Google Ads


Site Stats

TX-Gov, TX-Sen: Poll-a-palooza

by: DavidNYC

Fri Apr 24, 2009 at 4:08 PM EDT


Research 2000 for Daily Kos (4/20-22, registered voters, no trendlines). First up, the gubernatorial race:

Tom Schieffer (D): 37
Rick Perry (R-inc): 52
Undecided: 11

Tom Schieffer (D): 35
Kay Bailey Hutchison(R): 57
Undecided: 8
(MoE: ±4%)

Tom Schieffer's favorables are at 26-11, Rick Perry's at 51-43 and KBH's 64-29. Obviously we'll want to face Perry if we hope to have much if any chance here. But even though R2K didn't test the Republican primary, the favorability ratings among the GOP show what other polls have - KBH soars at 86-8 among members of her own party, while Perry sits back at a 76-19 rating. Still, I'm not willing to write Perry off for dead just yet.

And the Senate race:

John Sharp (D): 36
Greg Abbott (R): 43

John Sharp (D): 37
David Dewhurst (R): 44

John Sharp (D): 37
Michael Williams (R): 34

John Sharp (D): 37
Florence Shapiro (R): 33

Bill White (D): 36
Greg Abbott (R): 42

Bill White (D): 37
David Dewhurst (R): 43

Bill White (D): 38
Michael Williams (R): 34

Bill White (D): 38
Florence Shapiro (R): 33
(MoE: ±4%)

As you can see, it doesn't much seem to matter who is paired against whom - the two Dems pull 36-38, while the better-known Rs (Abbott and Dewhurst) get 42-44 and the lesser-knowns (Williams and Shapiro) take 33-34. And this race, of course, might not ever happen, or at least, might not happen for a long time.

You probably also saw the delightful finding that fully half of Texas Republicans want Texas to be an independent nation, and more than half approve of Perry's secessionist comments. Maybe he's found a winning campaign issue! Anyhow, who wants to help `em pack?

DavidNYC :: TX-Gov, TX-Sen: Poll-a-palooza
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Houston, we have a solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Poll-wise, that seems like a pretty decent place for our hypothetical top-tier candidates to start out in in our hypothetical Senate race; given that we haven't won a statewide race here in some time, this'll be a tough slog, but this state is slowly trending our way.


damn
Missed that before I posted it. lol

[ Parent ]
Texas is a Republican state
for the foreseeable future.

It's not an accident that no Democrat has won statewide since 1994.  


That's not a given anymore.
The demographics are going are way.  With the increase in blacks and Latinos, the growth is places like Dallas with people moving there from the north, much like Virginia, the dysfunction of Texas Republicans which is bound to catch up with them at some point, and the yellow dog Democrats that still exist in the state, it's just a matter of time.  I had thought a perfect storm was going to brew in Texas last year to propel Rick Noriega to the Senate, but Noriega was unable to raise significant funds so he couldn't take advantage of the dissatisfaction with Cornyn.  Still, time is on our side in Texas, not the secessionists.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

[ Parent ]
10 years, maybe more
Depends on how the Obama administration does on processing citizenship applications.

[ Parent ]
Let's be accurate
The black population in Texas is staying pretty stable (it continues to be 11.5% of the population, which is what it was in 2000). The Hispanic population is growing, but because of how many of them are either not citizens or aren't old enough (or both) they're not going to be voting anywhere near their numbers for a long time (latinos make up 35.5% of the Texas population yet only made up 20% of the vote in the state).

