The gap between political messaging in English and Spanish about Proposition 50 in California highlights the challenges Democrats face in connecting with Latino voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
I know what you are going to say. Duh, of course it is. Political ads are carefully crafted to appeal to their target audience; it’s political messaging 101.
But what happens when what you communicate to voters in Spanish doesn’t quite match the messaging for general market ads?
I was watching YouTube and came across a Spanish political ad in which California Senator Alex Padilla urges Latino voters to vote “si” on Proposition 50. That ad was followed by an ad from California Governor Gavin Newsom also urging voters to vote “yes” on Prop 50.
The disparity in the messaging between English and Spanish is what prompted me to ask myself that question.
Prop 50 is California’s answer to Texas’ mid-decade redistricting scheme that will guarantee them five additional Republican-leaning seats in the House of Representatives. Republicans looked at it as an opportunity to secure victory and preserve their majority in Congress in next year’s critical midterm elections.
What made this a blatant, sneaky, political scheme is that traditionally, congressional districts are redrawn every ten years after the national census is conducted. Congressional districts are supposed to be redrawn based on population to ensure a fair and equitable representation, regardless of how much a particular district leans towards one party or another.
Truth be told, both Republicans and Democrats have long benefited from redrawing districts that often don’t make geographical sense. Both parties found compromises and benefits in drawing districts that seemed politically balanced.
In response to this Republican power grab, Democrats have mounted a campaign spearheaded by California Governor Gavin Newsom that would allow California voters to temporarily set aside its independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and adopt a new, legislatively drawn congressional district map for the elections in 2026 through 2030.
As a result of Prop 50, California is expected to gain five more Democratic-leaning congressional districts, effectively countering Texas’ scheme. For context, in 2025, California’s congressional delegation consists of 52 seats, 43 Democrats and 9 Republicans.
The Bully and the Coward: Trump’s Vulgar Display of Power
Underestimating the political understanding of the Latino voter
“When Trump’s agents took me down to the ground, they took all of us to the ground”.
That’s the opening of the Spanish version of Senator Padilla’s Prop 50 ad, with the image of agents tackling him during DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s press conference in Los Angeles, following the ICE protests earlier this summer.
At the time, I identified Senator Padilla’s takedown as a political stunt. Whether it was necessary or not can be debated, but what can’t be debated is that it was a gimmick. The video of the takedown would prove to be useful for all kinds of political advertisement appealing to Latino voters, and it has.
After I saw the ad, I called a colleague of mine to have a heart-to-heart conversation about it, and why I felt insulted. My colleague is a strong advocate for immigrant rights and all things Latino, so I expected him to question my sensitivity.
To my surprise, he didn’t. He agreed.
He did start by defending Padilla’s takedown as necessary. In his own words, “Latinos have a spineless representation in Congress.” He argued that someone had to stand-up and put up a public fight to the Trump administration’s war against immigrants in large urban communities.
“Democrats love to talk, talk, talk, but I didn’t see any national Latino leaders out there guiding the tone of these protests or the discourse that has followed since,” he added.
He’s not wrong.
In my opinion, the ad reflects the Democratic Party’s inability or unwillingness to understand that Latinos are not monolithic. The ad is a portrayal of the Latino community as victims, and that has to stop.
In comparison to Governor Newsom’s very language-specific ad, Padilla’s seems like a dummied-down version, and it inherently assumes that Spanish speaking Latinos are incapable of the same level of understanding or sophistication.
You can take a look at the ads yourself and be the judge.
Some of the notable differences to me were the following:
The English version clearly states that it is California’s turn to fight back, and we can’t do it with both our hands tied behind our back, and it clearly states that Trump’s power play is about stealing congressional seats, rigging the election, and silencing California’s political influence.
The English version doesn’t speak in generalities; it clearly identifies Prop 50 as the Election Rigging Response Act, and it lists the policy actions prompted by Prop 50, including preserving independent redistricting. That’s a key provision in the appeal to voters, but it is ignored in the Spanish version.
The English version does not rely on the “saving democracy” message, it relies on the “fair election for all 50 states” message. They are very different, and they appeal to different kinds of voters.
The Spanish version is purposely vague and it doesn’t identify the election as just impacting California; it makes you believe that your vote is going to influence democracy in general, not just California’s role in fighting back.
Two Houses Divided: Conspiracies and a Lack of Leadership
Biculturalism and future messaging to Latino voters
Prop 50 is going to be approved by voters. The real question (and the measure of messaging success for the Democratic Party) is by how much, and what the Latino voter turnout will look like.
This is a special election, it’s an off-year, and there aren’t any other issues that will be motivating voters to go to the polls. We can expect a very low voter turnout; historically, these types of elections only draw about 15% of voters and even less Latino voters.
What this tells me is that, yes, California is willing to carry the bastion to oppose Trump, but not enthusiastically.
It also poses the question, what does that mean for the future of Latino voting power and how will we be messaged as the elections approach and even as we look ahead to 2030?
In my opinion, this type of missed messaging exemplifies something that is controversial to some, and I happen to agree with it. That being bilingual is not the same as being bicultural.
Whoever decided to approve of this Spanish wasn’t bicultural; if they were, the ad would be very different. Speaking Spanish doesn’t mean you can effectively communicate policy.
What I’m afraid of is that this will be the standard for Spanish political advertisement as we move towards the 2026 midterm elections.
This past presidential election proved to be a failure for the Democratic Party’s Latino voter outreach, and this type of messaging doesn’t convince me that it will be any different next year.
If the rumors are true, that Governor Padilla is going to run for Governor of California, and if he wants to win (which he can), these differences in language and how Spanish speaking, bilingual, and bicultural voters understand the message are critical to his voter outreach.
If Democrats want to reclaim the majority of the Latino vote, their Spanish ads need to be better. They can’t rely on the simple use of Spanish or a Latino political figure to appeal to Latino voters.
Te recomendamos
Síguenos en Google News
George I. Gonzalez
Fundador de la firma Complex Made Simple. Experto en comunicaciones de política pública y comentarista Fundador de Complex Made Simple y experto en comunicaciones politicas y corporativas. Originario de CDMX. Fue designado de la Casa Blanca y subsecretario de prensa de desarrollo urbano y vivienda. También fue gerente de comunicaciones de política pública de Facebook en Washington D.C.y recibe contenido exclusivo
