Can Hillary afford NOT to enlist Latino Vote?
It is rather comic, or perhaps tragi-comic:
Politicians and analysts in general have been talking about this “sleeping giant” for decades.
The 80s and, after that, the 90s, was supposed to be “The Decade of Latinos” in the U.S.
Politically, because demographically, and also economically, the numbers were cracking up upwardly with intensity.
The growth of the Latino population, not only through immigration, but mainly through births, made Latinos the poster boy of the new America, almost after the Vietnam War, 40 years ago.
Latino vote has been decried, praised, and then decried again, in a rarified environment in which the reality has been only partially explained.
On one hand, we talk about the Latino vote, but on the other, we trash Latinos, because, for example:
“They don’t vote..
“They don’t have documents..
“They don’t show up..
“They show up late, if they finally do..
“they are there, and we better keep them “there”...
...So we don’t have to, for example, include them.
And yet they are there, ready to be engaged, for a politician —not to speak to them in Spanish, as George Bush Sr, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush Jr, and then Barack Obama, the last 4 U.S. Presidents, have tried to do— badly, and with a horrible accent.
Accent not so much on the “phonetics,” but in the sincerity.
Latino vote, without being fully engage, already determine elections, paradoxically:
Both when it is partially engaged (like Obama’s first campaign, which slightly surpassed George W. Bush’s), or when it is made to stay home.
This is when, more often, politicians ignore it, or, on the contrary, actively demonize it (i.e. Pete Wilson, Donald Trump, etc.) so the dwindling fringe continues to choose the political leaders on election day, not out of confidence, but out of fear, not by simple majority, but simple “minority.”
That is, when voter turn out is below 40 percent.
Don’t you remember the “Proposition 187,” when “a brilliant” California Governor, Mr. Pete Wilson, decided that was the best way of getting elected, or re-elected, as he did, “thanks to the Latino vote,” but a Latino Vote demonized and subjected into passivity ?
So the real question here in 2016 is this:
Does Hillary feels she is in need of the full support of an active Latino Vote, which by the way can put her instantly into the White House?
When is she going to choose to do that?
Regardless of the antics of her Republican opponent, she can crush Trump in a heartbeat, the moment she pushes the “Latino Vote button” to the “On” position.
She knows she can outdo him easily asking for the full support of the Latino vote, as she is asking for the vote of women, in general, including the Latina segment, the most prone to vote for her —or against her.
Hillary knows (she is that knowledgeable) she can surpass easily Obama, and Bush and Romney, all put together, in enlisting more than 60 percent of the Latino vote, which has the power to put her ahead, both in the popular vote and the electoral college vote.
Latinos, Latinas, U.S. born, and Immigrant Latinos, as, all of those with the documents to vote, would vote in mass, the moment the first female candidate for president, first in the U.S. in this historic election, switches her current strategy and activates her natural Latino vote follow up.
The question is: When is she going to do it?
Or perhaps: Does she really need it?
Or maybe: Does she really care?
The more she hesitates, the more Donald Trump will enlist opportunist “Latino Leaders” that can confuse the Latino electorate in key battleground States and have the potential of undoing current Hillary’s advantage.
We hope this doesn’t become “Al Gore, II”— the president who never was.
Wouldn’t that be sad, Bill Clinton?