Julian Castro targets minority voters. Could they swing election for Dems?

Julian Castro became the first-ever Latino keynote speaker at the Democratic convention. President Obama enjoys a huge advantage over Mitt Romney in support from minority voters. But to win, he needs to get them to the polls. Here’s a breakdown of the data on minority voters.

2. What does that mean for the election?

Eric Thayer/REUTERS
Republican congressional candidate and Saratoga Springs, Utah, Mayor Mia Love addresses delegates during the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., on Aug. 28.

For the Election 2012, the actual number of minority voters matters less than their turnout, especially in swing states, says Frey.

“It depends on what degree minority voters’ enthusiasm and turnout balances the white voters’ enthusiasm and turnout,” Frey says in an interview with the Monitor. “In 2008, minorities were the winners in that smackdown.”

In 2008, Hispanic votes made a big difference for Obama in Florida and Nevada. In North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio – dominantly white states – the black vote balanced the white Republican vote, giving Obama the win.

This year, white voters could increase their support for Mr. Romney, which makes the minority vote crucial to Obama, Frey says. “That is the way he will win.”

A USC Annenberg/Los Angeles Times poll published on Aug. 23 shows that Romney leads among white voters, 55 percent to 39 percent, and Obama leads minority voters 76 percent to 17 percent, including 92 percent among blacks and 68 percent among Hispanics. 

In the Republican primary, 90 percent of the voters were white, Frey says.

But going forward, such as dramatic demographic split will not be sustainable, he says. Republicans, like the Democrats, recognize that the future of politics must include minority voters.

“Part of the reason the Republicans have featured minorities at the convention is to show sympathetic white voters that they understand the changing demographic and that they are paying attention,” Frey says. “I say politicians are the best demographers – at least the winning ones.” 

2 of 3

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.