An interesting set of numbers

[NoPasaran]

2000:

Kay Bailey Hutchison 65.03%
Gene Kelly 32.34%

2006:

Kay Bailey Hutchison: 61.69%
Barbara Ann Radnofsky 36.05%

Discussion?

[TexasThoughtCriminal]

1. Interesting indeed

Do we say support for KBH eroded? Certainly possible due to the unpopular state of her party.

Or did we get a better Democrat? There's no question that we did, but did the average voter know that? Or did they just pick the Democrat like they always do?

[VelmaD]

2. What it says to me...

is that Bar shouldn't bother. If she can only pull 4 more points than Gene Kelly (who spends no money and doesn't even campaign) then she isn't much of a candidate.

[crispini]

3. pssht! I blame the "conventional wisdom"that says we can't elect

a statewide Dem. ANY candidate is going to have a hard time getting money to get their message out. I don't care if you can heal the sick and walk on water, if you're running as a statewide dem you have a doubly tough row to hoe: 1) the race itself. 2) all of that CW out there saying "don't bother running Dems statewide, they can't win, don't waste your money."

The sadi thing is that this is just going to reinforce the CW, which sucks.

[Horse with no Name]

4. I blame the state party

They didn't give enough money to our candidates.

[crispini]

5. Hm.

I agree with you sort of. If we had a really strong state party that could be really organized on a statewide level, and mobilize grassroots support, then that would help, and in that respect the chaotic state of the state party can certainly be blamed.

However, the reality is, AFAIK, that they don't HAVE any money to give to our candidates. So I am not sure how they could give it! :rofl:

[Horse with no Name]

6. I was told they did but were saving it for 2008

Hmmm...interesting.

[crispini]

9. Well, I'd like to know where that money came from.

Because the last I heard, at the convention, they were pretty much hand-to-mouth, i.e. no extra money to give away at all.

[muse]

7. BAR only pulled one less point than DVO

Here's the breakout of our statewides:

Chris Bell: 29.6%
Barbara Ann Radnofsky: 35.6%
Maria Alvarado: 36.3%
Fred Head: 36.4%
David Van Os: 36.5%
VaLinda Hathcox: 40.1%
Hank Gilbert: 41.2%
Dale Henry: 40.9%
J.R. Molina: 41.4%
Bill Moody: 43.8%

Did Hathcox and Henry even campaign? And, they pulled 40+%?

If we could have only got the word out a little more about Bill Moody and the negatives out more clearly about his opponent.

[NoPasaran]

8. Hathcox and Henry's numbers are fascinating

Both were essentially invisible... remember they didn't even let VaLinda speak at the convention. And I think Dale Henry refused campaign contributions... sort of a Gene Kelly strategy without the name recognition factor.

[crispini]

10. WOW.

I don't think that Hathcox and Henry did much. So, I am inclined to think of 40% as our new baseline democratic vote. IF, and this is a big IF, the opponent is not anybody well known. KBH for some reason is fairly popular and I do think that some people crossed over to vote for her (why, I don't know.)

[Horse with no Name]

11. This is where I think that BRAC was instrumental

at least in our area with the Red River Army Depot. This purchased many votes in the northeastern counties.
Bush got to say he was going to close bases, KBH got to ride in on her white horse and save jobs.
She got almost 63-70% across the board in these counties up here.

[NoPasaran]

12. Bringing home the bacon is one of those powers incumbants have

I think analysis would show that one reason Lieberman was re-elected in Connecticut is he kept the Groton Sub Base open.

[Lithos]

16. Very astute

And yes, BRAC is not about economic efficiency, but political manipulation. Lieberman definitely used it to his advantage.

L-

[last_texas_dem]

14. I agree with you, even though

in some ways it shows how downright weird some Texas "Dems" are. Like, if someone considers themself enough of a Democrat to vote Democratic in the races where they know nothing about either candidate, why in the world would they decide to cross over and vote Repug for some hypocritical piece of shit like Greg Abbott?!

[crispini]

21. I think there's a sliding scale of voter awareness.

1) Don't know anything about either candidate.
2) Know a little tiny bit, i.e. seen an ad or two on TV and got a push card at the polls (this is a VERY superficial level)
3) Know a lot (your average DU'er)

I think this year there were a lot of people po'ed enough to vote for the Dems when they were at (1) but at (2) they were still willing to vote for an R. In other words, I'm going to go back on my earlier statement and say that this is NOT the new base... this is the base PLUS the pissedoffedness.

That's my new story, I'm stickin to it. :)

[David Van Os]

20. View from the front

In my book Barbara was an awesome candidate running uphill against an extremely entrenched incumbent.

I'm proud to be associated with all of these great Democrats who had the good spirit to step up to the plate in spite of all the naysaying. Any result in the range of 35-41% statewide on less than 200 thousand dollars vs. a Republican who spent in the range of 2-4 million dollars, coupled with the state's media establishment spending a year and a half spreading the message "they can't win", in my book constitutes a worthy achievement. Would good Democrats like Juan Garcia, Joe Heflin, or Ellen Cohen have been able to win their close races if the voters upon being given the ballots had seen a long column of state elections above their races with no Democrats running?

