Will Texas go blue?

Election day tomorrow, Tuesday, March 6, 2018, could be an early forecaster of the mood of the country.  Let's keep an eye out for 'em.  

Already, in early voting, Democratic turnout is up by 25%.  Republican turnout is in single digits, as enthusiasm wanes. Maybe a strong pissed-off factor?

Original Quill wrote:Election day tomorrow, Tuesday, March 6, 2018, could be an early forecaster of the mood of the country.  Let's keep an eye out for 'em.  

Already, in early voting, Democratic turnout is up by 25%.  Republican turnout is in single digits, as enthusiasm wanes.  Maybe a strong pissed-off factor?

Dem voting is up by more than that. Rep voting is up by a smaller figure. There will be some contested races come this fall, no doubt. Trump has helped to make a few Dems palatable, even in Texas.

But I still think, the old adage of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", will supersede the new adage of "Trumps a lunatic".

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Election day tomorrow, Tuesday, March 6, 2018, could be an early forecaster of the mood of the country.  Let's keep an eye out for 'em.  

Already, in early voting, Democratic turnout is up by 25%.  Republican turnout is in single digits, as enthusiasm wanes.  Maybe a strong pissed-off factor?

Dem voting is up by more than that. Rep voting is up by a smaller figure.  There will be some contested races come this fall, no doubt. Trump has helped to make a few Dems palatable, even in Texas.

Thanks for filling in the numbers. I was typing as I was getting data from the TV, and didn't get all of it.

Maddog wrote:But I still think, the old adage of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", will supersede the new adage of "Trumps a lunatic".

We don't know if it's broke or not, as the Republican Congress and Senate has refused to even show up for work.

Off-year congressional elections do tend to be a referendum on the administration. If that's the premise we are working under, anything goes. From pussy-grabbing to paying off prostitutes; from appeasing Russians, while abusing Puerto Ricans; from refusing to protect children from guns in our schools, to going into mega-debt for the rich...the voters will have a lot to chew on.

Tomorrow it begins. What do you think? What's out there that voters could cheer over?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Dem voting is up by more than that. Rep voting is up by a smaller figure.  There will be some contested races come this fall, no doubt. Trump has helped to make a few Dems palatable, even in Texas.

Thanks for filling in the numbers.  I was typing as I was getting data from the TV, and didn't get all of it.

Maddog wrote:But I still think, the old adage of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", will supersede the new adage of "Trumps a lunatic".

We don't know if it's broke or not, as the Republican Congress and Senate has refused to even show up for work.

Off-year congressional elections do tend to be a referendum on the administration.  If that's the premise we are working under, anything goes.  From pussy-grabbing to paying off prostitutes; from appeasing Russians, while abusing Puerto Ricans; from refusing to protect children from guns in our schools, to going into mega-debt for the rich...the voters will have a lot to chew on.

Tomorrow it begins.  What do you think?  What's out there that voters could cheer over?

Texas isn't broke, and this is just the primaries. Early voting has been gaining in popularity so more votes this time around makes sense.

The republicans don't have any real big races to excite the public except maybe for land commissioner as George P is running against a conservative.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Thanks for filling in the numbers.  I was typing as I was getting data from the TV, and didn't get all of it.



We don't know if it's broke or not, as the Republican Congress and Senate has refused to even show up for work.

Off-year congressional elections do tend to be a referendum on the administration.  If that's the premise we are working under, anything goes.  From pussy-grabbing to paying off prostitutes; from appeasing Russians, while abusing Puerto Ricans; from refusing to protect children from guns in our schools, to going into mega-debt for the rich...the voters will have a lot to chew on.

Tomorrow it begins.  What do you think?  What's out there that voters could cheer over?

Texas isn't broke, and this is just the primaries. Early voting has been gaining in popularity so more votes this time around makes sense.  

But that doesn't answer the question as to the disparity between parties at this juncture.  Do you think this is just an early voting anomaly?   If so, could you explain the internal mechanics that would produce such an anomaly?

Maddog wrote:The republicans don't have any real big races to excite the public except maybe for land commissioner as George P is running against a conservative.  

And the Democrats do?  How is it that there is such a disparity between Democrats and Republicans in the early voting turn-out numbers?  I mean, if you're saying that exciting races --> leads to greater turnout ("republicans don't have any real big races to excite..."), thus, higher turnout for Democrats  = Democrats have races that are more exciting for them, that means Democrats are going to win, eh?  I'm just trying to figure this out.

Either way, it will be exciting to watch.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/06/latest-buzz-builds-for-orourke-among-texas-democrats.html

Beto has the Dems very excited.

