South Florida Latino Trump voters stand by him, but question his immigration policies
MIAMI — After four months with President Donald Trump at the helm, Reinerio de la Torre says he's waiting to see if the president fulfills his promises.
The 56-year-old electrician, who came from Cuba 18 years ago, voted for Trump in November. But he says the president has gone too far with immigration, and he doesn't like to see hardworking people being deported. De la Torre also disagrees with the partial travel ban on Cuba, saying 'visas should be decided case by case.'
'But it's still early in the presidency and we have to give him time to see what he does,' de la Torre said outside Hialeah's City Hall, where roosters were heard crowing in the background. The street that runs across from it was recently named after the president.
Patricia, 52, who declined to give her last name, echoed de la Torre's sentiment. 'He is deporting innocent people, and I don't like the tariffs, but maybe at the end it will be for the better,' she said.
About 70% of Cuban Americans living in Florida voted for Trump in the 2024 election, and his support in Hialeah, a working-class city in Miami-Dade County with a robust Cuban American population, was one of the strongest. Trump held a rally here one year before the election and the rise in support he got helped him become the first Republican president to win Miami-Dade County since George H.W. Bush in 1988.
While Trump's support among Cuban Americans remains strong and few seem to regret their vote, worries over immigration policies have begun to creep up among the multiple voters NBC News spoke to, especially among more recent arrivals.
Cuban Americans began flocking toward Trump in big numbers during his first presidency, as he tightened U.S. sanctions against Cuba, banning flights to most of the island and restricting remittances. A hard-line policy is welcomed by many Cuban Americans who fled the communist-run island.
A historic wave has brought well over half a million of Cuban migrants to the U.S. since 2022. Cubans had long been allowed to become U.S. residents fairly easily through the Cuban Adjustment Act, but now Trump's immigration policies have left some Cuban immigrants in legal limbo.
Trump also revoked the legal status of migrants who entered the U.S. through the Biden-era CBP One app, which temporarily allowed migrants to live in the U.S., and ended the parole program that gave temporary legal status to 532,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans.
While the U.S. has been deporting Cubans regularly since 2017, some recent deportations have surprised some. News of families being separated or a former political prisoner's parole being revoked have alarmed some in the community.
Trump administration's partial travel ban on Cuba now makes it impossible for Cubans to gain a visa to visit family, something that was already cumbersome since the U.S. stopped processing visas at the Havana embassy in 2017. For most visas, Cubans had to travel to a third country, often Guyana, which is out of reach for most Cubans.
But Cuban Americans voted for Trump for more than hard-line policies against Cuba, and most seemed content with his presidency thus far.
Mirta Marino, 78, a retired bank worker, said, 'Trump is making tough policy decisions, but they are necessary to fix the country.'
She said many Cubans come to this country claiming political persecution but frequently visit the island after they become U.S. residents. Marino, who came in 1980 during the Mariel boatlift, said she never returned. She also believes some people come to this country and take advantage of benefits without working.
A few miles away in the city of Doral, known for its concentration of Venezuelans, many patrons at the popular El Arepazo restaurant are still firmly supporting Trump as well.
Rodrigo Torres, 22, a business owner, said he feels bad for all the Venezuelans affected by Trump's immigration policies, but he said it helps to get the criminals out of the country.
About half of the people deported in February did not have criminal records and more than half of those in ICE detention have no criminal charges or convictions, according to ICE data.
'There are people getting deported for no reason,' Torres said. 'But I would still vote for Trump over Harris.'
Like in Hialeah, a solid majority in Doral voted for Trump in 2024. The city is home to one of the president's resorts, where he held events and rallies before the election.
Venezuelans may be the group most impacted by Trump's immigration policies. Since he was campaigning, Trump regularly talked about Venezuelan gangs in the U.S.
'They're sending us our criminals from Caracas, Venezuela,' Trump said at a July 2024 rally in Doral, claiming Venezuela had sent 'all of their drug dealers, their criminals, and most of their prisoners into our country.'
Once in office, Trump used an 18th-century wartime law to send hundreds of Venezuelan immigrants to a maximum security prison in El Salvador, alleging they had ties to the gang Tren de Aragua — something many of the migrants' families and attorneys have disputed. The men have not been allowed to disprove any gang affiliation or contact attorneys or families. Trump also revoked special legal protections known as Temporary Protected Status for about 350,000 Venezuelans who had been living and working legally in the U.S.
Outside El Arepazo, Carolina Villalobo said she did not vote in the presidential election because she is not yet a citizen, but said she never liked Trump.
'He is very aggressive,' she said. 'I agree the country has to be cleaned out and the criminals should be deported, but it should be done with more tact.'
But among her extended family, including siblings and nephews, she's alone.
'My entire family continues supporting Trump,' Villalobo said.
The firm support for Trump in South Florida is not surprising to Fernand Amandi, a Democratic consultant and pollster in Miami.
