Focus groups: Latino Trump voters diverge on deportations but largely still back the president

Some divides are emerging among swing-state Latinos who voted for President Donald Trump when it comes to his approach to mass deportations, according to new focus group conversations with some of these voters, who nevertheless remain broadly supportive of the president.
Most of the Latino Trump voters who participated in recent focus groups observed by NBC News as part of the 2025 Deciders series, produced by Syracuse University and the research firms Engagious and Sago, said they approve of Trump's handling of illegal immigration. And most approved of his actions broadly as president.
These voters were key to Trump's win in 2024, when he improved significantly among Latino voters compared to his previous campaigns. The president lost Latinos by 5 points last year, after losing the group by 33 points in 2020, according to the NBC News exit poll. Other estimates of the 2024 vote have indicated the broad shift, too, though some have not shown quite as much movement.
The people in these focus groups said they voted for Trump because of concerns about the economy, including inflation, and about immigration. And most of them were still behind the president (all but four also voted for Trump in 2020).
'He's keeping his promises and he's doing what he said he was going to do,' David L., a 60 year-old Georgia voter who grew up in Mexico, said of Trump.
But there were cracks, albeit small ones, in support for some of Trump's specific policies. Two voters who supported Joe Biden in 2020 and flipped to Trump in 2024 said they would not vote for Trump if given the chance to redo their vote, choosing instead to back a third-party candidate.
One of those voters, Ruby L., 59, of Georgia, said she disapproved of Trump's presidency so far because of potential cuts to programs like Medicaid and because of his approach to deporting undocumented immigrants.
'He was going to deport people that were criminals and have backgrounds,' said Ruby, who was born in Colombia. 'But I see that he's deporting people that work hard and have been in this country. I think he should find a way to help them stay and get a citizenship or something.'
Deportation divides
Ruby's concerns about widespread deportations underscored some divisions among these voters, even as they broadly supported Trump's actions on immigration. Three of the Trump voters disapproved of his handling of illegal immigration broadly, while 10 approved. That may not reflect Latino Trump voters' broad views, because, unlike a poll, which uses statistical methods to demonstrate how a larger population feels, focus groups dig deeper into how individual panelists view key questions facing the country.
'Most of these swing-state, Hispanic American Trump voters firmly endorse the president's focus on illegal immigration, though they want more thoughtful prioritization regarding who gets deported sooner versus later,' said Rich Thau, president of Engagious, who moderated the sessions.
Several voters supported deportations of undocumented immigrants regardless of whether they have committed crimes.
'Well, what do you expect? If you came here illegally, you've done something illegal. Expect the consequences,' said Justin O., 38, of Nevada, who was born in the United States and is of Mexican descent.
'If we're not going to enforce laws, why bother even having them?' said Zachary N., 40, of Michigan, who is also of Mexican descent.
Maria P., a 40-year-old Nevada voter of Puerto Rican descent, said Trump's focus on deportations is no different from that of previous presidents, including Democrats Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.
'They all did it, but now it's just the first time everyone's discussing it,' Maria said.
Connie A., a 59-year-old Arizona voter of Mexican descent, questioned why an undocumented immigrant who has been in the country for decades had not attempted to apply for a green card or for citizenship.
'There's not a direct path,' countered Mariana L., a 27-year-old North Carolina resident who was born in Venezuela and was one of several participants who noted the path to becoming a legal resident, even for those who want to, can be difficult. Mariana was among the voters who did not approve of Trump's handling of illegal immigration, pointing to his move to revoke certain legal protections for immigrants from her home country.
'Changing those statuses is kind of unfair for the people that built their lives here,' she said.
Mariana and some other voters also said the administration should prioritize deporting undocumented immigrants who committed crimes.
'I guess they're focusing on both those who have committed crimes and those who haven't,' said Jennifer L., a 44-year-old Michigan voter of Mexican descent. She approved of Trump's overall performance as president but disapproved of his handling of illegal immigration.
'There's some that are going back because they should, but then there are also some immigrants that are going that really, maybe they haven't committed a crime,' she later added.
'He said he was going to focus on the criminals and stuff like that. And then there's people that are not criminals that are also going,' said Oscar B., a 52-year-old Pennsylvania voter, adding that the Trump administration should take a more 'tailored approach.'