In terms of relative numbers, could some of it be a relative reflection of how much name recognition the Republican opponent had, how entrenched an incumbent the Republican opponent was, and/or how hard the Republican opponent campaigned? Don't know, just speculating. More importantly, we've all become good friends who respect each other, and you won't see us comparing the worthiness of our campaigns with each other because we all know how hard a battle this was for everybody. Each race had its own factors.

[TexasThoughtCriminal]

54. My theory: TV commercials

In muse's two-tiered list of statewides, let's look at their Republican opponents.

36 Percent D Performance
Radnofsky vs Hutchison
Alvarado vs Dewhurst
Head vs Combs
Van Os vs Abbott

41 Percent D Performance
Hathcox vs Patterson
Gilbert vs Staples
Henry vs Jones
Molina vs Keller
Moody vs Willett

My challenge to DUers: Can you give me the first name of all these Republicans? Do you know what they look like? And which of them do you remember running commercials? I saw plenty of commercials for the R's in the first group, but in the second, maybe a few from Staples.

I think it came down to name recognition and familiarity. When it came to a choice between a Dem absent from TV and a familiar visitor to their home, they went with the known. When the choice was between two unknowns, the playing field was slightly more even.

Sadly, it comes down to money and media once again.

[crispini]

58. Yes, exactly.

I agree 100%

[montieg]

67. This is good thinking--two unknowns= more even

I think maybe this is congruent with what I've been thinking all along. Is Texas 40% natural Democrat? Until they KNOW KBH--Dewhurst, etc. when we lose another 5% to pure plain stupidity???
Name AND face rec. So it comes back to money--to get the name and face on the teevee

[CoolOnion]

88. YES!!!

We can have the best candidate in the world, but if nobody knows about the person, they'll go with the name they know.

And I think people don't really know KBH--it's just name recognition getting her through. If all the people who voted for her ever wrote her a letter and got a policy statement instead of a reply, they'd be looking for someone else.

We need media coverage and commercials.

[Melissa G]

13. Okay, number crunching, precinct watching, brilliant DU analysts..

Do you see any reason for me to be wearing tinfoil about any of these numbers?...:shrug::tinfoilhat:
Call me skeptical (i'm usually not, except when it comes to black box voting...but since R's do control the process and the machines?)
I'm just asking 'cuz I know how savvy y'all are... If so, where in our great state might tinfoil be fashionable?

[last_texas_dem]

15. A couple things

Well, it seems to show a very slight trend in favor of the Democrats, though not nearly as much of one as I'd hope, consider the demographic changes in TX over the past six years. In fact, any gains may simply come from the fact that Radnofsky was a credible candidate who tried to win as opposed to perpetual loser Gene Kelly. However, I also think the Dems may not have done quite as well proportionately this year compared to '00 for a couple of reasons: (1) 2000 was a Presidential year and I believe Presidential years generally have better turnout for Democrats as compared to Republicans, compared to "midterm" elections, even in "done deal" Repug-on-the-Presidential-level states like Texas; (2) also, I wouldn't be surprised if the Democratic vote in Texas has declined slightly b/c of turnout due to the number of Dems who have been stuck in districts unwinnable for Democrats. There may be some Democrats not turning out simply because they assume that Dems cannot win on the state level and now, due to Delay's gerrymandering, do not even have a chance to win in their congressional district. Unless their area is a locally Democrat, they don't really have a chance to vote for Democrats who they think will win. Obviously, these kind of attitudes are no recipe for future Democratic victories, and there may be no real evidence concerning this (it's just a theory of mine that I have nothing to back up) but I think it could be something having a possible effect on the Democratic vote in Texas.

[carpetbagger]

17. Her ads were annoying

There. Now that the election's over, I can get that off my chest.

I don't know of any person in Texas who could have broken 45% against Hutchison. Maybe an A-list candidate could have pushed 43%, but the Kool-aid drinkers still run this state. The more important issue is whether or not Radnofsky helped to build the party, build Dem credibility, and neutralize any of Hutchison's ability to help the state party. On those counts, I think Radnofsky did a decent effort. While not exceptional like Van Os, she did her job well. Except for the radio spots; they drove me nuts.

[muse]

18. Her numbers were not good and neither were DVOs

That was my point. Compare them to Hank, Hathcox, Henry, Molina and Moody - all in the 40's.

DVO and Radnofsky, 4 and 5 points lower. And, they campaigned like crazy all over the state. Radnofsky had media. DVO had robo calls.

I'm not clear how either one helped build the party.

[PDittie]

19. Would someone else like to answer this for Martha?

Because I don't think I can be civil in my response.

[muse]

23. I'm really not trying to be rude

I know how they rallied progressives, I really do.

But in the end, the numbers were not good for those two candidates, and you have to look at that objectively.

