A total rout in the Miami mayoral, in a race that had been highly nationalized (Trump endorsed the loser).
The Dem (Higgins) over-performed 2024 presidential in predominantly Cuban (+8), non-Cuban Hispanic (+9), Black (+9), and White (+11) precincts-- over-performance across the board.
Latest @EquisResearch memo on the state of play with Latino voters after the ‘25 elections, a level-set after the NJ/VA/CA swings, featuring new polling
www.weareequis.us/research/lat...
On what we can actually learn about Hispanic and Latino voters from Tuesday's elections, with @carlosodio.bsky.social: www.vox.com/politics/467...
In NJ-09, one of the state’s most-watched CDs, Sherrill way over-performed 2024 support in the densest Hispanic precincts. Given recent past, it is reasonable to expect that 2025, not 2024, is the proper benchmark for 2026. That’s a big boost for incumbent Nellie Pou.
Here’s Passaic County now, preliminarily. Sherrill support closely tracks Murphy ‘21 in Hispanic precincts, way outperforming Harris there. Turnout is lower in Hispanic areas, per usual for Passaic, but less notable in 2025 than in 2021.
Looking at all available precincts in Hudson County, Sherrill support is higher in the most-densely Hispanic turf & tracks closely with '21. Turnout is *higher* than '21 across the county-- and even more so in the most Hispanic precincts.
Update: safe to say that Trump discontent isn't a polling mirage. Partial end-of-night #s have Sherrill coming in at around '21 levels in key Hispanic cities in NJ: in aggregate, higher than '20/'24, but lower than '16/'17. The tape is rewound a bit heading into '26.
NJ election is the first real measure of Latino support since last year. A test of whether the Trump discontent in polls is re-shaping behavior heading into '26: will Sherrill come in closer to '21 or '24 in Hispanic bellwethers?
Here are cities to watch. Note '24 vs. prior.
New national polling of Latinos out today from the Equis team in partnership w/ @dataforprogress.org : views on Trump’s economic moves, what they most want to see now, & how it shapes their views of the parties — & their vote in 2026.
Memo & toplines here:
www.weareequis.us/research/202...
Full memo and toplines here:
www.weareequis.us/research/may...
New Equis polling out today, our first public release this year.
If others have not already hooked you up, we can probably help cc @juan-machado.bsky.social
bsky.app/profile/juan...
Our first clean look at Latino voting post-2024
Tip of the day for avoiding Trump’s traps
Don’t knock him for doing things differently, knock him for doing them poorly.
Distinguish between shaking things up and fucking things up.
For my particular focus, will need to wrestle with “closeness to people with a migration background” as a distinguishing feature of New Left vs New Right
Found this one very compelling: “universalism” (cosmopolitan) vs. “particularism” (traditionalist) as an update to post-materialism, explaining trends across class, education & urbanicity. (They point to the rise of knowledge economies.) Also assign prominent role to candidates & group identities.
The chart is useful bc it shows views on border & future flow. As you know, that is half the story. The other half is views on long-term immigrants — which was the more defining battle in an earlier era.
The piece is well-written. The problem is that in dismantling a one-dimensional approach (Latinos only care about immig), it threatens to replace it w/ another (“” are no diff on immig).
Can’t understand Latino vote past or present w/o unpacking the unique cross-pressures created by this issue.
Cue Montell Jordan: this is how you do it
Rule #1 for side-stepping Trump’s favorite traps:
Don’t let him draw you into defending the wrong things.
No need to defend: red tape, fentanyl smugglers, the military industrial complex, the status quo generally
Do defend: consumers, workers, families, real people generally
Preach
@mikemadrid.bsky.social @carlosodio.bsky.social deliver a master class discussion on what just happened re the Latino vote. Spoiler: it’s not what you think happened. Learn and pass it on.
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...
Fortunately, orgs like Young Men Research Initiative have done extensive analysis of where persuadable voters get their news. Hint: they don't think of it as news, rather as funny and interesting content that keeps their ears busy at work
youngmenresearchinitiative.substack.com/p/where-do-d...
From this article bsky.app/profile/carl...
This one breaks my heart. There is wishful thinking here. But also rational calculation based on past experience (see: enforcement of DeSantis immigration law). And there’s what came to be understood on campaign trail (Vance: “we start with the criminal migrants”), w/o pushback from Harris campaign.
“It’s not fair” — the sentiment at the heart of things, from those frustrated by broken immigration promises
Great @propublica.org piece
t.co/0ic8u6oGNm
Cool finding & charts brought to you by @juan-machado.bsky.social
By comparison, Harris voters weren't ticket splitting as much.
In Latino-heavy precincts, more "none of the above" than explicit Brown splitting; the opposite in the least Hispanic precincts.
Here's another way to look at it. As Washoe precincts get more Hispanic, there is more ticket-splitting AND more de facto roll-off (Nevada's unique "none of the above" option) among Trump voters.
In Washoe's heavily Latino precincts (30%+), 8.6% of Trump voters voted for Rosen, 8.9% voted "none of the above" or 3rd party & 1.5% skipped altogether.