I’m surprised that this story from yesterday hasn’t gotten more attention here …
“Donald Trump did not win 34% of Latino vote in Texas. He won much less.”
link to story below:
www.washingtonpost.com/…
Ever since the national exit poll reported that 29 percent of Hispanics voted for Trump, the accuracy of that number has been debated. In particular, some have questioned whether it is an overestimate, citing a separate survey of Latino voters by the polling firm Latino Decisions that reported that 18 percent of Hispanics voted for Trump.
Now, analysis of precinct data from Texas and several other states suggests that, indeed, the exit poll overestimated how many Latinos voted for Trump.
The story goes on to explain how the actual voting data was analyzed (you can read yourself) … and arrives at the following conclusions:
Finally, we estimate that Clinton won 77 percent of Hispanics and Trump won 18 percent.
These estimates strongly suggest that the exit poll estimates (61 percent to 34 percent) underestimate Clinton’s strength among Hispanics in Texas. The Latino Decisions exit poll in Texas — which reported that 80 percent of Latinos voted for Clinton and 16 percent for Trump — appears closer to the truth.
We find the same thing when we examine precinct data in other states.
- In Arizona, we estimate that Clinton won more than 80 percent of the Latino vote.
- In California, we estimate that more than 80 percent of Latinos voted for Clinton and that she won a higher percentage of the vote than Obama in nearly every Latino precinct.
- In Nevada, we estimate that Clinton won more than 80 percent of Latinos as well — even though the exit poll’s estimate is 60 percent. (all emphasis mine)
In short, the official exit poll — which suggests that Trump did better with Latinos than Romney — is quite likely wrong. Official election results in thousands of precincts across Texas and most other Western states show that Latinos broke more strongly for Clinton than the exit poll suggests, and more strongly than they did for Obama in 2012.
The essence of the story portends good news for Democrats in the long-term. Yes, in the short-term we’re kind of f***ed with Trump as President … but with him as the face of the GOP for at least the next four years (and hopefully only four) our long-term prospects in re. to changing demographics look hopeful. The same thing happened in the 1994 California election. The GOP demonized Latinos and they won that election … but the long-term result in California for the Republicans was the permanent loss of the Hispanic vote and the associated Democratic dominance of the state ever since; we all know what’s happened in the state over the last 20 years … California is now one of the most Democratic states in the country.