We EXPECTED their numbers to look much better than that. So, what happened? This needs to be analyzed.

Next time something different needs to happen. Numbers need to go up.

That's all I'm saying.

I had a discussion with someone the day before election day. Someone who is pretty smart about politics. Someone who has run before. He said the cities need progress, so they need a progressive Democrat. The rural areas want things to stay the same way they've always been, so they need a conservative Democrat. We were not talking about statewides. We were talking about Congressional candidates and state reps.

Anyway, we need to rethink.

[flamin lib]

33. I just did some number crunching on US District 6.

Joe Barton's district. It contains Arlington, Mansfield and some parts of far S Ft Worth and then extends 300 miles down I 45 to Trinity County.

About 65% of the population is in a 5 mile circle around Arlington. 80% is north of Corsicanna and 75% is in nine cities/towns.

From a sales perspective a candidate could and probalby should ignore everything except Tarrant and Ellis county. I'm not sure I'd advise that for a political candidate because it would give the opponent a mighty rehetorical weapon.

Part of my point is that the rural counties makeup a huge part of the geography without any real potential for votes. They tend to be conservative and there just aren't that many people out there.

It strikes me that muse is right. Market to the largest number of people in the most cost effective way. Taylor the message to urbanites but put a few yard signs in even the small towns.

[crispini]

35. Yes, I believe that something like 80% of the population of Texas...

is urban and suburban. With the operative word being SUB-urban; those are the red voters.

[flamin lib]

39. Again, just speaking of DH's district, the largest gains both as

a % and raw munbers came in the most densely populated areas. Gains in the really rural counties were 2% or so and in in Tarrant and Ellis they were 5 & 6% respectively. Technically speaking there are no urban areas in District 6. There are sub-urban and rural only.

There were gains across the board which is encouraging, but with only 2% of only 200,000 as opposed to 6% of 400,000 it makes sense to build the market plan around that. If we could count on a 12% gain in Houston Co. it would make sense to put more effort into that market.

If I were marketing to this demographic I'd put 80% of my effort into the 20% of the market with potential. Work my @$$ off in Tarrant & Ellis at every opportunity and take a weekend to drive down I45 and put yard signs at major exits so my opponent can't say I've ignored 80% of my district.

If I were marketing and running a sales campaign that's what I'd do. Retail polics is not the same.

[montieg]

40. It's always smartest to spend where the gain is

even tho as a rural county chair that would really burn me. How about stand-ins? Avatars? While it's not the same having Bell as having his hand-picked person--that's better than not at all.

[flamin lib]

45. That's basically what Joe Barton has done. He maintains several

offices in the district--three I think--as well as the one in DC. He may make one swing through the south end of the district a year but having a LOCAL phone number gives the impression of local representation.

Personal bitch about gerrymandering: Before the re-districting CD6 was compact and virtually 100% suburban. All the voters had similar concerns and issues. Only thing is half of it was in Chet(?)Edwards and he is stronger than a four day old polecat carcass. So they took the Dem part of the district and made him invincible and took Arlington and Mansfield, lumped in 300 miles of country road to get the warm bodies for Joe Barton to make a district. Those poor folks in S CD6 are without representation. They're just screwed 'cause the 75% have such different needs from the 25% in the country.

The real problem with urban vs rural comes up when both are lumped into one district. The folks in S CD6 are concerned about water rights and coal strip mining. The 80% in cities are worried about commute times. When asked if there was something to be done about the drought--like maybe low interest loans for ranchers--Joe said only the Lord can make it rain, so take it up with Him.

[montieg]

46. how do we adapt that sub-offices arrangement to the state-wide

candidates? And what would that cost be in a statewide race? Using stand-ins--with name/face rec will also cost

[flamin lib]

48. Quoting Deep Thought, "I'll have to think about it." nt

[flamin lib]

85. Okay, DeepThought getting back to your here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2964565

[PDittie]

56. This was the John Kerry Strategy

That worked out well, didn't it?

Just one more state than Al Gore, but let's not bother going to any of THOSE states; they're a waste of time and effort.

And here we go with the consultant philosophy of marketing our politicians just like soap. "Here's your Attorney General, on sale now for the low, low price of just $100,000!"

Hey, it DID work for Abbott. But is that what we want? A kindler, gentler version of the Republican?

[montieg]

61. Good point

but how do you allocate with finite--sometimes VERY finite-- resources? This was our conundrum in my county this cycle. We were outspent 3 or 4 to 1 and beat the bastards back anyway. With shoeleather and phones. All volunteer. Is that what we must do in future statewide races?

[crispini]

22. "I'm not clear how either one helped build the party."

LOL. You're kidding right?

These great candidates stood up and took on a terrific burden of running for a STATEWIDE office as a DEMOCRAT in TEXAS. They knew ahead of time that they would have a tough row to hoe and they did it. Look at their campaigns, I am SURE that each of them had maybe a THIRD or a QUARTER of the money that their republican opponents did, and thus MUCH less access to media and ability to campaign, and they did it anyway. And why? So that people would have OPTIONS and that we would have BALLOT LEADERS at the TOP OF THE TICKET to help our downballot candidates.

