So-called racial minorities – particularly Latin Americans – voted more for Donald Trump, to the point of tilting certain states like Michigan. For what reasons? Is this the case everywhere in the United States? Sébastien Rouxsociologist conducting his research on conservative communities in the United States, enlightens us.
Are we observing an increase in the Trump vote of minorities across the country?
Sébastien Roux: No, first of all because citizens with an immigrant background are not evenly distributed. If we look at Latinos, they are mainly in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Florida, California or New York. Then, we must put this push into perspective. If we take the vote of African-Americans, they constitute 3% of the electorate of Donald Trump against 17% of that of Kamala Harris [[alors qu’ils représentent 12,4% de la population]. The Republican candidate was not elected by a coalition of diversity but mainly by certain white men. The Latino vote, for its part, has in fact progressed much more clearly in favor of Trump.
“Working-class Latino men have suffered greatly from inflation. Despite his personal history, Trump managed to construct an anti-elite discourse that captured their voice”
Several exit polls estimate that approximately 46% of Latinos voted for Trump in key statesa number enough to tip some states like Arizona, where they constitute more than a quarter of the population. For comparison, 71% of them voted for Obama in a state like California in 2012.
Let’s not forget that some states have strong political traditions. If Texas is Republican, it’s not really because of the Latino vote. In Florida, for example, there is a tradition of Republican Latinos linked to significant Cuban immigration. Marco Rubioa Republican senator from Florida appointed secretary of state by Trump, is the son of Cuban immigrants. On the other hand, the change in Arizona constitutes a real surprise. And it is all the more painful since the Democratic Party – and American political parties in general –, in its desire to segment the population to adapt its programmatic offer, has made ethnicity a determining criterion for voting. The Democrats considered that the Latino vote was theirs and that, given the demographic growth of this population in the United States, the party was promised a prosperous decade, particularly in the face of a political camp that was particularly insulting to them. We remember that, at the end of October, the Texan comedian Tony Hinchcliffesupporter of Donald Trump, spoke at the Republican rally at Madison Square Garden in New York to say that Puerto Rico was a “a floating island of garbage”in a city where there are many Puerto Ricans. However, anticipating the vote of a given community based solely on ethnic identity is not necessarily a winning bet. For example, we talk without distinction about Latinos who voted for Trump as if they constituted a homogeneous group, but that is not the case.
What do we notice when looking in more detail?
Latina women, for example, did not vote for Donald Trump at all. On the other hand, the latter has progressed significantly among working-class Latino men, who have particularly suffered from inflation. For them, as for a growing part of the American working classes, the administration of Biden (and Democrats in general) bear responsibility for their loss of purchasing power. They can share the idea that their work is not valued enough and that they pay too much taxes – while the Democratic elites of Washington would live easily and be disconnected from the reality of the country. However, Donald Trump, despite his personal history, managed to construct an anti-elite discourse that spoke to a greater proportion of Latino men than usual.
“In voting, ethnic identity matters, but depending on whether you are a middle-class Latino or an educated, affluent Latina, you are not in the same social world.”
Does this mean that socio-economic criteria always end up taking precedence over identity?
No, the sociological variables are intertwined. Ethnic identity matters, but depending on whether you’re a middle-class Latino or an educated, affluent Latina, you’re not in the same social world either. Are we talking about women? Descendants of first or second generation immigrants? All of this matters. But yes, undeniably, some Latinos turned to voting Trump out of a desire for social advancement with the conviction that Trump represented more the idea of success through work. And all this despite the repeated insults against them.
How to explain it?
First of all, Latin American workers do not necessarily feel solidarity with immigrants from South America who arrived illegally. Then, Donald Trump is so into the insult and the permanent outrage that part of the American people ends up getting used to it, unfortunately. This effect is also reinforced by the fact that the Republican and Democratic spheres are increasingly compartmentalized. Today – and this constitutes a decisive political phenomenon in the United States – few people, whether among family or friends, have contradictory political debates. If we talk about politics, it is between citizens of the same side. Trump plays a lot of this extreme polarization. Some feel a form of saturation, of weariness, while others get used to it, or even end up appreciating Trump’s rudeness or his grotesque diatribes.
