The Wheelchair rolls over for Perry

Right, and a lot of the vacancies have been for the purpose of putting politically reliable people on the bench without benefit of election. That would slow down a lot if Davis were governor instead of a republican but it would still happen some and the appellate judiciary now is pretty bad.

And I am no supporter of Davis, whom I will not vote for. But I will not vote for Abbott either.

I used to vote for lesser evils by arguing that in 1938 Franz von Papen's party was less horrible than Hitler's party; though Franz got lynched at Nuremberg, and deservedly. He was still better than his opponent.

I am old enough now that I don't care anymore which jerk wins.
 
I did not realize the extent a Texas governor can fill the judiciary with appointees. Thanks for the info. Count me as another Texan who will hold his nose and vote for Greg Abbott.
 
I suspect Davis as governor would work in several ways that I wouldn't like. She would probably fight the voter ID law that is in place. She would definitely fight the restrictions on abortion that were recently passed. Plus, she would represent one more Texas politician that is politically liberal to fight against the conservative cause. That is ambiguous I know. Would she be financially responsible? I don't think so. Would she be worse than Abbott on that? I don't know. Will she stay out of the economy's way more than Abbott or do more to distort it? I doubt she would be an improvement in that regard over Abbott.

Deez, is there anything good about her as a candidate other than she isnt' Abbott?
 
Abbott is a strange one for me. I do not know why I hold out hope that he is not as corrupt as Perry. He has shown nothing in office to make me believe this, but I want to believe it dammit.

Patrick is the awful one.
 
Having a Democrat governor gives momentum to every single thing I listed.

If you think Wendy Davis would deploy the DPS to enforce the border to the same degree as a Republican (which admittedly isn't much, but they do (did) have road blocks and boats in the Rio Grande to stem the tide of illegals), you're nuts. I don't give a shat about what she says now.

If you think Wendy Davis would speak out against sanctuary cities and the effects of illegal immigration on the coffers of state and local governments, you're dreaming. The welcome mat would be thrown down unabashedly. Davis has already said she would have never deployed the National Guard to the border, and would've instead deferred to the corrupt border sheriffs who are neck deep in the drug cartel and human trafficking.

And in this age of a Democrat chief executive having a pen and phone, I would not be surprised at some sort of legislative bypass to expand Medicaid in cahoots with a Democrat-controlled federal government. Have you learned anything from Obama?
 
He'll do a damn sight more about it than Wendy Davis, that's for sure. The DPS and Texas Rangers' border surge of the past few years would have NEVER happened under the Democrat nominee.
 
Monahorns and m/,

Larry's explanation largely fits my view. However, I'd like to add another point. When I cast a ballot, I don't pretend that I'm voting for an emperor who will have absolute power. I put the candidates in the context of the office they're seeking as well as the checks and balances that will exist around him and her.

Davis can be as pro-abortion and anti-voter ID as she wants, but unless a Republican-dominated Legislature is willing to revisit those issues (which it most certainly is not), her views are irrelevant. Same goes for the Medicaid expansion. I oppose expanding Medicaid (which Davis supports), but Davis will have no ability whatsoever to make that happen. Because of that, I put little weight what she (or Abbott for that matter) think of those issues.

As for illegal immigration, they're a wash. Neither she nor Abbott will do ****. Like other Democrats, she wants the state taken over by Mexicans so she won't have to appeal to moderate. Like other Republican leaders, Abbott has big business' balls firmly entrenched in his mouth, and they don't want to stop illegal immigration.

Here's what I do know. For the last 10+ years, there has been an ethical stain on Texas government that has permeated the Governor's office, the Legislature, and the Texas Supreme Court. Rick Perry may have been its ringleader, but one-party rule (and therefore nonexistent oversight) has allowed it to become ingrained into Texas law and political practice. The branches of government are supposed to be somewhat adversarial. That's what encourages them to keep each other in check. When you have one-party rule, that adversarial relationship goes away, and corruption runs wild. Do you think a Democratic governor would have gotten an "Enterprise Fund" from a Republican Legislature? Hell f-ing no.

If Greg Abbott wins, that ethical stain at best continues and likely gets worse. If Wendy Davis wins, it gets smaller. Does it get smaller because she's a better person than Abbott? No, it gets smaller, because the branches of government charged will start to care about ethics again. It will be for partisan reasons rather than a good faith concern for the public, but it will happen. That is a big plus.
 
Despite any adversarial relationships in the Texas government, Wendy Davis will not diminish the ethical stains in this state. She is an unethical person. She will find ways to bypass her political opponents. What about leading a riot in the capital with people chanting "hail Satan" makes you think she will be a "lesser evil".

Look I don't like Abbott either. I will probably vote for a Libertarian or Independent for governor as I did last time. However, I would much rather have a governor in bed with Texas businessmen then someone seeking to overthrow our political culture. That's silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top