Chris Bell and David Van Os and Barbara Radnofsky WON Dallas county, and I for one am SO glad they were there, because their presence meant that people were more willing to continue down the ballot and vote for:

42 New Judges
County Clerk
District Clerk
Treasurer
DA

Now, please, tell me how THAT is NOT party building? And I know perfectly well that their names on the top of the ballot helped us. Furthermore, I think their presence at Democratic events helped inspire and support those of us who were out in the trenches doing the hard work for candidates up and down the ballot.

I for one am VERY proud and grateful to these great candidates. In fact maybe I'll go contribute to them all again now to help them retire their campaign debt. I'm sure they've got some!

[David Van Os]

24. A third or a quarter indeed

Having one-third or one-fourth of what Greg Abbott had would have been like having a mint. He had 54 times as much money. Nobody else got outspent by the ratios that Barbara, Maria Louisa, Fred and I got outspent. Hank's ratio to Staples was slightly less overwhelming but not by much.

[crispini]

28. Wow.

I knew it was a lot but I had no idea it was that much.

When will we ever convince the big Democratic donors in this state that only by contributing to our statewide candidates can we hope to take the state back? Us little donors will never match the contributing power of the big guys.

I wish we could start NOW with a "Statewide Dem Fund" to be earmarked specifically for the top 3-4 statewide Dem candidates in 2008, no matter WHO they are. I would be MORE than happy to contribute a monthly mite to that, and I bet a lot of others would too. I wonder if this would be practical at all?

[montieg]

29. What crispini says

[Melissa G]

38. 54 times as much money... That is some Sad Stuff. 54 times is the price of

beating the People's Choice here in Texas. Well, at least we don't make it easy for them!

I'm praying we start to organize now. If we Start preparing for 2008 campaigns today, I'm thinking that 108 times the money ain't gonna save them. I'm not thinking that Boyd Ritchie ought to be at the meeting...

Edit to say if the People start to Lead, maybe the leaders will get around to following...

[NoPasaran]

44. Hank's campaign

A friend who worked on the campaign (and of course by "worked" I mean "put in many, many hours for nary a penny" tells me that Hank's campaign was run on about eighty thousand bucks. Just for a sense of scale, Valinda Bolton seems to have raised about three times that much in a race for a seat in the legislature (and those of us from Austin have a pretty good idea of what that kind of money buys.) Of course, her opponent, Bill Welch got loads more, mostly from Bob "Swiftboat" Perry and James Leinenger.

[David Van Os]

25. Answer pretty simple

See my posting "A third or a quarter indeed" on this thread.

[montieg]

26. This may be the BEST thread I've ever read--ANALYSIS

rather than dogma. Thanks for the start NoPasaran.

After observing politics out here in west Texas since 1964, I think there are a few major disconnects rural to urban. Out here, KBH -- or any other statewide repub-- is gonna get about 45% locally that I call the inertia vote. Whoever's there can stay. Unless they get caught--with picture--screwing a goat.

I have only the most superficial idea of the urban dynamic so I leave that to others. And in the big picture, the rural vote essentially hasn't mattered much because of the numbers--we don't have the votes.

DVO's post about name rec is spot on out here--factors into the inertia variable. I have thought for some time--and heard other Dems say-- we NEED leaders, state and nationally, that when someone says Democratic--those faces are the frame. What some call branding. I saw what could be applied in Texas done with Tester, McCaskill, Ford, etc. We need our own brands here. And it's gonna take money--lots of it, to give us a leader with name/face rec.

[flamin lib]

43. McCaskill spent $13 million. That makes Joe Barton look positively

broke with only $3 mil.

Still, there are weapons to narrow the gap. MoveOn is working pretty hard to make grass roots work and they aren't ignoring red states.

[redqueen]

89. Yeah, I was gonna call it "tradition" rather than "inertia"...

but yeah. I completely agree.

[montieg]

27. And one more thought--what about a ballot issue

like the stem-cell in Missouri (where McCaskill did great bringing Dems back home in the rural areas). Could we use the Trans-Texas Corridor boondoggle like Chris and Hank started doing late in the campaign? I know out here in west Texas it scares the beejeebus out of even the most devout repubs.

[crispini]

30. I have often thought of that idea, but not statewide.

The Repubs do the same thing to us with their "gay marriage amendments" to get out their base vote. Wouldn't it be great if we could turn it on them? Stem cell is a GREAT idea. What does it take to get a statewide ballot initiative? I have looked into citywide ones, but have no idea about the state. Bet it would take some deep pockets.

[montieg]

31. Deep pockets no doubt

which is why I lean to the corridor idea--it's every bit as hot and there a beaucoup land owners who will go for it, and I think financially. Out in west Texas the corridor will not affect us directly--except for the seizure aspect. Personally, with a paralyzed mother, I would much rather see the stm-cell. But can we find researchers who will avail themselves of it---AND push it?

