Latino Trump voters: We regret our vote, but we'll never vote for a Democrat

That is the problem. They hate Trump but hate Dems more. Dems have to completely rebrand or the country needs a third party to stop MAGA.

People in hell want ice water.

Harris was a particularly horrible candidate. Maybe someone like Shapiro or another Dem Gov would do better. Maybe.

Pritzker with a side of Beto.

There's your ticket!

What’s to love about open borders, with millions pouring into the country and requiring billions in social services—services that Democratic-led cities, especially New York, have handed out without meaningful guardrails? Think hotels and cash debit cards. Add to that no-cash-bail laws, where criminals are arrested and released the next morning only to commit more crimes, disproportionately affecting poorer neighborhoods. Layer on top DEI initiatives and pronoun debates that many people can’t relate to, along with cancel culture silencing anyone who dares to speak up—even behind closed doors. It’s not hard to see why so many have left the Democratic Party and why many more still refuse to vote for Democrats. Yes, the party has accomplished great things in the past, but its recent embrace of far-left, “woke” policies has significantly damaged its brand.

If you didn’t vote for Kamala or stayed home, you basically voted for Trump.

I hope he deports everyone in that group

[Quote] They hate Trump but hate Dems more. Dems have to completely rebrand or the country needs a third party to stop MAGA.

No, they hated a Black woman. They’ll vote for Dems when it’s a white make leader who throws them a few sentences in Spanish

Th is headline in an inflammatory lie. It does not say they would never vote for a Democrat. The story even says thee are opportunities for Democrats.

But the truth wouldn’t help your rabble rousing on a Thursday morning, would it OP? Not enough discord for you?

You’re a real piece of shit.

I think the Latino cultural shift is something bigger than any recent election or anything R5 is discussing.

It was perhaps one of the biggest tactical errors ever made, in the game of chess that is politics, for Democrats to assume that a Latino voting block would always be in the Democratic column.

Over the last several decades, Latino/Hispanic people have shifted to the right - the Catholic Church being the biggest factor there. While the Church has lost membership for decades in most of the Western world, it has made tremendous gains in South America. It's part of the reason why Pope Leo was chosen (from America, with a strong pastoral background in South America).

Those new Catholics are very faithful and veer very much to the right. And many of them come from places where there's a history of strong authoritarian figures running the show, so the idea of Trump being a dictator and Pope Leo telling them what to do and how to act is hard to resist.

With Harris, there was also an anti-Black vibe from Latinos/Hispanics - definite racism/caste issues there among those different demographics.

I don't think that the right's rants about Democrats allowing undocumented immigrants in to get their vote was entirely true....but if the hope was that legal new citizens *would* add to the D rolls, it was a misfire and a miscalculation.

What’s “The Bulwark.com” OP and how many hours a day do you spend trolling the Internet for more political shit to drown Datalounge with?

The Bulwark is great. It’s mostly Never Trumpers who are now basically Democrats. They don’t play around.

[quote] Over the last several decades, Latino/Hispanic people have shifted to the right - the Catholic Church being the biggest factor there. While the Church has lost membership for decades in most of the Western world, it has made tremendous gains in South America. It's part of the reason why Pope Leo was chosen (from America, with a strong pastoral background in South America).

No, it has not. Catholicism is declining in Latin America while Evangelical Christianity is on the rise all over the place. The problem isn't Catholicism, it's Protestantism.

My bff is Puerto Rican and a Democrat.

Of course she's also 1) a woman, 2) very well educated, 3) a highly-paid professional (with a cousin who's a judge in NYC), and 4) an Army brat who lived everywhere from Hawaii to Germany.

"Latino" or not is [bold]never[/bold] the only demographic influence on a person's political opinion.

R5 is describing a world that does not exist. He will never be satisfied because fantasy complaints can never be rectified.

They specifically said they didn't want her, not as implied that they would never vote for a Democrat.

Partisan Democrats can't accept that Harris had lousy political skills.

[quote] Th is headline in an inflammatory lie. It does not say they would never vote for a Democrat. The story even says thee are opportunities for Democrats.

You can pretend all you want that the problem is Kamala Harris because she wasn't the right Democrat. But no Democrat will be "good enough." Any Democrat will be branded as too "woke" or "socialist" or "open borders." They'll find a reason not to vote for them. Kamala Harris, while not a perfect candidate, was perfectly reasonable. I'd love to know from these Trump voters which specific Harris policies they objected to and why. My guess is they can't name any. Also, if they hate things like tariffs, why did they vote for the candidate who said repeatedly that he would impose tariffs? Trump isn't doing anything he didn't say he would do.

Apparently, they voted for Trump even though they didn't agree with everything he said. Why do they hold Democrats to a different standard? Staying home or voting third party is basically saying, "Yeah, I'm OK with Trump."

They're lying. They'd vote for Trump again.

The Dems have to run a white male.

A few thoughts—

This was a focus group of SEVEN (7). And a very particular one: Latino, American voter, voted for Trump, now unhappy with Trump. This is not at all an informative pulse reading on “the Latinos.”

None of them say they would vote for Harris OR for Trump in a hypothetical do-over.

Several of them say they initially supported what they thought Trump intended with immigration: much tighter borders. Control. There was indeed an unprecedented surge of illegal immigration in 2021-2022, it did contain some criminal elements, and the reason Latino citizens/voters felt strongly about it was simple: the consequences were disproportionately affecting their communities… and their own demographic reputation as Americans. They wanted a correction. They are horrified by the cruel and ugly over-correction. There is an opportunity here for 2028 for a Democratic nominee to talk about a sane, not-inhumane, controlled and tight and fairer immigration policy. Post-Trump and Post-Biden. Harris couldn’t say that the out of control migrant surge of 2021-2022 was a mistake to not immediately confront and stop, but it was.

R16 Most people don't have a coherent sense of their own political beliefs or ideology. They are extremely attached to trivial signals. Those kinds of voters would react very differently to a tall macho guy like Gavin Newsom, regardless of being a "democrat". My grandma, a racist conservative, voted for Obama in 2008 because he was taller and had a nicer smile, which made her think he was "really honest".

This "focus group" appeared to have unsupported methodology and the "results" are mere anecdote.

[quote]Democrats to assume

The source of so many problems

I am currently reading the "Collapse of the 3rd Republic" by William Shirer. I am amazed at how divided over minor issues the left was, yet how threatened the right was and how steadily more extreme it became. Eventually, they welcomed their Nazi overlords and formed their own Waffen SS units.

FRENCH LATINO MOMENT: After the British evacuated 10s of thousands of them from Dunkirk, they elected to go back to France. They assumed the war was over and they would return to living "like God in France" as Europe put it. Instead, Hitler threw them in forced labor camps.

I hope Trump gets the Pétain treatment. Complete with Indignité nationale.

Un dernier Big Mac, Monsieur le Président ?

Im tired of all the analysis which thinks they have THE reason the US voted for Trump. The world is shifting right now- as often happens in times of dramatic technological change and uncertainty. The dynamics of this election were not ideal for Dems. There is a change in the way people receive information - that is more susceptible to manipulation. And R20 probably has the closest thing to THE answer - which is the majority of Americans really don’t put that much thought into their vote - “gut” instincts (which wrap up a lot of natural biases and media manipulated reactionary sentiments) dictate most people’s votes. The chattering classes are a small subset of the electorate.