The turn-out numbers tell the tale:

Democrats: +125%

Republicans: +15%

Somp'in them cowboys don' like.

Texas blue wins. So happy ...

Original Quill wrote:Texas blue wins.     So happy ...

It's a primary. What you have to understand is that in many parts of Texas, there have been no Dems to vote for as Reps ran unopposed. Primary day was just the day the Reps decided which Rep was going to run un opposed. Then in other districts, there was only one Dem, so there was no need for Dems to vote during the primaries. Their candidate was already chosen. This year, there has been a concerted effort to give Dems someone to vote for, and more than one choice in each election. The Dems actually had a reason to vote.

But there is no doubt, that Reps will have more than a cakewalk this fall, thanks to Trump.

Long and short is that many more Dems showed up than last time. But that still left them with a turnout that was half of what the Reps had.

But the Dems did actually field a candidate in every house race for the first time in years.

Original Quill wrote:Texas blue wins.     So happy ...

From the forum political expert.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Texas blue wins.     So happy ...

From the forum political expert.  

...who consistently calls it correctly, I might add.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

From the forum political expert.  

...who consistently calls it correctly, I might add.  

Not a single statewide office went blue.

Wrong again.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

...who consistently calls it correctly, I might add.  

Not a single statewide office went blue.  

Wrong again.  

Game ain't over yet, Side-saddle Tex.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Not a single statewide office went blue.  

Wrong again.  

Game ain't over yet, Side-saddle Tex.  

No, the game isn't over. But your comment about Texas going blue is currently wrong.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Game ain't over yet, Side-saddle Tex.  

No, the game isn't over. But your comment about Texas going blue is currently wrong.

Of course, everyone admits what was...was. But now it's about to change.

Quill wrote:Texas blue wins. cheers So happy ...

Quill was wrong.

The race ain't over yet. El Paso has gone blue. Dallas County is blue. Austin County is blue. Bexar County and San Antonio are blue. Most of South Texas is blue. Even parts of Harris and Ft. Bend County are blue...and that's Houston, fourth largest city in the nation.

Looks like the blue horse is gaining, approaching the far turn.

Original Quill wrote:The race ain't over yet.  El Paso has gone blue.  Dallas County is blue.  Austin County is blue.  Bexar County and San Antonio are blue.  Most of South Texas is blue.  Even parts of Harris and Ft. Bend County are blue...and that's Houston, fourth largest city in the nation.

Looks like the blue horse is gaining, approaching the far turn.

The City of Austin is in Travis County. In any event the election you were referring to already happened, and Texas did not turn blue. Therefore your comment was false. Just man up and admit it.

The race will be over when the population says it's over. Hispanic is about to become the majority of Texas.

Original Quill wrote:The race will be over when the population says it's over.  Hispanic is about to become the majority of Texas.

The election happened.

There will be others for you to make incorrect predictions about.

Move along now.

The GOP grip on Texas is definitely flagging. I remember seeing a poll about a year ago in which Trump had a sub-50 percent approval rating among Texans.

I just checked it and he has a +4 rating in Texas currently, which most people would say makes Texas a swing or toss-up state.

The Republican Party's control of Texas has been dishonest for decades, won not by being a good party but through gerrymandering and, I'll admit, superior organization and enthusiasm.

Ben Reilly wrote:The GOP grip on Texas is definitely flagging. I remember seeing a poll about a year ago in which Trump had a sub-50 percent approval rating among Texans.

I just checked it and he has a +4 rating in Texas currently, which most people would say makes Texas a swing or toss-up state.

The Republican Party's control of Texas has been dishonest for decades, won not by being a good party but through gerrymandering and, I'll admit, superior organization and enthusiasm.

You can't gerrymander a state wide election.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:The GOP grip on Texas is definitely flagging. I remember seeing a poll about a year ago in which Trump had a sub-50 percent approval rating among Texans.

I just checked it and he has a +4 rating in Texas currently, which most people would say makes Texas a swing or toss-up state.

The Republican Party's control of Texas has been dishonest for decades, won not by being a good party but through gerrymandering and, I'll admit, superior organization and enthusiasm.

You can't gerrymander a state wide election.

Why are you limiting your perspective to state wide elections?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:


You can't gerrymander a state wide election.

Why are you limiting your perspective to state wide elections?

How else do you measure a state?

What is the tielt of this thread?

Obviously there are blue and red areas of the state, but the state in whole votes very red.

I think Ann Richards was the last Dem in Texas to win a majority of the votes in Texas and that has been over 30 years ago.