[NoPasaran]

42. We don't have statewide initiative & referendum in Texas

What we do have are constitutional amendment elections. So before anything could get on a statewide ballot, it would have to be approved by both houses of the lege and signed by the governor. Also, since the regular sessions are in odd-numbered years, the elections usually are too.

[montieg]

49. Guess I'm short on knowledge (as well as.. never mind)

Are these issues--like marriage-- using the I&R vehicle?

[NoPasaran]

55. You mean in other states?

I think they often are... sometimes they are the result of actions of the legislatures (which remember in many states meet more often than every two years.)

[crispini]

50. Oh yeah, that Gay Marriage thing was on the ballot in the fall

along with a bunch of local stuff. That's not much help. Nevermind.

[flamin lib]

32. A couple of items to consider:

2000 was a Presidential year, so a pick up of 4% in an off year for a first time candidate with no name recognition on a shoestring budget isn't such a bad showing.

As many of you know I've been an avid supporter of David Harris against Joe Barton. The end vote was Barton 60% and Harris 37% (the highest anyone has scored against Joe since he's been in office). Sounds pretty dismal until you look into the numbers and see that DH picked up 6% and 12,000 new voters in an off year. Even more when you see that DH spent a whopping $22,000 to JB's $2 mil. In '08 JB will START with a $mil and DH will be at $0 again, but at this point he seems willing to do it.

The money situation is crucial. I don't know any way 'round it. With scarce funds it all gets saved until the last few weeks. If our candidates had some early seed money to get some low key name/face recognition the last week crunch would have much more impact.

Without money we and our candidates must take advantage of every opportunity to increase name and party recognition. Letters to the editor, public appearances, editorials and participation in favorable public events. With the title "2006 candidate for XXX", our candidates should be able to get published as editorialists. Anything to keep the name/face before the public even if it's only a handful of people at a time. It's an awful lot of damn work and brutal if you keep it up for two years, but if a hammer's the only tool you have treat every opportunity like a nail.

I, for one, am pumped at the gain in down ticket wins and the narrowing of the vote gap regardless of how small it seems. If we can close the vote gap to near striking distance people will be more likely to part with contributions and go to the polls. The fact that some of our candidates are willing to go at it again in the next election cycle makes me even more positive.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

[montieg]

34. Money, name, & FACE n/t

[crispini]

36. Early Money is Like Yeast - EMILY's list -

is there, or could we form, a PAC like this, with funding to go exclusively to the top 3-4 state Dems who win the nomination?

Honestly, I am enamored of this idea. If we start something like this now, and we could get 100 people to donate 10 dollars a month, that would be about $15,000 available to them right after the primaries -- more, if we could get more people to join.

Hmmm......

[montieg]

37. Kepp going...keep going

would Bernard Rapoport salt the mine? A challenge ?

[flamin lib]

41. There are a couple of ways to go about it.

Emily's list bundles checks. They market to doners at the kitchen table level and get checks made out to individual candidates. Then they total up the checks and present them to the candidate with their concerns about issues. That gets around contribution limits.

I'm not a lawyer and don't play one on TV, so I'm at a loss as to how to set up a bundling operation. The other problem is you have to know who the candidates are you want to support before asking for the donations.

Assuming you had a bundling operation, it's a matter of marketing the candidates to potential doners. That takes money, so you wind up with an operating budget which must be funded . . . how?

I think it's a wonderful idea if it can be structured correctly.

Perhaps simpler if we interceded with State/National party organizations and secure party money for our pet candidates. If we had a lobby to the party machine maybe we could shake some money loose.

[crispini]

59. Well, actually, my concept would be to NOT know who they are.

Just say, Look, we want to support the top 3 races on the Dem ticket, no matter who. With the possible exception of Gene Kelly. Call it the "turn Texas blue" fund! :P

So the problem would be marketing the basic CONCEPT of "Supporting the statewide ballot, period, because of this problem we are having with 'A democrat can't win in Texas' which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The idea would be to donate REGARDLESS of who it is. I don't know if that's a popular concept, though, and I don't know if people would get the idea. BUT -- here's a thought -- the very EXISTENCE of this kind of "seed money" might encourage people to run for statewide offices who otherwise could not.

Honestly, I'm thinking something more grassroots oriented. A website and a bank account, and NO employees. And the capacity to deduct $10 a month from each contributor's credit card or bank account, to build up the fund slowly over the next year. After all, who contributes in the off year? Nobody!

You're right, though, I don't know anywhere NEAR enough about the legal ramifications of all this. But I do know people who have set up PACs. Hm.... What do other people think, is it worth doing or is it just crazy?

[muse]

66. Top 3 candidates?

I guess everyone but me has forgotten the brutal thread where I supported giving dollars to a few top candidates and not to everyone. This was mostly about the whole statewide ticket, as I remember. There was huge criticism of the TDP and Democratic funders with deep pockets being very selective about support.

