Texas Senate Race Updates for June 15, 2011

June 15th, 2011

A few Senate race updates. Ted Cruz is turning a very good week into a very good month:

  • First off, Cruz gets some serious love from George Will.
  • Cruz also appeared on Fox Business News:

  • The Houston Chronicle rounds up news of Cruz’s recent successes.
  • Did you know that Tom Leppert compared himself to Obama, and his city-owned hotel plan to the stimulus, to a group of Young Democrats in 2009? He also answered a questionnaire for them during his Mayoral campaign.
  • A little bird passed me the flyer for a Michael Williams fundraising event for his Congressional campaign today at noon at The Coronado Club in Houston. Word is that he’s waiting until the District 33 lines are finalized by the legislature before officially dropping his Senatorial bid.
  • Roger Williams will address a Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans this weekend. As will Michael Williams (assuming he doesn’t drop out as part of refocusing on that Congressional campaign). As will Rick Perry. Hmmm, seems like quite the event. I may need to go next year, since it’s closer and cheaper than CPAC. Plus New Orleans beats the hell out of DC any day…
  • In Which I Come Perilously Close to Defending Lloyd Doggett

    June 14th, 2011

    Paul Burka has a post up in which he basically makes two arguments:

    1. Republicans are trying to Gerrymander white Democrats out of Congress; and
    2. “Almost no one has done as much damage to the Democratic cause” in Texas as Lloyd Doggett.

    He is mistaken, to differing degrees, in both beliefs.

    As for the first, Republicans are trying to Gerrymander as many Democrats as possible out of their congressional seats, white, black, Hispanic or purple, just as Democrats ruthlessly Gerrymandered Republicans out of congressional seats when they had control of redistricting. (Remember, Texas never had as many as three Republicans serving in the U.S. House of Representatives at the same time until James M. Collins joined George H. W. Bush and Bob Price in 1969, despite Texas voters preferring Republican Presidential candidates in 1928, 1952, and 1956.) It’s just that the Voting Rights Act makes it so much easier to do it against white Democrats than minority Democrats.

    As for the second, anyone who has been reading this blog for any appreciable length of time should realize that I have no particular fondness for Rep. Doggett. However, laying the lion’s share of the Democratic Party’s precipitous decline in Texas at the feet of Doggett’s unsuccessful Senate campaign is both misguided and deeply ahistorical.

    First of all, it was a lot less obvious in 1984 that Doggett was too liberal to win (though he was) than the fact that nobody was going to beat Phil Gramm. After Democrats threw him off the House Budget Committee for supporting the Kemp-Roth tax cuts and co-sponsoring the Gramm-Latta budget reconciliation bill, Gramm resigned from his House seat and ran for it again as a Republican, winning overwhelmingly and turning himself into a folk hero for doing so. In the Republican primary he creamed Robert Mosbacher, Jr. and Ron Paul, and then thumped Doggett by 900,000 votes. Nobody was going to beat Gramm that year, even if Kent Hance had managed to defeat Doggett. And remember that after losing to Doggett in the Democratic Primary, Hance switched to the Republican Party the very next year. Even back then, it was apparent that conservatives had no future in the Democratic Party.

    Further, fingering Doggett as the cause of the Texas Democratic Party’s decline ignores the pronounced decline in the fortunes of the Democratic Party in every state south of the Mason-Dixon line over the last 32 years, as the so-called “Reagan Democrats” have fled the party in droves in both the South and Midwest thanks to its unwavering drive for bigger government and higher taxes. That can be laid at Doggett’s feet only insofar as he was one of several hundred Democratic elites pushing their party relentlessly left, no matter the electoral cost.