Quill wrote:Texas blue wins. cheers So happy ...

Quill was wrong.

Can Quill admit it?

I mean I thought Hillary would win, and I was wrong. It's not really a big deal to admit when you make a wrong prediction.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Why are you limiting your perspective to state wide elections?

How else do you measure a state?

What is the tielt of this thread?

Obviously there are blue and red areas of the state, but the state in whole votes very red.

I think Ann Richards was the last Dem in Texas to win a majority of the votes in Texas and that has been over 30 years ago.

I think federal elections are pretty important, don't you?

The state is red in the mostly rural counties. But in the big, populous counties it is distinctly blue. I agree with your other post, that Texas is changing.

As much as I had admired Ann Richards, the important element is the Hispanic vote. Hispanics vote overwhelmingly blue...and after Trump and caging children, that will be even stronger.

Maddog wrote:

Quill wrote:Texas blue wins. cheers So happy ...

Quill was wrong.

Can Quill admit it?

I mean I thought Hillary would win, and I was wrong. It's not really a big deal to admit when you make a wrong prediction.    

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

How else do you measure a state?

What is the tielt of this thread?

Obviously there are blue and red areas of the state, but the state in whole votes very red.

I think Ann Richards was the last Dem in Texas to win a majority of the votes in Texas and that has been over 30 years ago.

I think federal elections are pretty important, don't you?

The state is red in the mostly rural counties.  But in the big, populous counties it is distinctly blue.  I agree with your other post, that Texas is changing.

As much as I had admired Ann Richards, the important element is the Hispanic vote.  Hispanics vote overwhelmingly blue...and after Trump and caging children, that will be even stronger.

Federal elections are important, but only the presidential, and senate races can measure a state. Other federal races measure parts of the state.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I think federal elections are pretty important, don't you?

The state is red in the mostly rural counties.  But in the big, populous counties it is distinctly blue.  I agree with your other post, that Texas is changing.

As much as I had admired Ann Richards, the important element is the Hispanic vote.  Hispanics vote overwhelmingly blue...and after Trump and caging children, that will be even stronger.

Federal elections are important, but only the presidential, and senate races can measure a state. Other federal races measure parts of the state.  

There's really only three elected offices in the federal system, and you just named two of them. I think the House is pretty important, too, don't you? It can weight a state one way or the other.

There have been countless dirty-tricks campaigns that discourage Hispanic citizens from turning out and voting in Texas. Once the Hispanic voting bloc loses its fear of speaking up, Texas will turn blue.

I see no other reason that Republicans in Texas have been talking about a battle for the soul of Texas. They see the writing on the wall as well as anybody else does.

You even see a lot of Texas Republicans who prefer to shy away from the divisive rhetoric and policies of many other Republicans, who style themselves more as pragmatic and independent.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Quill wrote:Texas blue wins. cheers So happy ...

Quill was wrong.

Can Quill admit it?

I mean I thought Hillary would win, and I was wrong. It's not really a big deal to admit when you make a wrong prediction.    

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

If you think Russians can alter a whole electoral college how can you still think that anything is as it seems in America?

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

If you think Russians can alter a whole electoral college how can you still think that anything is as it seems in America?

You raise a great point, but not going in the right direction. The institutional government--or deep-state without the political overtones--is petrified about it. If the election process falters, everyone will lose their legitimacy.

Why do you think Putin is doing it?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Federal elections are important, but only the presidential, and senate races can measure a state. Other federal races measure parts of the state.  

There's really only three elected offices in the federal system, and you just named two of them.  I think the House is pretty important, too, don't you?  It can weight a state one way or the other.

This isn't about importance.

It's about measure the state. The entire state.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

There's really only three elected offices in the federal system, and you just named two of them.  I think the House is pretty important, too, don't you?  It can weight a state one way or the other.

This isn't about importance.

It's about measure the state. The entire state.  

Adjectives are not arguments. 'Importance' can qualify any noun, including one that goes to the "measure of the state". Quit retreating down rabbit-holes.

Ben Reilly wrote:There have been countless dirty-tricks campaigns that discourage Hispanic citizens from turning out and voting in Texas. Once the Hispanic voting bloc loses its fear of speaking up, Texas will turn blue.

I see no other reason that Republicans in Texas have been talking about a battle for the soul of Texas. They see the writing on the wall as well as anybody else does.

You even see a lot of Texas Republicans who prefer to shy away from the divisive rhetoric and policies of many other Republicans, who style themselves more as pragmatic and independent.

