Texas Senate Race Updates for July 18, 2011

July 18th, 2011

A few quick updates on the Texas Senate Race:

  • Dewhurst sounds like he’s in, to be made official “midweek.”
  • So also says the Denton County GOP chair
  • …who will be hosting a Senate forum with Ted Cruz, Tom Leppert, Elizabeth Ames Jones, Lela Pettinger, and (presumably) Dewhurst.
  • Jason Embry in the Statesman joins the chorus of those saying that Cruz has the momentum in the race.
  • Ex-senate candidate Michael Williams Q2 fundraising report is up. He raised a respectable $550,018, which would have been better than his Q1 numbers, but still behind Cruz and Leppert. If he can transfer these funds to his congressional race (I am not a lawyer, but my impression is that he can), then he’ll go into his match with fellow Senate race dropout Roger Williams with a substantial warchest.
  • Dissension in the Ranks of the SDEC

    July 18th, 2011

    I went poking around the web to see if there were any signs that Ricardo Sanchez was actually assembling something resembling a serious campaign when I stumbled across some intriguing comments from one J. R. Behrman, a member of the State Democratic Executive Committee of the Texas Democratic Party. It’s always good to keep tabs on the other side, especially when there’s dissension in their ranks, and judging by these comments (pulled from down in the page), Mr. Behrman is not a happy camper:

    The “Texas right of center electorate” is a construct of pimp-consultants simultaneously raising money while picking “winners” — meaning losers — namely, candidates, races, and — surprise — themselves as campaign consultants. With a few up and coming sycophants they can spend the money on “likely voter” campaigns featuring a decades-old mix of racially segmented media messages, “GOTV”, and proprietary technologies they get a portion of the license fee from.

    These packaged candidate/campaign deals are peddled to the “Big Money Boys”. But, this has been so unsuccessful for so long, one wonders if it can be done any longer.

    The AFL-CIO has been fleeced and given up on this.

    There is, maybe, one rich, bored, living lawyer left dumping big bucks into a media campaign of his own design that does not appear to involve any actual candidates.

    Meanwhile, the GOP has an actually proficient small-donor campaign fund-raising and mobilization machine based on a common technology — the same one Obama brought to Texas in 2008 but has since folded or withdrawn.

    The GOP technology is nothing the same-old, same-old SDEC would even consider a competitive alternative to. They have a really great licensing deal on the VAN. The SDEC is an awards banquet for sycophants, not a strategic or technology forum.

    So, Rick Sanchez can re-run the Wes Clark nomination campaign and defeat his likely opponent … nobody.

    But, how does he win the general election Bill White just lost persuasively and expensively, …

    If the party can not raise enough money to keep the doors open on the Little Office, …

    If the Big Donors are tapped-out, dead, or, simply, looking at zero return on their “investments”, …

    If the Obama campaign uses its operation in Texas to harvest volunteers and money for battleground states, and …

    If the party establishment itself has nothing to stand on or run on but “ain’t it awful hand-wringing and grand-standing by districted incumbents with no race to run, and 70’s-vintage “celebrate diversity” identity politics masking zero-sum patronage among street-level race-hustlers?

    And more, further down:

    The SDEC has no plans or standards, just a mix of written and unwritten rules that are selectively enforced so as to perpetuate a patently failed party establishment in Austin — a Speaker’s Claque (with no Speaker).

    This is how the State Legislature worked “back in the day” when we dominated bi-partisan concession-tending regime in Austin that the GOP has now hijacked. Clearly, that regime is no longer bi-partisan, but we still wallow in nostalgia for it, conduct our business habitually, and cling to the “center-right electorate” theory and “likely voter” corollary, consultants, and voter file. Those all used to work. But, the world changed in 1994 and 2000. The TDP and, for that matter, the DSCC/DCCC has not yet adjusted.

    Delegate votes in the state convention — apart from ex-officio delegates — reflect the actual distribution of Democratic voters. Composition of the SDEC favors GOP voters and those in the lobby as administer the party’s McGovern-era racial quotas and patronage. This is a formula for rewarding sycophancy, not proficiency.

