Is Rep. Joaquin Castro More Progressive Than Congressman Lloyd Doggett?

State House v. U.S. House (5.00 / 5)

Is it appropriate to compare the State House v. the U.S. House?  Even though the the GOP controls both they have a much larger majority in the State House so it's not surprising to see Castro rank higher

---

by: MikeNT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 15:44:07 PM UTC

That's why I dug deeper (0.00 / 0)

That's why I compared them at a greater depth to see how they compare with other factors, including the reps in the districts covered by the new 35th.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 15:57:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

right (0.00 / 0)

and when you start splitting the numbers apart and looking at doggett in comparison to other Texas Dems, the numbers are even closer.

for instance, compare Doggett to the most conservative remaining Texas Dem: on the economy, National Journal ranks Doggett a 54 (the lowest of anyone in Texas except Chet) and Cuellar a 55.  on social issues? Doggett a 67 and Cuellar a 61.

as those of you who have worked in the sausage factory that is the legislative process at the state and/or fed level, you know that each bill has its own set of conditions and trade-offs.

"NO"...there is no ranking system that will answer every question and calm every concern.  but phillip's effort is an honest attempt that shouldn't be discounted.

 

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 20:06:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Among Democrats (0.00 / 0)

Rep. Castro ranked 12th out of 49 Democrats - putting him in the top 24% among Democrats.

Congressman Doggett ranked 147th out of 256 Democrats - putting him in the top 57% among Democrats.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 16:08:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Some validity to the point though (3.00 / 1)

There is some validity to the point. Remember, the rankings are based on the votes cast in their respective legislatures. That means the Texas House could have had more conservative items to vote on than the US House, possibly skewing the results, as Mike pointed out. That's why I went to the comparison of peers approach.

The bottom line is we really won't know how they stack up until we start getting them on record and in debate on the issues. At this point we're just in speculation mode, including those claiming Doggett is more progressive than Castro, which seemed to be the trend on that first blog entry.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 16:20:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right (5.00 / 2)

That's why I have the caveat in the first sentences of this post.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 16:21:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So True (5.00 / 1)

And yes, Phillip - I know you mentioned upfront about the trouble of comparing apples and oranges. But your post doesn't discuss that caveat much.

The Texas legislature, this year, is probably one of the most conservative governing bodies in the Western World. The US Congress, in 2010, was not.  

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write."  -  John Adams

---

by: Michael Hurta @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 20:43:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Michael (3.00 / 1)

The entire first half of the post discusses both the problem with this, but also the problem I have with others generally saying that Doggett is more progressive than Castro based on nothing. Had comments like that not been raised previously on BOR, I'm sure I would have never thought up this post.

When scouting for the NBA draft, two shooting guards could go #1 or #2. One scored 6 points more per game than the other, but with a different conference, different schedule, different coach, and different system, that doesn't tell the whole story. The same is true with the rankings in this post; it does not tell the whole story. But it does show that each person certainly deserves equal consideration, and the blanket assertions made by many Doggett supporters that he is more progressive than Castro do not hold water.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:18:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Michael's right on this (3.67 / 3)

The US House is to the left of the Texas House. So it's entirely possible that Doggett could be to the left of Castro, and is being pushed down in the rankings by strongly liberal districts across the country the likes of which we don't have anywhere in Texas.  

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:19:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

not by much (0.00 / 0)

this Congress has been pretty out there. they have taken huge swings at

but any analysis comparable to this (even if it were apples to apples) ignores each district's personality, values and priorities.

while one could easily argue that doggett voted the values or certain large parts of his district (Travis), he clearly ignored the wishes of other parts.  conversely, one could easily argue that Castro voted in a far more progressive manner than the majority of his district might have liked.

i commend phillip for injecting some facts to answer some of the questions that have been posed and i think many of the snippy remarks towards his diary are unfounded.

even if we compare NARAL ratings that the state level to NARAL ratings at the fed level, we still won't get the side-by-side comparison.  the issues are different, the bills are different, the legislative tactics that force certain votes are entirely different.

this is a good snapshot that hopefully helps objective-minded voters move on to other factors.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 19:56:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly (0.00 / 0)

And if Castro is more liberal than Doggett, why did Republicans go after Doggett and set him up to have a primary fight with someone from San Antonio, if the potential new rep from San Antonio that they are giving them was "just as bad" (more progressive?)

"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."- James A. Baldwin

---

by: Timothy @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 05:42:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just doesn't make any sense (4.33 / 3)

Your comment doesn't really make any sense. Castro entered the race AFTER the district lines were drawn. There was speculation in San Antonio that several Hispanics might run for the district. Castro was the one that emerged to run AFTER the district was drawn.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 11:51:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Interesting comparison but you still have to look deeper (0.00 / 0)

Great post Phillip. I think several in Austin and San Antonio may view Doggett to be more progressive based on a frame of reference but comparing Doggett to Castro in terms of progressive ideology will take more investigation. It means voters, or active Democrats, will need to dig deeper before completing their assessment.

Looking at Doggett's 147th ranking, that's compared within the US House. Within the Texas delegation he ranks 4th behind Eddie Bernice Johnson, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Al Green and just ahead of Charlie Gonzales, who's district he would be taking over (remember, the core of San Antonio, lest we forget the majority of voters in the district are from San Antonio). So it's not a stretch to say he's comparable to the voters of the district.

