The Hopson switch
I am tempted to use the worn-out image of the canary in the coal mine, but this is more like a vulture pecking at roadkill. The Democrats now find themselves looking up at a 72-78 deficit in the House. The retirement of David Farabee and the party switch by Chuck Hopson have wiped out, without an election, two of the three seats the Democrats gained in November 2008. And the Democrats have a lot of vulnerable seats to defend: Maldanado, Thibaut, Miklos, Heflin for starters. Heflin’s district is a blue island in a red sea; he has to contemplate whether life would be easier as a Republican. Indeed, I wonder if this current spate of party switching hasn’t been orchestrated to build momentum: first the Hardin County officials, then Hopson, then … Heflin? Homer?
Hopson probably didn’t want to switch. He now finds himself on the same side of the aisle as Debbie Riddle, who, upon happening to walk by his desk on one occasion and seeing Hopson and his deskmate poring over an open Bible, said, “Oh, I didn’t know Democrats read the Bible.”
Democrats have been leaking rural seats for some time now. It’s irreversible. Dan Ellis, gone. Robbie Cook, gone. Juan Garcia, gone. Pete Laney, gone. Heflin held Laney’s seat for the D’s on the strength of the last box to come in, against a uninspiring Republican opponent. Who is left? Frost in Texarkana, McReynolds in Lufkin, Homer in Paris. All are popular in their communities, but they have to run in a midterm election with a Democrat in the White House who brings the race issue into play in East Texas. The battle for rural Texas is over, and Republicans have won. The WD-40s are a vanishing breed.
The biggest problem for Democrats — and perhaps this is true for the Republicans as well — is that they do best when the opposition is in power. Their brief renaissance was fueled by the failures of the Bush Administration nationally and the overreaching of the Perry-Dewhurst-Craddick leadership at home. Now that their own party is in power, there is no check on the liberal policies that their leaders want to enact. And that is anathema here. The way things are going, Democrats are going to get their heads handed to them in Texas in 2010. They have no credible statewide candidates. They have a congressional leadership who put their ideological wish list — cap-and-trade and health care — ahead of the economy during a recession. They have a president who has fumbled the Democrats’ hard-earned recognition as more fiscally responsible than the Republicans. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Democratic strength in the Texas House back in the sixties a year from now. Anybody want the over?
Tagged: chuck hopson.
I am "Anonymous" in a Larry David kinda way says:
2011 is going to be ugly. Redistricting and a more than likely budget shortfall. The so-called honeymoon in the House is definitely over.
Reply »
Anonymous Liberal Lout says:
Hell, yea I’ll take the over.
Please list a single liberal policy that has passed the US congress. Plenty have been argued. But what has been passed? Cap and trade–proposed by Republicans years ago. Health care reform? Richard Nixon pushed it. Hate crimes protection for LGBT people? Texas has it for gays, already. Hardly a liberal leaning issue.
I like your analysis, most of the time, but you suffer from buying into labels of what’s “liberal” and what the US people really want. Last I saw 65% of americans want health care reform. That makes the dems mainstream, and the american public liberal.
Sure, I’ll take that over.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
If nothing passes the House, then Democratic turnout will be depressed because Obama and the Congress did not deliver on their promises.
Sure, a majority of Americans wants health care reform. But they don’t want to pay for it. That is the problem. The Democrats are in trouble if they pass a bill, and they are in trouble if they don’t pass a bill.
Reply »
Pat Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Paul, be careful. All of the healthcare bills before Congress–including the Republican proposal–actually save money and reduce the deficit. Stating or implying that any proposal will cost net money is a stale talking point from one side of the debate.
Reply »
anonymouse Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
good thing you wrote in, pat. apparently doug elmendorf was having a little trouble with his TI Business Analyist II and gave congress some terribly wrong information. i know he will welcome hearing from you.
Pat Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Hey Anonymouse, thanks for pointing that out. Here are Doug Elmendorf’s analyses of the Democratic House and Senate proposals, as well as the Republican proposal. Note how each reduces the deficit.
By the way, did you know that newspapers have continued to publish stories since July? This is late-breaking news, so you may have not heard yet.
Patti Page Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Has it occurred to you that Debbie Riddle was joking?
Reply »
MonkeyMan Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Debbie Riddle does not joke. Somewhere in the bible the letters of the phrase “thou shalt not joke” appear and she takes it as the literal word of God.