¡Pero estamos blanco! Blanco!! BLANCO!!!

There’s no question we’ve made huge tactical errors thinking that minorities will always be on our side. Especially Latinos who as a bloc come from a highly conservative religion. To think they’d always back Dems was blindness. Now we’re bleeding support from the Jews and Black people as well. Even the gays are leaving.

R9 is correct. Latinos are also heavily embracing Evangelical Protestantism.

However that’s not what really is being overlooked in Kamala’s loss.

Latinos are culturally programmed to respond to charismatic leadership. It has nothing to do with the political spectrum. Look at Alexandra Ocasio Cortez.

Gavin Newsom would do well with Latinos, as would AOC. Pritzker, probably. They want a fighter, not a student council president.

Shapiro, no. Walz, no. Beshear, HELL NO.

It’s like none of you watched Evita.

I know I always form my opinions about different cultures by watching a movie.

R5 What Democratic candidate has advocated for open borders? Can you name one?

Who wants to tell R27 that Evita is based on an actual chapter in the political history of Argentina?

R28 In my entire life, I've never even heard an American radical leftist promote open borders. I've only ever heard that from libertarians, before they joined MAGA.

We need to turn the culture war into a class war.

R9 "While the Church has lost membership for decades in most of the Western world, it has made tremendous gains in South America."

This is completely untrue. You are talking out your ass. Evangelical Christianity is taking over and Catholics now make up a smaller proportion of the population than before.

Decline in Percentage Brazil – 1991: ~83% Catholic → 2025: ~50% Catholic Chile – 1990s: ~75% → 2025: ~45% Argentina – 1990s: ~90% → 2025: ~62% Colombia – 1990s: ~90% → 2025: ~70% Peru – 1990s: ~90% → 2025: ~74%

(Source: Pew Research, Latinobarómetro, national census data)

We lost them when we started calling them Latinx. I will probably be canceled for saying this, but progressive white people are a menace, not as horrible as MAGA white people, but even black people and Hispanics roll their eyes at all the ways white progressives go too far. They're about to do it again in NYC, but that's not what this thread is about.

There are ways to achieve equality and inclusivity without making people want to run for the hills whenever they see you coming.

Do you want to hang out with the people who are always lecturing you about how awful you are?

Let’s keep this very simple:

The bottom line is that Latinos are super patriarchal, & racist AF, even the ones who are of Native Indian ancestry from South, Central America, the West Indies, and Mexico, and who aren’t white.

It’s sad, but true, especially with the Cubans, and those who come from places where democracy doesn’t really exist. They know nothing else. They get here and claim that they have found freedom, only to vote in authoritarianism and for corporate interests, en masse. I’ll be given shit for saying this, but because I hail from from a family of these folks, I want to communicate to you all that many are just peasants. It’s true, as much as I dislike admitting it.

The ones who are sharper/savvier, are usually Mexicans. They assimilate VERY quickly, and by and large, go to work as soon as they hit the streets in the U.S. They get here, and have huge communities of their own people, who are willing to help them get on their feet QUICKLY, as long as they’re willing to work and contribute.

Latinos are a conservative people, as are MANY African Americans, including the ones who vote straight dems down the ballot.

We seem to have either forgotten this, or it’s just constantly going over our collective heads, like some big balloon.

Religious people who attend mass every week or church services are conservative in values, even if they’re democrats. Latinos are, by and large, religious when they get here.

Remember this, because it’s true.

I guess the LatinX thing didn't work out for Dems. And no it's not a small thing when you try to change a language spoken for hundreds of years to fit into your fad gender ideology.

I doubt that is the reason. But if voters have reasoning like what the OP quotes, they simply deserve the fascism they voted for

R33 and especially R34 with your family background… to what extent can the Democrats improve our political fortunes by focusing hardcore on socio-economic issues and attacking Republicans as being to blame for it? The fact that we all notice the proverbial price of eggs and we’re struggling to get by while Trump is a billionaire parasite who pays little to no US taxes at all.. that kind of thing. Would that resonate enough with a majority of religious Latino voters to outweigh their other conservative values?

White women and white gay men, who are dominant forces in the Democratic Party leadership, have probably done a lot of damage to the party’s image. They are the ones who elevated Pete Buttigieg based on nothing to a plausible Presidential candidate.

These are the people who want a student council president.

It isn’t even really about sexism. Latinos LOVED Hillary. She wasn’t even particularly charismatic, but she was battle-scared and viewed as a tough old broad. They want a fighter, not someone who wants to hold your hand and sing folk songs while forcing Latinx on you (the term Latino itself is racist, as it merely exists to lump Brazilians and Franco-Creoles in with Hispanics. The Quebecois are technically Latinos.)

Can we all FF R27 for not knowing Evita is about a real person? I feel he shouldn’t be allowed to post here.

Defacto at r5 is like a Fox News talking point with legs.

I guess we can’t expect much from a grease monkey in terms of independent thought — someone who spends his days watching oil drip from the bottom of trucks … in Pittsburgh no less.

Still, the secondhand embarrassment is real.

R37, not that poster but the first thing Dems need to do is sideline the activist/"progressive" wing of the party. Dems need to show that these people do not represent the average Dem (and they don't).

r39 He should expelled, Evita is one the foundational planks of Datalounge knowledge.

Trump is more Peronism than anything else and after he leaves, the US will be bankrupt. MAGA will be swirling sewages like Peronism did after he left and still does to this day.

r41 'the activist/"progressive" wing of the party.' They aren't the problem on economic side. They are the problem on identity politics side. Stop normalizing trans. Those poor people who suffer from the condition need a doctor, not an activist group.

I already know that, R29 -- do you think I'm as vapid as you?

My 6 years of grad school (MA, PhD) taught me that there is [italic]always[/italic] much more to a situation than meets the eye (especially in a historical drama starring Madonna, FFS).

Or, in the words of one of my professors, "There is never a situation so complicated that, if you look at it from a different angle, doesn't get even [bold]more[/bold] complicated."

The trans are repellent to everyone. “Latinx” is the result of the gender police trying to appease trannies.

R41 = white gay man

Progressivism and activism elevate the Democratic Party when it is done about things people ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT.

White and black women and white gay men have DAMAGED progressivism by focusing it on bourgeois identity politics. There is a reason why all the people hired for DEI leadership roles in companies were black women. Because it was a grift that didn’t help anyone but made white college-educated liberals feel good.

AOC ousted a calcified, 10-term congressman because she understood how to use progressivism EFFECTIVELY. As is Zohran Mamdani.

R42 - not just trans, but racial issues as well.

Latinos loved Hillary because the Clintons had a long, deep relationship with them.

Latinos are racist and homophobic and misogynistic. However, Mexico has a pretty liberal woman president, and gay marriage and abortion are legal. Mexicans who live in Mexico aren't as conservative as those who come here and try to assimilate. They know Reagan, HW, and W Bush gave them amnesty.

