Politics
Column: In 2024, Latinos finally became Americans at the ballot box
Forty years ago this November, Cesar Chavez gave a speech at San Francisco’s Commonwealth Club that was as much of a promise as a warning.
The main topic of the 25-minute talk was the lessons he learned from a career organizing campesinos in California and beyond, in the face of fierce opposition.
“All my life, I have been driven by one dream, one goal, one vision,” Chavez told the hoity-toity crowd. “To overthrow a farm labor system in this nation which treats farmworkers as if they were not important human beings.”
The United Farm Workers leader praised the gains his union was able to achieve. But he felt the big payoff was still ahead for Latinos. They were growing in economic, political and demographic influence — and Chavez felt that memories of past injustices would inform how they wielded power, once they attained it.
“The day will come when the politicians do the right thing by our people out of political necessity and not out of charity or idealism,” Chavez said, sounding matter-of-fact in a recording of the speech. “That day may not come this year. That day may not come during this decade. But it will come, someday.”
Chavez’s Commonwealth Club address is little known outside of academic and activist circles, but I’ve long considered it a masterpiece of prophecy. He mostly called it right: Latinos now make up a plurality of residents in California and are the largest minority group in the country. Researchers at Cal Lutheran and UCLA found earlier this year that if Latinos in the U.S. were their own nation, their $3.7 trillion gross domestic product would rank fifth in the world, behind Germany and ahead of India.
Meanwhile, the number of Latinos in elected office grows every year, from school boards to state legislatures to both chambers of Congress. The political rise was long fueled by a liberal formula pioneered by Chavez’s movimiento: run as a Democrat, align yourself with unions and social justice groups and use the plight of the least among Latinos — farmworkers during Chavez’s era, illegal immigrants for the past generation — as a moral issue to push Latinos to the ballot box and reject Republican everything.
This winning template spawned fears among conservatives that Latinos — especially Mexican Americans — were engaging in a conspiracy to relegate white people to second-class status, and hopes among Democrats for a permanent majority. It seemed to follow Chavez’s boast that Latinos would create a new, more-just way for this country, one that would manifest Jesus’ teaching that the last would be first and the first would be last.
“And on that day, our nation shall fulfill its creed — and that fulfillment shall enrich us all,” Chavez said in the speech.
But as 2024 concludes, Chavez’s dream of Latino power isn’t playing out the way he forecast.
BooBoo, left, and Gil Tejada laugh during a recording of an episode of the “American Cholo” podcast in their North Hollywood studios. Tejada, a former Hillary Clinton supporter, voted for Donald Trump this year and urged his followers to do the same.
(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)
Donald Trump, who has lambasted Latinos all the way from his 2015 speech announcing his first presidential run to a recent social media post insinuating he would take back the Panama Canal, improved his performance with Latino voters in each of his campaigns.
In Los Angeles County, a Times map of the November election results showed that the biggest drift toward Trump didn’t happen in Republican strongholds but in purple, middle-class Latino cities like Downey and Whittier and blue-collar, Democratic-run, overwhelmingly immigrant communities like Bell Gardens and Maywood.
Surveys showed that Latino voters this year didn’t care about anything other than themselves. Issues like the economy and housing were their top concerns, while securing the border was more important than trying to secure amnesty for people without papers. Indeed, the proportion of Latinos who think illegal immigration is a problem is nearly the same as it was among whites 30 years ago, when California voters overwhelmingly passed the anti-immigrant Proposition 187 while hundreds of thousands of Latinos marched against it.
Kamala Harris still won the Latino vote nationwide, but the Latino-Trump cumbia has drawn headlines, and not just because he outperformed any previous Republican presidential nominee among Latinos. The disbelief and soul-searching among Latino activists and finger-pointing by Democrats will continue throughout 2025, predicated on the idea that Latinos who went with Trump voted against their self-interest. In other words, Latinos didn’t act like Latinos are supposed to, whatever the hell that means.
That’s why I say that 2024 is the year that Latinos finally became Americans.
As patronizing and silly as it sounds, there is no historic precedent for this moment. Even though Spanish was spoken in what’s now the U.S. decades before Jamestown, Americans have long thought of Latinos as a people apart who would poison the proverbial melting pot the more their spice dominated the stew. For more than a century, Latino activists have pursued equal rights with this in mind, casting the people they fought for as a helpless, forever-victimized group that could best find strength through ethnic solidarity.
