Why Latinos Deported Harris From the White House; Why So Many Latino Voters Abandoned Democrats, According to the Data: The Latino Realignment Looks Real. But It May Not Be Permanent; 😂😂Hispanic Male Voters Shunned Kamala Harris Because They Think ‘a woman belongs in the kitchen’: Radio Host🤣🤣

Why Latinos Deported Harris From the White House:

Latinos left the Democratic Party in a mass exodus last week, costing Vice President Kamala Harris the presidency.

The 13-point Latino shift toward President-elect Donald Trump noticed along the Rio Grande indicates Harris’ campaign failed to make Latinos forget the peril caused by her and President Joe Biden’s open border.

The Latino red wave surfaced in South Texas. Trump won 11 out of 13 Texas border counties. The Rio Grande Valley, with a 91% Hispanic population, flipped, creating a Republican majority for the first time in a century. The Latino base showed up for Trump, with Hispanic men ranked as the second-largest demographic group to vote red, according to NBC exit polls.

America’s Latino voting bloc was previously unpredictable by political analysts until the chaos along the southern border became an issue that could no longer be ignored.

The Biden-Harris administration created an invasion along the Rio Grande, which burdened communities across the nation. The unsecure border drastically increased Latino susceptibility toward transnational human trafficking for commercial sex purposes, drug trafficking, and exploitation of cheap labor.

Hispanics know those tragic matters affect their community, which explains why 74% of Hispanics polled earlier this year stated the Biden-Harris administration did a bad job dealing with the immigration crisis.

Instead of addressing this top concern among Latinos, Harris released a campaign promise, “Opportunity Agenda for Latino Men,” which avoided promising stricter border policies, an aspect Latino men searched for in a presidential candidate.

Harris’ address to Latinos also failed to account for more than 300,000 unaccompanied alien children lost by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security. U.S. Customs and Border Protection encountered over half a million illegal alien minors, 98% of whom were of Latin American origin.

The Biden-Harris administration endangered Latino children from the start when DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas repeatedly stated that unaccompanied alien children who crossed the border illegally would not be turned away. Cartels capitalized on this, often smuggling the same children through ports of entry multiple times in an endless cycle for trafficking profit. —>READ MORE HERE

Why So Many Latino Voters Abandoned Democrats, According to the Data:

In the hours after the election was called for Donald Trump, some of the finger-pointing started quickly: Latinos were to blame. Democrats lost Latinos, and it cost them the election.

According to Carlos Odio, co-founder of the firm Equis Research, which focuses on Latino polling, that’s not quite true. While Kamala Harris won Latinos by much smaller margins than Joe Biden did in 2020, she still won a majority of them — and her losses among the group didn’t cost her the election.

“You could erase the Latino shift in those [Blue Wall] states, and Trump would still win,” Odio said in an interview with POLITICO Magazine.

That should still be cold comfort for Democrats. Trump made gains across every group in this critical demographic, cutting into Harris’ wins with Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans and Central Americans. He did well in Florida and Texas and New York and New Jersey.

Even though many analysts expected a shift toward Trump this year, its extent was remarkable.

“You have to say it certainly looks and sounds like a realignment,” Odio said, before giving Democrats some slim hope. “Realignments are neither inevitable nor irreversible, especially when you’re talking about an electorate like Latinos that have been very swingy and very dynamic.”

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Since the election, there’s been a lot of conversation that Latinos were to blame for electing Trump, or at least that Democrats lost Latinos as a group. What’s been your reaction to that?

There’s a few levels here. One, it was entirely justified for people to jump on these eye-popping shifts we were seeing among Latino voters. It’s meaningful. It is, in some regard, historic, and has real consequences for elections going forward. At the same time, those shifts were not why Trump won, and it’s helpful to separate out our interest in understanding his Latino shifts from an analysis of the 2024 election.

What happened this election is that Trump improved on his margins in nine out of 10 counties. There was a 6-point uniform swing across the country. He swept the Blue Wall states, in fact, the entire battleground. And so the story of how Trump won is not a demographic story. You cannot narrow in on any single demographic to explain it. That mingles with a personal element, which is that it was very disheartening when you get into finger-pointing. To some extent, I’m always down to have a debate about the impact of different factors in an election. That’s an empirical conversation, and that’s a data debate. This got personal in a way we have to move past to get to any kind of real understanding going forward.

Look at the Blue Wall states, right? Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, where Latinos are 3 to 5 percent of the vote. You could erase the Latino shift in those states, and Trump would still win them.

What does your data tell you about how this Latino vote broke down in different states and among different countries of origin?

Our early indications, from precinct analysis and looking at other heavily Latino locales, is that the shift cut across geographies, urbanicity, country of origin. There were shifts of similar magnitude in Lawrence, Massachusetts, which is heavily Dominican, as there were in Allentown and Reading, Pennsylvania, which are heavily Puerto Rican, as there were among South American communities of Broward County in Florida, or Mexican American communities in Michigan, Wisconsin and the Tejano Rio Grande Valley in South Texas.

As we contend with what happened, provincial theories that explain some unique element of some subset of Latinos in one place are totally insufficient to explain the broader movement.

That’s really interesting, because it feels like there’s this entire conversation that gets repeated in recent elections, where we say Latinos are not a monolith, and that we can’t think of them as one cohesive group, but then we also keep wanting to know: Who won or lost Latinos? What you’re saying is whether it’s Dominicans, whether it’s Puerto Ricans, whether it’s third- or fourth-generation Mexican Americans, Trump is making inroads with all of these communities in one way or another. —>READ MORE HERE

Follow link below to a relevant story:

+++++😂😂Hispanic male voters shunned Kamala Harris because they think ‘a woman belongs in the kitchen’: radio host🤣🤣+++++

Source