What Does A Surge Of Hispanic Voters Mean For Texas?

Political blogger, R.G. Ratcliff, wrote a an article for Texas Monthly's Burka Blog providing some information on how the Hispanic vote could alter the Presidential election in Texas. He writes about how he was once skeptical of a Clinton victory in Texas, but due to a sudden surge of registered Hispanic voters, a Democratic win could be possible. Ratcliff declares that, "There are 532,000 more registered Hispanic surname voters this year than in 2012." He provides evidence to this by citing the Secretary of State's office's numbers of a total of 15 million registered voters this year, with Hispanic surname registration accounting for 23% of those registered. Ratcliff points out that the 15 million registered voters is 1.7 million more than in 2012 and Hispanic registration takes up 30% of that increase alone. He mentions that while the gap in Texas for the presidential race has closed, Clinton is still stuck around the same level that President Obama received from Texas. Again he cites, using multiple sources, polls indicating that Obama received 44% of votes in 2008 and only 41% in 2012. Clinton, depending on which poll you look at, is between 38-46% so far. He also mentions that Trump has lost significant support in Texas, falling from a simple majority to around the mid 40s. He goes on to explain that for Clinton to take Texas, she would need between 950,000-1.2 million Republicans to vote for her, or not vote at all. Luckily for Clinton, Ratcliff says that it looks like half of those voters are either sitting out of the election, or are voting for a third-part candidate. The other half could potentially be covered by the influx of newly registered Hispanic voters. However, he explains that despite the Democrats hoping that the Latino voters would help them to get a foot in the door of Texas, it is a misconception that Latinos will specifically vote Democratic. He explains that in past elections, Republicans have received around 40% of Hispanic votes. For example, George W. Bush received between 40% and half, and Governor Greg Abbott received 44% of the Hispanic vote. He even brings in a recent poll from CBS News' Battleground Tracker Texas which found that 31% of Latinos already plan to Vote for Trump, despite his racist and cruel comments of Mexicans. He ends his statements commenting on how the chances of Clinton taking a victory in Texas are still very low, but if she does, ..."...Republicans can blame Trump, and Democrats can praise the strength of a new Hispanic voting bloc."

I though this article was well put together thought provoking. He provides so much evidence and provides an analysis in a clear and rational way. I find Ratcliff very reliable and I suspect that his intended audience is the citizens of Texas, in an attempt to get people thinking about what the future could potentially hold for us a political state.

Texas's Moral Failing

Ramiro Hinojosa, former infantry sergeant and writer for the Dallas Morning News, has written a scathing commentary,titled 'Denying help to refugees is a moral failure for Texas', criticizing the Texas decision to back out of the refugee resettlement program. He opens with a first-hand account of a personal experience with a refugee. He explains how this boy fled from Baghdad to America at a young age, only to wind up returning to Iraq in 2016 to fight as an American soldier and interpreter. This former refugee went above and beyond the call of duty not only as an interpreter, but also as a soldier. Hinojosa writes, "...he did not turn his back on his adopted country; he served it with honor." He goes on to accuse Gov. Gregg Abbott of having "...cowered to the political winds..." with the decision to pull out of the resettlement program. He asserts that this is a "...moral failing to turn our backs on those refugees seeking solace from a hellish existence for which we, as a country, are partially responsible..."

Hinojosa argues that this withdrawal "does nothing to address the supposed security problem he (Abbott) cites as a concern." Hinojosa claims that Abbott used these safety fears not for the betterment of Texas, but rather to benefit his fundraising. I would have liked to see some more information on this but his detailing stops there. He does however provide a link to an Austin American Statesman article quoting Abbott as using the withdrawal as a fighting point to get donations for his campaign. Hinojosa goes on the to also accuse Abbot of "...in addressing a perceived problem, Gov. Abbott has created a very real one." Quoting the Texas Impact Interfaith leaders, he explains that the decision would "siphon precious nonprofit and faith-based resources..." He explains that without the federal funding that the resettlement program offered, "...our state leaders have shifted the burden to school districts and health facilities and nonprofits..."

Hinojosa offers some light through all of this darkness by mentioning that "...Texans have stepped up He explains that nonprofit volunteer numbers have increased despite the attempted fear mongering. Again, he doesn't provide very much evidence of this, but goes on to comment on how Texans have always been "...a caring and welcoming people." He ends the article writing, "We like to boast about our accomplishments in Texas, and we should be able to brag about outsized levels of compassion, too."

Overall I agree with Hinojosa, that our government has let us down by focusing more so on political gains than on supporting Texas. I feel like he very strongly made his feelings on the matter clear, and the tone of his writing, I believe, would strike a chord within any Texan. His intended audience is very obviously all Texans, as this decision will affect all of us. I think he could have used a bit more evidence with his arguments though. A lot of this article is pure emotion, and I think some rational evidence to back up these emotions would benefit the underlying message.