Thank you, that’s more precise. However you may find that there are those who would express the same outraged disbelief that there is even a baseline level of Republican support among the minorities.
Good thing that was not me. (I said that many are not shallow or greedy.)
I do know indeed relatives that are still supporters, not impressed about their knowledge on the issues, although one very rich conservative Hispanic relative recently explained to me that what Trump is doing with immigrants is a bridge too far for him now. He just can not ignore the now usual 3 monkeys act coming from most Republicans to items like that one nowadays.
I need to point out that I never claimed that anything like a majority of blacks and hispanics support Trump. If Trump were to get 20-30% of the black and hispanic vote, it would be amazing. But it would also be an historic shift that would not bode well for Democrats.
Everything I said about the potential for an increase in support for Trump by minorities starts from a VERY low bar. If he doubles his support he would still be under 20%. But doubling his support from minorities could easily flip a close election.
There have been a few polls showing approval ratings for Trump by blacks up around 30%. Even if true, that doesn’t necessarily translate into votes at election time. But it should be a warning bell to the Democrats that they can’t take their historical constituencies for granted when their policies and priorities have shifted dramatically from the past.
As a reminder, in the last election the Democrats were complacent because they thought they had the blue collar union vote locked up, and that the electoral college favoured the Democrats because of the midwest ‘blue wall’ of states full of such workers. Don’t let something like that happen again, just because you hate Trump so much you refuse to believe that you could lose any more voters to him.
I also have to mention that many of you who claim that ‘pocketbook’ issues don’t matter are the same people who were baffled by Republicans who didn’t vote for ‘obvious’ financial benefits like Obamacare subsidies, because it’s crazy to not vote for things that are in your own financial interests. Remember “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” That was the whole premise - the illogic of not voting for things that would help you financially.
Why should the minority communities be any different? When you’re poor, a job or a raise speaks to you a lot louder than the blatherings of the president.
Here in NC Dems get 90+% of the black vote and in some cases barely win. Obviously if they lose more black voters they probably can’t win.
As the 2018 midterms showed, that “would” remains unlikely.
As my close and wealthy relative showed, it is more likely that the Hispanic support for Trump will be less than before.
Nope, there is more evidence that the warning goes the other way:
Working on it:
Again, this is demanding that many minorities must become shallow or greedy. Maybe it is just me, but I think that for a better future most (and that goes for non minorities too) should reject the pied piper’s advice of a POTUS that wants to get credit of great deeds when at the same time he is abusing America’s credit.
You haven’t offered any evidence that there is any likelihood of this occurring. IIRC, the same kind of arguments were made prior to the 2018 election, predicting that minorities were going to go more for the Republicans than normal – and it didn’t pan out at all. I suppose this is possible. It’s also possible that minorities go even more for the Democrats than in the past. We’ll see, but I’ve see no evidence to suggest that your prediction has any validity.
There have been a few tracking polls cited in this thread with those numbers. However tracking polls are not intended to give you accurate absolute numbers, and if you use them for that purpose you are going to draw incorrect conclusions from them. I personally am not aware of any polls that have Black support for Trump above 15%. Latino support for Trump was around 30% in 2016 and AFAIK hasn’t changed. Trump doubling his minority support would of course be historic but there is absolutely no indication that is happening.
Candace Owens made a few goes at being a public personality. She’s an opportunist who saw the opportunity with the election of Trump to try a different route. She’s openly lied about why she became pro-Trump in the first place. And look, she’s quite free to be an opportunist and pursue a profit motive if she’s like, but she’s clearly not sincere. She’s playing a role for which she’s able to obtain a degree of fame, and some money, which is clearly all she’s ever really wanted.
It’s the ultimate ink blot test question. Nobody answers it, whether they themselves ‘minority’ or not but especially if not, without bringing all their subjective assumptions about what ‘supporting’ Trump means and all the arguments about the significance of Trump/Trumpism to ‘race’.
You can apply condescending explanations like ‘want to be viewed as white’, ‘want to be a big fish in a small pond’, but also similarly to why people lean left ‘want to be cool like the Hollywood types they love’, ‘want to pat themselves on the back for their moral superiority’. IME those kind of explanations can actually be true about some people in either category, but not necessarily in either case and a useless broad brush to apply categorically.
There are non-white people I know well who voted for Trump and probably will this time. It’s not a huge sample, but few people can construct a big sample of people they know well, I can’t. Anyway they ‘support’ him in that sense, but not in sense of ever dreaming of going to his rallies with ‘X’s for Trump’ signs. They think he’s a low quality person, they often laugh at him. But they think the Democrats are worse. And they take a lot of the more extreme accusations against Trump (Russian agent, criminal, ‘white supremacist’ etc) as political noise. There’s two parties that can actually win, one of them proposes policies they don’t find acceptable in terms of their own or the nation’s interest*, and the other party avoids that, at least somewhat, so that’s the party they vote for.
I can see how it’s an attractive pitch to try to say ‘no, no, Trump/anti-Trump is on a totally different level than a normal binary choice of lesser of evils of the underlying parties, it’s about the very soul of our nation!!!’ But you can’t make every other person accept that premise, and it’s IMO pointless to then psychoanalyze people’s ‘self hatred’ etc based on a premise they don’t actually accept in making their political choice.
*and parsing who favors what policy for their own v the nation’s interest is also hopelessly subjective IMO.
I bet those guys do the thing where they tell each new wife she’s a wonderful change from his ex, until the newbie notices he doesn’t do housework, refers to childcare as “babysitting”, and has more than one ex.
Given the choice between Hillary and Trump, I’d bet these guys have a lot of problems with more than one women, period. Trump’s hateful attitude toward women didn’t start with the access Hollywood tape. There was “she got schlonged” and "she was bleeding out of her eyes, her ears, her…wherever."