[quote]Latinos are culturally programmed to respond to charismatic leadership. It has nothing to do with the political spectrum. Look at Alexandra Ocasio Cortez.

AOC could easily win. IF she can never mention trannies.

[quote] My 6 years of grad school (MA, PhD) taught me that there is always much more to a situation than meets the eye (especially in a historical drama starring Madonna, FFS).

WOW.

R43 did not even know that Evita (ESPECIALLY on Datalounge) refers to the successful Broadway production starring Patti Lupone, not the hamfisted Madonna movie. Even when provided with a clip in the post.

F&F everything he’s ever posted. He doesn’t belong here.

Fuck Patti Lupone.

Fuck everyone who voted for Trump. Fuck everyone who didn't vote for Kamala.

This is on you. Happy?

Here are some ideas:

1) People equate wealth with success and the American dream. Attacking billionaires is not working, and people think it's great that billionaires can find ways not to pay their fare share in taxes. Make the argument in a simple soundbite why billionaires not paying taxes hurts the middle class, without making people feel bad about wanting to be successful and rich.

2) Progressive white people should leave the conversations about race, sexuality, and gender stuff to those specific groups. When you guys get involved, it becomes all about you.

3) Run candidates who say what's on their minds, not shit that has been run through fifty billion consultants. Let people be messy. Everyone is messy, and voters can relate to messy.

4) Stop the purity tests and the United Colors of Benetton approach to finding candidates. If a white guy is the best candidate, run the white guy.

5) Stop counting on white women. More often than not, they are just going to vote like their husbands or boyfriends or potential boyfriends.

6) Read the room. Either keep your mouth shut or lie about controversial positions. Do you all really think Obama and Hillary were against gay marriage back in the day? They weren't, but they had no problem giving politically expedient answers.

I suppose you're right, R49, because I'm a fucking [bold]lesbian[/bold], and not a theater queen like you.

But I'm happy to not be a member of that crew, thanks.

Most Latinos voted for Kamala. When the economy tanks, and it will, everyone will come running to the Dems

Oh.

White lesbians are part of the problem, they are arguably the biggest proponents of defanging the Democratic Party and making it about gender neutral bathrooms and preferred pronouns.

They need to STFU.

R5 speaking about Democrats:

[quote]cancel culture silencing anyone who dares to speak up—even behind closed doors

That didn't age well, did it?

[Quote] AOC could easily win. IF she can never mention trannies

Or gays

Homosexuals suck each others’ dicks and stick their dicks in each others’ buttholes

I'm still a firm believer in FAFO. Once they're largely in some El Salvadorian camp, it doesn't matter whether they'd switch their vote.

[quote] Partisan Democrats can't accept that Harris had lousy political skills.

I myself am fairly partisan and I readily accept that KH's political skills aren't the best. But then, what would have been the consequences? Some of her excellent policies would maybe not have come to fruition and she might not have then been successful running again in 2028 -- maybe even would have lost the primaries before the general election. But to not vote for her because she was black and a woman is something more conservative cultures have to answer for. Do they like Trump because "he's a man, a real man!"? There's the problem that is never going to go away. Men are in charge, full stop.

The Democrats may indeed go the way of the Whigs, but even worse I fear is that the US is heading for a long, long period of Balkanization. Loosely joined with eternal feelings of hatred, resentment, and hostility.

[quote] That is the problem. They hate Trump but hate Dems more.

Most voters understand the two party system. They understand the winner for president is going to be one or the other of the two major party candidates. No matter how much they may hate, loathe despise one of the candidates, they will vote for that person if they feel a strong enough need to keep the other candidate out of office.

You see over and over again people wondering how so many people could support Trump in the election. The people who say that can’t grasp, for whatever reason, that many of the people voting for him don’t approve of him, but they hate the Democrats more.

O querido, r24.

Isn't The Bulwark a moderate Republican thing like the Lincoln Project? I wouldn't take their focus group as the last word in political fact.

r9 really summed it up.

[quote] No, they hated a Black woman. They’ll vote for Dems when it’s a white make leader who throws them a few sentences in Spanish

Clearly that's not the case. They voted for Obama twice and in Mexico they voted a woman into the presidency. Plus, let's face it, Kamala is not Black-Black. But you seem to be calling Latinos a bunch of racist, misogynous fools.

[quote] [R9] really summed it up.

It’s six paragraphs. That’s not summing it.

R41 is what will tank the Democrats forever. Progressives are popular among actual Democratic voters. Look at Mamdani in New York. People are tired of corporate Dems who are only a shade better than the GOP at this point. We need FIGHTERS in our party and it ain't gonna be Klobuchar or Buttigeig types. They're not fighters, they're corporate stooges who value wealthy donors over actual working class people.

R41 progressives have the most popular policy platform in the country - what you really mean is drop the t and bourgeois identity politics

Mamdani doesn’t give a shit about the “working class,” dear. He doesn’t have a clue what that is. He’s a rich privileged nepo baby who’s never worked a day in his life and has found a way into the poor electorate in NYC by saying he’s going to make everything free. Spoiler alert: he won’t.

[quote]The bottom line is that Latinos are super patriarchal, & racist AF

White Latinos, the ones of pure European Spanish ancestry, are as racist as any white American redneck. The things I've heard them say are unbelievable.

Trump did not win because of who voted for him.

Trump won because of who did not vote.

If they don't vote again, it's the end.

As for Trump, the savage judge in me wants to see him have a Joe Kennedy stroke and spend ten years sitting in his own stink, aware and unable to speak or move.

Yup, still tards!

DEPORT THE ILLEGALS!

A mí, esto veramente no me importa. Y a tí?

Eat shit r64. R9 posted accurate information. So many whites who have no contact with Latinos outside of service clerks and domestic help are so fucking clueless.

Kamala Harris was perhaps the most plain spoken, "here's what you're gonna get with Trump" candidate and Walz was even more suburban Dad Democrat direct in speaking during the campaign. They got to within 1.5% of Trump. It was not some Mondale, or Dukakis blowout. Yes, I understand losing is still losing, but with all the built-in Democratic circular firing squad, and refusal of Gen Z to vote at all, it was a very close election, notwithstanding the distortion of the Electoral College and the price of eggs.

It's Democrats' fault, not Kamala Harris' fault, imo.

[quote] Look at Mamdani in New York

What works in NYC does not work in the rest of the country. The dems that overperformed versus Kamala last year were the ones who were more moderate or conservative.

[quote] They voted for Obama twice and in Mexico they voted a woman into the presidency.

Mexicans in Mexico are not representative of the ones in America.

[quote] What works in NYC does not work in the rest of the country. The dems that overperformed versus Kamala last year were the ones who were more moderate or conservative.

What we need in 2028 is a Democrat who is fairly moderate politically but also charismatic and viewed as somewhat of an outsider, not politics as usual. That's a tricky combination, but it's what elected Obama, Bill Clinton, and even Jimmy Carter. Our problem is trying to find someone who fits both categories. The more moderate Democrats tend to be dull establishment types. And the fiery, charismatic Democrats tend to be too far left to be palatable to swing state voters.

