Jim VanderHei

Good grief! Why won't Hispanics vote like they're supposed to? (With Axios think piece)

All together now: Good grief!

The other day I shared my frustration with readers, after enduring another elite newsroom story about the “shocking” trends among Hispanic voters in the 2020 elections. It turned out that quite a few Hispanics didn’t vote for Democrats the way that they were supposed to and it wasn’t just Cubans in Miami.

Of course there were economic issues involved. Of course there were efforts to paint Democrats as “socialists” or worse, using labels that really scare lots of voters in conservative Hispanic households (including Cubans, of course).

Of course, there are “religion ghosts” lurking in many of those memories of life in the old country.

Anyway, I wrote a post with this headline: “One more time — Why can't Democrats count on Hispanics, etc., to vote the way they should?” I noted that GetReligion has been running posts on this topic ever since the 2016 campaign in Florida, when there was evidence that evangelical Latinos helped make Donald Trump a winner there. As I said earlier this week:

There’s more to this story than Cubans in Miami. Reporters need to visit megachurches in and around Orlando. Also, if you have ever lived in Texas, you know that the political lives of third- and fourth-generation Hispanics is rather different than those of more recent arrivals. And, again, look for church ties. …

Now the editors need to ponder this truth: Political labels are not enough.

That post was about a New York Times political-desk story that was completely tone deaf to the religion angles in this important topic.

Now, low and behold, that Times team has gone and done it again — this time looking at Miami and its powerful Cuban community, in particular. The double-decker headline states:

How Hispanic Voters Swung Miami Right

Many expected that liberal young Hispanic voters would propel a Democratic wave. But Miami, a city where Hispanics hold the levers of power, confounded expectations.

It was more of the same, of course.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Election 2020: It ain't over 'til it's over, but familiar religion-news hooks are already obvious

The political recriminations will be flowing in coming weeks, months and years.

Why was the Joe Biden campaign effort so astonishingly (yes) "sleepy"? How could Donald Trump do so well when so many people kept telling pollsters they find him unnerving if not repellent, and bemoan his handling of the COVID-19 crisis? And speaking of polls, why did the nation’s elite media — once again — let them slant coverage, and can their distortions ever be remedied?

With control of the White House and U.S. Senate still undecided as this is written, The Religion Guy underscores a quote: "There's something going on out there that most of the media have been missing." That's from Jim VandeHei, the savvy co-founder of both Politico.com and then Axios.com, speaking on devoutly Democratic MSNBC Wednesday morning. He added, "Obviously Donald Trump and the Republicans are the big beneficiaries of that as we sit here today, even if Trump loses the presidency."

The Guy chimes in with the related observation that Democrats and sectors of the media continue to miss or misplay the religion factor in America’s cultural divide. This will require careful reconsideration following the recounts, legal games, Electoral College vote December 14 and state certifications of Senate winners.

Newswriters' analysis of religion and what happened should note data the experts at Pew Research Center posted October 26 and on October 13. Note well that Pew echoed many others in giving Biden a healthy 52- 42 margin over Trump among registered voters.

Pew found predictable pre-election enthusiasm for Democrat Biden among Black Protestants (by 90 percent), Jews (70 percent, though less among regular worshippers while the Orthodox minority leaned GOP), and Hispanic Catholics (67 percent, but hold that thought).

Then there's the big new constituency of "nones" with no religious identification (71 percent). That’s another theme GetReligion has been stressing for a decade. Democratic dependence on non-religious citizens presumably affects the party's lack of affinity for religious interests. The 2020 returns may tell reporters whether that is a mistake.

Trump's coalition per Pew consisted of white "evangelical" Protestants (78 percent support), non-evangelical white (i.e. "mainline") Protestants (53 percent) and white Catholics (52 percent). The Guy figured it would be hard for Trump to eke out a win unless he could do somewhat better with that last group. Repeat after me: Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.


Please respect our Commenting Policy