a candidate because the candidate was Hispanic, the answer is "no."
So what does 2010 say about Latinos and their attitudes toward elections and issues? Lesson number one: Demonizing immigrants and Hispanics is a losing strategy. If several Republicans had not fumbled the immigration issue, or had abstained from demonizing immigrants and Latinos, the GOP could have captured the U.S. Senate. Similarly, if Democratic candidates had taken a strong stance against these tactics, they could have motivated more Latinos to come out to the polls. While immigration did not rise on the general electorate's list of priorities, it certainly motivated Latino electoral choices and influenced outcomes in Nevada, California, Colorado, and Washington. Sixty percent of Latino likely voters indicated that immigration was the most important or one of the most important issues in their decision to vote and for whom to vote. Fifty-three percent were influenced by existing anti-Latino, anti-immigrant sentiment. The most noted Republican bearers of this approach did not succeed: J.D. Hayworth (again), Tom Tancredo (again), and Sharron Angle. There are also examples on the Democratic side: Walt Minnick and Zack Space. Sure, there are some politicians that got a boost, such as Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, but whatever short-term gains may have been extracted by a few, their strategy was gratuitous, is a certain loser in the long term, and will be a particular challenge for the GOP, which is seen as wholesale endorsing anti-immigrant, anti-Latino measures.
Lesson number two: Issues matter, but candidates need to define their stance on the issues that matter to the Hispanic community. Jobs and the economy have traditionally topped the list of Latino priorities, and with Latinos experiencing a higher unemployment rate than the national average, this is still the top concern. However, 47% of Latino likely voters felt that public officials do not take Latino concerns into account when considering economic reforms. Immigration was the second issue priority, spurred by a lack of progress on reform and by laws such as Arizona's SB 1070, which have Latinos feeling like suspects in their own communities. More than a few politicians used the issue to stir anti-immigrant sentiment, and many others just stayed quiet. Only a rare few took a decisive stand denouncing those tactics, whether from an immigration policy or a civil rights perspective. Politicians' lack of clarity on the issues leaves Hispanic voters with less reason for making their choices between candidates--and thus less enthusiasm.
Lesson number three: Meaningful outreach is essential. Some Democrats assume that Latinos are a base constituency, or that Republican immigrant-bashing simply leaves Latinos with nowhere else to go. True, Republicans are their own worst enemy and Democrats' best friend when it comes to these voters, but the "lesser of two evils" strategy is wearing thin. Senator Reid provides a good example of the way forward. He is one of the few Democrats who has been forthright in his support for immigration solutions that Latinos--and for that matter, the majority of Americans--support, and even though his opponent was running an anti-Latino campaign, he made very strong efforts to reach the Hispanic electorate. That kind of outreach was not in place in other campaigns. Lack of outreach combined with lack of issue definition is a losing strategy, no matter how weak your opponent may be on Latino priorities.
Looking toward 2012, both parties have work to do. For Democrats, undelivered promises combined with a neglectful attitude toward Latino voters could be devastating. A small number of votes made the difference in Democrats retaining the Senate this year, and the party should heed the signs: A significant number of Latino voters stated that their vote was against the Republican and not for the Democratic candidate. Latinos are just as frustrated with the state of the economy; add to that a lack of progress on immigration and a sense that many Democrats are sitting on the sidelines while the community is being attacked, and that frustration could turn to rejection or sitting out an election. Voters need something to vote for, not just something to vote against.
While the GOP hopes to attract Latino voters by simply running Hispanic candidates, Republicans will lose out big unless the party changes course and stops demonizing immigrants and Latinos. As we have seen in the past, Latino voters are willing to support a candidate regardless of his or her party affiliation if the candidate reaches out, takes positions on issues that matter, and builds a relationship with the community. But the GOP brand has been undeniably tarnished--just look at McCain's trajectory--and in addition to the Latino facelift, a substantive redirection is needed.
2012 stands to be another record year for Hispanic voters. It's time to take these lessons to heart.