[quote] We need FIGHTERS in our party and it ain't gonna be Klobuchar or Buttigeig types. They're not fighters, they're corporate stooges who value wealthy donors over actual working class people.

This does not align with what the average swing voter believes. That is who is most important for winning elections in a time as partisan as this one, not the more leftist Dem base who largely showed up for Kamala. What decided this election was people switching from Dem to Republican. Covid broke peoples brains.

[quote]Latino Trump voters: We regret our vote, but we'll never vote for a Democrat

That's not what they said, so why are you lying, OP?

They said they would not vote for Kamala. Kamala was a shitty candidate, so there are no surprises there.

Stop making shit up, troll.

[quote] The more moderate Democrats tend to be dull establishment types.

They’ve also been pushed out or to the periphery.

R76, bingo. i was specifically thinking of BIll Clinton's Sister Souljah moment when I typed what I did earlier about having to move to moderate on things. It isn't fair but the fact is the average American views the Dems as more extreme than Republicans. You only earn those people back by calling out those perceived as extreme. No more language about "birthing" or "menstruating" people.

[quote]We need FIGHTERS in our party and it ain't gonna be Klobuchar or Buttigeig types. They're not fighters, they're corporate stooges who value wealthy donors over actual working class people.

You are a hardcore Berner who voted for Jill Stein, right?

Mexican women haaate LGBTQ+. Combination of religion, ignorance and fear of competition for their men.

Refusing to understand what a massive vote-loser pushing men in women's sports and puberty blockers for dysphoric children is as a wedge issue will lose every election going forward unless that nonsense is stopped.

What part of "toxic and unpopular" don't you get?

I know I'm the cheese standing alone, but I think Biden could have turned it around after that bad debate. He is still the only Democrat who has beaten Trump.

I know this post will get the but he was old and senile crowd. But I bet he can still walk up a flight of stairs and not get winded or recite policy better than our current President.

And since we're playing hindsight in this thread, Kamala should have gone with Shapiro. I said it then, and I still believe he would have been the better choice.

r84, are you saying an unapologetic pro-Israel/anti-Hamas Jewish candidate would have HELPED?

In 2024? I disagree.

Don't feel one bit sorry for them. I remebrr pre election watching news interviews with potential latino voters singing abouy how much they loved Trump. The interviewer said to them are you aware of the things he has said about Spanish people/ Mexicans and all other derogatory things he's said- their response was a wide smile and unapologetically declaring their love for him.

Everyone knows Latinos would prefer singing a white man as POTUS over a brown/ black woman. Good luck to them.

I think he would have shored up PA and WI and wiped the floor with JD.

I was disappointed that Walz didn't do as many bro podcasts as possible. I know the VP supposedly doesn't matter that much, but the reason he was picked was to appeal to the sports/bro crowd that leans Republican. I think he wasn't utilized by the Harris campaign as effectively as he could have been in that regard.

[quote] This does not align with what the average swing voter believes. That is who is most important for winning elections in a time as partisan as this one, not the more leftist Dem base who largely showed up for Kamala. What decided this election was people switching from Dem to Republican. Covid broke peoples brains.

This is wrong. First of all, a big part of Kamala's problem was leftists, especially younger leftists NOT showing up because of Gaza and other issues. Again and again, we keep kidding ourselves with this idea that the Dems need to be more moderate, more muddled, more mushy, more terrified of having any actual position on any actual issue, just "compromise" and "reaching out." That shit is not working, and looks as fake as it is. it essentially tells the voters, I'll kinda sorta do what you want, but you know, not really cause in the end I'm just gonna look for some mushy compromise with the hard, hard right.

[quote]the average American views the Dems as more extreme than Republicans

I wonder how much longer that's gonna last...

The Bulwark piece seems to be saying the same thing we've heard for several generations now: spell out liberal/progressive policy without using liberal/progressive buzzwords, and the voting population responds very favorably; the inverse is as true when you discuss conservative policy without their oh-so-focus-grouped verbiage which hides the downside, and this reveals the fact that one side has spent the last 50+ years learning to communicate unpalatable ideas favorably while demonizing what is actually best for the most people while the other side continues to fail to learn from past mistakes.

And here's an example of not learning from mistakes: Hillary won the Hispanic vote in 2016 by a wide margin, but not as wide as Obama did in 2008 or 2012, and Obama's Hispanic voter turnout rate dropped slightly, from 49.9% in 2008 to 48% in 2012 (although the hard numbers increased due in large part to increasing Hispanic voter eligibility). In other words, Democrats were warned that Hispanic support was slipping.

Now, combine the fact that Hispanics are racist and misogynistic — at least as much as whites are, if not more — and you can see how Trump was able to peel off enough Hispanic votes to make a difference in a couple of key battleground states. I have harped on the sngle-most effective campaign ad that Trump put out in the last days saying that "Kamala is for they/them, I'm for YOU" and it goes well beyond the trans ideology and gender-removing language Democrats handily adopted; I believe Hispanics heard that statement and took it to heart not because it was true — it is demonstrably not — but because their choice was between mixed-race female cast as pandering and a strong white man who refused to give an inch in his core principles (be they ever so despicable).

And it doesn't take a demographer or political guru to see that Hispanics have preferred the strong authoritarian Daddy over the empathetic Mommy for centuries, mostly to their own detriment. Sure, point to the female president of Mexico, and I'll say I still hold hope that some Hispanics will come to their senses, but the reality is that decades and decades of lived experience will continue to matter.

Add to R5 MSNBC really does not speak about Asian or Latino people much except around election time to have an expert on to say: “Latinos are not a monolith.”

MSNBC primetime shows, while delivered by astute pundits, was very concerned with other types of social justice and the evil deeds of various republicans.

As much as Democrats think we all hold hands and fight obvious evil together, our vast umbrella has groups who really don’t feel other groups stick their neck out for them.

[quote]Hispanics have preferred the strong authoritarian Daddy over the empathetic Mommy for centuries

Stupid Americans!!

Can't teach 'em nothin'.

More.

And I guess I'll just leave this here...

The article is from 2010, but it shows some of the history of female presidents in Latin American countries.

Cheers!

R92, spot-on. That "Kamala is for they/them" thing swung the vote to Trump by as much as 3%! Bill Clinton warned Kamala's team about the ad but they didn't listen.

Kamala Harris was not a bad candidate. Her main challenge was being tied to the Biden years, even though as Vice President she had little real input in the administration’s policies. She ended up paying the price for decisions she didn’t fully support. On top of that, she was forced to defend the open-border crisis and other polarizing “woke” issues that were not of her making.

An open Democratic primary would have been far better, with Joe Biden stepping aside after one term as was originally implied. The responsibility lies more with Biden than with Harris. She is a smart, capable woman, but now, after losing in 2024, it’s difficult for her to mount another run.

Her biggest mistake may have been accepting the nomination but declining it would have brought its own backlash. Ultimately, she was put in a no-win situation by Joe Biden. That’s why I don’t blame her—I blame him. And this is coming from someone who voted for Biden in 2020 and twice for Obama/Biden.

[quote] And it doesn't take a demographer or political guru to see that Hispanics have preferred the strong authoritarian Daddy over the empathetic Mommy for centuries, mostly to their own detriment.

