Courting Hispanics
A little over two years ago, I had the pleasure of moderating the debate for Los Angeles mayor between candidates Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel, both of the Democratic Party. Despite how incredible it may seem in the context of a city with a Hispanic majority, the debate was the first of its kind. Garcetti, a young man from the Democratic Party with a bright and promising future, perhaps even on a national scale, used that opportunity to rough up his rival — a very serious woman with a lengthy career, but lacking the necessary charisma to campaign against a man with Garcetti’s skills.
Included in those skills was his talent with the Spanish language. At the beginning of the 20th century, Garcetti’s paternal relatives lived in Mexico, and Garcetti himself realized that it would be smart to learn to speak Spanish fluently. In the weeks that preceded the debate, Garcetti used every opportunity, every trivial topic, to start speaking Spanish. The calculation was clear: He hoped that his facility with the language spoken by the majority of people would be enough to earn their votes. This issue became so dominant that Greuel’s campaign demanded that candidates respond only in English during Univision’s debate. Garcetti accepted that rule even though it was to his disadvantage. He also accepted the rule because he planned to break it.
At one point in the debate, I asked Wendy Greuel if she thought the ability to speak Spanish was a good enough reason to court the Hispanic vote. Greuel gave some vague answer, missing the opportunity to establish a distance between herself and her opponent. In giving her the right to reply, Garcetti showed exactly why he would end up becoming the mayor of Los Angeles. With a smile on his face and in Spanish, he told TV viewers that no, they shouldn’t vote for him because he, like them, speaks Spanish, but they should vote based upon an analysis of his platform. Ten months later, he had beaten Greuel by a 10 percent margin.
For the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party will put in practice something resembling Garcetti’s strategy. It has become commonplace in the U.S. to exalt the aspirations of Marco Rubio, the young Florida senator who seeks to clinch the Republican nomination. The contrast with a politician like Rubio — young, with a message of self-styled renewal — could be something like kryptonite for Hillary Clinton.
Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time: In 2008, another politician with very little experience but huge charisma and a moving personal history snatched the presidential dream out of Clinton’s hands. Furthermore, Rubio, unlike Obama, has an unquestionable advantage. He speaks perfect Spanish. It might even be possible that in the event of a debate between both candidates televised to millions of viewers, for the first time ever, Rubio would put aside the English language in order to make a few remarks directly in Spanish. It would be a potentially devastating moment. Since Clinton can’t even stutter in Spanish, the contrast would be instantaneous and effective. As was the case with Garcetti, form would become content.
This explains the anxiety of the Democrats at Rubio’s arrival on the scene. Besides, being the son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio has a biography that is profitable for electoral purposes. (Furthermore, I must say that Rubio is an excellent orator. In the almost two decades I have reported on U.S. presidential races, I have only seen two other candidates able to hypnotize entire auditoriums in the same way: Bill Clinton and Obama.)
The Democratic Party’s preoccupation with Rubio’s potential nomination is no doubt increased when you add a number of novel methods used by Republicans to reach the Hispanic electorate. The Koch brothers —conservative millionaires with enormous influence — and other high-profile donors are starting to realize the importance of wooing the Latino vote. For this purpose, they have put in practice a number of campaigns with two primary goals: to connect with Hispanics by means of conservative social values and to help undocumented people in overcoming a number of daily hurdles. The perfect example of this is a recent campaign funded by the Koch brothers and other groups, the so-called “Libre Initiative,” which offered free workshops in Nevada to help Hispanics go through the driver’s license process. They also organize parties, neighborhood-cleaning events, and meetings to help war veterans. These are good-faith gestures that conceal political shrewdness. It is good for Democrats to worry, but they also better get to work: Under these circumstances and with these kinds of opponents, it would be suicide to take the Hispanic vote for granted.
Included in those skills was his talent with the Spanish language. At the beginning of the 20th century, Garcetti’s paternal relatives lived in Mexico, and Garcetti himself realized that it would be smart to learn to speak Spanish fluently. In the weeks that preceded the debate, Garcetti used every opportunity, every trivial topic, to start speaking Spanish. The calculation was clear: He hoped that his facility with the language spoken by the majority of people would be enough to earn their votes. This issue became so dominant that Greuel’s campaign demanded that candidates respond only in English during Univision’s debate. Garcetti accepted that rule even though it was to his disadvantage. He also accepted the rule because he planned to break it.
At one point in the debate, I asked Wendy Greuel if she thought the ability to speak Spanish was a good enough reason to court the Hispanic vote. Greuel gave some vague answer, missing the opportunity to establish a distance between herself and her opponent. In giving her the right to reply, Garcetti showed exactly why he would end up becoming the mayor of Los Angeles. With a smile on his face and in Spanish, he told TV viewers that no, they shouldn’t vote for him because he, like them, speaks Spanish, but they should vote based upon an analysis of his platform. Ten months later, he had beaten Greuel by a 10 percent margin.
For the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party will put in practice something resembling Garcetti’s strategy. It has become commonplace in the U.S. to exalt the aspirations of Marco Rubio, the young Florida senator who seeks to clinch the Republican nomination. The contrast with a politician like Rubio — young, with a message of self-styled renewal — could be something like kryptonite for Hillary Clinton.
Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time: In 2008, another politician with very little experience but huge charisma and a moving personal history snatched the presidential dream out of Clinton’s hands. Furthermore, Rubio, unlike Obama, has an unquestionable advantage. He speaks perfect Spanish. It might even be possible that in the event of a debate between both candidates televised to millions of viewers, for the first time ever, Rubio would put aside the English language in order to make a few remarks directly in Spanish. It would be a potentially devastating moment. Since Clinton can’t even stutter in Spanish, the contrast would be instantaneous and effective. As was the case with Garcetti, form would become content.
This explains the anxiety of the Democrats at Rubio’s arrival on the scene. Besides, being the son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio has a biography that is profitable for electoral purposes. (Furthermore, I must say that Rubio is an excellent orator. In the almost two decades I have reported on U.S. presidential races, I have only seen two other candidates able to hypnotize entire auditoriums in the same way: Bill Clinton and Obama.)
The Democratic Party’s preoccupation with Rubio’s potential nomination is no doubt increased when you add a number of novel methods used by Republicans to reach the Hispanic electorate. The Koch brothers —conservative millionaires with enormous influence — and other high-profile donors are starting to realize the importance of wooing the Latino vote. For this purpose, they have put in practice a number of campaigns with two primary goals: to connect with Hispanics by means of conservative social values and to help undocumented people in overcoming a number of daily hurdles. The perfect example of this is a recent campaign funded by the Koch brothers and other groups, the so-called “Libre Initiative,” which offered free workshops in Nevada to help Hispanics go through the driver’s license process. They also organize parties, neighborhood-cleaning events, and meetings to help war veterans. These are good-faith gestures that conceal political shrewdness. It is good for Democrats to worry, but they also better get to work: Under these circumstances and with these kinds of opponents, it would be suicide to take the Hispanic vote for granted.