Latest news with #majority-Hispanic
San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Dems want to spend $20 million to learn how to talk to men. Have they tried mansplaining?
The national Democratic Party has decided to spend $20 million to figure out a way to talk to men. Let me know if they find out anything that dating sites haven't yet. On Wednesday night, the San Francisco Democratic Party weighed in, endorsing the idea as well. The resolution noted that Donald Trump got 56% of the votes of men aged 18-29, and that 'addressing the challenge experienced by boys and men is not only a moral imperative, but is essential to fostering a more inclusive and responsive political movement that truly speaks to the needs of all individuals, and countering the resultant rise polarization and disinformation.' This effort is intriguing to be sure. Polling after the 2024 presidential election showed former Vice President Kamala Harris coming up short with men as well. According to Navigator Research, men voted for Trump, 54-43 against Harris, a four-point improvement from 2020, when the Democratic nominee, former President Joe Biden, came closer: Trump only won by two points. Women voted for Harris 51-46 in 2024, but Biden carried women by 10 points in 2020. Let's factor in age. According to the Navigator polling 'Men under the age of 45 voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 election by an 8-point margin (44% Harris, 52% Trump), a 16-point shift from 2020, where the group voted for Biden by an 8-point margin.' If you break the numbers down by race, Harris got 82% of the black male vote. Not bad, and close to the 86% Joe Biden got in 2020. What about Latino men? Here's where it gets more interesting. 'Trump made gains across the board. Of particular note, Trump won 47% of votes among Latino men, according to AP projections. He also produced double-digit gains in majority-Hispanic counties along the Mexico border in Texas and in Southern Florida. According to a survey by Edison Research, 'In 2020, Joe Biden won among Latino men by 23 percentage points: 59%-36%. Our latest estimate for the 2024 vote among Latino men is Trump winning by 10 points, 54% to 44%. This change of 33 points on the margin is a rather extraordinary shift in four years' time.' Rather. What's the problem? Democratic support for trans youth in sports? Naw, not really. Democratic support for basic social service programs? Nope. Democratic support for a robust U.S. foreign policy? Unlikely. It may be this simple: as unfair and irrational as it is, men like voting for men for president. This country has never had a woman president, and now looks even further away from that goal based on the 2024 results. The question is, how do the Democrats spend that $20 million? The New York Times reported last week that the plan 'is code-named SAM — short for 'Speaking with American Men: A Strategic Plan' — and promises investment to 'study the syntax, language and content that gains attention and virality in these spaces.' It recommends buying advertisements in video games, among other things. 'Above all, we must shift from a moralizing tone,' it urges. Well. God knows what those video game ads are going to look like. No moralizing in video games, I guess. Fundamentally, according to the data, younger voters, be they men, women, Black or Latino, voted on the economy. So, it's the economy, stupid, again. Younger voters have a particularly bleak worldview on the economy. Talk to any young person, and they don't really have IRAs, own homes, or have a lot of disposable income while they're working two or three jobs. The Biden economy worked well for some, and very poorly for others. My guess is that Trump's performance on the economy will make Biden look like FDR, his hero. The big, beautiful tariffs are already contributing to stock market uncertainty, likely inflation — or even stagflation, where prices rise while the economy stays flat. Oh, and interest rates are going to stay high for the time being, which doesn't help. I was talking to two men the other day about Trump. One voted for Harris, reluctantly, because he thinks Trump is erratic. If the GOP had nominated a good ol' 25 years ago Republican, he'd probably have voted for that candidate. He never said anything about Harris being a woman. 'Oh, he's (bleeping) crazy.' Well, that's the partial right answer. But do the Democrats have a response to them? The next GOP presidential nominee (if there is one) will not be Trump, and then the world looks a bit different, and by that I mean, maybe the country is just shifting right organically, Trump or no Trump. It happens. The country that elected JFK, Clinton and Obama also elected Nixon, Reagan and, gulp, Trump. Again. Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. wrote about a 30-year reset cycle in America that's been rather consistent: reaction begets over-reaction. Bring on the video game ads, the outreach to men (without the 'moralizing tone,' whatever that means), the appearances on Joe Rogan, all of it. Can't hurt. Maybe the Democrats need to mansplain to men. After all, it worked for Trump.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
DOJ, CFPB seek to end Trustmark redlining consent order early
