Will Beto O'Rourke do better or worse than Wendy Davis?

[Joe Fan]

The Fergusons were populists, and pro-local control when it came to alcohol, instead of being prohibitionists. They had a reputation for corruption and accepting bribes--the main knock on them. After losing to him in 1930, Ma Ferguson unseated Governor Sterling for her 2nd term in office. It was Ma Ferguson (populist, small town, sort-of middle class, ok with alcohol) vs Ross Sterling (extremely rich, anti-alcohol, Houston guy; Sterling was not just any oilman, but one of the founders of Humble Oil--which later combined with Rockefeller's Standard Oil of New Jersey to become Exxon). After leaving office the 2nd time, she tried for a 3rd time to enter the Governor's mansion, and lost to none other than the country music star--pass the biscuits Pappy O'Daniel.

Miriam Ferguson | American politician

And if you think The University has internal squabbles now... check out Pa Ferguson's meddling. He did not like UT:
https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2465&context=ethj

The above article also states that, in a newspaper he published, Pa Ferguson occasionally sank to that old favorite of so many demagogues worldwide--slur the Jews. Ferguson got so bad, that (according to the above article) even the KKK rebuked and ridiculed him for his over-the-top anti-Semitism. He published an article entitled The Cloven Foot of the Dallas Jew, in which he slammed Stanley Marcus (Neiman Marcus store), Alex Sanger (another department store owner), and other Jews. Ferguson was pissed that they wouldn't advertise in his newspaper (hmmmmm, I wonder why... ).

This is the sort of character we used to have for a Governor.

She also knocked off UT Dean George C. Butte in 1924, who was gunning to be the first Republican Gov since the days of the carpetbaggers. Almost all the honest Dem voters crossed over to vote for him, sick of the corruption of their own people. Weird how history repeats.

And speaking of corruption, it was not until Bill Clements that a Rep did finally win for Gov (1978)

 

[Joe Fan]

It's fun and easy to poke at the guy, but if Beto ran for Governor, the GOP had better run somebody good, or Beto would be likely to win. He would get massive $$$$ from out of state.

Apple, Google, Facebook and Amazon can probably elect whoever they want now. There is really no point to even vote anymore

 

[Chop]

Apple, Google, Facebook and Amazon can probably elect whoever they want now. There is really no point to even vote anymore

Wait a minute there...

You forgot to add Gamestop and AMC to your laundry list of tech and entertainment companies with the largest capitalization.

 

[Chop]

She also knocked off UT Dean George C. Butte in 1924, who was gunning to be the first Republican Gov since the days of the carpetbaggers. Almost all the honest Dem voters crossed over to vote for him, sick of the corruption of their own people. Weird how history repeats.

And speaking of corruption, it was not until Bill Clements that a Rep did finally win for Gov (1978)

Tower, GHW Bush, and Clements were the first I know about.

 

[Horn6721]

Chop
You mean George W
HW was never guv

 

[Chop]

Chop
You mean George W
HW was never guv

Ah, we're only talking governors then, ok...

I was talking about GOP politicians in general. Tower, GHW Bush, and Clements were pouring the foundations back in the 60s and 70s, and it came together in the late 70s and 80s. Before that, the GOP didn't stand a chance in this State.

Although, I understand some of the Hill Country and Northern Panhandle (North of Amarillo) has had GOP leanings since the beginning of that Party + the settling of those areas.

I don't care which party you support (if any). A one party state is bad, bad, bad!

 

[Joe Fan]

Tower, GHW Bush, and Clements were the first I know about.

Tower was Senate and W was not until 1994

Pre-Clements, it was Edmund J. Davis who won in 1869. He was a Yankee Army General and carpetbagger who imposed martial law on Texas, controlled the media, threw out elections he did not like, and finally had to be removed by force when he lost the next election. The incoming Governor was forced to enter the capital by ladder and then by using an axe.
It was another 105 years to Bill Clements.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Beta definitely blew his wad running for President. He ran much too far left to be able to competitively run statewide in Texas again, and it wasn't just policy. He went from being a unity candidate to a belligerent partisan *******. Once you go full-*******, you really can't go back. He wouldn't get his *** kicked Gary Mauro-style, but he wouldn't be able to seriously threaten Abbott.