    So, SDEC meetings are stuffed with non-voting members, honorific resolutions, and time-wasting ritual. There is simply no time to seriously or fairly consider questions, such as the employment of Ed Martin, that are sprung on the body by the staff and protected by the Palace Guard.

    From cycle to cycle, the celebratory happy-talk results in catastrophic losses every eight years. In my tenure, the SDEC has become more defensive and apologetic rather than imaginative and critical.

    I and others on the SDEC do come forward from Senate Districts outside of Austin with lots of both actual and potential Democratic voters or loyalists and small donors.

    We bring constructive proposals that relate to increasing turnout of new and old, rural and urban, “base voters” using technologies and techniques that do not involve kick-backs and cross-subsidies to the Austin-based hangers-on and auxiliaries. But, these are quashed in committee by the Palace Guard and the hired help.

    Statewide candidates, self-funded or pimped-out to their own bundler/consultants, just ignore the state party establishment which is, indeed, so negligent as to let the LaRouch cult get on the primary ballot steal votes and time from legitimate Democrats.

    The likely-voter and center-right nonsense, is just the half-baked rationale for “keeping on, keeping on”, turning the state into a “red-state” bastion, keeping it there, but promising to “turn Texas blue” Real Soon Now without even discussing much less rectifying profound problems of party governance and finance.

    While I would no doubt disagree with Mr. Behrman about most political issues, I find his comments quite interesting for two reasons:

    1. He attacks both the corrupt (pimp-consultants, Big Donors) and insane (“70’s-vintage ‘celebrate diversity’ identity politics masking zero-sum patronage among street-level race-hustlers”) wings of the Democratic Party with equal vigor.
    2. Some quibbles aside (I think the center-right status of the Texas electorate is an objective fact), most of his criticisms strike me as dead-on. The state Democratic Party has been largely ineffectual, and its reliance on corrupt street-level hustlers to get out the vote (and commit vote fraud in the process) certainly haven’t helped it’s reputation.

    Nor is this the first time Mr. Behrman has expressed these frustrations:

    The Democratic Party establishment in Texas and Harris County are artifacts of a bi-partisan concession-tending regime that lasted statewide from 1824 to 1994 and persists on City Council to this day. This establishment lacks proficiency and purpose – now that tort reform is a done deal and they have no alternative to debt-driven fiscal austerity at every echelon of government.

    So the prospects for winning statewide, countywide, and even citywide elections in 2011-12 are not good. There have been essentially no lessons learned from victories in 2008 or losses in 2010. “Wave Election!” is an excuse, not an analysis or a plan. The same consultants will be doing the same thing with the same tools but without the benefit of an Obama primary campaign here in Texas next year.

    Apart from dismay at the effects of national, state, county, and city austerity, there will be little motivation and no money trickling down from national politics unless and until we turn things around here on the ground … dramatically. The patronage-oriented base vote will be no better than 2010 and the (2008-vintage) “new base vote” will be hard to motivate, locate, or mobilize. It is true that on the margin there is still some ‘bloc voting’ by various interest groups. But that is not the way the politics of age, ethnicity, class, and gender work in “majority-minority” counties like Harris, for one. So we are going to have to adopt Obama-type political methods and messages if we expect results like 2008.

    He seems to be seeking a “mid-left progressive populist” position between toadying up to big business/big labor/big government interests (bailed-out banks, trial lawyers, etc.) and the party’s Identity Politics brigades and their race-hustling poverty-pimp enablers. This would theoretically enable the party to grow more middle class support for its redistributive policies. I rather doubt it.

    But while I differ with Mr. Behrman’s prescribed course of treatment, I do think he has admirably identified a number of the symptoms.

    How widely spread are Mr. Behrman’s sentiments? Being very far indeed away from the center of the Texas Democratic Party, I would not venture to estimate. My guess is that the sentiments themselves are fairly widely shared, but that few are inclined toward his suggestions…

    Paul Burka Offers Advice for Yankee Journalists on Rick Perry

    July 16th, 2011

    You might have noticed that I have not been overly kind in my assessments of Paul Burka’s political observations. He comes across as a world-weary, old school, middle-of-the-road liberal reporter who can’t come to grips with the changing political landscape, yearning for the days when the two wings of the Democratic Party controlled Texas politics, Republicans were an exotic novelty, and big-government policies could safely be forged in smoky backrooms over rounds of whiskey without input from those butinski outsiders known as “taxpayers.” He doesn’t understand why the Tea Party won’t just go away and let him go back to a time when the people in power returned his phone calls. (More on Burka’s textbook liberalness in this Kevin D. Williamson piece over at NRO.)