And this sort of analysis is just way too sweeping and silly. There will be times that SOME Hispanics have preferred authoritarianism, much like SOME white people, but it's silly to pretend this is some ethnic trait that will operate everywhere at all times and in all contexts. South American countries have often swung between conservative authoritarians and liberal reformers.

But the real flaw in a lot of all these anti-culture war arguments, which I think are legitimate on their face, is that the people who are saying we need to get away from the culture wars and focus on economic issues seem to NEVER have a strong economic message themselves. It always seems to come down to, we need to focus on economics and do exactly what rich fucks want us to do there, even killing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cause rich fucks resent those programs. Tell me the leftist economic policies that you would go with, or please stop telling me that you want to "focus on economics" and just admit you are a Republican.

Fuck 'em. They'll eventually learn that fat meat IS greasy. This year was the start.

R98, if Biden really refused to give Kamala the OK to downplay/renounce some of his policies as others have stated, he is really a huge asshole . I say that as someone who voted for him twice.

I disagree on the open primary part. If this was months earlier, I would have agreed. But considering the short time to the election, I think it would have just been too chaotic. The dems were afraid of another 1968 DNC on their hands and I don't blame them.

If Biden had simply announced he would not seek re-election—reminding people that this had been the plan all along—there would have been sufficient time for a proper primary and voter vetting. I blame Biden more than Harris for the leadership we have today.

Its the religion and the abortion issue. Catholics and evangelist used that as an excuse to walk over every other humans rights. Can't stand religion.

R102, I agree 100%. Again, this is coming from someone who does not regret voting for him but can easily admit that he made some fatal mistakes in his presidency. He was elected to be a moderate but he gave way too many "peace offerings" to the left. Like hiring mostly Warren people to be staffers in the White House. The people still defending Biden;s every decision are puzzling to me.

These voters would not vote for a Democratic candidate, period. In retrospect, I do think Joe Biden should not have re-run. But if another Democrat had received the nomination other than Harris, these voters still would not have voted for that person. It wasn't Harris they didn't vote for. It was the Democratic candidate.

Did the focus group ask these machismo foreigners WHY they didn't vote for Kamala?

We all know what their problem is. They hate women, and refuse to vote for one. Exit polls confirmed this.

Why do we keep running focus groups of assholes who made a stupid decision A YEAR AGO? What can be gleaned from this masochism? How about a focus group of today's problems and today's victims? Seven hardworking Americans who were utterly fucked over by The Fat One?

They are lying. They are so indoctrinated (brainwashed) by religion that it convinces them time and time again to vote against their interests. Why use your brain, common sense, and critical thinking to make decisions? God will do it. People are literally sheep!

Many people vote against their own interests. It confounds me. Now farmers are suddenly worried they won't make a profit because they cannot find workers to replace those who left or were taken away. Why didn't they think of this before they handed their support to a man who essentially promised he would make their lives harder?

Now they want financial assistance. Many of us are struggling and would like financial assistance. What makes them more deserving than the rest of us? I'd plant my own garden rather than provide support to the farmers at this point.

The real problem is when people define their interests as fucking over everyone who isn't exactly like them. Farmers above all should have very ambiguous feelings about the immigrants that pick their crops and the furriners that buy those crops. But when they decide that fucking over immigrants and furriners is just so fucking fun, well, I'm not sure we can reach fuckers like that.

It's ridiculous that people still believe in a magical man who lives in the sky and has supernatural powers in the 21st Century. And you have to do exactly as he says because you don't want to make him mad. It's so infantile but unfortunately religion will not go away in any of our lifetimes. It will probably take another century or more.

I'm not sure how many people really truly deep down vote their religion, at least their official religion. I suspect people decide who they want based on whatever fuckery and nonsense is rattling around inside and then decide it's their religious duty to vote for that person. The truth is, for a lot of white evangelicals, racism is their real religion, but they'll be happy to dress it up with a lot of Biblical bullshit if that will help. And for a lot of other people, all kinds of stupid shit, like misogyny and homophobia and transphobia and a whole lot of nonsense gets in there, but what the hell, throw in a couple of Bible verses to make it all seem okay. Either way, tough to penetrate that nonsense unless you can somehow tap into something even stronger that resonates with them. Theological debates rarely work on that type, since their religion and their politics are all caught up together and it's hard to get them to see the contradictions. Something stronger is needed.

The angry anti-wokers (let's assume they are the Democrats they claim to be) don't reckon with the consequences of their ideas. In a closely divided country, the Dems need every vote they can get. The very left is a source of not just votes, but energy and youth and enthusiasm.

What do we replace them with? Kamala ran as a semi-Republican and lost.

[quote] Kamala ran as a semi-Republican and lost.

Kamala was perceived as very left-wing by the average voter in swing states. I don't think she ran as a far leftist but that was the perception out there. Moving to the left is not going to help Dems.

R113 because of republican propaganda - they didn’t come to that conclusion because of her economic policies. Left wing economics are incredibly popular. Identity politics aren’t.

Texas Latinos are the most conservative in the country, so this is bad news for Republicans.

[quote] Texas Latinos are the most conservative in the country, so this is bad news for Republicans.

Maybe the GOP will shower them with money next year. Politicians do that in an election year.

Kamala Harris is a moderate for the most part, except when it comes to reparations. Moderate Democrats often have to defend far-left or ‘woke’ policies, many of which are challenging to explain and leave them vulnerable to criticism. Too many of the voters were exhausted by it all.

R116 Not the GOP, and not in an election year. Look how these assholes act. It took them months to scrape together enough of THEIR OWN VOTES to pass a watered-down tax bill, and they've done fuck-all since that victory. They don't have a functioning majority, especially when it comes to decisions of cutting or growing spending. Too many of their own circus-freak members will blow up any attempt to do either, so they're stuck.

The Freedom Caucus won't let them send a gravy train, especially after they just blew a hole in the deficit.

R117 Kamala didn't make a stink about reparations. That's just some white moron's nightmare.

[quote] Moving to the left is not going to help Dems.

Depends on the issue. Moving to the left, economically and very bluntly in a full on Fuck the Rich campaign could well be the only thing that gets people excited to vote for the Democrats.

For what it's worth, the Roman Catholic Church is seeing its numbers decline, not increase, in Latin America.

What is rising is evangelical Christianity.

Latin America is about 54% Catholic, 19% evangelical, and 19% unaffiliated. The growing evangelical proportion are comparable to the radicalized prosperity-gospel nitwits who have done so much damage in the US.

R9's comments about familiarity/expectations of authoritarian governments seem to have more basis. Newcomers entering a country where the well is poisoned and the radical right holds sway with a "guns/macho/fuck blacks/fuck everyone but the strong" mentality, an Hispanic underclass entering the US seems poised to join the American underclass that stupidly supports those in power who loathe them and have contempt for them.

[quote] Layer on top DEI initiatives

No one loves a DEI initiative more than Latinos. Unless, you know, they advantage black people over brown.

Fuck these ungrateful cunts who seem to be utterly ignorant if just how much Democrat laws and policies have benefited them all along. Faced with the indisputable truth and consequences if their votes, they still don't get it. Fuck 'em!