Checking out Castro in the Texas House and reps who have parts of their districts in the new 35th, he's more progressive than Ruth Jones McClendon and Mike Villarreal. However, he's less progressive than Eddie Rodriguez (slightly by .02 points) and Roland Gutierrez.

Now, the more interesting comparison is how the US House and Texas House compare. Remember, Rice made his assessment based on 1,000 votes in the Texas House and the National Journal made their's based on key votes in the US House. Rice used Stanford Univ. professor Jackman's Bayesian estimation procedure. The National Journal doesn't say what model they used. If it's the same, we have a winner! But I doubt it is.

I think the more telling comparison for voters is how the candidates rank with their peers mapped into the new 35th, if that makes sense. Based on that I think both candidates line up with the voters and would give progressives currently represented by Lamar Smith a better situation.

Austin progressives afraid of Castro's voting record shouldn't be worried and San Antonio progressives afraid of Doggett's voting record shouldn't be worried. They seem to be cut from the same vein as their current representatives.

Of course I'm sure some Austinites will take issue with that but the facts are there, thanks to Phillip.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 15:54:21 PM UTC

Progressive Punch Score (3.00 / 2)

Here's another scoring.

Progressive Punch scores Doggett at 106 of 432 with an Overall Lifetime Progressive Score of 90.24%.

His Crucial Lifetime Progressive Score is 86.91%.

Crucial Votes are really "where were you when we needed you" votes as defined by PP.

http://www.progressivepunch.or...

PP Lifetime Scores on the other reps:
Al Green: 92.09
Sheila Jackson Lee: 90.05
Eddie Bernice Johnson: 89.77
Charlie Gonzalez: 87.01
Ruben Hinojosa: 82.66
Silvestre Reyes: 81.51
Gene Green: 80.15
Henry Cuellar: 78.13

PP Crucial Lifetime Scores:
Sheila Jackson Lee: 85.97
Eddie Bernice Johnson: 83.89
Al Green: 78.69
Charlie Gonzalez: 77.49
Ruben Hinojosa: 71.06
Gene Green: 68.56
Silvestre Reyes: 66.62
Henry Cuellar: 43.16

PP ranking out of 432:
Al Green: 78
Sheila Jackson Lee: 110
Eddie Bernice Johnson: 116
Charlie Gonzalez: 142
Ruben Hinojosa: 163
Silvestre Reyes: 167
Gene Green: 170
Henry Cuellar: 175

---

by: SADem @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 16:44:13 PM UTC

Compares with National Journal (0.00 / 0)

That tracks somewhat with the National Journal which still validates Phillip's reference. As I stated in my posting you really have to compare to Gonzalez to see how closely he maps with the district he'll be representing.

Honestly, all this "progressive" talk is more noise to me than important from an issue perspective. The district encompasses Democrats who also lean moderate, like myself. If we're trying to elect a progressive to the district, in my opinion we've missed the boat. I want the district, both San Antonio, Austin and parts in between, to elect someone who maps to the overall ideology of the district.

If you market yourself as progressive only, you're going to lose this election. I find it interesting how some Democrats feel only their viewpoint matters and disregard the district in general. Remember, it also takes in Smith's district. Those people aren't going to move all of a sudden because a Democrat may be representing them. They're going to vote.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:13:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dr. Donna Campbell in 2012 (3.00 / 2)

Rather than worrying about who is most the statistically progressive Democrat is before this whole redistricting farce has been to federal court, Democrats would be wise to concern themselves about how to handle a possible Dr. Donna Campbell candidacy in 2012.

An unconfirmed rumor has her moving to Hays County. If that proves to be the case, we can anticipate her running for the proposed CD 25, a possible court ordered CD 25, or against State Senator Jeff Wentworth. No matter which option she might choose, I anticipate her have the same energized, aggressive campaign organization.

If Wentworth gets tea bagged, Bexar County Democrats may want to a have viable candidate ready to file. Congressman Doggett will have no chance of winning against Campbell in the proposed CD 25 running from East Austin, to Hays County, to Brownwood, to Cleburne, and finishing up in Corsicana. So for future discussion purposes, the concept of Congressman Doggett running in the Texas Republican proposed CD 25 should not be considered a viable option.  

---

by: ssuits @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:12:31 PM UTC

What Were The Actual Votes? (3.00 / 2)

What were the actual ores they were rated on? I would like to see that. For one thing, in some years, you can get a decently "progressive" ranking in the Texas Legislature based only on a handful of actual progressive votes. Plus, because Doggett has been in Congress so long, there is no doubt a disparity in the number and type of votes cast.

And, if Castro only ranked in the top 24 percent, who was above him? And which votes counted "against" Doggett and Castro in their respective positions?

Congressional votes and voting patterns are far different than legislative ones. For one thing members of Congress often have to vote against an entire bill--good or bad--because of something detrimental to their state or district, which is far less common in the Legislature.

Why not publish the full list of votes used to compile each ranking here in the comments?

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:23:20 PM UTC

The links to the sources were published (0.00 / 0)

Vince I think your browser allows you to go to links. Phillip published the links to the sources with their methodology and votes. I looked and did some further analysis.

You chastise Phillip for not doing the legwork you could do yourself with one mouse click. Unmerited in my opinion.

Personally I would prefer the links to the sources so I can do my own analysis and not deal with possibly filtered views.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:27:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Evidently... (5.00 / 1)

You didn't get what I was saying. I was asking because there ARE NO VOTES related to the Castro ranking I can find going through the links. The Rice/Tribune study doesn't show it's work.

