The cost of Not Knowing Or Clinton Campaigned More

So you have a bias towards Obama? That's not news, man:) I agree with you in so far as given Obama's success with the younger folks, the key we're searching for to unlock the "Latino" door probably rests with the age gap.

But, what if there is a simpler answer? In an LA Times piece, the Political Science professors Matt A. Barreto and Ricardo Ramírez write

The empirical evidence does not match his opinions, and the results from Super Tuesday and other important elections demonstrate Latino willingness to vote for African American candidates. Furthermore, the Latino vote in 2008 should be viewed as a pro-Clinton vote, not an anti-Obama or an anti-black vote, as Contreras and others have suggested.

What if Latinos just like Clinton more, as the Poli Sci profs suggest? Perhaps not even that they like her more, it is merely that she is better known? Brian hints at why this may be with his comment on the correlation between Obama's campaigning and his primary success. Clinton has had years to create her name and develop a base; she had placed Latinos on her staff, and, she had has garnered the endorsements of prominent Latinos throughout the country. These years of efforts have paid off in a superior rapport with the community. Outside of his home state, Obama has been campaigning for essentially no time at all. The conclusion would seem to be that Obama needs to play catch up. Perhaps then, this "Latino Gap" is not as significant an issue for Obama as pundits suggest.