They said they wouldn’t vote for Kamala. That’s not the same as they wouldn’t vote for a Democrat. That’s just racism and/or misogyny.

Or, maybe, Harris herself was the problem?

Kamala had to cancel the train interview because everyone from her to the host agreed she was too weird.

She couldn’t do Joe Rogan because there would be no editing.

That’s pretty bad.

[quote]If Biden had simply announced he would not seek re-election—reminding people that this had been the plan all along—there would have been sufficient time for a proper primary and voter vetting. I blame Biden more than Harris for the leadership we have today.

I truly believe that Biden thought he was the only one who could beat Trump, and that's why he ran again. Eight million Biden voters didn't show up in 2024; maybe he was on to something. We'll never know.

What I found most interesting about the 2024 election is that 77 million people thought that Trump's crimes didn't matter or that a convicted felon was a better choice than a Half Black/Half Indian woman with a funny name. Okay, you didn't like Kamala, but if the choice is Kamala or a convicted felon who had botched a pandemic and you chose the convicted felon who botched a pandemic what does that say about us as a people?

Save us, spineless focus-group-driven centrists! You're our only hope!

R126, your data is so far unproven. Take a look at Rockland County to name but one of many sites with massive irregularities. Dump Truck told you out loud it was rigged by Melon Husk — believe him.

I only hope I live long enough to see the results proven to be false. The election was massively interfered with as well, burning ballot boxes and bomb threats? INTERFERENCE and it should have been treated as such, but our leadership lost the game of chicken. They capitulated.

[quote] What do we replace them with? Kamala ran as a semi-Republican and lost.

Um, what? She sort of meandered to the left center at one point but she was never “semi Republican.” She was absolutely vilified as the furthest left progressive California liberal that had ever run for President. There was nothing even remotely Republican or right about her by the time she actually ran.

How the FUCK was Biden’s policies unpopular? My GOD we live in the stupidest timeline. We deserve this absolute disaster of our own making. The shit he got accomplished was fucking amazing. Our economy was the ENVY of the entire world. He handled GLOBAL inflation better than anyone. His jobs numbers were astounding. Before you can say the early ones were Covid related there was no guarantee they’d come back. Trump winning in 2020 would’ve seen the economy crater.

[quote] Kamala Harris is a moderate for the most part, except when it comes to reparations.

So she's not a moderate. But whether she is or not, she is like most Dem candidates always trying to be liked by everyone. Hence the cackling, the avoidant answers, the I'm so Black BS. People saw that and voted for her enemy.

[quote] the I'm so Black BS.

I didn't know Janet Jackson posted here?

Anna Navarro, The View co-host, said that, along with Canadians, wealthy Sourh and Central Americans are boycotting the US. They used to come up all the time to shop and go to Las Vegas for boxing matches. No more.

The projected loss for the US is in the billions

a big tent means you will get interlopers like the bulwark, senator fetterman, bernie sanders and AOC in your party.

never trumpers= Reagan republicans.

Reagan walked so maga could run down our legs like diarrhea. ORANGE DIARRHEA.

never trumpers allowed their former political party to be consumed by maga.

There is no republican party, JUST ASK MITCH ROMNEY OR DICK CHENEY'S DAUGHTER.

Now they have permitted their party to be destroyed, they want to reach across the aisle and destroy the democratic party FROM WITHIN.

President Biden won the 20204 presidential nomination and it wasn't even close. President Biden is a high ranking Democratic party member for decades and a little loyalty was not on offer!

Instead of supporting the President, "never trumpers" (and the donor class), demanded the President be removed from the ticket after he had fucking won!'

How did THAT strategy work out for the rest of us?

When President Biden said he is the only one to win against IT, he was telling the truth.

He was supposed to run again , WIN again and then resign and hand over this economy 👇 to President Harris.

We would be watching Jimmy Kimmel right now if the never trumpers (and the donor class) didn't offer their "help".

The scandal of an 81 year old being, old, and forgetful made you nervous.

A presidential candidate who shouted DEY EATIN DAWGS, during a presidential debate? not so much!

[quote] People in hell want ice water.

Thank you so much for quoting my lovely late mother.

[quote]Texas Latinos are the most conservative in the country...

Yeah, but just TRY to get them to vote. They WON'T!

Texas is actually a majority minority state, but is always near the very bottom in voter participation and Texas Latinos have a very long tradition of never voting at all! No matter how awful Greg Abbott and the GOP make their lives they will still never vote. Every candidate flushes millions in each election to get them to the polls and...nuttin'!

The answer is to just keep shitting on them and make their lives miserable, starting with Dems just ignoring them and their issues, and spending money on people who might actually vote. Screw 'em.

Now do you see why Democrats should be calling for closing the borders? These people are bringing their third world cultural conservative bullshit to the US in record numbers. They find homosexuality repugnant and against God’s law.

So this thread isn't about Latinos anymore. Okay.

This is for r28 and r30. What Democratic politician called for expansive borders? “Mighty” Joe Biden, during the 2020 campaign season, that’s who.

Per CNN, at one 2019 campaign event,

[quote]He pledged a 100-day moratorium on deportations after taking office. He promised to protect sanctuary cities from federal law enforcement agencies. And he harshly criticized the Trump administration’s treatment of undocumented immigrants at the southern border, asserting that America had the capacity to “absorb people,” while calling on asylum seekers to “surge” to the border.

Come one, come all! No, I’m not going to run for a second term in 2024. I give you my word as a Biden.

When are people going to realize that Trump favors rich, white men?

R142 You cherry picked you dumb fuck. Republicans are the ones who’ve given AMNESTY. Trump killed a conservative Republican written border bill because he wanted to run on the border. Republicans have never been serious about the border. They’ve actively sought immigrants for their cheap labor. Trump isn’t either. His current policy is just an exercise in cruelty and practicing for doing this to us all.

[quote] Especially Latinos who as a bloc come from a highly conservative religion. To think they’d always back Dems was blindness.

Indians and Pakistanis in the UK and Australia tend to support conservative parties. East Asians are vote slightly more left, but not by much.

Why would people who operate small businesses support regulation, paying taxes and worker’s rights?

Well, we can’t expect logic from people who voted for their own deportation. If Trump gets his way they will not be voting for anyone because they won’t be here.

[quote] Well, we can’t expect logic from people who voted for their own deportation.

But I thought he was only going to deport the bad ones!?

Kamala ran around the country with LIZ FUCKING CHENEY for weeks. She never really pushed the "I'm a black woman running for president" button. Her big policy thing was to help first time home buyers. She also hit on her experience as an AG pushing law and order.

If you perceive her as a hippie anarchist, that's on you.

[quote]You cherry picked you dumb fuck

How so, r144? How was that cherry-picked? Deflection, much. The question was asked, what Dem campaigned on open borders, and then answered at r142: for the 2020 election, Biden ran on inviting people to come to the border, and they did, for years 2020-2023, from all over the world, in their millions.

House Repubs were able to impeach Homeland Sec Mayorkas for refusing to secure the border, The public also reacted, including immigrant communities, once northern cities were overwhelmed with busloads of undocumented. Free housing and free $$.