Instead, Latinos forsook movement politics in this election and seem poised to do the same in the future. We’re now in a political Bizarro World where the GOP thinks Latinos are a winnable group while Dems no longer see us as automatic salvation. Both parties will fight for our votes by de-emphasizing appeals to ethnicity and instead focusing on meat-and-potatoes issues — you know, the way they usually do with “regular” voters.
Latinos are no longer the sleeping giant of American politics. We are the giant. Where we decide to go is where the country will go. We’ve joined the metaphorical firsts — and like previous groups, we’re now spitting on the lasts and want nothing to do with them.
This mainstreaming is something I’ve been calling out throughout the 25 years I’ve covered Latino politics. This year, I saw it play out it in real time.
In the spring, I wrote a four-part series about the history of Latino politics in Los Angeles. In August, I took a seven-day road trip across the American Southwest to gauge the political temperature of Latinos before the Democratic National Convention. I talked to Latino Trump supporters throughout the fall, including many who admitted they once leaned liberal but felt abandoned by Democrats, prompting them to ride shotgun on the Trump Train.
The thread that connected my stories was that change was inevitable, and banking on Latinos to stay in Democratic amber was electoral suicide.
UCLA professor Kelly Lytle Hernandez, right, walks along Main Street in downtown Los Angeles, while giving a historical tour to Los Angeles city councilmembers Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez in 2022
(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)
Wokosos and conservatives alike capitalized on dozing Dems who are finally awake to the desmadre before them. On L.A.’s Eastside, the cradle of Latino politics, Democratic Socialist City Council candidates swept away the political machines that dominated elections for decades. On the other end of the political spectrum, Latino Republican legislators now populate Sacramento in such numbers that the California Latino Legislative Caucus is having conversations about dropping its longstanding ban on GOP members.
Latinos are still nowhere near where we need to be in American life to brag about power commensurate with our numbers. There are still too many issues we need to work on, from educational attainment to the cost of living to health and housing disparities.
But the 2024 election showed that many Latinos are open to dropping the left-leaning politics of the past. The party that capitalizes on this opening is the party that can win.
This makes me think again about Chavez’s Commonwealth Club speech. What animated him most was the idea of a California “dominated” by the descendants of farmworkers, who would change things for the better and never forget where they came from, even generations later.
“Once social change begins, it cannot be reversed,” he said. “You cannot uneducate the person who has learned to read. You cannot humiliate the person who feels pride. You cannot oppress the people who are not afraid anymore.”
In 2024, Latinos showed that we are not afraid to think of a post-Latino future, at least at the ballot box. We’re now ready for politicians to treat us as Americans, for better or worse. And wasn’t that the goal all along?
new video loaded: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
By Shawn Paik
April 22, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Sparks flew on Capitol Hill as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accused Federal Reserve nominee Kevin Warsh of being a potential “sock puppet” for President Donald Trump.
Warsh, tapped by Trump in January to lead the Federal Reserve, faced a two-and-a-half-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
If confirmed, he would take the helm of the world’s most powerful central bank, shaping interest rates, borrowing costs and the financial outlook for millions of American households for the next four years.
WHO IS KEVIN WARSH, TRUMP’S PICK TO SUCCEED JEROME POWELL AS FED CHAIR?
Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, listens to ranking member Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., make an opening statement during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In her opening remarks, Warren sharply criticized Warsh’s record and questioned his independence, arguing he is “uniquely ill-suited for the job as Fed chair” and warning he could give Trump influence over the central bank.
She accused Warsh of enabling Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis, which fell during his tenure as a Federal Reserve governor when he served from 2006 to 2011.
“In our meeting last week, we discussed the 2008 financial crash, where 8 million people lost their jobs, 10 million people lost their homes and millions more lost their life savings,” Warren said. “Giant banks, however, got hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts… and he said to me that he has no regrets about anything he did.”
She added that Warsh “worked tirelessly to arrange multibillion-dollar bailouts” for Wall Street CEOs, with nothing for American families.
The hearing grew more tense as Warren pivoted to ethics concerns, pressing Warsh over his undisclosed financial holdings and questioning him over links to business dealings connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The two spoke over each other and raised their voices in a heated exchange on Capitol Hill.
