A group of undecided Latino voters said they would vote for President Joe Biden after watching his Thursday night debate with former President Donald Trump.

A clip posted on X shows the group being interviewed by a journalist. One man said he would vote for Biden because “Trump sounded like a crazy liar,” according to Matt A. Barreto, professor of Political Science and Chicana/o & Central American Studies at UCLA.

The man being interviewed said Trump “said the same thing time after time” and was not answering questions or “saying how he would fix things,” according to a Newsweek translation.

He went on to admit that “Biden was indeed a bit slow in talking,” saying the president “has a stutter” but believes Biden explained "what he has done and what he is still doing while president.

“After being undecided for a little while, I think today, I switched to Biden,” he added.

  • Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s a single focus group of specifically undecided Latino voters. Only more standardised and statistically significant polling will give a better estimation. Could there be an unexpected, seemingly paradoxical effect? Maybe, shit is complicated, yo. Politics are a chaotic system at times. I personally doubt it, but, hey, we will see.

    But this article in particular? To be blunt: It is cope.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is exactly how you do experiments in social sciences. You need one off events like a debate or Supreme Court decision. Gathering people in a room like this ensures they all watch the debate and don’t change the channel or something.

      “Cope” is listening to talking heads and ignoring actual experiments like this one. Donald Trump loses among Latinos when people listen to him. That’s what this tells me.

      • Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        True, thank you for pointing that point out, because this actually does show an important angle of messaging ahead. What makes the article itself cope in my opinion, is its misleading headline and overall presentation. It’s tabloid-level of presenting the message, your interpretation is actually a lot better.