    And as for Burka’s starting that “How could [Doggett] have had so little self-awareness as to not know that he had was too liberal to win a statewide race?”, two points:

  • There’s a reason they have elections: you never know with 100% surety how they’ll turn out until they actually occur. Remember the infamous Newsweek poll that had Walter Mondale leading Reagan by 18 points right after the Democratic National Convention? Here’s another way to ask the question: “Shouldn’t Bill Clinton have known that Bush was invulnerable when he got into the Presidential race in 1991?” Nor did Doggett’s liberalism keep him from being elected to the Texas Supreme Court in 1988.
  • Second, not recognizing that Democrats have become too liberal for the general electorate is by no means limited to Doggett; indeed, it is arguably the defining characteristic of the modern Democratic Party. For years they’ve been listening to the likes of John P. Judis and Ruy Teixeira proclaiming them the country’s “natural majority party,” and there was no shortage of Democratic triumphalism confidently predicting how the Republican Party was “finished” after the 2008 election, and how well Democrats were going to do in 2010 once voters realized how awesome ObamaCare was. The comforting, anesthetizing Liberal Reality Bubble conspires to let them continually “get high on their own supply,” managing to convince themselves that America the Liberal is just around the corner. Even today, even in Texas: just look at all those members of the statewise MSM lamenting that Republicans are actually following the voting public’s wishes by shrinking state government rather than listening to them and their liberal friends and raising taxes.
  • There are numerous reasons why the Texas Democratic Party has gone from the overwhelming majority party in Texas to a rump minority party, the biggest one being that their misguided policies of big government liberalism are objectively wrong, financially ruinous and extremely unpopular. But Doggett is only an outstanding exemplar of the problem, not the cause of it.

    (PS: Also remember that in 1992, Burka was blaming the Texas Democratic Party’s decline on Bill Clinton’s unwillingness to seriously contest the state against Bush41.)

    Texas Senate Race Updates for June 12, 2011

    June 12th, 2011

    Another roundup of Texas Senate race news:

  • Here is the video for the Republican Senatorial candidate forum I attended Wednesday:

  • And here’s the follow-up Q&A session they’re not showing on KRLU:

  • Here’s the Statesmen‘s report on the forum.
  • And here’s a report on the Forum from Miss Lizaface, a blogger I am unfamiliar with (linked from Texas Iconoclast).
  • The Fort Worth Star-Telegram‘s J. R. Labbe is shocked, shocked that all the contenders for the Republican Senate nomination at the forum sounded like Republicans rather than those “courageous” tax-hikers the liberal media is always carrying water for.
  • You have to admire the pithy concision of this line: “State Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, would be hard to beat in a bid for U.S. Senate, according to a poll released today by state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston.” Iconoclast is unimpressed. “Pretty much everyone I talk to scoffed at the numbers regardless of who they work for or whether they like Patrick.”
  • Ted Cruz’s campaign recruits Liberty Institute President Kelly Shackelford and former Attorney General Ed Meese as Chairmen of Cruz’s statewide and nationwide Leadership teams, respectively.
  • Hotline on Call suggests that if Perry entered the Presidential race, it would benefit Tom Leppert most by tying down David Dewhurst and uniting moderate Republicans behind his campaign. I find their logic unpersuasive. In Texas, moderate Republicans have shown a strong ability to write checks, but not much luck in defeating high-profile, well-funded conservatives. If they were able to do that, Kay Bailey Hutchison would be governor right now…
  • Democratic longshot Sean Hubbard makes his pitch to the Daily Kossacks on why they should support him over Ricardo Sanchez. Honestly, it’s pretty weak sauce, full of generic “I’ll be a good Senator and listen to my constituents” stuff. He also put up this missive to the Kossacks, which has more liberal talking points of the sort that will please that crowd. But it’s woefully short of what he has to do to even get on the radar. As an underfunded longshot, he pretty much has to be attacking Sanchez every single day from the left if he wants to gain even the tiniest bit of traction in the race. No one beyond hardcore political junkies have even heard of him or realize he’s running at this point. If he can’t change that he’s going to continue being Mr. Irrelevant, despite the fact that Sanchez could very well be vulnerable to a serious challenger on his left flank.
  • Here’s a piece on Senate candidates attending Tea Party events.
  • I’m linking to this piece mainly to mock it, as it looks like the text in the link above has been automatically translated into another language, and then back into English, and then posted without any editing. “Hе accepted thе credentials οf thе forums wіƖƖ contrariety depending οn thе hosting organization, bυt generally any claimant wіƖƖ margin qυеѕtіοnѕ frοm a regressive row acted bу attendees аnԁ thе panelists themselves. Each forum іѕ approaching tο final аbουt dual hours.” Even by the standards of content-scrapping linkbait zombie sites this is peculiar…
  • Elizabeth Ames Jones interviewed in The Jarrell Star Ledger. I’m just happy Jarrell has a newspaper, given the tragic affinity tornadoes have for the place…
  • Finally, one bit of non-news: We’ve been hearing for over a week that Michael Williams was getting out of the Senate race to run for the newly created Texas 33rd Congressional District, an idea buoyed by his absence from the candidate forum on Wednesday. However, Williams has not publicly confirmed or denied the information on either his website, his Facebook account, or his Twitter feed. I can understand weighing your options, but this complete silence on the issue after you’ve already sent out a fundraising solicitation for the congressional race seems a bit odd…
  • Democratic Senate Candidate Ricardo Sanchez Comes Out for Illegal Alien Amnesty, Teachers Unions, and…Tax Cuts???