The Castro ranking is based off a mathematical and statistical formula created by political science professors. Doggett's ranking is from Roll Call and is a more straightforward up or down ranking based on actual votes.  

This isn't even close to an apples-to-oranges comparison because the methodologies are completely divergent.  It is an apples-to-VW Bus comparison. The data is too dissimilarly calculated.  

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:32:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Darn it when sarcasm gets in the way of your message (3.00 / 1)

Vince, I got what you were saying and felt it unproductive and somewhat irrational. That's why I preferred looking at different aspects of the report, which you seem to have ignored. BTW, the votes used to calculate the scores are viewable. (Darn, another click.)

I think we all agree there is disparity in the votes and positions based on the differences in the legislative bodies. However, most Doggett supporters keep harping on him being more progressive than Castro or that Castro isn't progressive. Frankly, I don't give a hoot being a moderate myself. But I think the posting was to bring facts out instead of assumptions and accusations.

Read it however you want to. BTW, the Castro number is ALSO based on actual votes (999 in the Texas House in 2011).

There, now you have one less click to get to the data. Hope that helps you out in your criticism.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:39:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me say this one more time (0.00 / 0)

NJ/Roll Call actually publishes the list of votes they used. The Tribune/Rice study DOES NOT. I already checked, and the links from the Tribune site never take you to a vote listing. They didn't and really can't show their work like roll call because of the mathematical formulas required to get their end result.

The calculation methodologies are wildly different. NJ bases their rankings based on what the D/R "line" was on the vote. Tribune/Rice requires filtering through multiple algebraic formulas.  Go look at the methodology. It isn't the same, period. This is neither a boon nor disaster for either Doggett or Castro because it is simply not a valid comparison. It isn't the same thing as comparing poll X with poll Y. The formulas used to calculate the rankings far too different.  

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 17:50:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me say it one more time (5.00 / 1)

We know it isn't. Read our postings. We've expressed that. As I said in my first posting "comparing Doggett to Castro in terms of progressive ideology will take more investigation."

However, I used it as an opportunity to compare the two to their peers who currently represent that district to see how they stack. But don't chastise Phillip for posting it. I'm glad he opened the conversation and provided some information.

Reasonable people can see the differences in the data and can look at other factors, which I tried to do.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:27:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The point's been made (2.00 / 2)

that we really need to compare actual votes on specific policy.

It'll be interesting to see specific positions pop up. I'll be VERY interested to see positions on entitlements and the debt WRT our current economic environment.

I want to know who tracks with the President. That one issue right now will make my decision easy. If both of them are close to the President, then we have two pinheads in the race and the winner is largely irrelevant.

As for the latter part of my statement, I've never heard Castro speak and look forward to it. I want to hear him persuade.

---

by: McBlogger @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:13:00 PM UTC

One thing... (4.33 / 3)

..which shows this is not even an apples to oranges comparison is looking at other congressional and legislative score cards. Castro, for example, has a spotty record with NARAL while Doggett has straight 100-percent scores. Castro also scores higher on legislative scoring models from conservative groups than Doggett does. With some groups, they score about the same, with Doggett usually leaning more progressive.

Based on individual voting records and selected votes, conservative and business groups score Castro at least slightly higher than Doggett to substantially higher than Doggett.

Also, by and large, the Lege doesn't have the foreign policy votes Doggett has been ranked on, which I think may be skewing Doggett's ranking lower.

More fun stuff that is not apples to apples but isn't as bad as the Rice versus NJ rankings:

Castro got a 74 percent score from Americans for Prosperity in 2009. By frame of reference, Garnet Coleman got a 60. So did Lon Burnam. Americans for Prosperity gave Doggett a 15 percent score for 2009-10.

Castro scored far higher than the most liberal members of the Lege with conservative groups. Compare that score to Doggett's and Castro and Burnam both look like wanna-be Tea Baggers in comparison to Doggett. Are they? Of course not. The ranked votes and issues were far too different--and the Lege has far more unanimous votes than Congress.

Now the NARAL stuff is more troubling for Castro because that is a pretty cut and dry issue for progressives.

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:22:28 PM UTC

NARAL positions (0.00 / 0)

Interesting you bring that up because Vote Smart has Castro voting 100 percent for NARAL issues in several years. Hmmm.

To follow your comments, provide the information backing your position (or at least links). Tell you what, I'll help you out. Here's the overall Vote Smart analysis on Castro. Here's Doggett's scores. Granted, there's going to be a lot more scores for Doggett because he's been in office longer (as Castro stated, Doggett was elected to the Texas Senate the year before Joaquin was born) and the US House votes on a lot more and broader issues than the TX House (as you point out) but there is some comparative information.

The bottom line on this is that while you gripe at the info and the comparisons, you and others seem to want to create comparisons of Doggett to Castro (quotes Phillip pulled) that paint Doggett as more progressive. Personally, the problem with this race is it started way too early and we probably won't see any debates or true candidates head-to-heads for a while.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:45:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not all... (3.00 / 1)

...of Castro's NARAL rankings are 100 percent. All of Doggett's are.  

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 20:50:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One year and it was 91 percent (5.00 / 1)

What are you getting at? That's a pretty lame position. You provided no data, just a generalization and cast Castro as anti-NARAL ("Now the NARAL stuff is more troubling for Castro because that is a pretty cut and dry issue for progressives.").

Troubling? Come on Vince. I know you're above that kind of discussion. 9 percentages points on one year makes him pro-life?

