Editors across the nation are giving their writers the "What happened to Latinos?" assignment because Latinos in one county or some jail town underperformed; asking questions that pathologize our community, like something is wrong with us.

When not a few of these editors were pumping out story after story of feel-good narratives about "fed up suburban white women disgusted by the racism" only for the exit polls to show higher support for Trump among white women.

How about a story in the national media about how Latinos are forming coalitions with Black communities and white progressives in Georgia. How about the 500,000 Puerto Ricans in Pennsylvania, whose votes are no doubt giving the Dems a pathway to the Presidency as we speak.

How about a story on Latinos in Las Vegas or Milwaukee, or El Paso? Or how Latinas are once again the backbone of our community, not only on election day, but in the background organizing, working every other day?

The Dreamer kids have changed the landscape of how we view immigration and they are in stark contrast to the monstrosity in the White House. Where's that narrative? Latinos are breathing life back into labor unions, not with dues, but with clipboards. Where's that narrative?

How about a story on when Latinos came under attack in Arizona 15 years ago by criminal Joe Arpaio, and then later Jan Brewer. They built their own organizations from the ground up. They ran for school boards, county assessors, clerks, mayors. And they do a better job!

For sure, we have our own dirty laundry we must deal with; patriarchy, racism, issues with indigeneity, nationalism. But when someone gets maybe 35 percent of the vote from a small group (men), far from a stellar electoral performance, and a full 20 points less than white women,

I expect some editors to not fully NYTimes this by asking questions that fetishize us into the Latino version of
the next hillbilly elegy. (Though there's plenty of fetishizing already...)