This story was originally published on Banking Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Banking Dive newsletter. The Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a motion last week to terminate a consent order against Trustmark Bank over allegations the Jackson, Mississippi-based lender engaged in redlining between 2014 and 2018. The 2021 consent order marked the launch of a concerted effort by the DOJ, CFPB and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency during the Biden administration to root out racial discrimination in mortgage lending. Throughout three years, the agencies agreed to 15 settlements that brought $150 million in relief, the DOJ said last October. Trustmark has paid a $5 million penalty in connection with the order and disbursed $3.85 million into a loan subsidy program meant to increase the bank's lending presence in majority-Black and majority-Hispanic neighborhoods in the Memphis, Tennessee, area, and took steps to implement improved fair lending procedures, the DOJ and CFPB argued last week. Trustmark's consent order was to remain in effect for five years. Terminating the order now would free the bank 17 months early. The DOJ and CFPB seek to have it dismissed with prejudice, too, so future iterations of the agencies can't file claims later on the same allegations. 'Trustmark has demonstrated a commitment to remediation, and … [the bank] is substantially in compliance with the other monetary and injunctive terms of the Consent Order,' the agencies wrote in paperwork filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The bank likewise referenced its 'commitment to remediation' and 'substantial compliance' with the consent order in a filing Wednesday with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing the matter. The CFPB alleged in 2021 that Trustmark failed to adequately market, offer or originate home loans to consumers in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Memphis. Specifically, just four of the bank's 25 Memphis-area branches were in majority-nonwhite neighborhoods at the time, and none of the four had an assigned mortgage loan officer, the bureau said at the time. Further, Trustmark did not establish internal committees to oversee fair lending until August 2018, after the OCC launched an exam of the bank's fair-lending practices. 'The federal government will be working to rid the market of racist business practices, including those by discriminatory algorithms,' the CFPB's then-director, Rohit Chopra, said, noting the launch of the anti-redlining effort. Despite being used as a benchmark, the Trustmark settlement was hardly the first of the Biden era. The DOJ had reached an $8.5 million settlement with Cadence Bank just two months earlier over allegations the lender engaged in redlining in Houston from 2013 to 2017. But the Trustmark order signaled a lock-step among regulators. Observers might argue Trump administration regulators are aligning in a similar lock-step now, with different priorities. The CFPB, for example, dismissed 18 lawsuits and three civil investigative demands against various firms between February and early May, American Banker reported. So last week's Trustmark motion is in character. The DOJ and CFPB noted in their motion that 'modifications' to the 2021 consent order 'may be made upon approval of the Court, by motion by any Party, and that the Parties will work cooperatively to propose modifications if there are changes in material factual circumstances.' Trustmark's $5 million penalty was far from the highest from the cooperative anti-redlining effort. That distinction belongs to Royal Bank of Canada subsidiary City National Bank, which was ordered to pay $31 million in 2023. Recommended Reading Shared zeal for CRA reform leads OCC chief, entrepreneur to rare rapport
San Francisco Chronicle
08-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
This small city is the fastest-growing in California
Among the almond orchards, grapevines and alfalfa fields alongside State Route 99 is California's fastest growing city with more than 20,000 people: Shafter, California. According to a state report released this week, the population of Shafter, a Central Valley city just north of Bakersfield, grew by 4.7% — about 1,000 people — between Jan. 2024 and Jan. 2025, the most of any city in California with more than 20,000 people whose population gains did not come from college dormitory populations. Shafter's boost was largely driven by an increase in housing, according to John Boyne, a research data specialist with the California Department of Finance, which compiled the report. With 309 new housing units built in 2024, Shafter was also one of the fastest growing cities in the state in terms of housing. All of the added units were single family homes, Boyne said. The majority-Hispanic town is, like many Central Valley cities, an agricultural hub. But it is also home to an industrial park owned by the Wonderful Company (of pistachio and pomegranate juice fame) that houses distribution centers for large companies like Walmart, Target and Amazon — with plans to expand. The city has grown significantly over the last decade and a half, going from about 17,000 people in 2010 to just under 23,500 as of January this year. Shafter's growth was part of an overall growth trend in California's Central Valley and inland areas. Several other cities in the Central Valley saw notable growth, including Lathrop and Patterson. (Merced and Folsom also showed large gains, but Merced's was due to the city annexing the UC Merced, incorporating its on campus students into the city's population, and Folsom's growth was due to increases in the state prison population there.) And of the ten largest cities in California, Bakersfield gained the most population, though the increase was slight at just over 1%. And Fresno and Kern counties were first and second in terms of year-over-year population growth among California counties with more than 500,000 people. But not all of the Central Valley saw gains. Wasco, which is less than 10 miles away from Shafter, lost nearly as many residents as Shafter gained. Boyne described this as 'a tale of two cities.' While Shafter added housing, Wasco lost it, he said — it had a net loss of 163 housing units due to the demolition of 226 multi-family units as a part of a multi-year affordable housing project. On top of that, Wasco's population was also impacted by decreases in the prison population at Wasco State Prison, Boyne said. Some Bay Area cities were among the fastest growing as well. Belmont, American Canyon and Burlingame, which are all around the same size as Shafter in terms of population, were all in the top 10 fastest growing cities by population, and each saw notable increases in housing supply between 2024 and 2025.
