So this is the new doomer talking point about trendlines

[Non Swing Voter]

that because Trump marginally improved among hispanics by bringing out low-propensity voters in places like Miami and Las Vegas, the party is A-OK long term despite losing the popular vote in 7/8 of the last elections and TX clearly moving away from them? 

And it was really worth trading college educated whites for low propensity hispanic voters who might never vote again with Trump off the ballot?  And in their brilliance they are further making voting harder for these very same low propensity voters? 

[EastwoodS]

I think there’s just a growing Hispanic bloc in the country that’s more easily swayed by the GOP than by the Hispanics of 1970. Such as the newer Venezuelans or Puerto Rican’s or other South American immigrants of recently. Unfortunately for the GOP they might work well with the PV but most of them are in FL so not very efficient.

[THG]

This is one of the most languorous posts I’ve ever had the displeasure of deciphering. I put in more toil into my sixth grade history project!

I suppose this “WWC and Hispanics will never vote without Trump on the ballot!!” is the equivalent of “Chester and Orange County and every suburb in the dominion of the republic shall become R+20 without Trump on the ballot!!”.

While bucks to said trend are possible, long term, it clearly means something. I am in full agreement that our party needs to stop dropping the ball with College-Educated Whites, but in the meantime, an obvious and undeniable trend among the second largest ethnic group in this nation isn’t a horrible way to compensate for this gaping hole.

[Central Lake]

"Hispanics will not vote GOP with Trump not on the ballot" is very very subjective.

And very weird and ridiculous analysis in my opinion.