VisitDallas!HomeofAmerica'sWorstPresident says:
Health care is ideological?
And squandered the economic goodwill? Really? I thought the Unv. Chicago school of economic theory was discredited through the keynesian actions of this administration and as a by product forestalling a depression.
You’re positively Faulknerian in your self-determined abilities. Yikes.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Of course health care is ideological. It involves spending somewhere around a billion dollars to provide free health care to people who are not currently insured. A new government program to provide a service that people do not currently receive is ideological, the idea being that no one should be without health care, and the government will take money from taxpayers and use it to pay for those who can’t afford it. If using the public sector to provide a service that is now being provided by the private sector isn’t ideological, what is? It may or may not be a good idea, but it is certainly ideological.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“Over” here, please.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
Burka, when do YOU see the Texas Democrats finally getting the State Legislature back anytime soon ?
A. 2012-if Obama wins reelection in a landslide carrying 44-49 states.
B. 2014
C. 2018
D. Never
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
It will be the first election after the nation gets tired of President Perry. I guess that would be the 2014 midterm elections.
Reply »
sam Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Please don’t ever repeat the last 2 words in the first sentence.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Paul, in case you missed it, Obama brought the race issue into play the last time around. How many R voters are going to vote this time that didn’t last time? How many who voted for the WD-40s are going to hold Obama and the national Dems against them next time? The ones who are left are safe. Hopson wasn’t safe…as evidenced by his last squeaker. Whether the party switch will help is up in the air. If the “conservatives” want a true conservative, Hopson’s voting record is still his voting record.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Really crack reporting here, as usual.
Paul, why don’t you just pick up the phone and call Homer and Heflin to ask if they’re going to switch parties? Or is that not necessary because this is a “blog,” where basic concepts of journalistic competence go to die?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
One of the good things about blogging is that a blog is always a work in progress, and I can continue to revisit the subject matter and to to seek new material when appropriate.
Reply »
David Siegel says:
Where did you get “ideological wish list — cap-and-trade and health care — ahead of the economy during a recession” There is no hope for the economy if we can’t do something about health care costs. (And no hope for the planet if we don’t do something about climate change.)
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Oh, let’s not weep tears for the planet. It can get along fine without climate change legislation, which is based upon controversial science. (See my column in the November issue of Texas Monthly.) And while health care costs are a serious concern, climate change legislation would be a far greater burden on the economy than health care currently is.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Is the sky falling AGIN? “Climate change”? Is this what has morphed from Algore’s “globull warming”? I guess that gives good cover no matter what happens. Do tell, will the earth (gaia) turn into a flaming cinder when “global warming gases” hit 38 or 39 parts per hundred thousand? BTW, Algore’s contribution to the “stimulus” is buying ANOTHER 120 ft houseboat. He has 2 already. But they are such a bitch to get on the trailer to move. So he’ll just put one on each lake he likes. That will CREATE JOBS in the housboat building industry. So, if you are one of the 89.8% of people that has a job “saved or created” by Dear Leader, thank Algore for saving the houseboat building industry.
Reply »
Blue babe Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Snicker. Such a joke.
Reply »
Pat Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:35 am
Can I nominate Fiftycal for Most Ridiculous Post Ever?
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Only if you nominate Obammy as “most ridiculous President, EVAH!”
Pat says:
Oh and Paul, nice job plagiarizing your own work from “Capture the Flag” in 2006. “The battle for rural Texas is over, and Republicans have won.” It’s still one of my favorite pieces of all time on Texas politics.
But the real reason I keep it beside the toilet is that ridiculous photo of Kinky on the cover.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Does Straus survive your scenario, Paul (Dems in the 60s)?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Remember TARP and the stimulus, Paul? You may not think that it was about the economy, but your statement that the Dems put their idealogical issues ahead of the economy is just an opinion.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
I was speaking chronologically. The White House and the D leadership was foolish to run with cap and trade right out of the box, when everybody’s first concern was the economy. Then they sent too many mixed signals about health care, especially the cost and how to pay for it. It just wasn’t a professional approach to legislating. LBJ would be turning in his grave.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 11:29 am
I was speaking chronologically, too. See Emptyk’s comment below. Obama and the D’s DID put the economy first — people just like to b***** about what they did. And yet, we escaped economic armageddon and the stock market is much better off (which benefits a huge swath beyond just Wall Street). The stimulus may not have done as much for the job market as was hoped, but let’s face it, the economy was in the tank and heading further south long before Obama came on the scene…and the improvement is already in process despite all the rightwing naysayers.
