"Latino" versus "Naturalized Latino"

Via Ezra, Poblano at Daily Kos does a bit of number crunching and suggests Clinton wins Latinos is not because Latinos specifically are favoring Clinton, but because foreign-born voters are likely to vote for Clinton and many Latinos are foreign-born. Because the sample size is a bit small, this is really just a way of saying Clinton did better among Latinos in California (35% Latino, 26% of popn is foreign-born) than Arizona (29% and 12%, respectively) or New Mexico (44% and 8%), and that New Jersey and Massachusetts have more foreign-born residents than Connecticut. On a county level, though, this analysis partially holds up. But yet intuitively makes some sense—second and third generation immigrant families are more "Americanized" than their first generation counterparts, less likely to be poor, and more likely to go to college—and may help explain why new pollling shows Obama fairly close in Texas (35% Latino, but only 13% foreign-born).

Comments

[ikl]

This is also probably why Clinton went to South Texas after the Potomac primaries. She can't just count on Hispanics in Texas to be in her corner - it will take work.