    June 11th, 2011

    Ricardo Sanchez finally has a website up, though Google still can’t find it, and it was only announced on his Facebook page yesterday. I wonder why it took so long, since he announced back on May 11; it doesn’t take a month to put up a website.

    Also, he’s apparently going to be running as “Ric Sanchez,” though most of the media (save the Dallas Morning News) don’t appear to have gotten the memo.

    The website actually contains some policy substance, though you have to wade through lots of vague, boilerplate, focus-group tested blather to get to it:

  • Sanchez, after some hemming, hawing, and hand-wringing, supports the Dream Act illegal alien amnesty. Despite some vague comments on “enforcement of our existing immigration laws” and a nod to the drain illegal aliens put on state and federal budgets, there’s absolutely no mention of completing the border fence, and no mention of the narco-terrorist war raging in Mexico.
  • He also supports teachers unions. He mentions vouchers (but not school choice or charter schools), but in the sort of highly-qualified way that makes you think he only wants them for public schools. And he slams the No Child Left Behind Act, critics of which are not exclusive to the left.
  • So far, so standard for liberal Democrats. However, in “The Economy and Job Creation” section, in addition to the usual “green jobs,” “social safety net” and “infrastructure” blather all Obama-era Democrats parrot, there’s this: “The best approach to creating jobs in Texas is for us to provide tax cuts, incentives, and increase financing support for small businesses.” Never mind that the entire page is vague to the point of distraction, never mind that the words “budget deficit” and “national debt” are nowhere to be found; the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for the Texas Senate seat actually came out for tax cuts. Even more shocking is that there’s no mention of that holiest of Democratic talking points, “tax hikes on the rich.” Indeed, a Democratic candidate calling for tax cuts is so out of character that I feel compelled to take a screen shot in case the Nutroots read him the riot act and force him to scrub it, so here it is:

  • It’s in the third paragraph. Click to embiggen.

    Granted, anyone can say anything on their website; it doesn’t mean they believe in it, and it doesn’t mean they won’t jettison it ten minutes after they’ve won election. But for a major Democratic candidate to call for tax cuts not before the general election, but even before the Democratic primary, suggests that either Texas is even more conservative a state than even we on the right realize, or (and I mention this only as a possibility) Ricardo Sanchez actually believes in tax cuts as a way to create economic growth. That would put him in agreement with the all the major Republican candidates, but it’s pretty close to heresy in today’s Democratic Party.