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 00:43:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It was two years (0.00 / 0)

Look again and, depending on the vote, it sure calls some stuff into question.  

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 02:27:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yep, missed his first year in office (0.00 / 0)

But that was even higher atat 93 percent than 2005. You quibble over that? I guess you're just looking for an excuse and elevate that to "troubling." I guess you call A students in the 90th percentile "troubling" also. Your choice of words.

Of course NARAL also doesn't list the votes so isn't that statement kind of contradictory? You chastise Phillip for not having the voting record for Castro yet call a NARAL rating "troubling" without having the data yourself. I'm just sayin'.

So here are the votes:

2005
Against
Hijacking a Sunset Commission Bill to Risk Women's Health.  Representative Hartnett (R-Dallas) offered an Amendment 2 to CSSB 419 (a bill reauthorizing the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners) to amend the Occupations Code to prevent physicians from being licensed to practice medicine and to subject them to disciplinary action for performing a third trimester abortion when the fetus is viable, unless the abortion is necessary to prevent the woman's death. Amendment 2, as amended by Amendments 3 and 8, was adopted by a record vote of 118-16 on May 16, 2005.  A pro-choice vote ("P") was a vote against this amendment.  Amendment 3 added an exemption when the fetus has a severe, irreversible brain impairment, and passed by voice vote with 10 representatives recording "no" votes.

Out of 11 votes NARAL tracked Castro voted 10 Pro and 1 Against. BTW, Medendez and Strama also voted Against.

The 2001 information is not posted at the NARAL Texas website.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 02:39:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

One mistake on the comment (0.00 / 0)

A For vote was an Against NARAL. Kind of confusing but I get their logic.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 02:43:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

A Response to Vince (5.00 / 2)

Vince,

Of course there are no votes to compare between the two, and this is difficult to compare as I mentioned at the beginning of my post. Yet, despite that fact, many Austin Democrats -- including those who I quoted in the three comments atop this post -- have decided that Doggett is more progressive. I don't think that's the case at all. But either we allow such a comparison, or we don't. If we're going to, then here's one way we can make a comparison.

And if the conclusion is we simply can't make a valid comparison because there is no comparable data, then there should not be any Doggett supporters stating that Doggett is more progressive than Castro and we should future positions on issues going forward -- as I mentioned at the end of my post.

I don't mind that you don't like the conversation, but please give some credit to the fact that I acknowledge the concerns you raise. And you can't wish this post never existed - it was a conversation that was going on anyway.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:25:30 PM UTC

Votes on similar issues (0.00 / 0)

surely there must be some where you could actually compare the two. I can think of the Marriage Amendment for one.

I think that would give a better idea on where one stands in comparison to the other.  

---

by: McBlogger @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 19:10:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes... (0.00 / 0)

You said it was difficult to compare the two, but you have devised a metric of comparison from which actual comparison is not just difficult but rather impossible or misleading at best. The formulas and methodologies used to devise the two rankings are too dissimilar. Even if the two methodologies were comparing the same exact votes, NJ and Rice/Tribune have used such different methods to get to their rankings that the comparison just is not appropriate.  

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 20:48:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One thing is clear (4.50 / 4)

They are both solid progressives and we will be splitting hairs to find substantive policy differences.

I hope this helps folks understand Joaquin's value system a little better.

Now, I would hope we can talk about what this race means for the future of our party.

I'm confident that either gentleman would be a solid progressive voice.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 18:57:38 PM UTC

Entitlements and the debt (0.00 / 0)

I agree with you on balance. However, I'm holding support for either based on that issue alone. It is the single most important right now.

I want to see if either support the President on whatever deal ends up being cut with Boehner. If they do, then none of this really matters.

---

by: McBlogger @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 19:07:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doggett's Liberalism Can't Be Quantified Just With Votes (4.60 / 5)

Congressman Doggett does not have his reputation for liberal ideology based on his votes alone. What differentiates him between Eddie Bernice Johnson, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Al Green, the three Texas members who placed higher than him in those rankings, is the way he leads on liberal issues.

I'm not commenting on Rep. Castro's ability or willingness to do this right now, but I don't think people are worried about how either candidate will vote most of the time.

It's one thing to stay in line and follow the progressive crowd. It's another thing to be at the front of it, pushing for more. Doggett's ardent supporters are so passionate because they are confident he will continue leading, as he has consistently done in the past.

One might argue that Rep. Castro could do the same, but the sample size on Castro is much smaller. (And yes, I'll talk sample size even if this should be a qualitative conversation.)

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write."  -  John Adams

---

by: Michael Hurta @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 20:55:50 PM UTC

"The Way He Leads" (5.00 / 1)

That's a valid way to evaluate, and one I hope we get into. But that's not what Doggett supporters were initially saying. Initially, as I laid out at the top of my post, it was that we could trust Doggett's progressive policy position on issues, but we couldn't trust Castro's. Clearly, that's an invalid argument for Doggett supporters to make, and I'm happy for us to go into other topics -- like the value of seniority, the way someone leads and gives back to the Party, etc. -- once/if we set aside this argument.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:24:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Okay, they are both "Progressives" (5.00 / 1)

Let's delve into honor, integrity, intellectual abilities, effectiveness, and proven leadership after the court case on redistricting has been resolved one way or the other.

---

by: ssuits @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:40:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No (3.00 / 2)

I see no reason to wait until after the court case. Neither campaign is waiting, so why should we?