As to your second point: By fall 2023, responding to constituents' yelling, a bill was finally produced with provisions to address the chaos at the border that Biden helped create. The legislation gained Dem support solely because Dems were getting badly stung by the issue.

Both sides played election politics. Duh. Upside, though, Ukraine and Israel got military aid passed, with the immigration legislation out of the way. So there was that.

The best thing is just letting it play out in Texas and Florida. Seeing how Trump is devastating communities, small businesses and local economies will be what gets people's attention...or not.

When did Biden ever “invite people to come to the border”? He reduced border crossings so much that they actually went up when Trump took office. You’re living in a fantasy world R149

[quote] No, they hated a Black woman. They’ll vote for Dems when it’s a white make leader who throws them a few sentences in Spanish

This is AMERICA. Anyone who speaks Spanish is unfit for office.

The Hispanics here in Florida I know strongly identify as white, NOT a "person of color"! This anguish over "children at the border 'in cages' " would definitely be a white liberal thing. If anything, it's economy first, followed perhaps by the way ICE is randomly scooping up people, including legits without papers on them occasionally, that's sinking Rs.

[quote] "Latino" or not is never the only demographic influence on a person's political opinion.

Well, it had better start being the primary influence on the Latino electorate. ICE is rounding up everyone who 'looks' Latino without regard to residency status or citizenship. How long would a Puerto Rican have to be in ICE detention before convincing those morons that Puerto Ricans are American citizens?

R153, are the majority of them Cuban? If so, that could explain it.

[quote] I know I always form my opinions about different cultures by watching a movie.

I love "West Side Story."

[quote] White women and white gay men, who are dominant forces in the Democratic Party leadership, have probably done a lot of damage to the party’s image.

White gay men -- open and closeted -- seem to figure prominently in Republican Party leadership.

[quote] White gay men -- open and closeted -- seem to figure prominently in Republican Party leadership

Tell me about it.

A focus group is not intended to be, or interpreted as, a poll. It’s a form of market research, and the methodology is well understood. It has a valid use for political behavior analysts.

Can you read r151? CNN said Biden invited people to surge the border. See r142.

[quote] A focus group

I saw a video a long time ago of a focus group of all blatinos. They were very focused and it was hot.

[quote]White gay men -- open and closeted -- seem to figure prominently in Republican Party leadership

A lot of people would be shocked at the number of gays running republican politics, behind the scenes. When I worked on the Hill in the 90s, it was wild. They were all closeted or glass-closeted and never batted an eye while working on legislation that would screw themselves over.

R155: definitely not

R162, it is nuts to me that this is STILL a thing in 2025.

Can someone define for me what exactly they hate about the democrats?

Washington DC still has so many closeted gay men. In 2025. It's so strange.

R164 Them dudes think they got the best of both worlds. As they’re white, they’re right. It’s pretense, not the real closet. They’ve reconciled their gayness with their need to succeed and make $.

It’s the gold star gay gone wild. I’ve seen it a hundred times on Wall Street and in Big Law. At this point, it’s a 🥱.

R167 , right, my response to them is "Log Cabin Repubs are sooo 2004, move on already!".

R168–I know so well because I was that way early in my law career—late 80s…except that I was always a flaming…Democrat.

I know ‘em when I see ‘em. R167

7 voters, Big fucking deal. I dare say plenty of Latino and Latina voters are fed up with the GOP. The 7 in that group are a few who are too stupid to enjoy the right to vote.

white gays are architects of maga

White gay Republicans are usually from rich families and believe if they keep their gayness under wraps or claim to be “respectable, not like THOSE homos” they will inherit the family money.

Sometimes they are right about that, sometimes they are wrong.

That’s just silly^. It’s not about staying in pappy’s will LOL

"Latino disaffection with the Trump economy does not automatically mean they will go (back) to the Dems like 2016 again. But it does provide an opening if Dems can start talking about the economy (esp. tariffs, jobs, prices) and not raise a ruckus about every culture issue."

Democrats NEED to talk about cultural issues, but winning ones. Like, RFK Jr. is trying to kill your kids. Like, their masked goons are taking people off the streets and you could be next. Like, they’re stealing your health care and kid’s education to give it to people who sit on gold toilets.

A Latino friend of mine, openly gay and a proud beneficiary of legal immigration, recently told me why he can no longer stomach the Democratic Party. His words cut right to the heart of a growing frustration: Democrats, he said, seem to care less about working people and more about those who don’t work—or worse, those who commit crimes. Crime victims, in his view, are treated as an afterthought while their abusers are too often released back onto the streets the very next day, all in the name of “reform.”

He doesn’t like Trump. But he understands why so many Americans, weary of rising crime and soft-on-crime policies, are walking away from Democrats in droves. The numbers back it up: since the last election, the party has shed nearly 200,000 registered members.

That frustration isn’t coming from the far right. It’s coming from people like him—working-class, immigrant, minority voters who once believed Democrats stood for them. They’re asking a simple question: when did the party stop putting ordinary, law-abiding citizens first?

R176, I have heard that same thing from (believe it or not) a Venezuelan refugee that came here 10 years ago that is now a citizen.

The most progressive Dems do seem to have that attitude. Look at how those on the far left portrayed the Daniel Penny vs. Jordan Neely thing that happened. Jasmine Crockett (who I do like) called it a "lynching". I saw a lot of influencers condemn it as the "killing of a black man". No mention of the actual details of the case where Neely was actually scaring all the passengers he was visible too and the fact that all the passengers sided with Neely, including the black passengers.

Daniel Penney should never have been prosecuted. Alvin Bragg was wrong to file charges—just as he was with the bodega worker who defended himself and was initially charged with murder, only to have the charges dropped a year later. By then, the damage was done: threats, anxiety, and the stress of fighting for his freedom.

Now, Penney has become a symbol for victims’ rights and secured a high-paying job in Silicon Valley. I can only hope something good came out of it for the bodega worker, though I believe he left New York City as soon as the charges were dropped. Another hardworking, long-time New Yorker driven out—sadly, a familiar story.

No one even remembers or cares. Move on.

R176 nails it.

Biden: I will pick a black woman!

90% of the electorate: Maybe you should just pick the person you want to run with, eh?

"The blacks are rioting! What shall we do???"

Democratic establishment: "A second holiday based on race should do it!"

I understand that misses some nuance, but my point of Democrats' "We know what's best for you!" nanny-state, condescending approach stands.

(If I'm a "racist" who voted for Obama twice, Clinton, Biden, and Harris - so be it)

You’re not worth striking a match

Zzzz

My question remains, and I get that nobody wants to answer it, but they really do need to answer it.

Say the Democrats do abandon all culture wars and all culture war issues. Say they focus on economic issues exclusively. What are the particular economic policies that they should focus on? What should they stand for? And if it's just killing Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid to balance the budget, what is the point of voting for the Democrats rather than the Republicans? And don't be vague about it. Don't just say shit like jobs and inflation. What are the actual policies Democrats who want to talk about the economy only should support?

A friend of mine who's gay and an immigrant told me that white people who go on message boards talking to them about how immigrant attitudes perfectly reflect Fox News programming are totally full of shit and lying.