My whole thing was that we would end up with zero wins if we used a strategy of spreading money around equally. I'm certainly not saying that's why our statewides lost (as none of them got $$ until Bell at the end), but consolidating money into a few statewide candidates with the best chance of winning is still something I support for 08. The others could perhaps ride coat tails.

[montieg]

69. Damn, this goes against the grain

but it's something we have to give consderation to--and cold-bloodedly. I spent 99% of my politics money here in my county this cycle. Crispini may be on to something here.

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. Texas is quite red state-wide

Ms. Radnofsky didn't raise enough money to get her message out. Even in an election with the strongest anti-Republican wave in years she only slightly better than a guy who didn't campaign or raise money. It will take an unusual set of circumstances for a Democrat to win state-wide in Texas. A major scandal, or perhaps a third-party candidate are probably the only way that a Democrat can carry the state.

Until Texas' demographics change, the best area for Democratic growth is in the legislature, as well as in county and city elections.

[Melissa G]

52. Respectfully Freddie, I think that is BS. The demographics

have already changed, which was what re re redistricting was all about. Texas switched to a minority/ majority state a couple of years back. And minorities, If they vote, tend to vote Dem.

The problem is the way we are districted,(packed into districts) registering voters and then GOTV. I don't buy the myth that we are such a red state. Look at the Stats..We are pretty damn purple and we just need to organize and Get the vote out.

[Freddie Stubbs]

53. District lines have no effect on state-wide elections

Democrats actually made gains in the state legislature, despite how the lines were drawn.

When was the last time a Democrat won a state-wide office in Texas?

[Melissa G]

63. It is a State wide image problem and we can't easily grow state wide leaders with out having

lower offices available to bring them up through.
The demographics just changed..That, and nationwide disgust with R's in charge is why we made the recent gains.
When Dems were in charge before when I was growing up in the pre Reagan era. We were Southern Dems which meant were could not be R's because of reconstruction but Conservative Dems could have been R's except that Tx did not really elect R's then.

[PDittie]

57. Welcome, Boyd Richie, to DU!

:hi: :sarcasm:

[Melissa G]

64. Where and around when did you grow up? Our Demographics have changed.

[Freddie Stubbs]

72. Have demographics changed for the better?

Isn't it true that prior to 1996, there actually were Democrats in state-wide office in Texas?

[Melissa G]

76. I see you live in Florida and have no history of Texas politics...

Now the lack of context in your posts makes more sense. Your motivation for making suggestions about what our statewide candidates should do still has me a bit puzzled.

[Freddie Stubbs]

78. I lived in Texas in the the late 90's

Back then Bob Bullock, Gary Mauro, and John Sharp were still holding state-wide office.

[montieg]

51. Dammit, DUers!

Look what all of our posts have in common...... money. It seems like it all comes down to cadge--geetus--dine-ero.

[crispini]

60. Which means I really wish our Dems, now that they are in power,

would pass SOME sort of campaign finance reform or public funding for campaigns. Wouldn't THAT be cool!

[montieg]

62. AHH, the best of all possible worlds--

in tandem with non-partisan redistricting and....never mind. I like what you are saying about the off-year seedmoney fundraising. I know zip about actblue--put all my money here in my county. Is that how it works?

[crispini]

65. I don't know much about actblue either...

I'm just making this up as I go!

[montieg]

68. Shit! and I thought you knew everything

I laughed out loud (is that LOL?)when I read this post

[montieg]

70. OK, kids--it's been fun, but I'm goin to watch CSI--

see yall tomorrow. I say again: this is the BEST thread ever!

[David Van Os]

71. My wonderful DU friends,

I have to weigh in here for better or worse. Please do not anybody think I am attempting to criticize anybody because I do not have any such intention. It is at great risk that I do this because someone will surely call it sour grapes and that is a terribly hurtful charge when you are sitting right where I am. But I feel I have to say some things because so many DU'ers have been so incredibly kind, gracious, and supportive toward me I feel I owe it to you all to give you my perspective on this very serious and important thread. So for better or worse here it is.

Don't panic folks. Please don't give in to the big money chase. Sure I wish I had more money but I didn't need the kind of millions Abbott had. 54-1 was just a little too much to overcome but I didn't need 1 to 1 to beat him.

The biggest system failure confronting all of our statewide candidates was the absence of promotion by the state party. I'm not talking about money. I'm talking about the many supportive things the TDP could have done that wouldn't have cost another penny. Primarily, the TDP's ability to communicate to the public and the press through its emails, its website, and its press releases. The TDP's communications output treated the statewide candidates as insignificant. It didn't publicize our campaign activities and our messages in its press releases and Internet communications, except for just an occasional little tiny bit. This was so basic, so simple and so acutely wrong in this year's election.

The biggest problem our statewides had was the media's constant year and a-half long drumbeat, "Democrats can't win statewide...the Democrats didn't put up a ticket...the Democrats came up with weak candidates...the Democrats have no strong candidates...the Republicans have the statewide races sewed up without having to lift a finger..." Over and over, day in and day out in the metropolitan daily papers.