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 22:23:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Okay, "Game on!" (3.67 / 3)

Sometimes when a man is backed into a corner, if you give him some room, you might be able to work some things out with him. Should the court case make CD 25 or CD 10 a more viable option for Doggett, the battle in CD 35 could be averted. If battle lines are totally harden, any possible compromises in the future maybe impossible.

Both candidates need to do what they need to do. My point is that the party leadership and activists need to think this thing through before engaging in mortal combat.

From my perspective, as an avid Doggett supporter, whether Doggett's political career ends fighting Democrats in Bexar County or Republicans in Harris County in an uphill battle is immaterial to me. Travis County Democrats (minus the 200 that went to the Castro's event at Juan in Million) and Doggett will fight this out like ancient Spartans.

I do know that anyone that suggests Doggett should run for re-election under the current configuration for CD 25 is being less than honest about Doggett having any chance of winning and I resent that (see my earlier post about Donna Campbell above). I have not said one negative thing about Rep. Castro and will not until the court case is resolved.

---

by: ssuits @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 23:30:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really? You really speak for the rest of Travis County? (5.00 / 1)

So you really feel the rest of Travis County is for Doggett. I've heard otherwise. Yes, 200 showed up but they seemed like active and engaged Democrats. My guess is that for one engaged D at the event there are 10-20 that believe like them. Granted, that's not a lot but then consider the area of Travis County that'll be voting in the election is SE Travis County who possibly would love a Hispanic representing them and I think you see where the numbers are coming down.

BTW, I checked Doggett's committee assignments. With all that seniority he's far from ranking on any committee other than the Subcommittee on Human Resources. Do you think even the Democratic leadership is starting to shove him out also?

Look, I'm glad we've had Doggett there in Congress but maybe it's time we look at new talent. It's pretty apparent Doggett is becoming irrelevant and ineffective even in our own party. In his last election he barely won by 53% against Campbell in a district that he had been winning handily. I hate to be blunt but I think some people need to really look at the future of the party instead of holding on to the past.

BTW, regarding the court case on CD35 I doubt it will be altered much. It's targeted for Hispanics in a year when Hispanics represented growth in the state. It's mostly Democrat. My guess is the judges are going to look at it and ask "What's wrong with the district?"

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 16:51:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whoa; bringing up 2010? (3.00 / 3)

I don't think we can judge any politician's effectiveness based on a poor showing in 2010. We shouldn't have to talk about the tidal wave that hit us all, or the very, very competent and effective public officials we lost that November.

A lot of politicians were blindsided entirely, and I wouldn't be surprised if Doggett's district was ripe for a tidal wave takeover last year, too. But he showed that he knew that district, running a very hard campaign and starting off pretty early with it, too. He knew his district and saw a wave coming, but he still won.

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write."  -  John Adams

---

by: Michael Hurta @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 18:49:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The margins were declining (5.00 / 1)

Phillip look at his margins in the years prior. They had started declining ever since he took over CD25. So I don't completely attribute that to 2010. I know about 2010 and looked further.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 15:05:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Started declining ever since he took over CD 25? (3.80 / 5)

CD 25 was redrawn in the summer of 2006 when the DeLay-Craddick map was partially redrawn by order of the Supreme Court, so throw out the 2004 election results because those were from a much more Democratic district.

The relevant results you're left with then are:

2006: Doggett received 67% district-wide, 74% in Travis
2008: Doggett received 66% district-wide, 74% in Travis
2010: Doggett received 53% district-wide, 66% in Travis

Michael Hurta's point is a good one. 2010 was an anomaly, not part of a trend.

Let's look at another spectacularly good Travis County politician by way of comparison. Donna Howard did not have a Republican opponent in 2006, so we'll disregard that, but in 2008 and 2010, she had both a Republican and a Libertarian.

Her 2008 margin of victory over the Republican was 11.79%. Her margin of victory over the 2010 Republican (after the recount) was 4 votes, less than 0.01%. No one in their right mind would throw Donna under the bus because of this "decline."

Face it, in 2010, Republicans and Tea-Party types were energized and loaded for bear, especially in conservative, rural counties like Colorado, Fayette, Gonzales and Lavaca, where Lloyd's liberalism made him an especially inviting target and which aren't even in CD 35.

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:36:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I should have said ... (0.00 / 0)

Donna Howard did not have a Republican opponent in the 2006 general election. She certainly did have one in 2006 in a special election early in the year.

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:39:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Still proved my point (0.00 / 0)

Your comment further solidifies the thoughts that a Travis County-centric view of the district. CD25 encompasses more than Travis County and CD35 will also. There's no doubt that Travis County supports Doggett. Apparently the rest of the district doesn't have the same viewpoint.

BTW, no one's throwing Doggett under the bus. The point being made is that many of us feel that we need some new talent in the Texas delegation.

Oh, and to another comment by ssuits regarding CD25, if you feel Doggett, an incumbent, is not electable in the new CD25, why do you feel another Democrat would do any better? Is it that you feel Doggett HAS to have a solid Democratic district to win? In other words, he's not favored with moderates either?

Actually, I'm starting to find some of the comments interesting, including probably myself. It seems we continue to back ourselves into our respective corners with the candidates and we're many months away from the primary. The arguments we are using to back our positions are becoming very parochial.

Personally, I will be living in the new CD35 after having lived in CD20 with Charlie Gonzales for many years (I'm curious how many Austinites commenting will live there also). I don't mind having Doggett as my rep.

