While it is a truism that political voice is a cornerstone of democratic theory, less theorizing has focused on its counterpart, political listening. Drawing upon research related to listening practices, this study operationalizes for empirical study Dobson’s (2014) normative concepts of apophatic listening, which is dialogic and facilitates discussion across lines of difference, and cataphatic listening, which is monologic and disruptive in nature. Using data from a national sample survey of Latinos fielded shortly after the 2016 U.S. presidential election (N = 720), we provide an empirical test of these listening practices’ democratic value by examining how relational and analytical listening (dimensions of apophatic practices) and task-oriented and critical listening (dimensions of cataphatic practices) are associated with various political outcomes, including political interest, knowledge, trust, and participation. Findings indicate that, from a normative point of view, task-oriented listening was unrelated or negatively related to political outcomes while relational listening had ambivalent relations. However, the two cognitive-epistemic dimensions of both types of listening – analytical listening and critical (error-seeking) listening – were both strongly and positively related to most studied political outcomes. These findings offer nuanced evidence that apophatic and cataphatic listening might not necessarily be at odds with each other where democratically desirable outcomes are concerned.