Does Hillary do worse or better than Obama with Hispanics ?

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

What do you guys think ?? It is hard to tell , I figure alot of Hispanics could identify with Obama as a fellow minority and were put off by some of the race baiting and thinly veiled racist attacks on him.

On the other hand, Hillary did win Hispanics handily in the 2008 Democratic primary and won heavy Hispanic states like CA, NV , NM, NV etc.

[IceSpear]

Around the same. If I had to pick, a tad better.

[TDAS04]

I would guess slightly better, maybe 75%.  The Clintons are popular with Hispanics. 

[Mister Mets]

Worse.

Republicans are likely to nominate a candidate with more appeal to Hispanics than the rich northeastern mormon who talked about self-deportation.

Parties tend to lose support the longer they're in the White House. I don't see Hispanic voters in 2016 as the exception.

[Likely Voter]

Historically Hispanic voters are the swingiest group. Here is how they have voted for the last 4 elections vs. how all voters voted:
Candidate:   Hisp        All
Gore            62           48
Kerry           53           48
Obama        67           53
Obama        71           51

the 18 point swing from the low in 2004 to the high in 2012 may be as simple as the GOP nominee in 2004 was for a path to citizenship for undocumented and the nominee in 2012 called for 'self-deportation'. It is noteworthy that in both cases Hispanic voters trended in the opposite direction than white voters.

Obviously the GOP party establishment (via the 2013 'autopsy') believed that they had to embrace path to citizenship, but the party grassroots rejected this. So is it possible for a pro-path candidate to get through the GOP primary? And is it possible for an anti-path candidate to win the general? This is the GOP Catch 22.

So in answer to the OP question, I would say it is impossible to guess what Hillary will get until we know who the GOP nominee is, and what their position is on the path to citizenship. But nominating a Latino (or Latina) isn't going to help if the party is still fighting the path.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Unless the GOP changes it's actual policy positions - no, just nominating a Latino will not work, she should do as well as Obama in 08... 2012 was probably the upper maximum you can expect.

Mind you, if the GOP nominates someone stupid enough again who believes self-deportation is a real thing.... anything could happen.

[Vosem]

2012 was an outlierish Democratic high caused by Romney's (incorrect) calculation that by not appealing to Hispanics he could gain more white votes, a decision never made before 2012 and that won't be made again. Clinton will almost certainly do worse than Obama 2012.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Clinton does well with hispanics due to puerto rican community in NY. Reguardless of commonwealth status they, along with mexicans are the 51st state constituency that get the 272, electoral votes in NV and CO and Pa and NH to win prez.

[Ljube]

I think a lot worse. Similar to Gore's numbers at this moment and that can only go down depending on Republican candidate/platform.

[DS0816]

I think a lot worse. Similar to Gore's numbers at this moment and that can only go down depending on Republican candidate/platform.

But in another thread you answered my question with the following:

Is it possible that Hillary will perform much worse with men than Obama did?
If that happens, she may get less than 38% of the vote.
She won't get more women than Obama already got. I think Obama maxed out on women.


In those circumstances, which candidate would be best: Bush, Christie, or Rubio?
I know that Paul is a serious candidate and I support him, but I don’t think that 2016 will be his year because of ISIS.

… What is your thinking for the 2016 U.S. presidential election?

Republican pickup — or — Democratic hold?

Hillary is a strong candidate, so at this point I'd say a Democratic hold.
But there is a chance for a Republican pickup, because the Democrats have held the presidency for 2 cycles. In fact, any other possible Democratic nominee would have lower chances than Bush, Christie, or Rubio.

Why would Hillary Clinton perform "a lot worse" nationally with the Hispanic vote, in Election 2016, if she is a "strong candidate" and, "at this point" you would lean toward predicting a "Democratic hold" with the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election?

[Ljube]

She is far stronger with whites than Obama.

What I wrote about her floor with whites was a hypothetical question that will most likely not happen.

[DS0816]

Barack Obama won re-election in 2012 by a popular-vote margin of D+3.85.

If Hillary Clinton wins the 2016 presidential election, in what would be a Democratic hold, we're going to want to know if the popular-vote margin shift further Democratic of if it goes Republican without being enough for the Republican nominee to win pickups in the U.S. Popular Vote and Electoral College.