Oscar, who was born in Venezuela, also noted that he has seen posts on a local Facebook page for Latinos in his area that warn about Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids.
'People on there, they make posts where they talk about ICE being in the city and not to go out of your house,' Oscar said.
Ruby of Georgia also said she has seen 'a lot of fear' in her community.
'They're afraid to go out and [they say], 'Don't go out if you're a citizen, don't go out without your citizenship certificate or whatever because you never know,'' Ruby said. 'So they're creating that source of fear around the area.
Other voters, like Maria from Nevada, appeared to wrestle with different approaches to deporting undocumented immigrants who have been in the country for years "giving back to society," she said.
'It is the law,' she later added, 'but sometimes the law makes it nearly impossible for a lot of them to actually become citizens at the end of the day. And that's what we have to realize, also. So that's why I'm torn.'
'We see in their responses how conflicted some of these voters are when it comes deporting longtime undocumented residents who have become de facto Americans, have families, pay taxes, live peacefully and contribute to society," said Margaret Talev, director of Syracuse University's Institute for Democracy, Journalism and Citizenship, which leads the focus group project in partnership with Engagious/Sago.
"Yet overwhelmingly they're still supporting President Trump, showing the resilience of their loyalty and just how motivated they are in opposing illegal immigration,' Talev said.
Los Angeles response
While there were some divisions over the Trump administration's deportations, the Trump voters who participated in the focus groups broadly backed Trump's response to protests against ICE raids in Los Angeles.
Ten of the 13 participants approved of the president's decision to deploy California National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines, with several voters describing the protests as violent and destructive.
'Normally it might be kind of out of the ordinary, being that it was so early into the demonstrations. But I think given the [Black Lives Matter] riots and everything our country went through a few years ago, and it being in California where [Gov. Gavin] Newsom will pretty much not put his foot down at all, I think that he had to get ahead of it, otherwise we would be seeing even more of it,' said Rozlyn C., a 44-year-old Georgia voter of Cuban descent.
'These idiots are trying to tear down their city,' said Irma C., a 58-year-old Arizona voter of Mexican descent.
The few who disapproved of Trump's actions described them as 'too much too soon' or out of bounds.
'There is a chain of command that has to be followed. A governor needs to request — we can't just go in there, the state needs to request. Now, he's just completely gone against that,' Justin of Nevada said, referring to Trump.
'The U.S. military should never be used against its own citizens ever. Period. Ever,' Justin later added.
Mostly positive on economy
Several of these voters said they supported Trump because they believed he could best address the economy and high prices, and for the most part they like what they've seen of Trump so far on those issues.
Eight voters said they feel less anxious about the economy compared to when Trump took office in January. Just two said they were more anxious.
'The reduced anxiety eight of them feel about the economy after just five months reflects not only their experiences as consumers, but also their faith in President Trump as businessman-turned-leader,' said Thau, the focus group moderator.
'As a small-business owner, my costs went up under Biden,' said William A., a 60 year-old Georgia voter of Puerto Rican descent, suggesting Biden's policies raised the price of oil, which impacted 'everything else.' In his view, Trump's policies are 'raising our fuel production and lowering fuel costs.'
Mariana, the North Carolina voter who was born in Venezuela, said she backed Trump and the Republican Party because of her concerns about the economy. She said she's seen local grocery prices go down since Trump took office.
'I think that the inflation, economy's what they know and Trump being a businessman is just what he does and has been doing for a living,' she said.
But Jennifer, the Michigan voter, said high prices on goods such as eggs, dairy, meat and produce have persisted, and she did not believe that Trump was making addressing inflation a priority.
'I thought it would be a top priority instead of renaming the Gulf of Mexico the 'Gulf of America' instead,' Jennifer said. 'But hopefully it does happen. But definitely, in Michigan here it has not — prices here have gone up and have stayed up.
A majority of voters also said they supported Trump's actions on trade and tariffs, with the rest saying they do not know enough about the issue to weigh in.
Georgia's Rozlyn C. said she disagreed with the president's decision to impose tariffs on some countries with which the U.S. did not have a trade deficit. But she is still broadly supportive of the president.
'I think he has a grand master plan that most of us probably don't understand,' Rozlyn said. 'But I have faith that he, a hundred percent, has the best interest of our country at heart.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