Reply »
paulburka says:
That’s a good question. It would depend upon who the opposition is. Craddick could put the Craddick D’s back together, but I can’t see the mainstream R’s wanting to have to deal with Craddick again, especially the committee chair wannabes who chafed under Craddick’s centralization of power. Phil King doesn’t have enough good will. Maybe Chisum could pull it off.
Reply »
Stevie F says:
This isn’t really a blow to the Democrats. Hopson was going to lose that seat in 2010. The Democrats weren’t going to win a majority in Texas House anyway. In the end, the Democrats will be better off with the moderate Republican Hopson at that desk than with that seat in the hands kind of far right Republican challenger that would have beat him in the general election.
Sometimes half a loaf is better than none. And, sometimes a stale crust is better than nothing.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Agree that Ds weren’t going to see a majority in 2010 anyway. If Hopson would have lost as a D (and I just don’t have enough info to know), I’d have to agree that this is, as a practical matter, better news for Ds.
Given the current political climate, the fact that the Rs have resorted to siphoning off Ds to keep control of the Lege speaks volumes about how badly they have run with the ball in their hands.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Hopson’s opponent pulled out, and Hopson has already handily survived three challenges. He wasn’t in any real danger, but either way, Republicans are happy to welcome him and any other comers ready to make the jump.
Reply »
Toby.Belch Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Surviving by the skin of your teeth (120 votes in a recount) is handily surviving a challenge? I guess we better start calling him Landslide Chuck.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Skin of your teeth would be 19 votes like another house member. Kind of makes 120 look like a landslide, now don’t it? Three times.
Fiftycal Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
RACIST! SEXIST! ANTI-GAY! That is what anyone that doubts the power of the DEAR LEADER is. You best get rite with the LORD or you will be run over! KINKY/KATZ in 010!
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Given that Heflin held Laney’s seat for the Ds, your statement “Pete Laney, gone” doesn’t fit. While I don’t disagree with your statements about the irreversible loss of rural D seats, including Laney is deceptive and doesn’t support your premise.
Reply »
Emptyk says:
Where to start?
The economic stimulus plan followed the bailout of Wall Street. The Bailout was proposed by Republican Treasury Secretary Paulson (former CEO of Goldman Sachs) and supported by Bush. After passage by the Democrats in Congress, it was changed by the Bush administration from a “buy the bad mortgages” program into “pump blind cash into the banks”. While that Republican effort may be anathema to one politically, it probably was the first very unpleasant act that brought the world economy back from the abyss of a world-wide depression.
But don’t take my word for it. Switch from CNBC and talk radio to analysis by about any economist who won’t be invited on the Kudlow report. Better yet, go to the source, Paulson on Paulson, explaining the necessity of the actions to the world. If you still hate it, go to the origins of the problem, proposed and enacted by Phil and Wendy Gramm. Wendy, (late of the board of Enron) chaired the regulatory agency that oversaw the deregulation of financial futures contracts. Phil (recent advocate of dead peasant policies for the Texas Teacher retirement fund) conceived, authored and passed financial deregulation by Congress. Phil was rewarded in retirement by shilling for UBS, a Swiss bank which recently plead to massive US tax evasion to the benefit of wealthy Americans.
Stimulus then and now:
The Democrats in Congress, stung by having supported Texan President Bush’s bailout of the failed financial and auto companies with little to no Republican support, passed a huge economic stimulus package before considering health care reform and cap and trade. Obama did NOT put health care and cap and trade before economic stimulus, it was actually the other way around.
The stimulus package combined with the bailout, created an environment that has resulted in, among other good things, a huge positive reversal in the world investment markets, including the American stock markets, where most of our retirement money is invested.
The Republican mantra through all of this has been to criticize and offer tax cuts while calling for American financial institutions and manufacturing companies to fail.
The stimulus program is working and the only thing lower than a snake’s belly is the number of Americans who call themselves Republicans.
Health Care:
The most popular parts of health care reform are a public option and a prohibition on denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. This is true in Texas as well as in the nation. Ask around, the data are out there, partially available in the Tribune/UT poll.