Follow Clarissa Martinez De Castro on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@nclr
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msc719IKjIo&feature=related
Open borders are the solution. Write it into the US and Mexican Constitutions that all people born in Mexico shall be considered US citizens. Then we can change the United States government to be more reasonable and stable like Mexico's. And we will have 110 million "New Americans" to help us decide.
That's the politically correct term now in this debate: "New Americans".
Sort of like when a group of people takes residence in your garage without asking they are your "new family members".
Open borders and amnesty are things Americans object to and Mexico wants. Not happening now.
Mexico counts 20 million "New Americans" here without permission. That is quite a voting block for them.
While there are a lot of American Hispanics, research shows that their interests are close to other Americans, with immigration farther down the list.
Mexico has tried to use race as a reason to ignore American borders. Ethnicity does not give foreigners the right to vote in America and they are being used to fatten the numbers of Hispanic voters.
Both Democratic and Republican legislators are going to try to ignore the immigration debate. It was a good distraction and political draw.
Latinos have been fooled by the "Hope and Change" lie as much as the rest of us.
But by two countries in their case.
We need legal immigration fixed and streamlined so people can immigrate, but you can't fix that system if you just overlook 14-20 million people every 20 years. We need to have a secure border so that we can actually spend more time fixing the system then we do trying to enforce immigration laws on those that are coming here illegally. Just giving everyone a free pass is going to bring a rush of more immigrants that will overload the system again. So will we be looking at 25-30 million looking for Amnesty in another 20 years?
We have to stop it somewhere. The worst part of the entire immigration debate is the only victims are the immigrants. The debate does nothing to help them and neither does the screams of racism of those that don't support amnesty in any form. Its not racist to hope it can be solved correctly this time, and not just another 20 year bandaid.
As much Clarissa Martinez De Castro, has minimized the effectiveness of the Republican party in reaching out to Latinos by stating “republicans hope to attract the Latino vote”, the fact is that Latinos overwhelming voted for a Republican Latina and Latino for Governor for the state of New Mexico, and the state of Nevada a Latino US Senator in Florida, Yet the Democratic party has never nominated or voted for Latino Governor or U.S Senator for the blue state of Califas Questions that has to be asked is why and what message does that send to Latinos. Could be that the fact is Democrats and the their accomplices in the media present a false hood that Latinos all vote Democrats and forget that we have are not one monolithic group with different views, customs, values, and are in different social educational economical classes that are factors how we vote. Thank you Clarissa Martinez De Castro once again for your arrogance in thinking you alone represents 48milion Latinos which includes me. 1. This should be a wakeup call for Republicans and particularly Democrats in Califas i.e (California) that the state of New Mexico, Nevada and Florida has set the example for California. 2. Not all Latinos vote the same perhaps (being a different kind of Latino in California due to the water we drink we are different, this is not the case) 3. People shouldn’t be so arrogant
I think that naturally, the Democrats are going to be more at ease in tapping into the Latino vote. They will be more willing to speak to those voters and come to favorable solutions on immigration and other social matters that are important to Latinos, and will be rewarded by collecting most of the Latino vote. I understand that Latinos do not constitute a monolithic, collective voting bloc. All the same, however, it will be very hard for the Republican party to win them over since they work so hard to appeal to the disaffected whites of the country by promoting conservative 'values', which most Latinos will feel alienated from.
The reality is that this country is changing, and the national constituency is changing as well. Even if immigration were to be totally halted, the amount of Latinos will still outnumber whites in the near future. Politicians will need to adapt to survive.
While legal American citizens' unemployment rate is nearly 10% = 16 million legal Americans out of work - losing 6 million homes to foreclosure.
11 million illegal aliens in the USA working = cause of 10% unemployment, scabbing Americans' jobs
I know - let's move in illegally to a nation built upon the hard work of generations of others and make demands that everything change to suit our needs.
That's real cool. Real nice.
It is your attitude that ticks people off. You should know that, too.
***sarcasm**
It's like they haven't actually watched Steele or Keyes et al run for office and get trounced.