The Latino Vote........

[paulo537]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think you are making a completely different point. The statement is that latino's don't care for Rubio. If he got 45% of the Latino vote in a three man race including the Gov of the state who was a Republician running as a moderate independent and a Democrat how does that show they dont care for him? Your Mexican voter percentages dont say much other than most people dont know him or much about him considering that 76% of those people in that polled chose another option. As a matter of fact being that the vast majority of Mexican voters are located in CA and Texas they wont play much of a role considering that it is extremely likely Texas is going to vote GOP and CA is going to Obama.

The idea that these percentages really show or prove that Latinos dont care for Rubio is a weak case. Any GOP candidate is going to have trouble with the immigration stance that they are taking. And unlike Obama who carried 90% of the black vote, Rubio is not a democrat unlike Obama and the vast majority of black voters. Yea Rubio isnt going to push the ticket to huge margins of hispanic voters like Obama did with blacks but he will have a lot of positive influence in FL where 57% of Latinos voted Democratic in 2012. To think that the first hispanic candidate wont be supported by Hispanics in at the very least luke warm fashion

Do I understand you correctly?

Even though:

Rick Scott (obviously non-Latin) got only 1% less of the Latino vote than he did overall.

Rubio got 4% less of the Latino vote than he did of the overall,

You mean that there is nothinlittle to infer regarding Rubio's ability to significantly affect the Latin vote?

I understand your points, you may be right.

But to me, when a Latino candidate's Latin vote percentage don't even match what he got overall, I think that's meaningful.

[travelling_vic]

Yup ALL ethnic groups vote in mass together right down the line.

Piffle

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by travelling_vic

Yup ALL ethnic groups vote in mass together right down the line.

Piffle

Many do.

[paulo537]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Many do.

I am sure Blagojevich got 90% or more of the Serbian-American vote.

Is this a good example?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by paulo537

I am sure Blagojevich got 90% or more of the Serbian-American vote.

Is this a good example?

only if the Serbian-American Chicago nation is a 1/10th of the hispanic population which, it's not. Being Czech from Chitown and separate from the Polish or Serbian/Croations I'll guess not.

It's Darwinism at work!

Same reason why the Arab countries, with the history they have, are so far behind Euro and American countries and everything the modern world considers the norm. Like washing hands after you crap or not killing daughters out of honor, marrying more than one woman etc etc etc etc etc

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by paulo537

Do I understand you correctly?

Even though:

Rick Scott (obviously non-Latin) got only 1% less of the Latino vote than he did overall.

Rubio got 4% less of the Latino vote than he did of the overall,

You mean that there is nothinlittle to infer regarding Rubio's ability to significantly affect the Latin vote?

I understand your points, you may be right.

But to me, when a Latino candidate's Latin vote percentage don't even match what he got overall, I think that's meaningful.

I dont think that 51% in a 2 person race is better than 45% in a 3 person race especially when the 3rd person in the race came from the person in questions party. Was the 45% an overwhelming percentage? No but again the original remise made by Riot was that in general Latio's dont "care" for Rubio. Well 45% of the voters in the Senate race cared enough to vote for him. As I said if Rubio were to be on the ticket I guarantee that you wont see similar %'s from hispanics that Obama saw from blacks but more because of party politics not because Latino's dont "care" for him.