    All that said, he offers some very useful advice to his Yankee cohorts (i.e., fellow liberal journalists) on mistakes to avoid in covering Rick Perry. I doubt they’ll take that advice (Burka is, after all, a native Texan, and didn’t graduate from an Ivy League college (I’m sure the idea that Rice might be as good or better than many Ivy league schools is not the sort of thought likely to penetrate their mind) and is therefore automatically suspect), but it’s good advice none the less. The short essays next to Points 1 (Perry is not George Bush) and 5 (Perry is not a male hair model) are particularly good.

    It is true that Perry has a much-remarked-upon coif, but don’t let this lead you to assume that he’s soft, or feckless, like that other recent walking shampoo ad, John Edwards. Perry is a hard man. He is the kind of politician who would rather be feared than loved—or respected. And he has gotten his wish.

    Read the whole thing.

    Senate Race Updates for July 15, 2011 (Including Some Fundraising Numbers)

    July 15th, 2011

    The candidates have started releasing their fundraising totals for Q2:

  • Ted Cruz came out on top of the fundraising quarter with $800,000.
  • According the the Statesman, Leppert raised $750,000 and Elizabeth Ames Jones raised $313,000.
  • Ricardo Sanchez raised $160,000. Which is about what you would expect the DNC’s hand-picked candidate to raise.
  • The FEC reports aren’t up yet, so we can’t look at the details. In truth, Cruz did a bit worse than I expected him to with all the endorsement momentum he’s been building up, and Leppert did significantly better. Jones managed to raise her quarterly fundraising totals from disastrous to merely disappointing.

    Q2 is usually a slow fundraising quarter the year before an election, but both Cruz and Leppert will need to pick up the pace if Dewhurst does jump in.

    A few more pieces of senate race news:

  • Last week Paul Burka was confidently predicting that Dewhurst would blow away the competition with his money. Now he’s wondering if Dewhurst is too complacent. “There is an enthusiasm gap in this race, and it favors Cruz.” It’s like Burka fell asleep at his desk and woke up in pain, discovering that someone had inexplicably jabbed a sharp clue into his side while he slept…
  • The San Antonio Express-News says that Ted Cruz has the momentum, especially compared to one “Tom Lippert.”
  • Elizabeth Ames Jones has announced that former GM Chairman (and fellow San Antonian) Ed Whitacre would be her campaign manager. If he brings several million dollars in campaign donations with him, this will be a brilliant move. If not? Not so much. Usually candidates like to have someone with, you known, political campaign experience running their campaign. Hiring a guy who is most famous for taking over GM right after Uncle Obama dumped a ton of taxpayer money on them probably isn’t going to vault her into first place. She also named oilmen W.A. “Tex” Moncrief Jr. and George P. Mitchell as honorary chairman.
  • According to Jones’ and Tom Leppert’s Facebook pages, there was supposedly a Ronald Reagan Republican Women Senate candidate forum in Houston last night, but I can’t find reports on it anywhere today…
  • A Sean Hubbard sighting in the local Dallas gay newspaper.
  • Senate Race Update for July 13, 2011

    July 13th, 2011

    There’s two big senate race shoes waiting to drop over the rest of July: The announcement (whatever it is) Dewhurst is going to make on July 18, and FEC releasing Q2 fundraising results. In the meantime, here’s a smattering of senate race news