18 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

MAGA tears itself apart over Iran as Steve Bannon unloads on Bibi for dragging America into war: 'Who the hell are you?'

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon pivoted his criticism away from President Donald Trump and aimed it toward Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu as the president weighs further military action against Iran. Bannon lambasted the Israeli government for pushing Trump to get involved in the goal of 'regime change' in Iran and trying to manipulate the American people into support of further military strikes in Iran. 'Who in the hell are you to lecture the American people? Who are you to lecture the American people?' Bannon said angrily on his War Room podcast. He demanded that Netanyahu do more to 'finish the job' to destroy Iran's nuclear capacities. 'The American people are not going to tolerate it. Not going to put up with it. Who are you to jam us into this situation which you knew you couldn't finish the job, or if you can, go finish it!' he announced. In recent days, Netanyahu has pressed Trump and his MAGA allies for more support, speaking to the media about the importance of getting the United States further involved with the war against the 'evil' in Iran. 'Today, it's Tel Aviv. Tomorrow, it's New York. Look, I understand "America First" I don't understand "America Dead,"' he said on ABC News on Sunday. Bannon said that it was the Israeli's responsibly to conclude the war, and expressed frustration that they had no problem starting the conflict. 'Go finish it! Quit coming to us to finish it. President Trump may come to that conclusion, but it's not something he would just say… 'Oh yeah, let's go bomb 'em and take care of it,"' he said. 'He's going to do it because he's got to weigh the options now that you've gotten us into it. That's reality. That's the truth. That's exactly where we are and people should be truthful with each other, particularly in these tough decisions,' he said. 'That's what allies do. Allies don't manipulate and don't inextricably draw people into situations of which the other party has to get them out of,' he continued. On his show, Bannon questioned the timing of the military strikes on Iran, asking the Israelis why it had to be now. He demanded Netanyahu show their intelligence that proved the Iranians were on the cusp of obtaining a nuclear weapon. 'Why did you start something that you couldn't finish?' he asked. Bannon told his viewers that Trump was facing enormous pressure to get involved in the war. 'The pressure on President Trump is coming from the outside and it's coming from people who are not straight with him,' he said. He conceded that Trump could conclude that military action was necessary but that it was important to detail the reasons why they had to do it. 'We have enough faith in President Trump and his judgement that he will come to the right conclusion, but we have to get all the cards on the table,' he concluded.