As a moderate, I don't agree with all his views. I line up more closely with Castro's views than Doggett's in some cases. I also feel a Hispanic should be elected from a Hispanic Opportunity District to provide more opportunity for a growing class of people in this country. I also feel we need to be building a new generation of Democrats to help grow the party. Living in the past only helps create more 2010 type elections.

Those are my three main reasons why I've made my decision. That's why I'm supporting Castro over Doggett.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 02:52:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK now you've said something I totally disagree with (4.00 / 2)

This whole identity politics thing is crap. By that reasoning if Quico Canseco were to run against Doggett in a Hispanic opportunity district then Canseco should be elected. I live just out of the new CD 35 and many of my friends live in it. I haven't committed to either candidate at this time but saying that only someone with a Hispanic surname can really represent Hispanics is outrageous, by that reasoning President Obama can't represent me because I'm white.
Voters should be interested in what legislators do and not what their name is or what the color of their skin is. Anything else is not in keeping with the ideals of the Democratic Party.

As long as corporations are people and money is speech, then democracy is a farce.

---

by: Blue_in_Guadalupe @ Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 02:09:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

al & randy are right (0.00 / 0)

his numbers were declining...but the movement was minor from 06 to 08. and al is right in saying that the 10 circumstances were quite lively.

the 53 was pretty shocking. i attribute it more to doggett's level of comfort and underestimation of the political environment (as a few other members did as well) than to anything else. even Dems who went all out (Rose for instance) faced stiffer challenges than ever expected.

in northern hays county it wasn't even apparent that doggett was running a campaign in 10.

finally, the power of incumbency only serves as a power if it is utilized. not using the frank, sitting on your financial resources for some unknown reason rather than running a full operation in a testy cycle, and not showing up throughout the two-year cycle is a recipe for disaster. i'm one who thinks you can't ever take a cycle for granted.

(and randy's comment wasn't anywhere close to unproductive)

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:50:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who's randy? (n/t) (0.00 / 0)

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 05:24:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, nevermind ... (0.00 / 0)

I kind of believe in "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" on screen identities or whatever you call them.

I realize after a quick search that RBearSAT is one of those nom the blogues that people in the know just know ... unlike mine, which is designed to conceal my true identity.

Say goodnight, Gracie!

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 05:58:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

haha (2.00 / 1)

sorry al (if that is your real name!!!).

randy was introduced here a few months ago writing on some SA council races. i've followed his blog in SA for a few years.

i join you in having discovered who some posters are for the first time in the past several days.

i know that when city of austin politics get discussed i am totally in the dark with 3/4 of the names, groups and alphabet soup that gets thrown around.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 14:56:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ways and Means (4.00 / 2)

Pure seniority doesn't necessarily always get you a chairmanship-- but when Rangel was ousted people were floating Doggett's name to replace him because he was more acceptable to many than Pete Stark.

But if Doggett leaves Congress that is a position we lose.

"this post does not reflect the views of anyone or any other organization other than Citizen Andy, and even then not all the time."

---

by: Citizen Andy @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 04:52:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Many of those 200 people who showed up (0.00 / 0)

I know several people who went, almost all of them were Doggett supporters, and only there out of curiosity.  The number of attendees is not necessarily indicative of his support in Travis County.

"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."- James A. Baldwin

---

by: Timothy @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 03:19:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree on that assessment (0.00 / 0)

I attended to see what the level of Austin support was. Some were curious but several that I talked to were supporting Castro, either because they knew him from the legislature or through other organizational ties. I agree that you didn't have 200 solid supporters but I would venture to say 2/3 were supporting him.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 03:25:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

disagree (4.00 / 2)

i think it is pretty clear that both gentlemen have honor, integrity, intellect, effectiveness and proven leadership.

to imply that one has more of an intangible than the other is to imply that the other is lacking, and that doesn't seem to be the case.

glad to know that you are reserving your negative attacks until October. (?)


Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 19:29:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also curious on how Doggett's liberal "no" votes on D Legislation factor (2.67 / 3)

Doggett is one of those Congressmen who vote "no" on some stuff because it's not liberal enough. I'm curious as to how that factors into these rankings.

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write."  -  John Adams

---

by: Michael Hurta @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:31:20 PM UTC

Well, Michael (3.00 / 1)

The votes are right there. Go look them up and run an analysis. If you want to actually do the leg work, then go for it. Up until this point, everyone has speculated that Doggett was more progressive than Castro, and it was impossible for anyone to consider otherwise. Now that I've raised this point, Doggett supporters are speculating that the numbers must not be right. Speculation is the mother of laziness.

I think we can do better than speculate, and I hope this post spurs more critical thinking and less lazy assertions.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 21:38:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not convinced - and not sure if this is the right frame (3.67 / 3)

As someone who looks forward to voting in this primary, let me say that this is ultimately unconvincing to me as a potential voter. Because I care less about a label of "more progressive" and more about an actual legislative record.  

Here's what I know:

As a legislator, Doggett was involved with the writing of the original TPIA and TOMA.  As a Congressman, just in the past few years he voted AGAINST TARP (and for all the right reasons), wrote his own climate bill (Climate MATTERS, which was far better than Waxman-Markey and could've been passed through the senate under budget reconciliation), and was originally against Waxman-Markey for all the right reasons, then he voted for it at the last minute because the vote was so close. I know Joaquin has done some good things in the Lege, and voted correctly most of the time, but I don't want another Yes vote in Congress-- I want a leader, a thinker, a person who has seniority on Ways and Means who understands how to unravel the tax code in positive ways to close loopholes.