 

[huisache]

He would also have to explain why he advocated taking our guns away.

 

[huisache]

Tower was Senate and W was not until 1994

Pre-Clements, it was Edmund J. Davis who won in 1869. He was a Yankee Army General and carpetbagger who imposed martial law on Texas, controlled the media, threw out elections he did not like, and finally had to be removed by force when he lost the next election. The incoming Governor was forced to enter the capital by ladder and then by using an axe.
It was another 105 years to Bill Clements.

Davis was a Texas Unionist who opposed secession and was county judge in south Texas before the war. Calling him a Yankee is misleading. Calling him a carpetbagger is a slander. He was born in Florida and lived in Texas a good while before the war. He practiced law in Corpus. The secessionists and KuKluxers thought little of him but he stood up for the freedmen. The best Republican governor we have had thus far

 

[Chop]

Re: Beto

Don't underestimate the power of "celebrity", outside big $$$$, and the fickleness (and forgetfulness) of the voters. He came relatively close to knocking off an incumbent Republican Senator in a statewide race.

 

[mb227]

Re: Beto

Don't underestimate the power of "celebrity", outside big $$$$, and the fickleness (and forgetfulness) of the voters. He came relatively close to knocking off an incumbent Republican Senator in a statewide race.

Remember also, however, that the roller still beat the lesbian (and sheriff) by double-figures. Valdez didn't have NEAR the strikes against her that Beto has...and as noted, Beto went FULL partisan hack in the years that have followed.

 

[Joe Fan]

Davis was a Texas Unionist who opposed secession and was county judge in south Texas before the war. Calling him a Yankee is misleading. ...

Pretty simple, if you fought for the blue, you were a Yankee. But this guy was even worse than just that, being an evil and greedy Reconstructionist made him a yellow-bellied, carpetbagging scallywag, son of a ***** Yankee

 

[theiioftx]

Constantly run the video of him saying, “Hell yes we are taking your guns.”

 

[Mr. Deez]

Re: Beto

Don't underestimate the power of "celebrity", outside big $$$$, and the fickleness (and forgetfulness) of the voters. He came relatively close to knocking off an incumbent Republican Senator in a statewide race.

Chop,

He was able to threaten Cruz for several reasons that won't be present against Abbott, and I say this as someone who doesn't like Greg Abbott and thinks he's a massive hypocrite.

First, Cruz had very little support beyond the Republican base, and even that support was blunted, because some of the base was pissed because of the "vote your conscience" speech in 2016. Abbott's support is broad. It goes far beyond the base, so he just isn't as vulnerable.

Second, though Cruz is a terrific Republican primary campaigner, he's a crappy general election campaigner. Abbott is a good all-around campaigner who knows how to win statewide after doing it so many times.

Third, in 2018 Beta had a "nice guy image." He was likeable, and it inflated his support with suburban women. He massively pissed that away in 2019 and 2020, and I don't think he can get that back this quickly. Furthermore, Abbott has a nice guy image that people have known for 20 years - something Cruz lacked. Chicks dig the Wheelchair.

Fourth, Beta didn't take a lot of controversial positions early on, which allowed him to build momentum. Since 2018, he has taken much more Left-leaning positions and said a lot of controversial things. Accordingly, he'll face an onslaught of campaign ads highlighting those positions from the very beginning. The "we're gonna take away your guns" comment will get a lot of use.

Fifth, because the Texas political media hates Ted Cruz and wanted him to lose, they basically made themselves Beto's human bidet for about 8 months. The Texas political media doesn't hate Abbott like they hate Cruz, so they won't help Beto the same way.

Finally, 2022 will be a midterm election with a Democrat in the White House rather than the reverse. That means higher Republican turnout and lower Democratic turnout instead of the reverse phenomenon that we had in 2018.

