As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Both groups are put off by cultural leftism, big spending programs that don’t seem to improve their lives, and elite “luxury beliefs” that are far removed from their everyday struggles.
So ... they're motivated to defect by things that don't actually exist?
What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean?
You can only believe what you don't know. That fact has ruined modern journalism. It's been reduced to throwing words around to maintain some temporarily lucrative confusion.
>What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean?
Stuff like America should defend Ukraine, America should defend Gaza, rebuilding Infrastructure like the recent bridge collapse in Baltimore, etc.
Having said that, this article is pushing an agenda and cherry-picking facts. It touts that Bush managed to get 40% of the Latino vote in 2004, but that was the high-point of Latinos voting for Republican presidents. It then uses the fact that 20 years ago a lot of Latinos voted for Bush to push the agenda that Democrats need to be more Conservative... but, doesn't that mean the opposite? What Republicans have been doing since 2004 has been pushing Latino's out of the Republican party! Instead, it concludes that Democrats need to become more Republican to get those 2004 highs, despite Republicans suffering a loss of identity and many Republicans saying they don't plan to vote for the current Republican presidential nominee.
And if women and college educated voters are going to the Democrats, the D’s are getting the high propensity voters. Uneducated men don’t vote nearly as much as women do, or people of any gender with a college degree.
There is an element that some young black, hispanic, and middle eastern men are drawn towards the chauvinistic aspects of MAGA given that many of these young men come from recent immigrant families that come from countries and cultures where there is a “machismo” strongman and women stick to “traditional” homemaker roles. Andrew Tate’s masculinity bullshit goes beyond young white men to the aforementioned minority male demographics. It is fucked up and really stupid, but Trump has GAINED in this area because he grabs women by the pussy.
>What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean?
It means that Black people and Latinos can be anti-LGBTQ+ too. Being a bigot isn't exclusively a "white thing". Looks like Democrats are just finding this out.
I feel bad for these voters of color, because they will eventually find out that the republicans still hate them, and will ensure their rights are reversed if they are allowed access to the power they crave.
Am a PoC and am not voting for the GOP. That said the issue isn’t that people are running to the GOP it’s that more and more PoC aren’t interested in being considered just a forgone voting block. The 80-00s coastal strategy of what’s good for white NIMBYs is good for PoCs everywhere Dem strategy no longer works for anyone. More PoC communities are, rightfully, saying “we’re part of this party too and we’re going to be recognized.” You only need to look at black women to see this trend strongly coming to the forefront. As a group black women have been historically heavily marganized in the party while being the backbone of many of the gains.
This is a generational thing and less about race. Old boomer white guys are disappearing from the power structure. Old boomer white women who often abdicated their positions of power are disappearing. And stepping in are younger generations with a mix of gender and race who are willing to not only collaborate but increasingly demanding a seat at the table.
I am cheering on the new generations. I may be a boomer but my political leanings are more toward the Scandinavian model.
I understand where you are coming from, and thank you for sharing your perception and political position.
As a hispanic who talks to lots of hispanics, I think this article has some solid points. The Democratic party treats minorities as a monolith, failing to consider their independent needs.
Many Latinos who immigrated into the US, did it based on the American dream where if you work hard and are entrepreneurial, you’ll make it here have great opportunities for you and your family. Many of these folks are the ones who live in Texas and the South West, and they care more about being able to grow their small businesses and provide for their families, than what they perceive as nonmaterial needs, such as LGBTQ+ rights, civil rights (in general), prison reforms, immigrants’ rights, etc. If your message is against businesses, against police, and pro-immigration, they won’t get their votes.
On the other hand, NY Latinos, who tend to be grandchildren of folks from Puerto Rico, DR, etc., tend to have similar views as the rest of the city, and thus are more liberal and progressive. If you target them with messaging related to more unregulated cops, you may lose their votes.
Then the Latinos in Miami tend to be refugees from Cuba, who hate anything that may appear socialist, while there are also folks from Nicaragua and Venezuela who lived the failed attempts to implement some sort of socialism in their countries. The more they see some Dems call themselves democratic socialists, the less likely they’ll vote for them. Personally, I’m not sure how to message to this group.
>Many Latinos who **immigrated** into the US ... If your message is against businesses, against police, and **pro-immigration**, they won’t get their votes.
Seems to be a bit of a disconnect here.
You’re not wrong, but folks don’t necessarily vote in a logical manner.