All that being said, I would be proud to be represented in Congress by Joaquin Castro- I just see no compelling reason to change from someone who has been doing excellent work in public service since before i was born.

Also, let's be clear that the redistricting plan always had as one of their top agendas to get rid of Doggett. A win by Castro is giving the GOP what they want. It's not to say Castro won't be an effective Congressman, I'm just saying how the other side sees it.

If we want better metrics, here's one i care about: the environment.  Doggett got a 100% from the League of Conservation Voters for the 111th Congress.  Castro got a 92% for the 81st Lege.  

"this post does not reflect the views of anyone or any other organization other than Citizen Andy, and even then not all the time."

---

by: Citizen Andy @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 00:22:07 AM UTC

I guess we should just disregard it as a Hispanic Opportunity District (5.00 / 1)

I guess we should just forget the fact that it was also carved out as a Hispanic Opportunity District. I mean, all the clamoring we've done about disregarding Hispanics as having the highest population growth rate and probably what gave Texas a part of the four new seats is just hogwash when it comes time to actually elect someone to the district?

I like what someone told me at the Castro event. The folks of south Austin have never had a US Rep or Senator that looked like them. Now may be their time. If not now, when?

BTW, regarding change most of the people in the new district are having to change regardless. You seem to want to take an Austin only viewpoint. I'm telling you, that's an easy way to screw with the San Antonio base. We're looking at issues down here and could easily be represented by either.

If folks in Austin keep shoving the "it's our rep and our district" argument down the throats of San Antonio Democrats, I think you know what the results will be. I'm just sayin'. I think that kind of talk needs to start going quiet if you REALLY want to win this election.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 01:31:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not to quibble, but. . . (5.00 / 1)

First of all,  don't think this should be about race. I also don't think it should be about geography. It should be about who will best represent the people of this district. I'm looking at once guy with an extensive record and one guy with less of one. That's all.

But please tell me exactly WHERE in my post I'm taking an "Austin-only" viewpoint?  Or made a "it's our rep and our district" argument? Because I don't think I dd either.

"this post does not reflect the views of anyone or any other organization other than Citizen Andy, and even then not all the time."

---

by: Citizen Andy @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 01:59:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good points but there is some track record, not from you (5.00 / 1)

Andy I agree we should get to where it's not about race but I also think we shouldn't shove disregard a Hispanic for a carved out Hispanic district because we want to retain the Austin rep.

Maybe I read too much into this statement: "I just see no compelling reason to change from someone who has been doing excellent work in public service since before i was born." Doggett represented only a portion of this district. The majority of population and geography is in San Antonio where he's never been a representative.

It seems to follow the line that Austinites would prefer Castro go away and let's give the seat to Doggett.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 02:14:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

but... (0.00 / 0)

geography and inertia are the primary arguments being made in support of doggett.

but it is immoral for our central legal premise to be "Hispanics fueled the growth that resulted in Texas receiving new districts and, therefore, should receive more Hispanic-opportunity districts", while allocating THE ONLY NEW H-O district to a non-Hispanic by default.

there was a similar situation in 04 in Bell's district. i find the position that "minorities have enough representation" odd.  and to imply that these minority communities don't want to be represented by their own or that they would be represented better by their own flies in the face of our very redistricting legal arguments.

we can't take both positions. either minority representation matters...or it doesn't. we can't pick and choose what parts of Texas it matters in.

the situation sucks, but it is the situation that we are stuck with (for the time being). and ignoring the other very meaningful debates about the next generation, potential for leadership, etc...race, ethnicity and geography are critical issues that should be considered.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 19:43:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Geography and inertia? (3.00 / 4)

Look, I support Lloyd Doggett, and it has nothing to do with geography and inertia.  I support him because I feel that he is hands down the best member of the Texas Congressional Delegation.  Feel free to disagree with that, but don't call it geography and inertia -- because that isn't what it is about for many of us.

With respect to minority representation, I absolutely support that -- hell, I'm a minorty myself.  And the district has been drawn up in a way that increases minority representation.

But once the district has been drawn up, then it is solely about who the best man or woman for the job is.  If a minority representation district votes for a white male, what is the problem.  If the voters say that that person is the one they want to represent them, no one has the right to tell them otherwise.

Simply put, the purpose of minority represention districts should be to give the minority voters a greater voice.  But that voice is theirs, not anybody elses.  

In the end, it looks like Castro will go in as the favorite.  And if he is the next congressman, great -- he has a strong record and will do well.  It makes sense for him to run in this district in 2012, and nobody should fault him for doing it.  Opportunity doesn't knock very often.

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 20:50:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good points and we may elect a minority (5.00 / 1)

Great points on your post. I agree with your positions. If we elect a minority, then so be it. I think a lot of Doggett supporters other than you need to breathe on this and understand that may be the case.

I've seen a lot in here that still think this district should be "given" to Doggett and list their reasons.

Several of us feel it's time for a Hispanic with good track record to enter the Texas Congressional delegation. It's time to allow new energy into the delegation.

Thanks for the rational comment.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 15:10:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My pleasure! (0.00 / 0)

and thanks for your insight on this race -- it is very informative.  