WARSH’S $226 MILLION FORTUNE UNDER SCRUTINY AS FED NOMINEE FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Fed has been plagued by deeply disturbing ethics scandals in recent years. It’s critical that the next chair have no financial conflicts — none. You have more than $100 million in investments that you have refused to disclose. So let me ask: do the Juggernaut Fund or THSDFS LLC invest in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies tied to money laundering, Chinese-controlled firms, or financing vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein?
Kevin Warsh: Senator, I’ve worked closely with the Office of Government Ethics and agreed to divest all of my financial assets.
Warren: Could you answer my question, please? You have more than $100 million in undisclosed assets. Are any of those investments tied to the entities I just mentioned? It’s a yes-or-no question.
Warsh: I have worked tirelessly with ethics officials and agreed to sell all of my assets before taking the oath of office.
Warren: Are you refusing to tell us if you have investments in vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein? You just won’t say?
Warsh: What I’m telling you is those assets will be sold if I’m confirmed.
Warren: Will you disclose how you plan to divest these assets? The public might question your motives if, for example, someone who profits from predicting Fed policy cuts you a $100 million check as you take office.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren questions Kevin Warsh during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Warsh: I’ve reached a full agreement with the Office of Government Ethics and will divest those assets before taking the oath.
Warren: I’m asking a very straightforward question. Will you disclose how you divest those assets?
Warsh: As I’ve said, I’ve worked with ethics officials.
Warren: I’ll take that as a no.
In a separate exchange, Warren invoked Trump’s past statements about the Fed and challenged Warsh to prove his independence in real time.
She insisted that Warsh answer whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election and if he would name policies of the president with which he disagrees. The hopeful future Fed chair dodged the question and said he would remain apolitical, if confirmed.
THE ONE LINE IN WARSH’S TESTIMONY SIGNALING A BREAK FROM THE FED’S STATUS QUO
Warren: Donald Trump has made clear he does not want an independent Fed. He has said, “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be Fed chairman.” He’s also said interest rates will drop “when Kevin gets in.” Let’s check out your independence and your courage. We’ll start easy. Mr. Warsh, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?
Warsh: Senator, we should keep politics out of the Federal Reserve.
Warren: I’m asking a factual question.
Warsh: This body certified the election.
Warren: That’s not what I asked. Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?
Warsh: The Fed should stay out of politics.
Warren: In our meeting, you said you’re a “tough guy” who can stand up to President Trump. So name one aspect of his economic agenda you disagree with.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Kevin Warsh listens to a question during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Warsh: That’s not something I’m prepared to do. The Fed should stay in its lane.
Warren: Just one place where you disagree.
Warsh: I do have one disagreement — he said I looked like I was out of central casting. I think I’d look older and grayer.
Warren: That’s adorable. But we need a Fed chair who is independent. If you can’t answer these questions, you don’t have the courage or the independence.
On March 28, a sunny Saturday in southwestern Utah, Jack Hoopes and his wife, Lorna, brought their homemade signs to the local “No Kings” rally.
The couple joined a crowd of 1,500 or so marching through the main picnic area of a park in downtown St. George. Their signs — cut-out words on a black background — chided lawmakers for failing to stand up to President Trump and urged America to “make lying wrong again.”
After about an hour, the two were ready to go home. They got in their silver Volvo SUV, but before pulling away, Jack Hoopes decided to swing past the demonstration, which was still going strong. He tooted his horn, twice, in a show of solidarity.
That’s when things took a curious turn.
A police officer parked in the middle of the street warned Hoopes not to honk; at least that’s what he thinks the officer said as Hoopes drove past the chanting crowd. When he spotted two familiar faces, Hoopes hit the horn a third time — a friendly, howdy sort of honk. “It wasn’t like I was being obnoxious,” he said, “or laying on the horn.”
Hoopes turned a corner and the cop, lights flashing, pulled him over. He asked Hoopes for his license and registration. He returned a few moments later. A passing car sounded its horn. “Are you going to stop him, too?” Hoopes asked.
That did not sit well. The officer said he’d planned to let Hoopes off with a warning. Instead, he charged the 71-year-old retired potato farmer with violating Utah’s law on horns and warning devices. He issued a citation, with a fine punishable up to $50.
Hoopes — a law school graduate and prosecutor in the days before he took up potato farming — is fighting back, even though he estimates the legal skirmishing could cost him considerably more than the maximum fine. The ticket might have resulted from pique on the officer’s part. But Hoopes doesn’t think so. He sees politics at play.