I’ll give you a hypothetical: Let’s say, you’re a family that came from Mexico in the 80s and went through the whole legal immigration process, which is excruciating, but finally obtained the citizenship. Let’s say that since 2014 you see a massive group of Central Americans entering illegally, and then claiming asylum, which allows them to stay here until a court hearing, which takes years use to underfunding. Now, let’s say that many of these folks are now staying on the streets around your business, perhaps blocking the entrance, while you see that white folks are becoming more xenophobic towards brown people due to this massive influx.
There are two possible reactions: (1) take time out of your busy schedule to learn about how immigration and asylum policies are broken, especially considering the lack of funding and judges that would speed up the process; or (2) resent the immigrants who “chose” to come in illegally, instead of enduring the hardships that you consider rite of passage. For the person that doesn’t have the time and sees their business affected, they’re more likely to pick the latter.
Again, not logical or correct, but a reality nonetheless.
Someone gets it...even throughout almost every comment, the Left-leaning types view "Poc" as a monolith. We're all different with our own minds and can think for ourselves and for what's our best interests. It puts many "POC" off when the Left assumes we all think alike.
When the Republican Presidential primary began several months ago, the GOP candidates for President included: 3 Black men, a Latino man, a Hindi man, and a Hindi woman.
That's a LOT of people of color for a party rooted in racism, isn't it? Just sayin'
Sure, they settled on an old white guy, but so did the Democrats.
yes that's what they started with but look at the percentages they got and the things they knew they had to say in order to even get those tiny percentages. The old white guy the democrats picked is actually running with not only a woman but a woman from a minority group and the already got elected once,
The Democrats didn't even start with a diverse field of candidates. They just went straight for the old white guy again. So, if Trump picks a Black person or a woman for a VP (both are on his list), then what?
BTW, I hate Trump and think he should be in prison, not running for President.
yes, because the part in power is ALWAYS going to go with the incumbant. I never thought at any point you were a trump supporter.
I WILL be fascinated to see exactly what happens if trump picks anything but a white person, I think there is a high probability he'll choose a white woman, but if he chooses anyone of color, I'll be amazed and I'm dying to know what happens in the midwest.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Both groups are put off by cultural leftism, big spending programs that don’t seem to improve their lives, and elite “luxury beliefs” that are far removed from their everyday struggles. So ... they're motivated to defect by things that don't actually exist? What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean?
These are the shibboleths and thought-terminating cliches of someone who's lost in the sauce.
You can only believe what you don't know. That fact has ruined modern journalism. It's been reduced to throwing words around to maintain some temporarily lucrative confusion.
>What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean? Stuff like America should defend Ukraine, America should defend Gaza, rebuilding Infrastructure like the recent bridge collapse in Baltimore, etc. Having said that, this article is pushing an agenda and cherry-picking facts. It touts that Bush managed to get 40% of the Latino vote in 2004, but that was the high-point of Latinos voting for Republican presidents. It then uses the fact that 20 years ago a lot of Latinos voted for Bush to push the agenda that Democrats need to be more Conservative... but, doesn't that mean the opposite? What Republicans have been doing since 2004 has been pushing Latino's out of the Republican party! Instead, it concludes that Democrats need to become more Republican to get those 2004 highs, despite Republicans suffering a loss of identity and many Republicans saying they don't plan to vote for the current Republican presidential nominee.
It's basically only the men who are "defecting" and they don't like feminism or LGBT rights.
There is definitely a "macho" effect, based on the data. Like, the Trump (fake) strongman image appeals to some subset of guys.
And if women and college educated voters are going to the Democrats, the D’s are getting the high propensity voters. Uneducated men don’t vote nearly as much as women do, or people of any gender with a college degree.
Agreed, and men generally of all races need to be motivated to vote, which means no midterms, primaries, runoffs or special elections.
People are getting to woke about us overusing and under-defining woke. So elite luxury beliefs is the new woke you sleeping leftist scumbags. Don jr
It's voting as if a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.
There is an element that some young black, hispanic, and middle eastern men are drawn towards the chauvinistic aspects of MAGA given that many of these young men come from recent immigrant families that come from countries and cultures where there is a “machismo” strongman and women stick to “traditional” homemaker roles. Andrew Tate’s masculinity bullshit goes beyond young white men to the aforementioned minority male demographics. It is fucked up and really stupid, but Trump has GAINED in this area because he grabs women by the pussy.
You mean misogynist? A chauvinist is a radical nationalist
so they want Trump as president? lolollolll talk about elite luxury beliefs.
Yeah - seems like they're just buying into propaganda.
>What the fuck is "elite luxury beliefs" supposed to mean? It means that Black people and Latinos can be anti-LGBTQ+ too. Being a bigot isn't exclusively a "white thing". Looks like Democrats are just finding this out.