  • Paul Burka with (another) not very insightful Senate race update, saying Dewhurst will just bulldoze the field by carpet-bombing with money. “Cruz has a great reputation as a lawyer but little else.” Yeah, nothing else except the endorsement of just about every prominent conservative that’s weighed in on the race, most of the Tea Party, and national media buzz. There have been plenty of big-money “sure thing” candidates who couldn’t close the deal with actual voters. Which brings us to…
  • Ross Ramsey at the Texas Tribune on Dewhurst’s long shadow. Best quote: “David Dewhurst might be the safest bet for the U.S. Senate since former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist.” Heh.
  • Tom Leppert says he’s in the race for the long haul.
  • Roger Jones at The Dallas Morning News says that history is against Leppert, pointing out that Mayors have traditionally done poorly in statewide races.
  • There was evidently a Texas Senate Candidate Forum hosted by the San Antonio Tea Party on July 9th that included Ted Cruz, Tom Leppert, Elizebeth Ames Jones, Glenn Addison, Lela Pittenger, and Andrew Castanuela, but I can’t find any reports on it anywhere online.
  • Cruz won the San Antonio Tea Party straw poll there.
  • Cruz was also endorsed by George P. Bush, son of Jeb, nephew of Bush43, grandson of Bush41, and co-founder of Hispanic Republicans of Texas. (Cruz is, of course, a member.) That can’t hurt, especially if he can steer some of the Bush clan’s legendary fundraising prowess Cruz’s way.
  • Cruz was also endorsed by not one, not two, but three former Republican Party of Texas chairs: Cathie Adams, Tina Benkiser, and George Strake. Those are all good names to have in your corner.
  • Since I mentioned Glenn Addison, take a look at his campaign schedule. He can’t win this race, but that’s the schedule of a man who’s serious about trying.
  • As if Ricardo Sanchez didn’t have enough troubles running as a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Republican state, the Islamic Republic of Iran wants to try him in absentia for war crimes. They also want to try Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Gen. Tommy Franks, and Gen. David Petraeus, so he’s in good company…
  • Ron Paul to Retire From Congress

    July 12th, 2011

    To concentrate on his 2012 Presidential run. After which, since he won’t be the GOP nominee, he will presumably retire from politics.

    More about Paul’s somewhat-mixed legacy, and the nature of his supporters, at a later date…

    This Month in Jihad

    July 11th, 2011

    Well, I’m not really updating it weekly anymore, am I?

    So here are some notable Jihad-related stories from the last month or so:

  • Geert Wilders acquitted.
  • Pakistani generals helped sell nuclear secrets to North Korea. Lovely.
  • Christopher Hitchens, who is probably considerably more pro-Palestinian and skeptical of Israel than I am by a good measure, questions the motives of the “Gaza Flotilla,” noting the many ties of the organizers to Hamas, and of Hamas to Assad’s Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran. “The intended beneficiary of the stunt is a ruling group with close ties to two of the most retrograde dictatorships in the Middle East, each of which has recently been up to its elbows in the blood of its own civilians.”
  • Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Hasan will face the death penalty. Good news, but why did it take a year and half to get to this point?
  • Al Qaeda leader Ilyas Kashmiri is dead.
  • At least 29 women in Leeds have UK courts to thank for preventing forced marriages.
  • Baby’s first jihad.
  • Robert Spencer on the possible Hindu roots of Islam.
  • Tom Leppert’s Campaign on Programs He Cut as Mayor of Dallas

    July 10th, 2011

    At the Texas Tribune Senate Candidate Forum back on June 8th, Tom Leppert said that he could be counted on to be a staunch budget cutter in the U.S. Senate, and for supporting evidence claimed that he had cut or eliminated several government programs as Mayor of Dallas.

    Since I have been somewhat skeptical of Leppert’s conservative bona fides, this claim piqued my interest. So i wrote his campaign to see if they had a list of programs he had eliminated as Mayor.

    It took a couple of reminders, but i was finally able to get a reply from Leppert’s Communications Director Shawn McCoy. Below is his reply verbatim, save for some WordPress list formatting and removing his phone number and email address:

    Lawrence,

    Sorry, it has taken a while to pull all of this together.

    One of Tom’s greatest accomplishments as Mayor was working to make substantial cuts to the civilian budget in order to increase the size of the police force. He did this without raising taxes. In response, the crime rate dropped by double digits, with violent crime plummeting 30 percent.

    Tom’s trimming of the civilian payroll led him to eliminate over 1400 positions. Pay was also reduced for the remaining civilian employees.

    Tom’s consolidation or elimination of city departments took the city from 31 departments down to 23.