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Orlando commissioner Tony Ortiz switches from Republican to Democrat
Orlando city commissioner Tony Ortiz has switched his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat, citing his disagreement with GOP positions on issues ranging from immigration to banning certain books in schools and dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Ortiz, a retired police officer and U.S. Marine veteran, has served on the city commission for 17 years, representing a majority-Hispanic district spanning the Conway area and the Semoran Boulevard corridor. He said he formally filed the paperwork Monday. 'The Republican party is not the Republican party I signed up with,' said Ortiz, who had described himself previously as a 'Ronald Reagan Republican.' Ortiz also confirmed rumors that he's considering a run for Mayor once Buddy Dyer leaves office after 2027 – but said his party flip had nothing to do with that potential pursuit. 'This has to do with my conviction,' he said. So far, Rep. Anna Eskamani, a Democrat, is the only candidate who has filed paperwork. Orlando's city council and mayor are non-partisan positions. Before his switch, Ortiz was one of two registered Republicans on the seven-member panel. In switching from the political right to left, Ortiz is bucking a recent trend in Florida politics of Democratic elected officials leaving the party. Last month, state Sen. Jason Pizzo, who was the Senate's top Democrat, left the party to have no party affiliation. Prior to him, two state representatives who were elected as Democrats announced they'd switched to Republican ahead of the legislative session. In an Op-Ed he submitted to the Orlando Sentinel announcing his party change, he listed 'attacks on Medicaid expansion and the erosion of social safety nets' as well as 'political theater used to target the LGBTQ+ community, punish public school teachers and erase inclusive history from classrooms' as motivations to change sides. Ortiz has been outspoken in defending immigrants, and pushed the city council to pass the so-called Trust Act in 2018, which bans city cops and employees from inquiring a person's immigration status if they aren't accused of a crime. The policy came under fire from Republican Attorney General James Uthmeier last month as a 'sanctuary policy,' but remains in place. 'And let me say this clearly: the marginalization of Latinos and immigrants — many of whom have helped build this country and proudly served in its defense — is not leadership. It's fear-based politics,' he wrote. 'Immigrants are the backbone of countless industries in this country. They work the fields under the blazing sun to ensure we have food on our tables. They take on the jobs many others refuse to do — often with dignity, resilience and little recognition.' Ortiz has been elected to his last three terms without an opponent. rygillespie@
Japan Today
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Japan Today
Racist gunman jailed for life over U.S. supermarket massacre
Crusius drove hundreds of miles to the Walmart Supercenter in El Paso, where he killed 23 people The racist gunman who killed 23 people at a crowded supermarket near the Mexico border was sentenced to life in prison without parole Monday after admitting capital murder in one of the deadliest shootings in U.S. history. Patrick Crusius, who struck at a Walmart in the majority-Hispanic Texas city of El Paso in 2019, pleaded guilty at a state court as part of a deal that enabled him to avoid the death penalty. The 26-year-old white supremacist was already serving 90 consecutive life terms over hate crimes convictions handed down last year in federal court. Clad in a bulletproof vest, Crusius stared straight ahead as the El Paso County District Attorney James Montoya named his victims. "You came to inflict terror, to take innocent lives, and to shatter a community that had done nothing but stand for kindness, unity and love," District Judge Sam Medrano told him. "You slaughtered fathers, mothers, sons and daughters." Crusius drove 660 miles (1,060 kilometers) from Allen, Texas, near Dallas to the Walmart Supercenter in El Paso with an AK-47-style assault rifle and 1,000 rounds of ammunition. He opened fire on people in the supermarket parking lot, killing 23 and wounding 22. He had uploaded a document to the internet entitled "The Inconvenient Truth" in which he said the attack was "a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas." He said he was "defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement," referring to a far right conspiracy theory that other ethnic groups are "replacing" white Americans. When police showed up Crusius got out of his car and identified himself as the shooter. While in custody he told police he wanted to kill "Mexicans." The massacre -- which took place during Donald Trump's first term -- ignited a debate on how president's repeated criticism of immigrants influenced the behavior of people who supported him. At his July 2024 federal sentencing, then-assistant attorney general Kristen Clarke described the shooting as "one of the most horrific acts of white nationalist-driven violence in modern times." It came two years after a gunman killed 58 people at an outdoor concert in Las Vegas and three years after a man murdered 49 at an LGBTQ nightclub in Orlando, Florida. © 2025 AFP