Sky News

an hour ago

• Sky News

Russia would react 'negatively' if Iran's leader is killed, says the Kremlin

Why you can trust Sky News Regime change in Iran is "unacceptable" and the assassination of the country's Supreme Leader would "open the Pandora's box", the Kremlin has said. In a rare interview with a foreign media organisation, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Sky News that Russia would react "very negatively" if Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed. The comments came as US President Donald Trump said he will decide within two weeks whether America will join Israel's military campaign against Tehran, after earlier speculating on social media about killing the Iranian leader. "The situation is extremely tense and is dangerous not only for the region but globally," Mr Peskov said in an interview at the Constantine Palace in Saint Petersburg. "An enlargement of the composition of the participants of the conflict is potentially even more dangerous. "It will lead only to another circle of confrontation and escalation of tension in the region." Russia has deepened its ties with Iran since invading Ukraine, and the two countries signed a strategic partnership in January. "[Regime change in Iran] is unimaginable. It should be unacceptable, even talking about that should be unacceptable for everyone," Mr Peskov said, in a thinly veiled reference to Washington. 1:35 But Mr Peskov refused to be drawn on what action Russia would take if Khamenei was killed, saying instead it would trigger action "from inside Iran". "It would lead to the birth of extremist moods inside Iran and those who are speaking about [killing Khamenei], they should keep it in mind. They will open the Pandora's box." Vladimir Putin's offers to mediate an end to the conflict have so far been rejected by Mr Trump, who said on Wednesday that he told the Russian president to "mediate your own [conflict]", in reference to Russia's war against Ukraine. Mr Peskov denied the American president's words were insulting, adding: "Everyone has a different language. "President Trump has his own unique way of speaking and his unique language. We are quite tolerant and expect everyone to be tolerant of us." The Trump administration's own mediation efforts to end the war in Ukraine have failed to yield any major breakthroughs, despite two rounds of direct talks between Moscow and Kyiv. Moscow has stepped up its aerial bombardment of Ukraine in recent weeks and continues to reject Volodymyr Zelenskyy's calls for a 30-day ceasefire. "Now we have a strategic advantage. Why should we lose it? We are not going to lose it. We are going further. We're advancing and we'll continue to advance," Mr Peskov said. Russia has previously said it would only commit to a ceasefire if Kyiv stops receiving foreign military support, fearing that a pause in the fighting would offer Ukraine a chance to rearm and regroup its forces. 0:57 Asked if Moscow could commit to not using a ceasefire in the same way, Mr Peskov said: "A ceasefire is a ceasefire, and you stop. "But America is not saying that 'we'll quit any supplies'. Britain is not saying that as well. France is not saying that as well. This is the problem."

Leader Live

an hour ago

• Leader Live

Lammy to meet Iranian foreign minister as Trump steps back from military action

The Foreign Secretary is set to meet Abbas Araghchi alongside his counterparts from France, Germany and the EU as he seeks to negotiate a settlement before US President Donald Trump decides on whether to take military action against Tehran. In a statement read by his press secretary on Thursday, Mr Trump said there was still 'a substantial chance of negotiations' and said he would make a decision on deploying US forces 'within the next two weeks'. Mr Trump had previously said he 'may' join Israeli strikes against Iran and its nuclear programme, but added: 'I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' Friday's meeting with the so-called E3 countries follows Mr Lammy's visit to Washington, where he met US secretary of state Marco Rubio in the White House on Thursday evening to discuss 'how a deal could avoid a deepening conflict'. The Foreign Secretary said: 'The situation in the Middle East remains perilous. We are determined that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon.' The situation in the Middle East remains perilous. We are determined that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon. Meeting with @SecRubio and @SteveWitkoff in the White House today, we discussed how a deal could avoid a deepening conflict. A window now exists within the next two… — David Lammy (@DavidLammy) June 19, 2025 Adding that a 'window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution', Mr Lammy said: 'Now is the time to put a stop to the grave scenes in the Middle East and prevent a regional escalation that would benefit no one.' Earlier on Thursday, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer had urged the US to step back from military action, saying there was a 'real risk of escalation'. It remains unclear whether the UK would join any military action, although there has been speculation that US involvement could require using the British-controlled base on Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands. The B-2 stealth bombers based there are capable of carrying specialised 'bunker buster' bombs which could be used against Iran's underground nuclear facility at Fordo. Attorney General Lord Hermer is reported to have raised legal concerns about any British involvement in the conflict beyond defending its allies, which could limit the extent of any support for the US if Mr Trump decides to act militarily. Meanwhile, two Labour backbenchers pushed for a 'fresh, tough approach' to Tehran. Jon Pearce and Mike Tapp, chairman and vice-chairman respectively of Labour Friends of Israel, said the UK urgently needed 'a multifaceted diplomatic, economic and national security plan to guard against the Iranian threat and force the regime to change course'. Writing in The Daily Telegraph, the pair called for tighter sanctions on Iran, the proscription of the country's Revolutionary Guard Corps and a 'comprehensive diplomatic solution' that 'eliminates once and for all' Iran's nuclear threat.