Texas has the highest percentage of uninsured in the nation at 25%. Even Rick Perry, who wants Texas’s record on health care to be a model to the rest of the country, has refused to say whether he would support “opt out”…it might even be “good for Texas” and Rick wants to wait and see.
Poor Chuck Hopson. He even refers to the “Texas DEMOCRAT Party” in his press release. Chuck should call some of the old dogs, like Charlie Evans and ask how much they enjoyed pallin’ around with Republican primary voters and how warmly they were received after the switch.
Pablo, Chuck’s days as a Representative are probably over in any party. Chuck just decided that, By Gum, Texas needed him SO much in the legislature that being a turncoat was a heck of a lot better than standing on loyalty and principle. Oh, and on the denouncing of President Obama? Well the saying in East Texas has always been, “Don’t talk civil rights when you’re standing under a pine tree”.
Reply »
anonymous Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
You may be correct but it took longer than thirty seconds to read or explain it. That won’t work in today’s politics.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Yah. “It’s Bush’s fault”. HA HA HA HA No problemo. Is Dear Leader going to use that for a campaign slogan after he’s be “in charge” for 3 years? Maybe the “man-child” could take RESPONSIBILITY for his actions at some point?
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:33 am
If my memory is correct the Republicans claimed it was Bill Clinton’s fault almost until the time that George Bush got on the plane to come home.
Reply »
DTC says:
riddle actually said that? how vile.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
What? Assuming that dimorats could read?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 8:51 am
How’s that Jim Beam hangover this morning, Fiftycal?
Reply »
insanely connected says:
we’ve heard the stories about who’s lined up to challenge these WD-40’s in 2010, and it is abundantly clear that Heflin and Homer will lose (Frost too if the candidate can raise a dime).
What about McReynolds? Who are the would-be GOP challengers in that race? Do they have a chance?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Spoken like a true lunatic. Care to wager?
Reply »
paulburka says:
Agreed, Stevie F. That seat was gone, and the D’s weren’t going to win a majority. Too many vulnerable freshmen with voting records that were way too liberal. Senior D’s should have advised the freshmen about what they needed to do to get reelected.
Reply »
anonymous Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
I think they chose to listen to the wrong Senior D’s.
Reply »
Dewhurst's Watchwinder Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Now THERE is an accurate statement.
Don’t you think that a reversal of fortunes is good news for Straus?
And, Chisum? Great legislator and appropriator, but no Speaker.
Swinford needs to have his jersey retired.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
This may have been lost in other posts, so reposting:
Hopson’s opponent pulled out, and Hopson has already handily survived three challenges. He wasn’t in any real danger, but either way, Republicans are happy to welcome him and any other comers ready to make the jump.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
LBJ said it was all over for the Democrats in the South when the Civil Rights legislation of the 60’s passed. He knew all that legislation would kill the Party down here and it did…took several decades…but the Democratic party in Texas is gone. We have to seriously consider the creation of a new party to be competitive with the Republican party for future decades. That competitive group cannot be associated with Yankee liberals – but should be left of center. So who is going to be the bold leader to start this group? Anyone? Anyone?
Reply »
Distinguished Gentleman says:
As the demographics of Texas continue to change, Democrats will indeed regain control one day. Hispanics are going to be the majority of the entire Texas population in the not-to-distant future, and the vast majority of them who actually vote, habitually vote Democratic.
Reply »
Tom Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 7:09 am
The key assumption your argument rests on is that hispanics will always vote democratic. Always is a long time in politics. In the short run your a comments may be true, but the old civil rights generation is leaving us and a new generation is taking over, with different perspectives and outlook.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Texas Tribune poll points out that voting Hispanics don’t always vote Democratic. Of course, many don’t vote at all. It’s not a good idea to put all of your eggs in that basket if your in the Democratic Party.
Reply »
Dick says:
Of course this ridiculous bill is deficit neutral, it taxes the hell out of employers and the folks in our country who pay for 99 percent of this government already. What moron thinks deficit neutral means it is free??
I’m sure the 65 percent who are clamoring for reform won’t end up paying a dime for it. Is that really a solution?