Plus, it's important to point out that Noriega and Obama performed about equally, a typical Texas Democrat is still at a large disadvantage against a typical Texas Republican (which is really what the battle between Cornyn and Noriega was). It'll be a good while before Texas is competitive for us again.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
And the longer we go without testing that competitiveness
the longer it will be.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

[ Parent ]
But Texas is also an extremely expensive state to compete in
In a race that wasn't all that competitive (Cornyn won by 12 points and there was never any serious doubt about who would ultimately win) $22 million combined was spent just by the two candidates (I don't believe that either the DSCC or the NRSC spent any real money there in 2008). Who do you think would be willing to spend that kind of money just for a slim chance that it might possibly be competitive? This isn't like spending money in states like Montana or North Dakota or South Dakota where it's quite cheap to compete even if you don't win. Think about it this way, in New York State (a place that might be more expensive than Texas but is still in the same ballpark) during the 2000 election (when Hillary Clinton was elected) Hillary Clinton and Rick Lazio spent a combined $70 million that year (which would not include any money either the DSCC or the NRSC would've spent at the time).

How much money should the DSCC spend to test the competitiveness of Texas? How much money should the Obama campaign (when re-election time comes) spend to test the competitiveness of the state? Should they really be willing to spend $30-$40 million dollars each in a state that, barring very special circumstances, the Democrats start off 10-12 points behind?

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
First Competitive, Then Money
I'm a Texan, but I cannot fault the party committees or Obama one bit for not spending money in Texas.  Money can only close the gap so much.  At the presidential level, we're many years away at best from Texas ever becoming a battleground state.  At the Senate level, our candidate needs to poll somewhat close before natinal money should be spent.  The state is just too expensive and the opportunity cost thus too high to spend money on someone who's likely to lose.

[ Parent ]
I definitely agree
I think that Texas will come to the blue (or at least become competitive) in time, but now (or the next 3 years) is not that time. I think the same thing about Mississippi, by the way, that state will probably become Majority-Minority in the next two decades or so (thanks to the growing black population and the ever growing (but much less acknowledged) Hispanic population (Mississippi, Georgia, and North Carolina are eventually going to be radically different from what they were).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Northerners
In the SE Houston burbs (where Im at), at least, even the northern transplants seem to be Republican.  

[ Parent ]
Citzenship for illigal immigrants
could go a long way in making TX a swing state.

Citizenship for illegals
Itll be many years before they get that, though, and then probably many years before those same folks are regular voters.

[ Parent ]
Bill Clinton expidited citizenship apps
in 1995-1996.  I suspect that Obama will do the same.

[ Parent ]
I'm warming up to Sharp.
His shot at Perry's secessionist talk did my heart good.  I'm sure he's a pretty conservative guy, but I'm starting to think his heart's in the right place and his head is screwed on right (which is more than could be said for the Evan Bayh crowd).  He's not my candidate yet but he very well could be.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

I'm Likely Voting for Hutchison (in the R primary only)
Obviously we'll want to face Perry if we hope to have much if any chance here.

Technically correct but misses the bigger picture.  First, there's likely no Senate race unless Hutchison wins the R primary.  Second, although Hutchison would be a much stronger general election candidate than Perry, Perry would still be the heavy favorite to win the general if he won the primary.  Third, some of us live in Texas and would prefer the lesser of two evils as governor.  The worst scenario is Perry as Governor and Hutchison as Senator, which is the likely outcome if Perry wins the R primary.  The best realistic scenario is Hutchison as Governor and Sharp/White as Senator.


Good point
unless it looks like we have a realistic shot at beating Perry, the best solution for EVERYONE is to hope that we get a less insane Republican as governor and an open Senate seat.

[ Parent ]
We have a decent chance of beating Perry
let KBH and Perry beat each other up.  I think this race will look very different a year from now.

[ Parent ]
Thanks for giving us a more down to earth opinion...
It does really paint a different picture than you get from those of us out looking in than the one you see.  

[ Parent ]
All fair points
Though as a much more famous man once said, I had a truly marvellous exposition of all these issues which this blog post was too narrow to contain. :)

Anyhow, I think there's a decent chance KBH would bail on the Senate altogether if Perry beats her. She has been eyeing this race for a long time and seems very eager to make her exit - she hasn't even been giving the requests of an important fellow Texan, NRSC Chair John Cornyn, much respect.