If Beto actually becomes the nominee in 2022 l would expect Abbott to win by about the same margin he won in 2018 plus maybe 2 or 3 points. He'll reach the upper 50s.

Frankly, if Beto wants to run again, he should run for AG in the event Ken Paxton tries to run again. I hope Paxton doesn't run, but if he does, that'll be the biggest opportunity for Democrats to flip a statewide office in 30 years.

 

[Joe Fan]

Constantly run the video of him saying, “Hell yes we are taking your guns.”

I thought constantly running the video clips of Biden pinching the nipples of 10 year old girls would work in the same manner.
Unfortunately no one ever tried that, so we cant say for certain it would not have worked.

 

[huisache]

Pretty simple, if you fought for the blue, you were a Yankee. But this guy was even worse than just that, being an evil and greedy Reconstructionist made him a yellow-bellied, carpetbagging scallywag, son of a ***** Yankee

Simpleminded is simple, I guess.
He was hated because he defended the US amongst a bunch of people who did not want to lose the one third of the population held in bondage. Then when the unionists prevailed he tried to secure the future of the freedmen. Shame on him I guess

 

[theiioftx]

I thought constantly running the video clips of Biden pinching the nipples of 10 year old girls would work in the same manner.
Unfortunately no one ever tried that, so we cant say for certain it would not have worked.

It didn’t work federally due to mail in voting and ballot harvesting in swing states. I expect Texas to tighten up voting laws in next session.

 

[Chop]

Chop,

He was able to threaten Cruz for several reasons that won't be present against Abbott, and I say this as someone who doesn't like Greg Abbott and thinks he's a massive hypocrite.

Wait, Abbott is a massive hypocrite? Are you sure? I didn’t know about that. Please explain on the Political Hypocrisy thread. (as it’s kinda off topic here...)

 

[Joe Fan]

It didn’t work federally due to mail in voting and ballot harvesting in swing states. I expect Texas to tighten up voting laws in next session.

Florida made a one and a half word change to its state constitution
From "Every" to "Only a"

(old)ARTICLE VI, Section 2. Electors. Every citizen of the United States who

(new)ARTICLE VI, Section 2. Electors. Only a citizen of the United States who is at least eighteen years of age and who is a permanent resident of the state, if registered as provided by law, shall be an elector of the county where registered.​

 

[Joe Fan]

Simpleminded is simple, I guess. He was hated because he defended the US ...

When you have something simple and straightforward but deem it "complicated," it is usually because you do not like the conclusion.

This is the exact same problem liberals judges and justices deal with every new case. If you don't already know, the way the caselaw is supposed to work is --
-- there are the facts of each case (a record)
-- there is the applicable law
-- you then apply the relevant law to the facts in the record
-- you draw a conclusion

Makes sense, yes? The problem for liberal judges is that they do it backwards. They start with the conclusion. They first ask, "who do i think should win this case?" After deciding the ending, they then must back into a rationale for that conclusion, twisting into a legal pretzel along the way. This is why the law in the US has become such a mess. It is liberal judges attempting to justify their feelings based conclusions. It's a horrible situation.

And this is what you have done here. You decided the ending first. You decided you want Davis to be seen as a hero, instead of the yellow bellied, carpetbagging scallywag that he was. So you had to twist into a nonsensical pretzel of reasoning to get there. Why did you do this? Because, for some unknown reason, you desperately want to imagine that if you were alive in 1861 you would have agreed with Davis. As a purely statistical matter, this is highly unlikely. LOL. But, believe me, I get it -- most liberals refuse to let statistics and probabilities come between them and their feelings.

And, in any event, unfortunately for you, there is only one real issue of relevance pertaining to Davis -- if you fight for the enemy, you are a traitor. Davis took up arms against the people of Texas. He tried to kill, and did kill and harm them. Thus it is an inescapable conclusion that Davis was a traitor to Texas.

That is the distinction between he and Sam Houston. Houston disagreed with secession too, but he did not take up arms against and attempt to murder the people of Texas. Davis did. And Davis should have been hung from the highest tree for it.

Attempting to rewrite history to soothe your 2021 sense of self worth is a fool's errand.

 

[huisache]

You are the authority on fool's errands so I will bow to your greater knowledge.

But please be advised that a carpetbagger was one who came south from the north to loot. Davis was a Texan.

And in 1861 I would have probably been a Unionist like most of the other German Texans.

 

[Chop]

Watch out. He did the mind meld with his feline overlord:
(He'll be going all Machiavellian from this point on...)
(He'll also always order the fish at restaurants, that's a sure fire give away.)

 

[theiioftx]

You are the authority on fool's errands so I will bow to your greater knowledge.

But please be advised that a carpetbagger was one who came south from the north to loot. Davis was a Texan.

And in 1861 I would have probably been a Unionist like most of the other German Texans.

I think it is funny that someone knows how they would have thought 160 years ago. Throughout history, good people have done bad things thinking they were in the right. During those times, your news came from locals who all thought alike with no other sources of information. My guess most thought about only what benefited them personally as to how they were going to get their next meal and protect their family from freezing to death.

 

[huisache]

pretty sage commentary but I was responding to that great sage Joe Fan who presumed not only why I was saying what I said based on present politics but what I would have thought 160 years ago. I merely responded, in accordance with your own comment, that I, being descended from Texas Germans would have been pro union and anti secession. ' He found that unacceptable based on his own presumed passion for the secessionists and, my presumption, that he did not think much of Davis' attempts to protect the freedmen from the light pleasures of the klan and other nineteenth century trash.

 

[Horn6721]

iis
That is all true except the issue of slavery, of thinking it is the right one someone to OWN another. For some, not all, was a very deeply felt as not a right.
I can't speak for anyone back then and I know, just like in loyalists and patriots during our revolution the decision either way did not come eaily.
For people here in Texas it must have been even more difficult since slavery was not a large happening here versus the larger, To Texans, of states rights.
I can see many of not most Texans who had fought for or had relatives ho fought for our freedom viewing the civil war not that long ago in much the same way.
That would also have many thinking someone like Davis was no better than if not a defacto carperbagges

 

[huisache]

the slave population of Texas in 1860 accounted for between a fourth and a third of all the people in the state at the time. That is a lot and if you read the Texas Ordinance of Secession the main if not only reason for secession according to the convention was fear of abolition. Read it if you have any doubts.

Jefferson famously wrote that the problem whites had with slavery was that they had a wolf by the ears. They knew they could neither hang on or let loose. I sympathize with their legitimate fears at the time after what had happened in Haiti but the Reconstruction era governments and the freedmen did not create a reign of terror as was feared. Their opponents most assuredly did.

 

[theiioftx]

iis
That is all true except the issue of slavery, of thinking it is the right one someone to OWN another. For some, not all, was a very deeply felt as not a right.
I can't speak for anyone back then and I know, just like in loyalists and patriots during our revolution the decision either way did not come eaily.
For people here in Texas it must have been even more difficult since slavery was not a large happening here versus the larger, To Texans, of states rights.
I can see many of not most Texans who had fought for or had relatives ho fought for our freedom viewing the civil war not that long ago in much the same way.
That would also have many thinking someone like Davis was no better than if not a defacto carperbagges

Again, at one time many people thought the earth was flat. I agree it would be hard to think slavery was ever good, but somehow it was accepted. As to civil war, most southerners who fought did not own slaves. They readily accepted slavery though which goes to the point in my post. 20% of all civil war soldiers were under 18. Most were probably fighting for the adventure versus a political position in life.

 

[Horn6721]

Just like you have large urban populations controlling the state today you had the Houston area ( Wharton, Brazos and Montgomery) with the largest % of slaves. They of course felt the needed continution of the institute.
To ii' s point most of the rest of our large state focused on survival with freedom from a restrictive gov't. Much like today.

 

[huisache]

I: I’ve read a lot of ranger narratives and agree with your point about the youth of the soldiers and their desire for adventure. Camping out with your buddies and fighting seemed vastly preferable to staring at a mules’ ***