Reply »
TX House Mouse says:
Paul, this is just the beginning. The Harper County folks, of whom all of the elected leadership switched at one time this past week, Hopson, and more are being worked over. the real benefit of all this switching? one: it save the right of center hundreds of thousand of campaign dollars, two: it takes away the one process issue of Hutchison which was the party was shrinking now its growing, three) combined with the independents fleeing democratic candidates across the nation last Tuesday the suburban democrats might think of switching since the Republican party will embrace them and they will have a better shot getting re-elected; and four) it shows Cathie Adams will be great party chair who will roll up impressive record. Winners: Hopson, Perry, Strauss, Adams. Losers: Dunham, the Boxers Boys (blue net roots types), Hutchison and political consultants.
Reply »
dynomite says:
Seriously…get off Paul’s ass. If you want to get on here and chat, have at it. But, to blast Paul and be rude should be beneath you. For now on, if you have the balls, post your real name if you want to start blasting him.
Reply »
dynomite says:
Next topic:
Q: What’s really wrong with the Democrat Party in Texas?
A: Voter ID. The democrats lose all credibility with the voter ID issue and the Republicans have figured it out. Republicans, Democrats and Independents all want it, but the party itself, and the Valley machine, think it is dangerous to their long term plan — though, being against it will ultimately set back their long term plan with Indies.
Anchia will never become governor, or win any state-wide, because this will be the issue shoved down his throat.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
The next biggie on the neo-communist agenda is to extend “card check” to voting. Everyone will be required to stand up and declare how they are voting at the polling place. Trucks will be waiting to deliver the people that voted the “wrong” way to either the “re-education” camp or the Soylent Green factory.
Reply »
anonymouse says:
Those estimates are all subject to substantial uncertainty.
Reply »
anonymouse says:
sorry for the quick “enter” key there. i was responding to pat’s answer at 12:31 a.m. where (s)he pointed to a july CBO estimate that the pelosi’s / reid’s / baucus’ / SOMEONE’s health care reform bill would reduce the deficit.
i see the problem in the different interpretations now, too.
pat is dealing with july information. the following statement came from CBO in october:
“Those estimates are all subject to substantial uncertainty.”
Reply »
houtopia says:
I agree with Paul that the battle for rural Texas is over, and Republicans have won it. In the short term, this may help them hold on to power here. (By the way, the last time I checked, while Democrats may run things in Washington, Republicans control every lever of state government, so the “party in power” argument can cut both ways.)
The problem in the longer term for Republicans is that rural Texas is dying. As former state demographer Steve Murdock pointed out in a recent presentation, over half the counties in Texas have actually lost population since the last Census, while the state’s overall population is exploding.
In short, Texas is rapidly urbanizing. Where have Democrats been making gains in the Lege? In the urban/suburban areas, where all the people are. Dominating rural Texas is not a recipe for long term GOP success in this state.
One point on redistricting — don’t you think an Obama Justice Department will have something to say about any plans the Lege draws vis a vis the Voting Rights Act? Especially after the Census shows that virtually the state’s population growth over the last decade was from minorities? Just a thought.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:28 am
There are plenty or rural Democrats we just don’t have the organization and money that the Republicans have had for the last 15 years. The “battle” ( I don’t especially like military terms for civil issues} goes on.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Burka writes this same column every two years. The Democrats have no chance. Yawn.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
What I write consistently is that the Democrats have no chance in statewide races because they have no public face to their party. If you disagree with that, may I refer you to the secretary of state’s Web site for previous years election returns. No Democrat has won a statewide race since 1994.
Reply »
Anon Observer says:
Hero Hopson magically may be on to something, such as Exhibit A: The non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation just confirmed that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962) could land people in jail!
Reply »
Brown Bess says:
This is the awful truth: time and demographics will make the Texas Republican mostly rural white redneck base a distinct minority. It’s just a question of when.
Even now, the sons and daughters of Cathie Adams’ groupies really don’t give a crap about gay marriage and probably smoke a joint in the evening after work. In 5 years, they’ll be enjoying cheaper and better health care.
If the contest is coming down to rural vs urban Texas, it’s easy to see which side is going to come out on top. In the meantime, the longer the Republicans refuse to even acknowledge there is an urban Texas, they did themselves a deeper and deeper hole, regardless of this or that switch in party allegiance.