“Some Latinos turned to voting Trump out of a desire for upward mobility with the belief that Trump represented more of the idea of success through work. And all this despite the repeated insults against them”
Did Kamala Harris’ campaign play a role in the increase in Trump voting among minorities?
Without a doubt, the very pro-Israeli positioning of the Biden administration has done damage. Many Arab-Americans in Michigan have turned away from Kamala Harris, who almost never stood out from the outgoing presidency. However, this claimed continuity was not without risk. For example, at many pro-Palestine protests, signs calling Biden and Harris “genocidal” were common, even though these rallies were primarily attended by individuals who typically vote Democratic. Finally, we greatly underestimate the misogyny and racism of American society, and it largely explains the defeat of Kamala Harris. This permanence can explain, for example, that at the very moment when Arizona gave Donald Trump a majority for the presidency, voters chose in this state Ruben Gallego as the first Democratic Latino senator. This is also what allows us to understand that, during the November 5 vote, Nevada, Arizona, Montana and Missouri were able to place Trump in the lead while voting, at the same time, for a liberalization of the right to abortion after the reactionary laws which followed the annulment, by the Supreme Court, of the Roe decision vs. Wade.
**To what extent do the trends discussed in the article reflect a broader shift in American politics, beyond the Latino community, where issues like economic anxiety and identity politics are becoming increasingly intertwined?**
Here are some open-ended questions to discuss the topics covered in the article, divided into thematic sections:
**Section 1: Shifting Latino Vote and Socio-Economic Factors**
1. **The article suggests that socio-economic concerns may have outweighed ethnic identity for some Latino voters. How significant do you think economic anxieties are in shaping voting behavior, especially among minority groups?**
2. **What are the potential long-term implications of Latinos, traditionally considered a Democratic voting bloc, leaning towards conservative candidates?**
3. **The article mentions working-class Latino men specifically. What unique challenges and pressures might they face that could influence their political choices differently from other segments of the Latino population?**
**Section 2: Trump’s Appeal and the Republican Party**
1. **Despite his rhetoric and policies that some might consider offensive to Latinos, why was Trump able to attract a significant percentage of their vote? What aspects of his message resonated with this group?**
2. **How does the rise of candidates like Marco Rubio, who connect with Latino voters based on heritage and conservative values, impact the future of the Republican Party?**
3. **The article mentions that Trump’s anti-elite rhetoric appealed to some working-class voters. How has the perception of “elites” changed in recent years, and what role does it play in political polarization?**
**Section 3: Identity Politics and Voting Behavior**
1. **The article argues that relying solely on ethnic identity as a predictor of voting behavior can be inaccurate. How can we better understand the complex interplay of identity, socio-economic factors, and political ideology in shaping individual voting decisions?**
2. **To what extent does the article suggest that identity politics, while important, may be losing some of its potency in certain demographic groups? Do you agree or disagree with this notion?**
3. **What are the ramifications of increasingly polarized political spheres where people rarely engage in cross-partisan debate? How can we encourage more open and productive conversations across political divides?**
**Section 4: The Role of Gender and Kamala Harris’ Campaign**
1. **The article argues that misogyny and racism may have played a significant role in Kamala Harris’s struggles to connect with some voters. How do these factors continue to shape American politics and elections?**
2. **What can political campaigns and parties do to address the concerns and challenges faced by women and minority candidates?**
3. **Considering the complex political landscape, do you think that identity politics, when combined with economic anxiety and social issues, will continue to be a significant factor in future elections?**
These open-ended questions are designed to encourage deeper reflection, critical thinking, and a nuanced understanding of the themes presented in the article.