I contend it was the TDP's job to combat and overcome that drumbeat. But the TDP staff did the opposite; they reinforced it. How? Pretty simple. When the TDP's communications department hardly ever mentions the statewide candidates in its press releases and public communications, that sends a strong signal to the reporters and editors that the party itself considers those candidates to be insignificant. So the reporters and editors assume they're correct about the insignificance of the party's ticket. Especially when the party never even challenges their constant repitition of the "they can't win" refrain.

And it also has a direct effect on the money. When potential donors hear all this refrain and the party is not coming to them and telling them it's not true, these candidates are good candidates, we do stand behind them; well then those donors assume it is solid conventional wisdom that the candidates can't win and the candidates can't get the funds for media pushes in the fateful final three weeks.

I didn't need to match Abbott penny for penny, and Hank didn't need to match Staples penny for penny, but boy oh boy how we both would have loved to be able to do meaningful radio and newspaper ad campaigns in October.

The hard part is that it was not a mere oversight at the TDP. Statewide candidates regularly pointed it out to the TDP staff. To no avail.

It is a terribly empty feeling to work yourself so hard for causes you believe in - like bringing relief from Republican rule to your neighbors - but to feel like your own party is blocking you. I may be the only one of the candidates who is coming out publicly saying it. I'm picking DU as my place to say it because there are so many friends here whom I respect very much. place to say it. But we all feel this way. Trust me, we are talking about it among ourselves daily.

It is especially sad that the TDP was so MIA when so many county parties and local organizations and volunteers, including many here at DU, worked so, so hard with so much spirit and love for this good cause. Everybody was let down.

Texans are not six-legged green-skinned space aliens. They are just as susceptible to the Democratic wave as their neighbors in other states. And they displayed it in many of the lower-level elections. But there have to be cues of legitimization coming from the candidate's political party to suggest to the voters that the candidates are worth voting for. Most voters don't want to throw away their votes especially when the newspapers are telling them voting for these candidates is a waste of effort. The TDP didn't do rudimentary basics at the statewide races. It was deliberate and it resulted from a preset determination that was embedded nearly two years ago. At this point I will respectfully refrain from the details of that history and its current implementation.

And anyway, like I'm sure you all are, I'm ecstatic about the Democratic takeover of both houses of Congress. I truly think the American people finally rose up and, just in the nick of time, blocked the Bushite drive for executive dictatorship. There is still much struggle ahead but we've turned the corner. And here in Texas, the highest level Executive Branch of our government is still in the iron grip of the robber barons, to the great detriment of the people of our state. This part is very bad and we could have won some of the statewide elections if our political party had been there for us - not for me, or the other candidates, but for us, the people, all of us.

There's still arctic freeze in Texas even though the rest of the country is finally thawing. Fight 'em on the ice. Thank you all for everything you do, for your support, and especially for your warmth and friendship.

[Freddie Stubbs]

73. Perhaps isntead of running for state-wide office every two years,

you should run for the chairmanship of the TDP. You seem to have very strong feelings about how the party should operate. You could run for some state-wide judicial position in 2008, but if what you are saying is true, you will likely lose by a wide margin again.

Or you could run for TDP Chair, and implement the changes which you are talking about.














PS: I double-dog dare you.

[crispini]

74. Oh, that would be totally wizard.

Do it. Those of us who were there as the Maxey lobby and are (were) political neophytes to the process know how to do this better now. I have to admit I was very impressed by the organizational abilities of the Ritchie supporters (and a tad annoyed at the strong-arming tactics that were displayed by some).

Seriously, if the TDP continues to be recalcitrant and unsupporting of our statewides, we should have another contested election for Chair.

[montieg]

82. Maybe the single most intelligent pol I've been in direct

contact with is John Sharp. Tho he's tainted and got baggage, what do others think of him now? For Party chair?

[crispini]

83. I don't know much about John Sharp.

What I want is someone WITH political acumen who is also willing to fight, fight, fight every race, or at least fight as many races as we can. We need BOTH in the party -- the canny politico who knows how to do the political math but with the heart of the lion who will not let the "math" and the conventional wisdom get in the way of doing the right thing.

If you go to every voter that you can and ask them for their vote, like Dean's 50-State Strategy, you may not always GET their vote but you certainly get their respect.

[Lithos]

86. There is a need for a 254 county strategy here

Texas is too diverse of a state to pursue anything but. If the Democratic Party is to represent the state, then we need to reach out to all of its citizens. More cynically, if you don't play to win, you won't - and we didn't even show up in many areas.

I was disappointed this year about how the elections played out. Kinky should have been challenged day one in his claims to the mantle of being a Progressive and a Populist. Carole's receipt of monies from traditional Dem donors was unforgiveable. That type of action is only the result of inattention and lack of identity communication.

Sharp would be interesting. I think Frost as well. Frost lobbied for Dean's 50 state strategy back in 2005 with full insight as to how the US voters would react in 2006. He pretty much nailed the opportunity.