R176 That conversation never happened.

R177 Neither did that one

[quote]Daniel Penney should never have been prosecuted.

So an unarmed man gets choked to death in the middle of a crowded subway car and no one is going to answer for it?

Someone is masturbating to ICE atrocity videos.

Sofffffttt. 🍄 on kkkrime?

There will never be a viable 3rd party in the US, they won't let it happen. Remember a few months ago when Elon Musk got serious about creating and funding an "America" party then quickly shut up and never mentioned it again? Wonder why. Anyway I see the US following in the same footsteps as the rest of the West for a long time with a series of unpopular and ineffective leaders, from either wing of the uniparty duopoly, until a serious crisis hits that breaks the machine.

R187 We aren’t a parliamentary system. A third party won’t work. The problem is so many fat lazy asses won’t get out and vote in a primary or vote out their representatives who aren’t doing their jobs.

"We regret our vote, but we'll never vote for a Democrat"

Every single "Christian" in the country

r184 is 100% accurate

"We don't believe in free government handouts but we need a check from the feds because our farms are failing."

Bootstrapping bootlickkers

[quote]His words cut right to the heart of a growing frustration: Democrats, he said, seem to care less about working people and more about those who don’t work...

Of course none of that is true, but if you are a cement head like your friend you feel certain it is.

Enjoy losing every labor case imaginable for the next decade and be robbed blind by banks, health insurers and airlines! You will be working that much harder for less!

Real reform should focus on what actually helps working and middle-class Americans with the day-to-day worries of life: meaningful student loan reform, expanded grants for trade schools and essential degrees, federal tax deductions for renters, first-time homebuyer assistance, and affordable long-term care insurance.

At the same time, it’s time to move past policies that don’t serve the public—like no-cash bail, open-border leniency, performative pronoun politics, and DEI mandates—and instead focus on common-sense safety measures. That means ramping up prosecutions for repeat offenders, while keeping diversion programs limited to genuine first or second-time offenses. These are the kinds of balanced, reasonable steps most citizens can get behind.

[quote] Real reform should focus on what actually helps working and middle-class Americans with the day-to-day worries of life: meaningful student loan reform, expanded grants for trade schools and essential degrees, federal tax deductions for renters, first-time homebuyer assistance, and affordable long-term care insurance.

Some of this is being done already of course. But for the most part, tax offsets are bullshit for people struggling to get by. Telling somebody they can pay a thousand dollars to get a hundred dollars back in a tax refund is useless for people who don't have an extra thousand lying around. "meaningful student loan reform" doesn't really mean anything. Loan forgiveness? We know that sends half the country into hysterics, so what then? "affordable long term care insurance." Again, how? What will make it affordable? What are the practical policies? The problem is the moderates who hate all this leftist stuff never have any real, practical answer to help people who actually need help. It's all just shit that rich people want, like tax cuts and vague bullshit about reforms and assistance that will never actually materialize.

Bullshit. Watch Trump’s Madison Square Garden Rally and tell me that “balanced, reasonable steps” are relevant to politics in the 2020s.

The thing about the no-cash bail is that fundamentally bail is NOT supposed to be a substitute for conviction. We're actually not supposed to have a system in which the poor are sent to long jail terms as soon as they're arrested while the rich are let out on bail. It is supposed to be a surety that people show up for trial, and unless you have a reasonable suspicion that somebody is going to jump bail and flee, they actually shouldn't be kept in jail. And the truth is most people aren't going to flee for petty accusations. That's asking for a lifetime of shit just to get out of a petty theft conviction. It really should be either a reasonable, affordable bail for the person accused, or no bail at all if you are honestly worried that person will flee or commit the crime again. Otherwise you wind up with what we unfortunately have: rich people skate and poor people are jailed without the bother of a trial.

R185 Daniel Penney saved an entire subway car full of passengers from a dangerous criminal who threatened to kill. Nobody knew he was unarmed until afterward. It’s tragic that he died, but charging a hero with murder is unacceptable. It makes Democratic prosecutor Alvin Bragg appear to defend criminals rather than protect the citizens of the city, but of course you see it strangely at best.

Who was complaining the loudest about over policing? People who do not live in crime infested areas. No one should ever get shot for stealing a pack of cigarettes, but the way you solve that is not let criminals run wild and then rig the data so that it looks like crime is down, when it's anything but.

You are an asshole. Ignorable. Asshole

Subduing an unarmed black and strangling him is a white fetish explored in GET OUT.

Keeping someone in a chokehold for 15 minutes is not "heroic." The guy was subdued and limp.

that sounds like a real horror scenario for people, let the Dems continue on, it should all be fine

I wouldn't want to call Penny a hero because he did apply the chokehold incorrectly. But the people on here acting like this was a racist hate crime are delusional.

[quote] A number of passengers during the incident testified that they were scared of Neely and felt relieved by Penny moving to restrain Neely, including witnesses called by the prosecution. Alethea Gittings said Neely's actions "scared the living daylights out of everybody" and later thanked Penny for his intervention. Gittings and other passengers noted that Neely's actions were more frightening than other outbursts they had witnessed on the subway. Passenger Lori Sitro testified that Neely lunged at people within a foot of their faces, while Dan Couvreur described Neely as having his hands balled into fists. A passenger testified that Neely had made her fear for her life and she believed that he was "most likely armed", although she did not witness him with a weapon. Prosecutors used the witness testimony to assert that Neely did not directly target or hit a rider, or brandish a weapon, whereas defense attorneys stated that the prosecution's own witnesses were making the defense's case for them.[83][84][85][86] 911 calls from passengers were also played in the courtroom, with one passenger relaying that Neely was "trying to attack everybody".[85]

sick fetish. nasty

The Perry fangirls have never set foot in NYC or on the subway. Yet they confidently tell us that he saved lives by choking a man to death.

choking an unarmed man to death. with assistance.

it would be different if the victim was discovered with a knife, box cutter, shank,pepper spray or gun, any weapon at all

this crime makes limp three inch🍄 semi-erect.

Penny should not have kept him in a chokehold for that long. That, along with the wrong technique being applied, were the big mistakes he did and he should have been charged for that. But he was not wrong in putting him in a chokehold in the first place. According to the testimonies, many people in the train car were scared of Neely and said that his behavior was worse than the typical erratic homeless person. Neely was also making threats. This is a case where I do see both sides. Neely also had prior issues with assaulting others. Tbh, this is what happens when anarchy on transit is accepted. Think of public transit all across America--it's ALL like this. I live in Chicago. Yesterday, there was a crazed homeless man who threw his clothes on the train tracks before riding his bike into the train car I was in. He was pacing back and forth erratically and everyone was freaked out. And then he just started smoking a joint. Nobody wanted to do anything because they were afraid of him. I just moved to a different train car at the next stop. But that's what public transit is like everywhere in this country. No wonder nobody likes public transit here. That would not be tolerated in any other country with transit. Try doing that in Japan or Germany and see what happens; good luck! This is what happens when transit is treated like a semi homeless shelter.

Excuse me. Wrong technique. White outcome.

An unarmed black was lynched in public to the fevered delight of maga.

This would not even be a discussion if the victim was armed.