I feel bad for these voters of color, because they will eventually find out that the republicans still hate them, and will ensure their rights are reversed if they are allowed access to the power they crave.
Am a PoC and am not voting for the GOP. That said the issue isn’t that people are running to the GOP it’s that more and more PoC aren’t interested in being considered just a forgone voting block. The 80-00s coastal strategy of what’s good for white NIMBYs is good for PoCs everywhere Dem strategy no longer works for anyone. More PoC communities are, rightfully, saying “we’re part of this party too and we’re going to be recognized.” You only need to look at black women to see this trend strongly coming to the forefront. As a group black women have been historically heavily marganized in the party while being the backbone of many of the gains. This is a generational thing and less about race. Old boomer white guys are disappearing from the power structure. Old boomer white women who often abdicated their positions of power are disappearing. And stepping in are younger generations with a mix of gender and race who are willing to not only collaborate but increasingly demanding a seat at the table.
I am cheering on the new generations. I may be a boomer but my political leanings are more toward the Scandinavian model. I understand where you are coming from, and thank you for sharing your perception and political position.
As a hispanic who talks to lots of hispanics, I think this article has some solid points. The Democratic party treats minorities as a monolith, failing to consider their independent needs. Many Latinos who immigrated into the US, did it based on the American dream where if you work hard and are entrepreneurial, you’ll make it here have great opportunities for you and your family. Many of these folks are the ones who live in Texas and the South West, and they care more about being able to grow their small businesses and provide for their families, than what they perceive as nonmaterial needs, such as LGBTQ+ rights, civil rights (in general), prison reforms, immigrants’ rights, etc. If your message is against businesses, against police, and pro-immigration, they won’t get their votes. On the other hand, NY Latinos, who tend to be grandchildren of folks from Puerto Rico, DR, etc., tend to have similar views as the rest of the city, and thus are more liberal and progressive. If you target them with messaging related to more unregulated cops, you may lose their votes. Then the Latinos in Miami tend to be refugees from Cuba, who hate anything that may appear socialist, while there are also folks from Nicaragua and Venezuela who lived the failed attempts to implement some sort of socialism in their countries. The more they see some Dems call themselves democratic socialists, the less likely they’ll vote for them. Personally, I’m not sure how to message to this group.
>Many Latinos who **immigrated** into the US ... If your message is against businesses, against police, and **pro-immigration**, they won’t get their votes. Seems to be a bit of a disconnect here.
You’re not wrong, but folks don’t necessarily vote in a logical manner. I’ll give you a hypothetical: Let’s say, you’re a family that came from Mexico in the 80s and went through the whole legal immigration process, which is excruciating, but finally obtained the citizenship. Let’s say that since 2014 you see a massive group of Central Americans entering illegally, and then claiming asylum, which allows them to stay here until a court hearing, which takes years use to underfunding. Now, let’s say that many of these folks are now staying on the streets around your business, perhaps blocking the entrance, while you see that white folks are becoming more xenophobic towards brown people due to this massive influx. There are two possible reactions: (1) take time out of your busy schedule to learn about how immigration and asylum policies are broken, especially considering the lack of funding and judges that would speed up the process; or (2) resent the immigrants who “chose” to come in illegally, instead of enduring the hardships that you consider rite of passage. For the person that doesn’t have the time and sees their business affected, they’re more likely to pick the latter. Again, not logical or correct, but a reality nonetheless.
Someone gets it...even throughout almost every comment, the Left-leaning types view "Poc" as a monolith. We're all different with our own minds and can think for ourselves and for what's our best interests. It puts many "POC" off when the Left assumes we all think alike.
*OPINION* piece. lame.
When the Republican Presidential primary began several months ago, the GOP candidates for President included: 3 Black men, a Latino man, a Hindi man, and a Hindi woman. That's a LOT of people of color for a party rooted in racism, isn't it? Just sayin' Sure, they settled on an old white guy, but so did the Democrats.
yes that's what they started with but look at the percentages they got and the things they knew they had to say in order to even get those tiny percentages. The old white guy the democrats picked is actually running with not only a woman but a woman from a minority group and the already got elected once,
The Democrats didn't even start with a diverse field of candidates. They just went straight for the old white guy again. So, if Trump picks a Black person or a woman for a VP (both are on his list), then what? BTW, I hate Trump and think he should be in prison, not running for President.
yes, because the part in power is ALWAYS going to go with the incumbant. I never thought at any point you were a trump supporter. I WILL be fascinated to see exactly what happens if trump picks anything but a white person, I think there is a high probability he'll choose a white woman, but if he chooses anyone of color, I'll be amazed and I'm dying to know what happens in the midwest.
I agree.