Latinos in Poll Defy Old Notions

Once the Los Angeles mayoral campaign turned into a two-man race, it became conventional wisdom that Antonio Villaraigosa could count on one constant: overwhelming support from a fast-growing Latino electorate that now represents about one in five city voters.

Which is why some political analysts were surprised Tuesday when a Los Angeles Times poll showed Villaraigosa garnering only 57% of likely Latino voters--less than exit polls showed him receiving from Latinos in the April election.

The relatively low level of support from his ethnic base was one reason Villaraigosa trailed Hahn 47% to 40% citywide in the poll of 857 likely voters conducted May 22 to 27.

Experts offered no consensus on the numbers beyond agreeing that the Latino vote defies the stereotype of a monolithic bloc and warning that the poll was a momentary snapshot. A significant number of Latinos, particularly older, long-time residents, may be drawn to City Atty. James K. Hahn’s persistent emphasis on fighting crime, the analysts said. And poor Latino voters are more likely to make up their minds at the eleventh hour.

The Times poll found that Villaraigosa’s Latino support was significantly less than Hahn’s overwhelming support (74%) among black voters, drawn to him in part by the legacy of his father, the late county Supervisor Kenneth Hahn. Villaraigosa’s 57%-27% lead over Hahn among Latinos in the poll was dramatically down from the 62%-7% lead he held in the April election. That field included U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra, who captured 17% of the Latino vote.

Sergio Bendixen, a veteran poller of Latinos, was stunned by the Times Poll numbers. “It doesn’t make any sense,” he said. “I don’t think there’s any rational way to explain it.”

The candidates’ reactions were predictable: A spokesman for Villaraigosa labeled the numbers wildly inaccurate, while a Hahn official called them evidence of growing crossover support.

Both the Villaraigosa campaign and Bendixen, now working for the Spanish-language Telemundo network, said the Times poll presented an inaccurate reading of Latino voters. Bendixen said the poll does not contact a sufficient proportion of Spanish-speaking residents. Susan Pinkus, director of the Times Poll, defended the poll’s methodology and accuracy.

Independent analysts cautioned that Latino voters, who are disproportionately low-income, tend to make up their minds late in the campaign. Working-class and poor citizens in the past have told exit pollers that they were influenced by last-minute campaign literature and TV advertising blitzes. Spanish-language radio, geared to immigrant listeners, has devoted little attention to the race.

“A lot of decisions are made in the last couple of weeks of the election,” said Harry Pachon, executive director of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, a Latino studies think tank. “That’s exactly when many Latinos start paying attention.”

Analysts said the numbers also may indicate that the Latino electorate cannot be pigeonholed.

“Ethnicity is a factor, but it is not the only factor in the minds of Latino voters,” Pachon said.

Although Los Angeles’ voting Latinos are overwhelmingly of Mexican ancestry, they are a very diverse group. Their ranks include recently naturalized immigrants whose principal language is still Spanish and multigenerational U.S. residents who speak virtually no Spanish. Economically too, Latinos range from wealthy professionals to among the city’s least affluent residents.

“What we know about Latino voters is that, like other voters, they respond to issues and candidates who discuss issues that are important to them,” said Mark Baldassare, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.

The divisions on issues of crime in the poll were particularly striking. Only about one in four Latinos (24%) responded that Villaraigosa would do a better job of holding down crime. Twice as many (49%) said Hahn was the better crime fighter. By a 10-point margin (42% to 32%), Latinos said Hahn would do a better job of promoting economic prosperity.

Villaraigosa got better marks for his ability to improve schools, even though the mayor has no formal role in public education. More than half (56%) of Latinos said Villaraigosa would do a better job, compared with 23% who chose Hahn.

Latinos have traditionally been less likely to be bloc Democratic voters than have African Americans. The Los Angeles contest is nonpartisan, and both candidates are Democrats. Outgoing Mayor Richard Riordan, a Republican, generally ran well among Latinos.

But Latinos are broadly seen as fiscally liberal and more conservative on social issues. It is a distinction that could work to the advantage of Hahn, with his emphasis on public safety and a background as a lawyer compared to Villaraigosa’s roots as a labor organizer.

A Villaraigosa campaign spokesman disputed that notion and said that internal polling showed Latino support for the former Assembly speaker above 70%.

“There’s nothing in the campaign I’m more confident of than Antonio’s vote in the Latino community,” said Parke Skelton, a Villaraigosa campaign consultant.

The Villaraigosa campaign, with its presumed Latino base, must wrestle with a dilemma: How to win over the conservative, non-Latino voters who are most in play while not alienating the candidate’s Latino base.

Similarly, Hahn must reach out to other groups while not alienating his black constituency.

In the weeks leading up to April’s election, there was some grumbling among Latino activists that Villaraigosa had not done enough to reach out to Latinos. Both candidates must walk fine lines to maintain their bases while building broader coalitions.

In the case of Villaraigosa, who had never sought citywide office--and has downplayed his ethnicity in recent years in the run-up to the mayoral campaign--it may be particularly difficult to take any portion of the electorate for granted.

“As a candidate he has to reach out and be sure he has that core group,” said Baldassare. “It can be a big mistake to make assumptions about a group that hasn’t voted for you in the past.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Latinos on Hahn and Villaraigosa

If the election were held today, for whom would you vote?

*

James K. Hahn: 27%

Antonio Villaraigosa: 57%

Don’t know: 16%

*

How important is it to you that the next mayor of Los Angeles be someone from your own ethnic or racial group?

*

Important: 27%

Not important: 73%

*

Which candidate do you think would do the better job ....

...promoting economic prosperity?

*

Hahn: 42%

Villaraigosa: 32%

Neither*: 1%

Both*: 12%

Don’t know: 13%

*

*

...holding down crime?

*

Hahn: 49%

Villaraigosa: 24%

Neither*: 8%

Both*: 13%

Don’t know: 6%

*

...improving race relations?

*

Hahn: 17%

Villaraigosa: 54%

Neither*: 2%

Both*: 11%

Don’t know: 16%

*

...improving schools?

*

Hahn: 23%

Villaraigosa: 56%

Neither*: 2%

Both*: 16%

Don’t know: 3%

*

HOW THE POLL WAS CONDUCTED

The Times Poll contacted 857 likely voters in the city of Los Angeles by telephone May 22-27. Latinos made up 21% of the likely voter group. The margin of sampling error for the Latino subgroup is plus or minus 8 percentage points. Respondents were given the choice of taking the survey in English or Spanish.

*

* Answer was volunteered.

Note: Among likely Latino voters.

Source: L.A. Times Poll