Nuevo angulo en torno al voto hispano

Esto acaba de ser publicado por el Pew Research Center. Lo someto a consideracion de la tertulia, esta muy bueno. El unico elemento que no contiene, o que contiene mal, es de alguna manera la vision del voto hispano en Texas como univoco, cuando en realidad en Texas hay dos tipos de electorado hispano: el urbano, concentrado sobre todo en Houston y San Antonio, y que va a favorecer fuertemente a Hillary, y el rural, que es muy disperso, y que esta dificil saber pa’donde va a girar.

Reporte del Pew Hispanic Center

The Hispanic Vote in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primaries

by Susan Minushkin, Deputy Director and Mark Lopez, Associate Director, Pew Hispanic Center

February 21, 2008

Overview

As the Democratic presidential nomination contest heads for a showdown in Texas on March 4, Hispanics have emerged as a potentially pivotal constituency in the battle between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Latinos have already made a big mark in the primaries and caucuses held so far. Their share of the Democratic primary vote has risen in 12 of the 15 states for which exit polling makes it possible to compare 2008 and 2004 turnout shares. And in the Super Tuesday primaries on Feb. 5, Latinos voted for Clinton over Obama by an aggregate margin of nearly two-to-one. They were especially important to Clinton in California, where they comprised 30% of the turnout (up from 16% in 2004) and voted for her by a larger margin than did all voters statewide.

Since Feb. 5, however, Obama has won 10 states in a row and made deep inroads with many voting groups (including whites, lower-income voters and middle-aged voters) that had previously been strongly aligned with Clinton. It remains to be seen if Obama can make similarly big gains with Latinos.

In Texas, Latinos make up 36% of the total population and 25% of the eligible electorate. A mostly Democratic-leaning constituency, Hispanic voters could account for a third or more of the turnout in the Democratic primary. (In Ohio, the other big state that holds a primary on March 4, Latinos make up just 1.5% of the eligible electorate).

As the Texas showdown looms, this report examines the turnout, demographic characteristics, opinions and voting patterns of the Latino electorate in Democratic primaries and caucuses held so far in 2008.1 Where possible, it draws comparisons and contrasts among Latino, black and white voting patterns. It also compares Latino turnout in 2008 with turnout in 2004. The report is based on an analysis of Super Tuesday exit polling data about Latinos that the Pew Hispanic Center received on a contractual basis from Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, the firm that conducts exit poll surveys for the National Election Pool, a national consortium of media organizations.

Key findings:

In a year when the turnout in the Democratic primaries and caucuses has risen sharply across the board, Latinos have been a growing share of the turnout in 12 of the 15 states for which exit polling permits a comparison between 2008 and 2004. The most noteworthy increase came in California, where Latinos were 30% of all Democratic primary voters on Feb. 5, compared with their 16% share in 2004.

Latinos have shown a marked preference for Clinton, supporting her over Obama by 63% to 35%, according to aggregated exit polls from 16 Democratic primaries on Super Tuesday.

Hispanic voters in the Super Tuesday Democratic primaries were markedly younger than voters in other racial and ethnic groups. More than one-in-five Hispanic voters on Super Tuesday were ages 17 to 29, and more than half of all Hispanic voters were younger than 45 years old. By comparison, just one-third of white voters in the Super Tuesday Democratic primaries were younger than 45.

Hispanic men and women of all ages, educational levels and incomes voted for Clinton over Obama on Super Tuesday. For example, younger Hispanics (ages 17 to 29) voted heavily for Clinton (62%) over Obama (37%) on Feb. 5, in contrast to their counterparts among whites and blacks.

On Super Tuesday, Hispanics were more likely than whites to say that race was an important factor in deciding their vote–28% of Hispanics said this compared with 13% of whites. However, Hispanics who said that race was important voted for Clinton by about the same percentage (64%) as did Hispanics who said race was not important (63%). By contrast, whites who said race was important were more likely to vote for Clinton than were other whites. And blacks who said race was important (29% of all black voters) were more likely to vote for Obama than were other blacks–87% did, compared with 80% of blacks who said race was not important.

Latinos were also more likely than whites to say that a candidate’s gender was important in their voting decisions on Super Tuesday. Latinos for whom gender was important were more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton than those who said gender was not important.

A majority of Hispanic voters on Super Tuesday (53%) said that the economy is the most important issue facing the country, a greater share than that of white voters who said the same thing (45%).

Read the full report at hispanic.org

——————————————————————————–

Notes

1 The analysis in this report is limited to primaries and caucuses for which exit polls from the National Election Pool are available. These include the states of Nevada, Florida, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, Louisiana, Washington state, Maryland, Virginia, and Wisconsin. The bulk of the analysis that follows is limited to the 16 states that held Democratic primaries on Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2008.

Anuncios

3 Replies to “Nuevo angulo en torno al voto hispano”

  1. Siendo que ganar la lucha por obtener el voto hispano es primordial para ambos candidatos, la incognita es que tan efectivas son estas campanas para obtener este voto. Si estamos de acuerdo que una gran mayoria de los votantes hispanos son jovenes, o de que cuentan con menos de 35 primaveras, entonces espacios como youtube son el lugar para comenzar el analisis. Mientras que Obama se va por una formula chabacana, Hillary se va por lo guapachoso. Cual es la mejor estrategia? Decidanlo ustedes visitando esta ligas

  2. De las cifras sobre el voto hispano, hubo una que me llamó la atención: una mayoría considera que la economía es el más importante reto que enfrenta EU.

    Acá en México ya ha habido algunos comentaristas extrañados por el hecho de que en las campañas el debate económico no se haya colocado en el centro de las campañas.

    De hecho, se ha recordado que la campaña de Clinton en 1992 fue exitosa en buena medida por la frase “Es la economía, estúpidos”, atribuida al estratega James Carville.

    A pesar de ello, por lo que he podido ver hasta ahora, nadie ha buscado establecer el tema como eje de su agenda político-mediática, a pesar de las tribulaciones que enfrenta la economía norteamericana.

    En cambio, como bien ejemplifica xsibaja, están entretenidos, entre otras cosas, con los ritmos de mariachi y guapachosos.

    De parte de los republicanos, seguramente se sienten más cómodos hablando de la geopolítica y del caso de Irak.

    ¿En el campo opuesto será necesario que alguien les desempolve la frase “es la economía, estúpidos”?

  3. En una discusion de cafe, lo que supongo se vale comentar aqui, ya que este espacio se llama la tertulia, comentabamos en este respecto. Para nosotros lo peculiar de esta contienda es la no prioridad de temas.

    Los cuates especulamos que el manejo mediatico de los temas estan muy enredados. En el 92, a “Es la economia estupidos” se le agrego “just do it!” que evoluciono en las pancartas con el lema “just do something”, esto cuando Clinton se presentaba a los “rallies.” En este contexto era obvio que las politicas economicas de papa Bush, pues eran las equivocadas.

    Pero ahora quien es el culpable? la crisis hipotecaria? los imigrantes ilegales que se “robaron” los trabajos en la construccion, que por cierto, no son mal pagados? NAFTA? los chinos con sus baratijas toxicas que se venden en Wal-Mart, y que como consequencia ha cerrado fabricas en EU, o la India que subcontrata servicios publicos tales como el procesamiento de declaraciones de impuestos de los ciudadanos americanos? que me dicen de el alza del crudo, de la baja del dolar, y del deficit presupuestario?

    Momento, que paso con la guerra elastica? quiero decir, Iraq-Iran-Afganistan-Pakistan? Hablando de superficialidades, que me dicen de la corrupcion corporativa, el escandalo del lobby protagonizado por Abhramof, el fiasco de Gonzalez. En otras palabras, a donde quedaron las pretensiones moralistas republicanas?

    Pienso que a los medios se la pasado la cuchara de la dosificacion de la informacion, y han saturado la capacidad de analisis del votante. Creo que somos una nacion de zombies que ha perdido la habilidad de dialogar y de dilucidar lo que es mas importante para el pais. Quiza esta incompetencia tambien aplique a nuestras ilustradas elites.

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s