[ Parent ]
I think KBH would retire in 2012
if she loses the primary.  And I think 2012 is our best chance to win that Senate seat, with Obama on the ballot, and probably contesting Texas.

[ Parent ]
I doubt Obama will contest Texas though
It's way too expensive to compete in and if Obama's reasonably competitive in Texas then Obama's also probably pushing 400 electoral votes (Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, Arizona, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota were all closer than Texas).

I mean I agree that it'll probably be our best chance of winning in 2012 if KBH loses the gubernatorial primary and retires in 2012 it'll be out best chance, but don't assume that Obama will be throwing any serious money into Texas in 2012.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
I think he will contest Texas
I think Obama will be leading prospective Repubs by 15-20 nationally in polls in mid-2012.  And that will spur Obama to put money in Texas into massive voter registration of Hispanics and blacks, which in turn will get them to believe that they could carry the state.

If the economy recovers, I think by June 2012 it will be obvious that Obama will win a landslide.  

Texas is getting purple because of demographic changes.  And I think it is the darkhorse pickup of 2012.  After all, how many people in 2005 honestly believed that the Democrats would win Indiana in 2008?


[ Parent ]
I can envisige that scenario


[ Parent ]
Good point
North Carolina was a big surprise too.  I assumed the only was we could win NC was with Edwards.

[ Parent ]
North Carolina's demographics have been moving in our favor though
Even in 2004 Kerry did slightly better than Gore did in NC even though he did worse in the national vote. The growth of the Research Triangle has been extremely good to us (just like the growth of NoVA has been extremely good for us in Virginia).

Actually, while we did improve on Kerry's weak performance in Texas by a solid 10 points (or so) the fact that Bush was the favorite son in 2008 means that Texas is probably still substantially behind the national curve and that it'll stay that way for a while.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Wasnt the Research Triangle once a swing district?
At least on the Pres. level. My how things have changed.

[ Parent ]
Errr
District - area, rather.

[ Parent ]
Depends on what you mean by swing
Of the eight counties which make up the Research Triangle (Chatham, Durham, Franklin, Harnett, Johnston, Orange, Person, and Wake) John Kerry won the two-party vote in those counties by 3 points (51.5-48.5). Put in the context of the national popular vote (in which Bush won with roughly 51.3 compared to Kerry's 48.7 of the two-party vote) it was certainly a swing district in the context of the national popular vote, but in the context of the state of North Carolina, it's actually quite Democratic. Let me put this in context, in the 2004 Senate election, Erskine Bowles won the Triangle by nearly 10 points even though he lost statewide by 5 points. Actually, it'd probably be considered part of the base of any Democratic victory in North Carolina.

Of course, if someone who's actually from NC wants to correct me, then please feel free.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Yes, but Indiana is different
Here's a few things to remember:

1. Obama was from neighboring Illinois (the western 1/3 of Indiana is part of the Chicago media market).

2. Indiana isn't really that different from Missouri or Ohio (two states which tend to always be battlegrounds). It's more a matter of us underperforming the demographics for a long time rather than some massive demographic change.

3. Landslides tend to produce low turnouts (especially when incumbents are involved), even if we win Texas, I'd bet it would be something like how Michigan turned out this time around rather than something like North Carolina or Indiana.

4. As I mentioned before, the major problem isn't that we haven't done enough registration in the state among Hispanics and blacks, it's that a significant portion of the Hispanics in the state are not citizens (whether they be legal or illegal immigrants) and thus can't vote. This is something that will change in time, but if we're gonna win in Texas it's gonna have to be because Obama has won over some of the secessionists...

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
2012
Is too far away to know who will have the edge. Especially with the economy in the crapper right now.  

[ Parent ]
Fully half? C'mon...
It's only 48%.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic
But it was 48-48 - "fully half" of those who ventured an opinion.

[ Parent ]
seriously
I saw this today, I've watched it repeatedly, and I have laughed everytime!



Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox