The United States has had its new president-elect, Donald Trump, for just over a week. The former president's victory represents a historic milestone in American politics, as it was not just the election of the first criminally convicted individual to the White House, as well as the second time that a female candidate has been defeated at the polls (the case of Vice President Kamala Harris), with Hillary Clinton being the other defeated candidate, previously in 2016 (also in a dispute against Donald Trump). The defeat was not the only setback for the Democratic party, but the results represented a high number of surprises. In addition to it being the first time in twenty years that Republicans won the popular vote, both houses of Congress and an expansion of the electoral college vote, demographic groups, previously part of the Democratic electorate, voted in large numbers for Donald Trump, such as the Latinos. In this year's election, Trump won 43% of the Latino vote, an increase of eight percentage points compared to 2020, in addition, in a segment of this group, that of Latino men, the president had a greater share of the votes than Kamala Harris. In this way, how is it possible to observe these changes in the Latino electorate, which is migrating to the Republican party, and how did this scenario lead to the defeat of the Democrats? Analyzing the configuration of some urban centers in the country can help with this issue.

Miami

According to a national exit poll conducted focusing on Hispanic performance in this year's US elections, among the ten states analyzed (namely: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin), only in Florida did current President Donald Trump surpass Kamala Harris among Latinos, receiving 56% ofthe votes.

Given this scenario, the daily newspaper Miami Herald set out to try to understand what was behind Miami’s red transformation, starting with an analysis of Miami-Dade County. First, it is understood that this change was not sudden, but rather an ongoing development. There are three main reasons that justify this scenario, according to the headline: the Republican Party’s ongoing campaign, the mistaken way of dealing with Miami’s history, and the personas developed by Republican candidates. Over the past three decades, the Republican front has established a strong presence in communities like Miami-Dade, aiming to align itself, even if “forged,” with the values ​​that prevail in the electorate, through local events and relationships. Democrats, in turn, have often been late in focusing on the importance of electoral popularity. This configuration of building connections with the people who vote gave Republicans an advantage because, even amid controversial opinions and actions, their ties to communities – precisely because they are more deeply rooted – earned them a trust that transcends political positions, since they understood that, for many, one of the main selection criteria is familiarity.

As for the argument of “misinterpreting” Miami’s history, the author of the analysis used as a basis at this time criticizes the Democrats’ approach to various groups in Miami, such as blacks, Haitians, Cubans, Venezuelans, Colombians and Mexicans: “Miami-Dade is a county shaped by a unique political history that is inseparable from the experiences of immigrants who fled leftist regimes in Latin America. Democratic campaigns that have embraced progressive labels and social justice narratives have struggled in Miami, where words like “socialism” and “progressive” are often met with skepticism. Republicans capitalized on this disconnect by framing all Democrats as socialists, a charge that resonated strongly with voters who associated leftist ideologies with political oppression, economic mismanagement, and corruption.” And while Democrats are not, in fact, active in socialist ideology, it is historic that Republicans have been able to exploit this strand to their advantage. “Ultimately, Miami-Dade’s shift to an all-Republican county in 2024 reflects both Republicans’ effective strategy and Democrats’ failure to understand the unique dynamics of the community,” he concludes.

Houston

As one of the largest cities in Texas, Houston has a population of two million three hundred thousandinhabitants, according to the 2020 Census, and its GDP reaches almost US$513 billion dollars. In addition, considering its county, called Harris, this population rises to almost four million nine hundred thousand people, a significant number. In recent decades, Harris County has been one of the fastest growing in Texas and in the country, with its urban area growing by 2.2% between 2020 and 2023. Furthermore, among the millions of people who live in the county, Latinos stand out, being an extremely important group. According to the Census, 44% of the county's population is Latino or Hispanic, indicating a weight, for example, in the political direction of the city, the state and the United States.

The political issue was highlighted, among many others, because it was a point observed in the presidential elections that took place in the country in the 21st century. Harris County, following the tradition of large American cities, usually votes in large numbers for the Democratic Party. In 2008, Obama obtained 50.4% of the votes in the city, a number close to that obtained in his 2012 reelection, in which he won 49.4% of the votes. In 2016, Hillary Clinton reached 54% of the vote in Houston, representing a victory for the Democrats, with the current president, Joe Biden, reaching 55% of the vote in 2020.

In those elections, Donald Trump obtained 41.6% and 42.7% of the vote in the city, respectively, but something unusual happened in 2024, when the now president-elect achieved his highest percentage in Houston, 46.5%. Despite obtaining the majority of the vote, 51.8%, Vice President Kamala Harris had the worst Democratic performance in the city since 2012, going against the Democratic trend that the county was experiencing. In addition, she saw her party's biggest defeat of the decade in the state of Texas, with Trump reaching 56.22% of the vote in the state against 42.38% for the Democrat.

It is therefore clear how a Democratic city in the recent elections, previously part of the party's strengthening trend in Texas' urban centers, has swung towards Trump and the Republican Party. From a difference of 12.5 points in 2020 to 5.3 in 2024, the growth of the right is notable, something that can be seen in the city's own Latino population, which corresponds to 44% of the inhabitants and, like Latinos nationally, favored the Republicans in the current election. However, a curious fact is that this small difference was not noticed in the Senate election. The Democratic candidate for the Senate in Texas, Colin Allred, obtained 54% of the votes in the city, against 43% for Ted Cruz, the current occupant of the position. In other words, the vote of the city and its Latino population differed in the two races, indicating divergent preferences for the candidates.

Thus, it can be concluded that the recent election in the United States, which culminated in the victory of Donald Trump, raises a series of questions about the behavior of the Latino electorate in large cities, especially in relation to the Democratic Party. This phenomenon, which can be interpreted as a "fiasco" for the Democrats, reveals a significant change in the political preferences of this demographic group. Furthermore, the Latino vote in large cities represents a reconfiguration of the political landscape in the United States. The rise in support for Donald Trump among this demographic group not only challenges traditional assumptions about the Latino electorate, but also highlights the strategic failures of Democrats to understand and connect with the unique concerns and experiences of this community. Analysis of the electoral dynamics in cities such as Miami and Houston illustrates the urgent need to reevaluate political approaches to effectively engage the Latino vote in the future.