    We’ll see what sort of reaction his positions get, assuming people can actually find his website…

    The Unexpected Return of This Week in Jihad

    June 10th, 2011

    I stopped doing This Week in Jihad because it was eating up too much of my time. But this week there were enough big Jihad-related stories to justify putting one up:

  • Michael Totten has an interesting interview with Claire Berlinski on the situation in Turkey. If Turkey put up a status update, it would read “Mood: Delusional.” Also, is it just me, or does Berlinski look an awful lot like Dr. Lisa Cuddy on House?
  • Rep. Peter King to hold a hearing on Muslim radicalization in U.S. prisons.
  • Extensive New York Times piece on the Cosmos Foundation, Turkish Muslim preacher Fethullah Gulen, Atlas Construction, and charter schools in Texas. NYT calls Gulen a moderate. JihadWatch disagrees. Also, Gulen has hired George W. Bush’s PR rep Karen Hughes.
  • You know that “unarmed peace flotilla”? Yeah, not so much.
  • Female Kuwaiti “activist” calls for the return of sexual slavery to keep rich Muslim men from committing adultery. Sisters are doing it to themselves. And somewhere, Dominique Strauss-Kahn is kicking himself.
  • Strafor analyzes the latest al Qaeda video and sees a message of defeat. “The very call to leaderless resistance is an admission of defeat and an indication that the jihadists might not be receiving the divine blessing they claim.” The also show how al Qaeda ignorance of American gun control laws (no, you can’t buy automatic weapons at a gun show, since you need to fill out a form, undergo a background check that can take up to 90 days, and have a local law enforcement “chief” authorize your form (among other requirements), and that assumes you live in a state they haven’t been outlawed in) has lead to the arrests of several Jihadests looking to purchase them.
  • Newt’s Staff Quitting En Masse=Rick Perry Jumping Into the Presidential Race?

    June 9th, 2011

    So Jim Geraghty suggests over at The Campaign Spot. He’s not the only one to to do so.

    This would seem to address Texas Iconoclast’s first point about why Perry won’t run.

    Make no mistake: If Perry jumps in, he will be a very formidable foe. Kay Baily Hutchison was supposed to beat him in the Governor’s race and he dismantled her. Texas has shown the type of economic growth the rest of the Obama-stricken nation can only envy. Though he has real baggage (the Trans-Texas Corridor, toll roads, and the Gardasil blunder all come to mind), but nothing compared to Romneycare or Obama’s disastrous handling of the economy.

    Perry has the name-recognition, the executive experience, the fundraising prowess, and the instinct for the jugular necessary to win both the primary and the election. Unless Sarah Palin or Chris Christie jumps in, no one else has the national stature Perry has.

    And as for the possibility of any lingering Bush fatigue, well, Bush is starting to look pretty good in retrospect, isn’t he? Bush’s worst economic month in office still beats Obama’s best.

    If he gets in, I like Perry’s odds better than Romney’s. Or Obama’s.

    Quick Impressions of the Texas Senate Debate

    June 8th, 2011

    I attended the Texas Tribune Republican Senate Candidate Forum tonight, and thought I would post a few quick impressions before I have to walk my dog.

    Three of the four candidates came across as prepared, articulate, polished and effective speakers, and all four tried to portray themselves as tea party conservatives:

  • Ted Cruz was the most polished of the four, as you would expect of the former Texas Solicitor General. He was very good not only at making his points, but also expertly tying highlights of his career and life-story (like his work on 10th Amendment issues for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, and his father fleeing Castro’s Cuba [see here for correction]) into answers without it seeming forced. His only drawbacks were that every now and then he would seem just a little bit too polished, his pitch modulations a little too calculated, and he needs to add a few touches of humor liven things up. (His one recycled Reagan anecdote isn’t going to cut it.) With Michael Williams out, I think Cruz cemented his status as both tea party favorite and frontrunner.
  • I have not made any secret of my doubts as to Tom Leppert‘s new-found conservative convictions, but he comes across as a very polished and prepared speaker. He says that he cut a lot of unnecessary programs as Dallas Mayor; when I get a chance, I’m going to ask his campaign for a list. If you didn’t know about his previous record, you would think him just as conservative as his compatriots. He did have a couple of weaknesses as a public speaker: shrugging and spreading his hands was his go-to move for almost every question. He also displayed a sort of nervous eye-twitch between questions, maybe because of the bright stage lights. But guess what? There are going to be a lot of bright stage lights between now and March…
  • Roger Williams had the most varied performance: He has an engaging, natural personality (with just the right touch of rough-hewn “old coot” country charm) and can clearly hold his own against his more polished opponents, but he went back to his “I’m a small businessman” routine two or three times too many, and too transparently. On the other hand, Williams also got the best laugh lines of the night. Referring back to an earlier question about how he’d eliminate the budget deficit in one year (he didn’t think the Ryan plan went far enough), in a question on the the EPA’s attempt to take over Texas air quality, he said “You know that 1.6 trillion I’d cut out of the deficit? The EPA would be among them.” Williams probably improved his standing the most of any candidate attending.
  • Elizabeth Ames Jones…look, I’m not going to sugarcoat this. Jones should get out of the race. It wasn’t her message (she made effective conservative points), it’s the fact that she was a cringingly bad public speaker tonight. I can’t tell if it’s nervousness or an actual speech impediment, but her voice sounded like it was trapped at the back of her soft palate, almost as if she had all her wisdom teeth yanked a week ago and was still getting use to her own mouth, and late in the debate she seemed to have a slight lisp. She spoke like someone who was so eager to talk that the words all tried to come out in a rush at once, causing her to stumble over herself, stop and start, and generally sound nervous; way too nervous for someone that already holds a major statewide office. She calmed down a little bit after the first couple of questions, and occasionally made good points (“I have to fight the EPA every day”), but she was far and away the weakest candidate on stage by a good measure. And her “I was down in the trenches” refrain (mostly dealing with her time in the legislature) got even tireder than Williams’ small businessman shtick. Between this and her abysmal fundraising numbers, I see no hope for Jones in this race and no reason she should continue in it. She’s doing a good job on the Railroad Commission, and she should probably stay there for the immediate future.
  • Not a lot of policy differences on display. All agreed not to raise taxes under any circumstances (I wondered why moderator Evan Smith didn’t ask any of them “Not even in the event of a World War with China?”), all were on-board with the Ryan plan or an even more immediate cutback in federal spending, all for greater border control measures and against amnesty, all pro-life (one of Jones’ most effective moments), all more national energy exploration, all against earmarks, all slamming Obama.

    Enough for tonight. I’ll post more tomorrow if I have the time.

    Percy Bysshe Shelley, Now With Added Dick Jokes

    June 7th, 2011

    Iowahawk has outdone himself this time.

    `My name is Weinermandius, Dong of Dongs:
    Look on my junk, ye mighty, and despair!’

    Anthony Weiner’s Seat Could Be a 2012 Pickup Target for Republicans

    June 7th, 2011

    So now that Anthony Weiner has fessed up to twitting his Little Tony to multiple women, what’s next? He claims he won’t resign, despite Nancy Pelosi asking for a House ethics committee investigation. A poll on whether Weiner should resign was evenly split, though interestingly, more men than women said he should resign: “42 percent of women agreed that Weiner should pull out.” This poll was of all NYC rather than just the 9th Congressional District.

    I remember thinking that the scandal would have very little impact on 2012 elections, since Weiner’s 9th district is in New York City, and thus a deep blue liberal stronghold Republicans have no chance of picking up.

    But now that I’ve looked into it more closely, the answer is: Not so much. Despite Weiner being one of the most liberal Democrats in congress, New York’s 9th Congressional District is probably the least liberal congressional district in New York City. Indeed, the district seems to be drawn to get white voters out of other NYC majority minority districts. Obama only beat McCain there 55% to 44%, much worse than Gore’s 67%-30% drubbing of Bush there in 2000, and Weiner only pulled in 60.8% of the vote against an underfunded Republican opponent in 2010,about which Hotline on Call notes: “For Weiner, that was a limp performance.”

    Whether Weiner resigns or not, New York’s Ninth congressional district will still be a tough target for Republicans, but not an impossible one. It just went from “Solid Democrat” to merely a “Strong Lean.”

    Michael Williams to Drop Out of Senate Race to Run for Newly Created 33rd Congressional District

    June 7th, 2011

    So the Texas Tribune is reporting, backed up by an email from the Williams for Congress campaign, and confirming the piece they published last week.