The long-awaited presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump took place on Tuesday, September 10. The two traded rhetorical punches and jabs. However, unlike a boxing match, where knockouts occur frequently, this match will be settled by judges – the American voters. My interest is in one particular set of judges, the Latino electorate. Their growing political strength and residency in key battleground states make them pivotal in determining the presidential contest. Their view on who won Tuesday’s debate may foreshadow how they will vote in this election.
In an effort to understand the Latino electorate, this week marks the launch of the 2024 Entravision/AltaMed Latino Weekly tracking poll.* For the next eight-weeks, the poll will follow how Latino voters are reacting to the dynamics of the election. Launched after the September 10 presidential debate, respondents were asked a wide range of questions, including who they thought won the debate.
Two-thirds of Latinos say Kamala Harris won the debate while a mere 34% of respondents believe Trump outperformed Harris. This is a significant change from the first debate between Biden and Trump in which CNN Polling reported that only 33% believed Biden won. The June 2024 debate was a decisive win for Trump and turning point for Biden, who ultimately ended his campaign. Harris’ nomination, surge in the polls, and debate performance demonstrate that her candidacy may be on the cusp of victory.
From the perspective of Latino voters, Harris is clearly the favored choice to lead the nation. Of course, there is significant diversity among Latinos and support for Harris varies across different segments of the population. Two key segments that are receiving a great deal of attention this election are women and young voters. How did Harris perform among these groups?
Among Latina women, 69% say Harris won the debate, while a mere 31% say Trump held the upper hand. For Latino men, Harris outperformed Trump, 62% to 38%. A difference of 7-points separates the evaluations by Latina women and Latino men of Harris’s debate performance.
There are many reasons Harris is heavily favored by Latinas. Some of that support may be due to their affinity for and admiration of a woman of color running for the presidency and taking on Trump and his toxic masculinity. However, it is much more likely that their support for Harris is due to her stance on issues that matter to women broadly and women of color in particular. Reproductive rights are a key issue to women in this election. Although reproductive rights affect women broadly, women of color are particularly vulnerable to restrictive legislation as economic and social disparities limit their ability to access vital health services.
During the debate, Harris attacked Trump for his support for the repeal of Roe v Wade and the aftermath of policies that are endangering the health of women. Trump stood steadfast in his support for the Supreme Court’s decision and doubled down on abortion lies about newborns being executed. Clearly, the candidates are worlds apart when it comes to reproductive rights, and Latinas are reacting to those differences. The unusually high support for Trump by Latino men is an ongoing phenomenon that will be watched closely over the course of the election, and it will be the subject of greater analysis in a future blog.
Young Latinos between the ages of 18-29 evaluated Harris’ performance positively relative to Trump, though not as high as other age cohorts. Among those aged 18-29 years, 61% believed she won the debate, while a whopping 70% of Latinos between the ages of 30-49 gave the victory to Harris. Older Latinos, 50 years plus, also rated Harris’s debate performance positively at 65%. Kamala Harris’ longstanding support for protecting the environment should be appealing to young voters who are at the forefront of environmental activism. Debate moderator Linsey Davis noted the importance of climate change to young voters and asked what each would do to address this pressing issue. Donald Trump ignored the question and Kamala Harris lauded the achievements of the Green New Deal and reminded viewers that Donald Trump considers climate change to be a hoax. Nonetheless some pundits have noted that more could have been said about the environment and Harris may have missed an opportunity to connect with young Latino voters.
Each week until Election Day, the Entravision/AltaMed Latino Weekly Tracking Poll will document the changing attitudes and behaviors of Latino voters. Launched a day after the September 10 presidential debate, my focus here is on Latino evaluations of the debate performance by Trump and Harris. Social science research notes that presidential debates do not have much effect on voters’ choice of candidates. In essence, presidential debates do not matter much in affecting the outcome of the contest. While that may have been true of past elections, it is also the case that social scientists would not have predicted that a dismal debate performance would have caused a sitting president to drop out of the race.
Thus, in 2024 the presidential debates matter. In this first match-up, Kamala Harris is the clear winner among Latino voters. Whether she remains the clear favorite remains to be seen. The tracking poll will allow us to determine the degree to which either contender surges or slumps over the course of the remaining seven weeks. For now, Kamala Harris should keep la champagña on ice.
*Methodology. Fieldwork was overseen by BSP Research, LLC based in Woodland Hils, CA. For the first week, 500 respondents were interviewed from across the United States, in English or Spanish at respondent discretion, with a margin of error of +/- 4.4%. Online panels were from 8 leading national panel vendors who verify panelist identity and can match to the voter file, and consist of a combination of randomly recruited and opt-in panel vendors. Universe of analysis consisted of 50-state national Latino registered voter population. Within the sample frame, respondents were selected at random with quotas established for age, gender, education, and nativity. Within each quota all sample was randomly recruited, and quota were staged to ensure that quotas did not “fill up” and affect other quotas. Instead, quotas were staged and updated each day to allow for full random recruitment both within and across quota layers. Post-stratification weights were employed to match the final sample, nationally, to the best known estimates from the U.S. Census and voter files for age, education, gender, nativity and partisanship for each sample.