MEMO TO: Rep. Rahm Emanuel, Sen. Chuck Schumer, Howard Dean

I am writing you in your capacities as chairman of the Democratic Party’s top three national political committees: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

It’s time to throw out the traditional playbook and be bold as you plan for the 2006 elections. There is a real possibility that next year’s contest will be a landslide for Democrats and you need to be prepared to win.

Specifically, Emanuel and Schumer should file candidates for every single Congressional seat and ever single Senatorial seat in the country, even those that have traditionally been Republican. And the DNC should be encouraging state legislative leaders throughout the country to take similar action on the state house and senate levels.

In 1964, Democrats picked up 37 House seats. Republicans picked up 54 House seats, in 1994. At the depths of the Great Depression in 1932, Democrats picked up 90 House seats. History could repeat itself in 2006, but only if Democrats expand the playing field.

Why do I think big Democratic gains loom? The public is rapidly coming around to the view that Republicans lack the ability to handle the big issues facing our country. It’s one thing to be right-wing ideologues, but it's quite another to not be able to put one foot in front of another.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169195,00.html

[montieg]

87. Damn, I knew Frost was smart, but holy sh__

this is prescient!

"It’s now time to shoot the moon. Recruit and file everywhere and then late in the cycle decide which races present the best opportunities. Be prepared to win some seats that you don’t deserve because the “force is with you.”"

The guy is a genius! I was a dist coord for Stenholm for 12 years and met Frost at one of Charlie's meetups. I tho't Sharp was better but now I'm unsure. Both very bright, and Stenholm aint no slouch. He nearly knocked off Naugahyde--neuggybuggy--whatever--in a district bugman tailored for him.

Hell, maybe these three are what we need to take back Texas. Add Van Os, Bar, and Gilbert--- WHOO-HOOO!!!

[crispini]

75. "Cues of legitimization"

That phrase certainly has the ring of truth -- that's why we have yard signs, polling place signs and greeters, ads, and so on. That makes a lot of sense. I like that phrase.

When is our next opportunity to vote for TDP chair? And, in lieu of a strong statewide party, don't you think that individual campaign money would certainly help? I think the "cues of legitimization" can come from other sources than the statewide party -- although they would certainly help.

I would agree that the party kingmakers and the state media certainly do pay attention to what the party says. However, your average voter probably has NO idea about what the party says. Their "cues" come from mailers, tv ads, and media ads. For example, my new DEMOCRAT from HD107 managed to take the seat, which does lean R, by a carefully crafted (and, I am quite sure, expensive) campagign. I probably got FIVE direct mail flyers from him -- three "positive" and two "attack." I saw ads by him in every local daily that is read in the district, i.e. the small circulation papers which we actually read. I even saw TV! (I was floored). I think that's why we are thinking about money in this thread.

Anyway, thank you for your thoughtful contribution to this discussion and your service. It is always worthwile to have an open and honest discussion about what is going on in our various locales and our state. After all, the 2008 election cycle started yesterday! :)

[David Van Os]

79. cues of legitimization

The "cues of legitimization" from the state party aren't necessarily for the average voter. They are the signals to potential donors and to the press that a candidate is legitimate. They get the press to stop saying "he can't win". They get the potential donors to contribute the money to enable the candidate to communicate with the average voter through the ads, the mailers, etc.

[montieg]

81. Wicked good term: Cues of legitimization

that was completely unknown to me. But again, it zeros in on a BIG hole in our arsenal. Maybe because Dems had the 'free ride' for so many years? We let the Reps blow us out of the water and are still reeling? Amateurs at TDP? I will say this: the VAN data program probably helped pull us through here locally with direct mail and phone banks. These are the kinds of tools we need on the local level. How can we use what we have to effect the changes many of us see we MUST make-- viz the Reps as well as internally?

[montieg]

77. Mr Van Os (God, how I wish that were "The Honorable")

First and foremost, thank you for you work, your energy, and your sacrifice over the past months. Since the convention I have watched your campaign with the utmost respect. If all our campaigns were of the quality of yours and Hank's, Texas would be BLUE today. Thank you.

I see your point about the efforts of the state party. And you are spot on --especially as concerns the 'netroots' It seems that TDP has no clue as to the value or the impact netroots had nationally --and could have had statewide. I also think Dr Dean's 50-stae strategy should be applied to Texas. I had no Dem candidate for state rep NOR congressional rep. My area was simply abandoned. Our county party beat back strong challenges in three races and won them all--one by 2 votes out of 800. Had our ColeCoJackasses club not contributed, campaigned, walked and called, our courthouse would now be contaminated by Repubs. We are still pure.

I say always fight forward. What do we do now, locally and statewide?

Respectfully,
montieg

[David Van Os]

80. Fight on.

[TexasLawyer]

84. Only 4 points over clown boy

That is really tragic. I think it says more about Texas than it does about BAR. She was such a good candidate.