<p>WASHINGTON (CNN) – A new poll released Thursday shows overwhelming support from Latinos for Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. John McCain.</p>
<p>A new poll out Thursday shows strong support for Sen. Barack Obama among Latinos.</p>
<p>Obama’s approval rating with registered Latino voters, the nationwide Pew Hispanic Center poll found, is at 66 percent versus 23 percent favoring McCain.</p>
<p>Obama’s “strong showing in this survey represents a sharp reversal in his fortunes from the primaries, when Obama lost the Latino vote to Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly 2-to-1,” according to Pew Hispanic Center associate director Mark Hugo Lopez.</p>
<p>Obama’s favorability among Latinos is slightly up from a Gallup Poll summary of surveys taken in May, which showed Obama with 62 percent of Latino voters nationwide, compared with 29 percent for McCain.
<p>Latinos(legal citizens) make up about 7% of electorate, and about 5% vote.
Bush did a great job getting the latino votes, more so than kerry or gore recieved/
Minoritys have historically low voter turnout numbers, so it will be interesting to see how a minority candiate will effect the turnout of minorities</p>
<p>ilagb - never heard it referred to as “pimping” before. </p>
<p>When you think about how dems try to garner support & votes by promoting vast social programs, pandering, and utilizing “scare tactics” by telling voters that “Republicans will eliminate Social Security” (for example), it seems like an appropriate term!</p>
<hr>
<p>Sorry, but it’s fun sometimes to “stir the pot”. I’m sure I’ll get blasted for this post! Fire away! :)</p>
<p>bz, most of the scare tactics I’ve seen employed have been by Republicans, concerning September 11th. I think it is disgusting how September 11th victims are being exploited for votes, still.</p>
<p>There is a HUGE difference between answering a poll in August and casting the vote for a … black person in November. One can expect that the Bradley effect will raise its head in November.</p>
<p>Without a VP that can help rally the latino vote for Obama, there is little doubt that McCain will increase its appeal among the many latinos who are hardly sold to the liberal mindset. People forget that many latinos view themselves as small business operators and independents and do not care to waste their time answering polls and speaking before it matters. They do however VOTE and that is something that the moronic pollsters and the John Kerry of this world have such a hard time understanding. They only count on the support of welfare babies.</p>
<p>How far ahead was Mr Flip Flop the Idiot in August 2004? :D</p>
<p>unreg - I agree that any “victims” (real or perceived) should not be expoited for votes or political gain. I wouldn’t agree that Republicans are more guilty of this, however.</p>
<p>Now, do you think that the electorate should not be occasionally reminded about the events of 9/11 or the struggle against terrorism in which we continue to be engaged? (Sometimes it’s easy to “forget” that terrorism is a constant threat). Do you think any mention of 9/11 is “exploitation”?</p>
<p>No, I think that the threat of terrorism needs to be addressed, clearly. This is a far cry from some of the fear tactics that I have seen employed, and I find it especially ironic considering the current administration’s mismanagement of the war on terror, focus away from the war on terror, and the creation of a terrorist breeding ground that have all taken place under the guise of our supposed war on terror. I find the misinformation a bit disgusting, really.</p>
<p>xiggi, I don’t believe the Republicans or the Democrats have a monopoly over this issue, but I don’t see the Democrats using the same fear-mongering techniques with regard to terrorism, and I don’t understand what good the Republicans could have done to merit them.</p>
<p>You seem to be suggesting that you think that eliminating Social Security is an issue that is unpopular with minorites. If that’s what you think, you could not be more wrong. It’s the elderly and the retired–regardless of their race/ethnicity–that are most opposed to eliminating Social Security.</p>
<p>I’ll assume that the fear-mongering tactics must have a negative impact on your life for you to decry the existence of counter-measures. Despite the negatives of heightened control, I doubt that the alternative of the abject laissez-faire policies of the Clinton administration is one we’d like to return to. Under *that *administration, the United States was repeatedly victimized by attacks abroad that all culminated into the 9/11 attack on US soil. </p>
<p>Let’s not forget who was deep asleep --or too concerned with lose zipper issues-- as the enemies of the United States were allowed to operate unchecked, and our country allowed to bask in the glaring illusions of economic well-being and safety at home.</p>
<p>I would hardly call the planned murder of a million people - half of them children - “deep asleep” or “laissez-faire”. (The President of Sudan is currently being hounded for much, much less.)</p>
<p>I just wish he’d spent more time “unzipped”.</p>
<p>Easy. What he did when he WASN’T unzipped was truly disgusting (like crimes against humanity, in violation of U.N. Resolution 260, Convention on Genocide, Article Two, Section C), much, much more so than anything he did in his tawdry private affairs</p>
<p>Never said that - I was citing a “typical” scare tactic used by dems agaist Republicans. That’s all - no reference to anyone other than recipients of SS.</p>