'I haven't seen a single person who voted for Trump in November of 2024 come out and say: I made a mistake,' he said. 'What I have seen is a tremendous amount of rationalization, justification and unwillingness to admit that their votes have contributed to this situation that is now impacting a lot of families and a lot of people directly.'
In order to have a substantial number of voters change their minds, Amandi said, there would have to be a situation in which the economy hits rock bottom and it's personally affecting them.
Regardless, Democrats are already taking jabs at Republican lawmakers in South Florida that are up for re-election in November 2026. Recently, a group called Keep Them Honest launched an ad campaign on Miami highways and radio criticizing Republican Reps. Mario Díaz-Balart, Carlos Giménez and Maria Elvira Salazar over their support for Trump.
Salazar has been publicly critical about some of Trump's immigration policies and all three lawmakers have a meeting scheduled with Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem this week.
'They certainly are feeling pressure, they certainly are feeling some backlash, but I'm not quite sure yet it's to the point where it has made them feel like they are in existential political danger,' said Amandi of the Florida Republican members of Congress. 'We see it in their lack of engagement or confrontation with the Trump administration directly ... they're not criticizing the policies or Trump, saying this is out of control and unacceptable.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Associated Press
24 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Trump moves to merge wildland firefighting into single force, despite ex-officials warning of chaos
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday ordered government agencies to consolidate their wildland firefighting into a single program, despite warnings from former federal officials that it could be costly and increase the risk of catastrophic blazes. The order aims to centralize firefighting efforts now split among five agencies and two Cabinet departments. Trump's proposed budget for next year calls for the creation of a new Federal Wildland Fire Service under the U.S. Interior Department. That would mean shifting thousands of personnel from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service — where most federal firefighters now work — with fire season already underway. The administration has not disclosed how much the change could cost or save. Trump in his order cited the devastating Los Angeles wildfires in January as highlighting a need for a quicker response to wildfires. 'Wildfires threaten every region, yet many local government entities continue to disregard commonsense preventive measures,' the order said. The Trump administration in its first months temporarily cut off money for wildfire prevention work and reduced the ranks of federal government firefighters through layoffs and retirement. The order makes no mention of climate change, which Trump has downplayed even as warming temperatures help stoke bigger and more destructive wildfires that churn out massive amounts of harmful pollution. More than 65,000 wildfires across the U.S. burned almost 9 million acres (3.6 million hectares) last year. Organizations representing firefighters and former Forest Service officials say it would be costly to restructure firefighting efforts and cause major disruptions in the midst of fire season. A group that includes several former Forest Service chiefs said in a recent letter to lawmakers that consolidation of firefighting work could 'actually increase the likelihood of more large catastrophic fires, putting more communities, firefighters and resources at risk.' Another destructive fire season is expected this year, driven by above-normal temperatures for most of the country, according to federal officials. A prior proposal to merge the Forest Service and Interior to improve firefighting was found to have significant drawbacks by the Congressional Research Service in a 2008 report. But the idea more recently got bipartisan support, with California Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla and Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy sponsoring legislation that is similar to Trump's plan. Before his election last year, Sheehy founded an aerial firefighting company that relies heavily on federal contracts. In a separate action aimed at wildfires, the Trump administration last month rolled back environmental safeguards around future logging projects on more than half U.S. national forests. The emergency designation covers 176,000 square miles (455,000 square kilometers) of terrain primarily in the West but also in the South, around the Great Lakes and in New England. Most of those forests are considered to have high wildfire risk, and many are in decline because of insects and disease.