I know plenty of conservative Hispanics. It's not a consistent democratic voting block in Texas. Hispanics, like every other group often reflect the local trends. California Hispanics are often liberal. Texas Hispanics are often conservative.

Immigrants in general are hard to predict, and many Hispanics are first or second generation immigrants, with a different world view than other minority groups in the US.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

This isn't about importance.

It's about measure the state. The entire state.  

Adjectives are not arguments.  'Importance' can qualify any noun, including one that goes to the "measure of the state".  Quit retreating down rabbit-holes.

This isn't about importance.

It's about measuring the state. The entire state.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

If you think Russians can alter a whole electoral college how can you still think that anything is as it seems in America?

Stop being logical.

In the state’s race for governor, about half of Hispanics (53%) voted for Democrat Lupe Valdez and 42% backed the Republican, Greg Abbott.


https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/09/how-latinos-voted-in-2018-midterms/

That's not a big margin considering Lupe is Hispanic.

In 2018 U.S. congressional races nationwide, Pew Research reported that according to National Election Pool exit poll data, an estimated 69% of Latinos voted for the Democratic candidate and 29% backed the Republican candidate . This is a more than two-to-one advantage for Democrats, These results largely reflect the party affiliation of Latinos.

Also, in a Pew Research Center pre-election survey, 62% of Latinos said they generally identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party compared with 27% who gravitated toward the Republican Party.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/09/how-latinos-voted-in-2018-midterms/

Original Quill wrote:

In 2018 U.S. congressional races nationwide, Pew Research reported that according to National Election Pool exit poll data, an estimated 69% of Latinos voted for the Democratic candidate and 29% backed the Republican candidate .  This is a more than two-to-one advantage for Democrats,  These results largely reflect the party affiliation of Latinos.

Also, in a Pew Research Center pre-election survey, 62% of Latinos said they generally identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party compared with 27% who gravitated toward the Republican Party.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/09/how-latinos-voted-in-2018-midterms/

Yup. That's why I said Hispanics in Texas are different.

They tend to be more conservative the Hispanics in general, which makes sense.

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

If you think Russians can alter a whole electoral college how can you still think that anything is as it seems in America?

Stop being logical.

Okay, find one liberal who thinks that things are as they seem in America. We've been preaching about the corruption, and the need for reform, in the American political system since the days of Reagan, and for older liberals, Nixon.

It's time to stop pussyfooting and equivocating and just point to the problem, which in America is the Cult of the Right. They are the ones who started the so-called culture war, branding the left not as fellow citizens with whom they disagreed, or as the loyal opposition, but as the enemy within -- the dark force trying to topple America from the voting booth.

Since at least the days of Gingrich assuming the office of Speaker of the House, the Republican Party has flouted the spirit of America's laws and traditions in order to acquire and hold onto power.

The past two Republican presidents, elected (quote-unquote) within 16 years of one another, have each attained office without winning the popular vote. The past two Democratic presidents won popular majorities along with the Electoral College.

Since 2000, the Democratic candidate has won the popular vote four times, yet all we got out of that was eight years of Obama. We could have had at least four years of Al Gore, and Hillary Clinton would be president now, if it weren't for the Electoral College that so many on the left, but nobody on the right, want to abolish or at least reform.

It was the Republicans who fucked with the process of appointing Supreme Court justices, denying Obama a pick.

It's the Republicans who prove unable to follow the rules from election to election. Problems crop up consistently in places with a lot of liberals but that are controlled by Republicans. Every single time. I can provide the links.

This isn't about feeling superior, looking down on anybody, or virtue-signalling. This is about common sense and calling a spade a fucking spade.

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Read the title of the thread.  How can one be wrong for asking a question?

Hillary did win...by about 3-million votes.  Russian meddling 'rigged' the electoral college.

If you think Russians can alter a whole electoral college how can you still think that anything is as it seems in America?

Stop being logical.

Explain please.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

In 2018 U.S. congressional races nationwide, Pew Research reported that according to National Election Pool exit poll data, an estimated 69% of Latinos voted for the Democratic candidate and 29% backed the Republican candidate .  This is a more than two-to-one advantage for Democrats,  These results largely reflect the party affiliation of Latinos.

Also, in a Pew Research Center pre-election survey, 62% of Latinos said they generally identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party compared with 27% who gravitated toward the Republican Party.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/09/how-latinos-voted-in-2018-midterms/

Yup. That's why I said Hispanics in Texas are different.

They tend to be more conservative the Hispanics in general, which makes sense.  

Got any substantiation? Once we get over Texas' Jim Crow laws, rigging elections and such, Latinos will resume their normal tendencies.