Here’s an interview with Southern New Hampshire University political scientist Ernesto Sagás who talks about the Granite State primary, Super Duper Tuesday and whether it makes sense to talk about Latino voters as a bloc. Below is an excerpt from the interview:
Looking at Iowa and New Hampshire is there any measurable impact of Latino voters?
Not really. The thing about both Iowa and New Hampshire is that these are new frontiers for Latinos. These are not the traditional core of Latino states like the border states, like New York, like Florida. Most of these are new Latinos, new arrivals direct from Latin America.
There’s not much to talk about Latinos in New Hampshire.
Is Nevada the first place where Latino voters will count?
Could be. But, I would place it more in Florida. Nevada, even though it is called Nevada, most of the Latinos are recent arrivals. The other thing is that it is a very low-key election unlike for example Iowa or New Hampshire. I don’t think it is really until Florida where finally we are going to see an impact by Latinos.
Speaking of Nevada and Latinos, Bill Richardson if he is still in the race he could make some kind of a small comeback there. Not only because of the Latinos but because of the fact that he is governor of a neighboring state. He has spent some time campaigning in Nevada, he has name recognition there. It is not entirely due to the Latino vote. I think that Florida will be when we see Latinos coming into the fray.
But on the Democratic side there are no delegates coming out of Florida. Why would there be any impact?
It is more about the headlines. For example, Rudy Giuliani is already pandering to Cuban Americans in South Florida. He has been campaigning heavily with the Latinos.
It is like Iowa, you get only a handful of delegates but it is all about grabbing the headlines.
Looking ahead to Super Duper Tuesday – will the Latino vote have an impact?
It could be a moot point. Maybe by the time we get to Super Duper Tuesday this could have been decided by then. Right now, we have Barack Obama gaining momentum. Hillary has the money to go all the way to Super Duper Tuesday but we’ll have to wait and see.
In some of the states, the Latinos could have an impact. But, again, you see all these headlines “Is This The Year For Latinos?” and you get that every four years. This myth that Latinos represent a homogenous group and they are a cohesive voting bloc. If there is a group that is certainly a cohesive voting bloc it is African Americans who steadily vote upwards of 80 percent for the Democratic Party.
We’re going to have to wait and see. Every four years we tout this label ‘is this the year for Latinos.’ Well, in some states and in some counties yes they make a significant difference.
Particularly in the case of Florida when you talk about Cuban Americans and the Republican vote they are quite a cohesive voting bloc. But, even among Cuban Americans, the old, first-generation is dying off. The second generation they tend to be more heterogeneous when it comes to voting, at least at the state and local level.
I don’t want to get into this kind of labeling that Latinos are going to make a difference.
In terms of this issue of labeling – does it make sense to talk about Latino voters? Nevermind as a bloc but just as a group?
If anything, you can talk about the Cuban American voting bloc in South Florida. Or you can talk about the Puerto Rican vote in New York or the Chicano vote in Los Angeles. When you get more to the micro level than you can start making certain assumptions based on poll data. But just to tout a Latino voting bloc at a nationwide or maybe even a statewide level it doesn’t make any sense.
Latino Democrats heavily prefer Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. Why that gap?
I think it has to do with the Clinton mystique. Among Latino Democrats, the Clintons are seen as being friends of Latinos. There is name recognition. For most Latinos, Barack Obama is Barack Who?