CNBC
29 minutes ago
- CNBC
An Israeli attack on Iran could send oil prices above $100 as tensions mount
Beset by near-universal bearish outlooks just a month ago, oil prices could spike to more than $100 a barrel in the event of an Israeli attack on Iran, some analysts are warning. Crude prices spiked as much as 5% overnight — before paring gains — on fears of military escalation between Iran and Israel as President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal of some U.S. personnel from embassies and bases across the Middle East. The front-month August contract for global benchmark Brent crude was trading at $69 per barrel at 3:20 p.m. ET on Thursday, while the front-month July U.S. WTI contract was at $67.7 per barrel. "They [U.S. military personnel] are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place and we will see what happens... We have given notice to move out," Trump told reporters on Wednesday. The Pentagon has ordered the withdrawal of troops and non-essential staff from embassies in Baghdad, Kuwait and Bahrain. The jury is still out as to whether the moves are a pressure play ahead of upcoming U.S.-Iran nuclear talks, or whether the U.S., Israel and Iran are truly on the verge of conflict. The geopolitical risk premium is "already at least partially reflected in current oil prices," according to J.P. Morgan's global commodities research team, citing Brent crude trading at just under $70 a barrel, already above its model-derived fair value figure of $66 for June. "This suggests an elevated 7% probability of a worst-case scenario, where the price reaction is exponential rather than linear, with the impact on supply potentially extending beyond a 2.1 mbd (million barrels per day) reduction in Iranian oil exports," the bank's research team wrote in a note published Thursday. Iran is OPEC's third-largest crude producer. Israel appears ready to attack Iran, according to reports citing U.S. and European officials, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pressing Trump to allow strikes. But the American president said in late May that he had warned Netanyahu against attacking Iran while negotiations with Washington were under way. U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff is currently set to meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Oman on Sunday for a sixth round of negotiations. Strait of Hormuz in focus Oil traders are focusing on the potential of a wider conflict shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint through which 20% of the volume of the world's total oil consumption passes daily. The British Navy on Wednesday issued a rare warning to ships in the region, saying it had "been made aware of increased tensions within the region which could lead to an escalation of military activity having a direct impact on mariners." It urged caution for vessels transiting "the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman and Straits of Hormuz." Beyond that, J.P. Morgan warned, "a more general Middle East conflagration could ignite retaliatory responses from major oil producing countries in the region responsible for a third of global oil output." "Under this severe outcome," the bank's analysts wrote, "we estimate oil prices could surge to the $120-130/bbl range." Even before the latest uptick in tensions, some oil industry watchers were already making bullish calls despite a flood of announced OPEC+ supply coming onto the market, and lower global growth and demand forecasts due to trade and tariff tensions. Josh Young, founder and chief investment officer at Houston-based Bison Interests, told CNBC in late May that physical markets are more tightly supplied than previously thought, and with several oil rigs in the U.S. shale patch coming offline just as the U.S. summer driving season begins, markets should be preparing for Brent crude at $85 a barrel. "The pure inventory versus consumption would indicate $85 [per barrel], which is way higher than where we are right now. It's almost uncomfortable to say that, but that's the current price implied by inventories," Young told CNBC's Access Middle East. He cited his forecast figure as "fair value," arguing that "typically, you go from too cheap to too expensive. So I don't think we should be ruling out $100 oil this year. And I think if there is a geopolitical risk, it could get even higher." Without the geopolitical risk premium — namely, a conflict with Iran — Young still sees crude coming up to the $80 to $85 per barrel range, particularly in the event of trade deals being reached and Trump's tariffs being lowered. The outlook is boosted by this month's forecast from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which sees a decline in U.S. oil production for the first time since the Covid-19 pandemic due to slower drilling activity and a declining rig count. Such bullish forecasts are certainly not the norm, however. Without a military attack on Iran, J.P. Morgan's base case for oil "remains in the low-to-mid $60s oil for the remainder of 2025, and $60 in 2026." Goldman Sachs also maintains an oil price forecast in the $50 to $60 per barrel range for this and next year, despite noting an improving demand picture, downside risks to U.S. supply and geopolitical tensions. The recent rise in inventories due to OPEC+ output increases, "supports our cautious oil price forecast, with Brent expected to average $60 for the rest of 2025 and $56 in 2026," the bank's commodities team wrote. "However, small misses in OPEC+ supply suggest that lower-than-anticipated spare capacity represents an upside risk to our price forecast."
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Rare Earth Trap: How China Could Cripple America's Tech and Defense in One Move
China may not have Silicon Valley, but it controls the minerals that make Silicon Valley run. From electric motors to missile systems, rare earth elements are the silent backbone of modern techand Beijing owns the playbook. In 2024, China produced 270,000 tons of rare earthsabout six times more than the it dominates global refining. When trade tensions flared again, Beijing didn't just talk tough. It added seven rare earths to its export control list, causing headaches for American manufacturers. Tesla (TSLA) flagged rare-earth magnet shortages as a bottleneck for its humanoid robot, while Ford was forced to idle a major Chicago plant due to supply disruptions. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 6 Warning Sign with MP. The pressure doesn't stop at consumer goods. The F-35 fighter jet alone requires over 900 pounds of rare earths. And yet, the U.S. has just one major rare-earth mineMP Materials' (NYSE:MP) Mountain Passand almost no refining capacity. Trump, aiming to break China's chokehold, invoked emergency powers in March to accelerate domestic mining and processing. He followed up with an investigation into the national security risks of mineral imports, with recommendations expected within 270 days. Still, even fast-tracked projects could take years, and in the meantime, tariffs could drive up prices for the very materials U.S. companies depend on. China's control runs deep. It can approveor delayexport licenses without explanation, leaving global supply chains exposed. The message is clear: if the U.S. wants to restrict chip exports, China can slow-roll the magnets that drive EVs and missiles. Trump has floated Greenland and Ukraine as alternative sources, but neither has proven, scalable capacity. Rare earths aren't rarebut reliable supply chains are. And as the trade war evolves, the world is learning that dominance in materials might be more powerful than dominance in manufacturing. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.