“I’ve beeped my horn for [the pro-law enforcement] Back the Blue. I’ve beeped my horn for Black Lives Matter,” Hoopes said. “I’ve seen a lot of people honk for Trump and for MAGA.”
He’s also seen plenty of times when people honked their horns to celebrate high school championships and the like.
But Hoopes has never heard of anyone being pulled over, much less ticketed, for excessive or unlawful honking. “I think it’s freedom of expression,” he said.
Or should be.
Jack and Lorna Hoopes made their own protest signs to bring to the “No Kings” rally in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
St. George is a fast-growing community of about 100,000 residents set amid the jagged red-rock peaks of the Mojave Desert. It’s a jumping-off point for Zion National Park, about 40 miles east, and a mecca for golf, hiking and mountain-bike riding.
It’s also Trump Country.
Washington County, where St. George is located, gave Trump 75% of its vote in 2024, with Kamala Harris winning a scant 23%. That emphatic showing compares with Trump’s 59% performance statewide.
St. George is where Hoopes and his wife live most of the time. When summer and its 100-degree temperatures hit, they retreat to southeast Idaho. The couple get along well with their neighbors in both places, Hoopes said, even though they’re Democrats living in ruby-red country. It’s not as though they just tolerate folks, or hold their noses to get by.
“Most of my friends are conservative,” Hoopes said. “Some of the Trump people are very good people. We just have a difference of opinion where our country is going.”
He was speaking from a hotel parking lot in Arizona near Lake Havasu while embarked on an annual motorcycle ride through the Southwest: four days, a dozen riders, 1,200 miles. Most of his companions are Trump supporters, Hoopes said, and, just like back home, everyone gets on fine.
“Right?” he called out.
“No!” a voice hollered back.
Actually, Hoopes joked, his charitable road mates let him ride along because they consider him handicapped — his disability being his political ideology.
Hoopes is not exactly a hellion. In 2014, he and his wife traveled to Africa to participate in humanitarian work and promote sustainable agriculture in Kenya and Uganda. In 2020, they worked as Red Cross volunteers helping wildfire victims in Northern California.
Virtually his entire life has been spent on the right side of the law, though Hoopes allowed as how he has racked up a few speeding tickets over the years. (His career as a prosecutor lasted four years and involved three murder cases in the first 12 months before he left the legal profession behind and took up farming.)
He’s never had any problems with the police in St. George. “They seem to be decent,” Hoopes said.
A department spokesperson, Tiffany Mitchell, said illicit honking is not a widespread problem in the placid, retiree-heavy community, but there are some who have been cited for violations. She denied any political motivation in Hoopes’ case.
“He must’ve felt justified,” Mitchell said of the officer who issued the citation. “I can’t imagine that politics had anything to do with it.”
And yes, she said, honking a horn can be a political statement protected by the 1st Amendment. “But, just like anything else, it can turn criminal,” Mitchell said, and apparently that’s how the officer felt on March 28 “and that’s the direction he took it.”
The matter now rests before a judge, residing in a legal system that has lately been tested and twisted in remarkable ways.
Jack Hoopes’ case is now before a judge in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
As he left an initial hearing earlier this month, Hoopes said his phone pinged with a fresh headline out of Washington. Trump’s Justice Department, it was reported, was asking a federal appeals court to throw out the convictions of 12 people found guilty of seditious conspiracy for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.
“We have a president that pardons people that broke into the Capitol and defecated” in the hallways and congressional offices, Hoopes said. “Police officers died because of it, and yet I get picked up for honking my horn?”
Hoopes’ next court appearance, a pretrial conference, is set for July 15.
-
Miami, FL3 minutes agoCain, Kushner launch South Florida JV with plans for Edgewater rental tower
-
Boston, MA9 minutes agoMBTA Green Line trains out from Kenmore to Boston College on B branch through April 30
-
Denver, CO15 minutes agoNuggets vs. Timberwolves | 3 keys to a Denver win in Game 3
-
Seattle, WA21 minutes agoThe Honorable Brandon Lee Gowton Picks for Seattle at #32 | Field Gulls
-
San Diego, CA27 minutes agoPerson struck, killed by train in Encinitas
-
Milwaukee, WI33 minutes agoFatal opioid overdoses decline in Milwaukee County
-
Atlanta, GA39 minutes ago‘Rich and Unemployed’ podcaster sentenced for $3.8M scheme
-
Minneapolis, MN45 minutes agoEdina shooting leaves 1 dead, suspects on run