    This included:

    • Sustainable Development and Construction
      • Development Services
      • Building Inspection
    • Housing & Community Services
      • Housing
      • Environmental & Health Services
    • Management Services
      • Public Information Office
      • Intergovernmental Services
      • Strategic Customer Services
      • Efficiency Team
      • Office of Emergency Management
      • Fair Housing
      • Office of Environmental Quality
    • Trinity Watershed Management
      • Trinity River Corridor Project
      • Streets/River Levee Operations
      • Public Works/Floodplain Management

    Additionally, the zoo was privatized.

    Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

    Best,

    Shawn

    Shawn McCoy
    Communications Director
    Tom Leppert for Senate

    Thanks to Shawn McCoy and Tom Leppert for providing this information.

    I am very far indeed from an expert on Dallas’ budget process, but I hope to take a look at the official budget numbers over the next few days to confirm the information above. My first impression from the FY2011 budget suggests that they may very well be credible, as official numbers show Dallas budget was cut by just 1.5% between FY2010 and FY2011, showing at least fiscal restraint here in the midst of the Great Obama Recession.

    At some point I also hope to take a look at the mentioned Trinity Watershed Management, a subject that includes the controversial Trinity River Toll Road project, a complex subject on which I don’t feel I yet have a firm handle.

    Blogrolling In Our Times

    July 8th, 2011

    Today Matt S. Dowling named BattleSwarm his blog of the week. Thanks!

    This inspired me to finally get up off my lazy ass and add two of the three blogs I’d been thinking about adding to my blogroll anyway:

  • Matt S. Dowling (wow, I bet you never saw that coming), who has been doing a lot of good pieces on the Texas senate race (including some of the Tom Leppert-related stories I’ve posted here).
  • Merv at Prairie Pundit, who’s been blogging up a storm from the wilds of Washington, Texas for several years now.
  • And the third blog I was thinking about adding, but won’t right now? That would be The Race to Replace Kay Baily Hutchison, a blog focused on the Texas Senate race that I used to check every day for updates…but there hasn’t been one since June 2. I’d be happy to add it if posts start up again, but a month’s silence isn’t getting the job done…

    Pat Buchanan 1, David Brooks 0

    July 8th, 2011

    Since leaving the Reagan Administration, Patrick Buchanan has been, at best, an erratic conservative, on any number of issues (Israel, Iraq, Free Trade, etc.), flogging a philosophy (“paleoconservatism”) that failed to catch on with any but a tiny fringe, and carried out political adventures ill-advised at best and amazingly stupid a good portion of the time. (I mean, why would you even want to take over the Reform Party? That’s like stealing a half-chewed bone from a blind dog; even if you succeed, you’ve disgraced yourself for a worthless prize.)

    But on the debt limit debate, Buchanan has penned an essay that is coolly rational in articulating why House Republican must stand firm aginst Democratic promises of future spending cuts in exchange for tax hikes now.

    Behind the GOP opposition to tax hikes is the party’s word given to the country that elected it in 2010, its political principles, its traditional view of what not to do when the nation is in a slump, and party history.

    Fully 235 Republican House members signed a 2010 pledge not to raise taxes. And by giving their word they were rewarded with victory.

    Should they now dishonor that pledge, what would differentiate them from George H.W. Bush, who famously promised in 1988: “Read my lips! No new taxes!” then went back on his word and took the party down to defeat with him?

    It also does a fine job dissecting David Brooks’ panicked appeal for them to take Obama’s handful of magic beans in exchange for their good word:

    In 1982, President Reagan agreed to the same deal being offered the party today: three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases to which he assented. As he ruefully told this writer more than once, he was lied to. He got one dollar in spending cuts for every three in tax increases.

    Buchanan at least has learned the lesson Brooks hasn’t: Future budget cuts are non-existent budget cuts, and only a sucker believes they’re real. The only budget cuts that count are the ones to this year’s budget. Democrat promises of future spending cuts are always lies to be taken back in the next budget session. Even ironclad budgetary mechanisms to limit spending (i.e. Gramm-Rudman) will be jettisoned at the first opportunity.

    No one should mistake Buchanan for a reliable mainline conservative these days, but he’s dead right on this issue. But given David Brooks’ swooning over Obama and his heresy on tax hikes, perhaps we should stop mistaking him for a conservative at all.