Reply »
Tom Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Blah, blah, blah….we hear this repeated over and over on this site by those on the other side. Go ahead and keep telling yourself this if it makes you feel better. In the meantime, the Texas GOP will continue winning elections and governing the state.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
To all anonymous posters:
Paul catches a lot of flack for his opinions but they are his. He provides a forum for all of us to discuss issues. Chuck Hopson may have decided that his party may have moved too far to the left for his district or may only be concerned about reelection. I would rather have him than another right wing radical. I don’t live in his district but this could draw challengers on either side even at this late date.
Reply »
cyrus says:
I think there’s an important question here that no one has bothered to ask:
Who has promised Hopson no primary challengers? Because there’s no reason whatsoever to switch, healthcare reform or no, unless he was guaranteed a free pass. Any remotely credible challenge from the right and Chuck is toast, period.
So who cut the deal with Chuck to keep the R primary clear for him?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Good question, cyrus. With the illustrious governors of Texas and Alaska banding together to lead a conservative rebellion against the Republican candidate in NY-23, you’d think they wouldn’t be able to keep their hands off of a Texas Lege seat?!
Reply »
Hans Klingler's New Title says:
Homer will not switch parties because he would lose to one of the two announced candidates on the R side in a primary.
It will be interesting to see if Hopson draws a primary opponent because he would probably lose if he did. I don’t think the party brokers can prevent some of the conservative groups around the state from fielding a candidate.
Paul, what chances do you give Homer against a qualified Iraq war veteran and small business owner in what will probably be a terrible year for Democrats? I think the odds are against him.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Homer is going to have a tough race. That area of the state is one of the last to hold onto a little populism, but it’s fading fast.
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
The best part of Hopson’s switch was reading Philip Martin’s whiny screed about how he was once fired as his aide. It was very bitter and angry and I loved every word of it.
Reply »
asmith says:
Tom,
Facts are facts. We’ll keep trading the rural seats for the old suburban seats. Redistricting will be tough on the rural Repubs, and with a Obama DOJ, the GOP can’t get too cute.
Reply »
b.s. says:
Democrats don’t have the money? B.S. They have the trial lawyer money and it’s been effective. What a joke.
Reply »
Anonymous Liberal Lout says:
Lots of interesting thoughts, above.
1) In Texas, it’s rural v. urban. Dems are winning urban, republicans are winning rural. Dems win on this in the end.
2) Demographics are destiny. Hispanics will be the majority of the population soon. They don’t vote in high numbers, in the Valley, in general elections. There are some comments above that R’s think they have a chance winning hispanics over their side. Some also think voter ID is the next killer app for R’s against D’s. I put it to you that those two concepts are mutually inconsistent.
3) I still see no evidence that 2010 will be bad for national and state D’s. Yes the R’s took two governorships last week. But they lost the one US House vote that counted because they were too conservative. IF, a big IF, D’s deliver on health care, and fairly soon, R’s don’t advance on national level. Texas House is up for grabs, one way or other.
4). It will be tough for a R’s to draw a house map that is terribly favorable to them. Over the last 10 years in Texas we’ve seen urban growth, hispanic growth, young voters turning out. Not a recipe for R success. They will probably continue to beat the dead horses of gods, guns, gays and foreigners. That is NOT a sure recipe for success.
5) The most interesting votes last week were in Maine. Obviously, the same sex marriage issue was informative. Not because it narrowly won, but because it narrowly lost. (Same sex marriage is the future folks, get used to it.) Compare that to the Maine vote for medical marijuana–a blow out! If I were an R right now, forced to be anti-(gay)-marriage, I’d start looking for a way to ingratiate myself to younger voters. Legallizing marijuana may be it.
Reply »
asmith says:
If the D’s don’t win a majority on the LRB, the GOP will try to pair some of the suburban Democrats, but they won’t be able to do the type of packing and cracking to the extent they did in 2001. Their problem will be keeping all of the rural Republicans happy.
Reply »
Calculatin' Coke says:
If the race for rural Texas is over, did rural Texas win? If so, what did they get for it?
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
November 9th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Obamacare.
Reply »
Pink Elephant says:
Maldonado barely won her seat in 08. The Obama Big Broom swept her into office. Women in their thirtes and forties that voted for her said in exit polls that they had never voted before in their life and were there to vote for Obama and Dems as they wanted change. Will they show up for her again? I don’t think so. Most of her district is very conservative. Most are against the Dem’s national policies. Obamacare is wildly unpopular. If the R’s can get a better candidate in the general this time, and most think that person is Larry Gonzales, she will be a one-termer.
Reply »