Today I would like to share a statistic with you:
93-6.
71-27.
If these were scores from a basketball game, we would call the game a blowout. Let us keep that in mind and have a look at another graph:
What the graph above shows is that the number of Latinos who are eligible to vote has nearly tripled since 1988; what it means is that the Latino "game score" - 71-27 in 2012 - has become an increasingly decisive factor when it comes to winning the election game overall. But there is more to consider:
In other words, the potential voting power of the Latino bloc has hardly even been tapped into, and Latinos could potentially be more than twice the factor that they are now.
Just as importantly, as the following graph from U.S. Census Bureau predictions shows, the Hispanic (read: Latino) demographic is expected to continue to grow, which means millions more eligible voters of their kind:
Let us take a look the following chart, which shows the mean income for Hispanics/Latinos in the United States:
We see that, in 2004, Hispanics/Latinos had a median household income of $34,241 per year. Because of what we know about medians, we should expect the figure for the average Hispanic/Latino salary to be about the same, around $34,241, ostensibly including figures higher but also lower than that sum. Assuming that to be the case, we should expect the vast majority of Hispanics/Latinos to fall in the category circled below, earning either less than $30,000 annually or between $30,000 and $49,999 annually:
The Democrats swept this category of voters with scores of 63-35 and 57-42. The graph below shows the poverty rate by race. Note the increase in the total number of impoverished Hispanics, indicated at the right side of the graph, between 2005 and 2011:
That increase presumably added to the "annual income under 30,000" demographic - the one that voted 63-35 for Obama. So what caused the increase in poor Hispanics, thus contributing to Obama's victory? It wasn't the recession, unless that affected Latinos independently (it didn't), since the number of impoverished Blacks, Asians and Non-Hispanics grew only slightly during the same recession period in which the number of impoverished Hispanics shot upwards. So either the Hispanic poor birthrate is phenomenally high, even next to the Black poor birthrate, or there was a influx of unskilled laborers, particularly the illegal immigrants that America went to great lengths to naturalize. As this chart shows, it was probably both:
Either way, what we are seeing is a trend that will allow the Democrats to potentially win every election from here on out with increasing ease. Import the poor, let the poor multiply...
But who benefits from this? Do you?
93-6.
71-27.
If these were scores from a basketball game, we would call the game a blowout. Let us keep that in mind and have a look at another graph:
What the graph above shows is that the number of Latinos who are eligible to vote has nearly tripled since 1988; what it means is that the Latino "game score" - 71-27 in 2012 - has become an increasingly decisive factor when it comes to winning the election game overall. But there is more to consider:
In other words, the potential voting power of the Latino bloc has hardly even been tapped into, and Latinos could potentially be more than twice the factor that they are now.
Just as importantly, as the following graph from U.S. Census Bureau predictions shows, the Hispanic (read: Latino) demographic is expected to continue to grow, which means millions more eligible voters of their kind:
Let us take a look the following chart, which shows the mean income for Hispanics/Latinos in the United States:
We see that, in 2004, Hispanics/Latinos had a median household income of $34,241 per year. Because of what we know about medians, we should expect the figure for the average Hispanic/Latino salary to be about the same, around $34,241, ostensibly including figures higher but also lower than that sum. Assuming that to be the case, we should expect the vast majority of Hispanics/Latinos to fall in the category circled below, earning either less than $30,000 annually or between $30,000 and $49,999 annually:
The Democrats swept this category of voters with scores of 63-35 and 57-42. The graph below shows the poverty rate by race. Note the increase in the total number of impoverished Hispanics, indicated at the right side of the graph, between 2005 and 2011:
That increase presumably added to the "annual income under 30,000" demographic - the one that voted 63-35 for Obama. So what caused the increase in poor Hispanics, thus contributing to Obama's victory? It wasn't the recession, unless that affected Latinos independently (it didn't), since the number of impoverished Blacks, Asians and Non-Hispanics grew only slightly during the same recession period in which the number of impoverished Hispanics shot upwards. So either the Hispanic poor birthrate is phenomenally high, even next to the Black poor birthrate, or there was a influx of unskilled laborers, particularly the illegal immigrants that America went to great lengths to naturalize. As this chart shows, it was probably both:
Either way, what we are seeing is a trend that will allow the Democrats to potentially win every election from here on out with increasing ease. Import the poor, let the poor multiply...
But who benefits from this? Do you?