If Hillary wins better than Obama, these racial demographic numbers will be reflected with increases; if not increases with all, there will barely be a difference.

Can Hillary win more than 71 percent (a margin of 44 percentage points) of Hispanics if she is to win the 2016 presidential election? Yes. But if she dip to 67 to 70 percent part of what may cause that is that the Hispanics would become an even larger share of the size of the national vote. In 2004, they were 7 percent. In 2008, they were 9 percent. In 2012, they were 10 percent. The Hispanic vote, in 2016, may go up to 12 percent.

So, let's do some math.

2012
Hispanics (10): Obama 71%

2016
Hispanics (12): Clinton 67%


Percentage of the U.S. Popular Vote from Hispanics:

2012
Obama 10 x .71 = 7.10 percent

2016
Clinton 12 x .67 = 8.04 percent


In that example, Clinton would have one more percent nationwide from Hispanics. And that's if there is reduced party support while winning even better than a 2012 Obama.

I don't think, if Clinton wins election to become the next president, and gets a larger electoral-vote score and popular-vote margin (than a 2012 Obama), she'd see some precipitous drop in support nationally from Hispanics.

[Likely Voter]

Obama's 2012 shouldn't necessarily be seen as some kind of ceiling. Bill Clinton actually did better and even Dukakis got 70%.

[jeron]

2012 was an outlierish Democratic high caused by Romney's (incorrect) calculation that by not appealing to Hispanics he could gain more white votes, a decision never made before 2012 and that won't be made again. Clinton will almost certainly do worse than Obama 2012.

Bill clinton got 72% of the Hispanic vote in 1996 and Jimmy Carter 75% in 1976. Even Mondale got 66% of the Latino vote! In that sense 2004 was much more of an outlier than 2012 was.

[pbrower2a]

About the same, unless the Republican nominee does something to tick off Cuban-Americans in Florida or Mexican-Americans in Texas -- which probably means that the Republican nominee is going to lose lots of other voters. 

[BlueSwan]

Given a close election result, I'd say worse.

Saying that Hillary will do BETTER than Obama with Hispanics is giving the election to her already. By deafult you would expect Hillary to do relatively worse than Obama amongst racial minorities and relatively better than Obama amongst whites.

[New_Conservative]

Depends on the candidate.

Jeb Bush/Marco Rubio - Worse
Ted Cruz/Mike Huckabee - Better

[Incipimus iterum]

It really depends on the candidates overall

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

2012 was an outlierish Democratic high caused by Romney's (incorrect) calculation that by not appealing to Hispanics he could gain more white votes, a decision never made before 2012 and that won't be made again. Clinton will almost certainly do worse than Obama 2012.

Bill clinton got 72% of the Hispanic vote in 1996 and Jimmy Carter 75% in 1976. Even Mondale got 66% of the Latino vote! In that sense 2004 was much more of an outlier than 2012 was.

Yea they do seem pretty partisan D, maybe the 2000's was an aberration due to  Dubya.

[Mister Mets]

Depends on the candidate.

Jeb Bush/Marco Rubio - Worse
Ted Cruz/Mike Huckabee - Better

One risk for Republicans is that the party decides that the best strategy going forward is identity politics for white people. Which would result in Hillary doing better with hispanic voters.

I think Huckabee's brand of fiscally moderate social conservatism might be effective with hispanic voters. Though I haven't followed him that closely, so he might have said something offensive to hispanics, given his inability to say that you don't have to be a protestant to get into heaven.

[Ljube]

Depends on the candidate.

Jeb Bush/Marco Rubio - Worse
Ted Cruz/Mike Huckabee - Better

One risk for Republicans is that the party decides that the best strategy going forward is identity politics for white people. Which would result in Hillary doing better with hispanic voters.

I think Huckabee's brand of fiscally moderate social conservatism might be effective with hispanic voters. Though I haven't followed him that closely, so he might have said something offensive to hispanics, given his inability to say that you don't have to be a protestant to get into heaven.

I don't think it's possible to rely solely on whites, because the math, or should I say, the fuzzy math just isn't there. See my thread on Republican problems with the EC and my latest post with the numbers.