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 03:40:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

fair point on re: this diary (5.00 / 2)

i was offering more of a commentary on the balance of the comments over the course of the 3 diaries that have been posted on this possible race.

having experienced several congressman over the years, my personal rankings differ from your's, but i can understand your support of doggett.

i'm feeling better and better that the maps will ultimately give both gentlemen a chance to represent their own district in 2012.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 19:37:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks Colin (0.00 / 0)

this is a good discussion...

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 03:41:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This new district is not to the far left (5.00 / 1)

As I've stated before (and it seems to get lost in the "I'm more progressive than you are" babble), this district takes in some more moderate areas up and down IH-35. NE San Antonio isn't a liberal paradise. New Braufels and San Marcos are probably not either.

We can try to push these candidates to the left as far as we want but in the General Election, that's probably not what the district will want.

I hope we don't try to paint them into a corner with our "more liberal" fanaticism.

That's why tried comparing them to some of the people who already represent the areas of the new district. I consider that a more reasonable litmus test. But if you guys want to keep drawing lines in the sand, we've got a great historic icon and tourist spot down here in San Antonio where you'll fit right in.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 00:51:24 AM UTC

Phillip, I will look into the two rankings, but ... (3.88 / 8)

Let me give my two cents now while this thread is still fresh. Over my years of involvement with the Texas League of Conservation Voters, I've learned that records of floor votes tell you a great deal about very little. They often miss and mislead on the key component of leadership.

For example, if you visit the TLCV website and look at the older scorecards, you'll find a couple of lawmakers with environmental voting records above 90% who were also Craddick Democrats. At the same time, if you look at the 2001 voting records of Rep. Zeb Zbranek (67%) and Sen. David Bernsen (78%) you'll miss the key fact that the two of them were outstanding leaders on the most important environmental legislation of that session.

After TLCV helped them in their 1999 races, both of them asked for assignments on the committees dealing with one of our most important issues: air pollution, particularly with industrial polluters with plants that were "grandfathered" from having to comply with the Clean Air Act. Environmentalists had been working on this issue session after session with little success, but the leadership of these two was absolutely crucial: on their committees, on the floor, as the authors of strengthening amendments and back home in their districts. Sen. Bernsen, for example, brought up plant managers from a couple of the big oil refineries in his district having persuaded them to endorse the legislation; those endorsements neutralized the effects of the oil industry's lobbyists, and the legislation passed.

Voting records alone miss a big part of the story because the most important action usually occurs in committee. Voting records don't capture how strenuously a legislator questions a witness, for example. Nor do voting records measure how good one is at forming coalitions, authoring legislation or getting bills passed. There are an awful lot of backbenchers in legislative bodies with perfect voting records as measured by one side or the other.

Now let's talk about Lloyd Doggett's leadership in particular. I remember a conversation I had with Lloyd in 2002 about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction. Tony Blair had recently revealed supposed intelligence regarding the presence of WMD's and I brought that up. Lloyd's reply, "Do you trust Tony Blair? I don't." He later added, "There are some issues that you have to stake your entire career on. This is one of them." Because of Gephardt's position, none of the Democratic House leadership could lead opposition to the resolution. Nancy Pelosi, opposed though she was to the resolution, had to stay in the background, so Lloyd became the anti-iraq war whip.

The Democratic leaders of both houses of Congress--Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle--had helped draft the resolution Iraq-war resolution. Nearly every Democratic Senator with presidential aspirations--John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman--voted for the resolution (Florida's Bob Graham was the notable exception).

Who stood firm against the rush to war? Who exercised leadership while others ducked for cover, scared that they'd be on the wrong side of history? You know who: Lloyd Doggett.

Personally, I like Joaquin Castro; he's smart, personable, and has impressed me with his sincerity on environmental issues. Is he a leader? I have no idea. When push comes to shove, will Joaquin risk it all for a principle? Only time will tell.

Lloyd Doggett is a proven progressive leader and has been one for decades. In his ten years in the Texas Senate he was the author of major reforms, such as the Sunset Law and myriad laws to protect consumers. A pair of basketball sneakers sitting on his desk signaled a filibuster that struck fear in the hearts of the opposition. As a Supreme Court Justice, he wrote opinions advancing progressive principles. When Lloyd came into Congress in 1995, Dick Gephardt had just surrendered the gavel ending "forty years of Democratic rule," as he put it, and Lloyd as a freshman vaulted to the head of his class, tirelessly confronting Newt Gingrich, a Speaker unlike any we had yet seen in the post-World War II era. Lloyd quickly earned a seat on the Ways and Means committee, due to his many leadership qualities including his tremendous fund-raising efforts and willingness to invest funds from his campaign account into the campaigns of Democratic challengers across the country.

So, Phillip, while I hold you in the highest regard and admire your tendency to present quantitative data and will look at it myself, I cannot rest this evening without pointing out something I learned while earning my MS in statistics and that I have had reinforced time and time again. Just because one can measure something doesn't mean that it is either important or useful. Many a man has had his prostate removed based on high PSA levels and suffered the consequences; now medical science tells us that damn few lives have been saved.

Sometimes when you reduce things down to just a couple of numbers, you're left with practically nothing.

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 07:02:55 AM UTC

Both my be progressive, but Lloyd is a lot more trustworthy (1.40 / 5)

I have no doubt that both men will represent south and central Texas progressive values.  The big question is, have any of you researched all of the corruption scandals that Castro has been involved with?  Everywhere from fraudulently posing as his twin brother during at SA City Council event, and being caught in the act, to assisting in cover-ups in an ongoing criminal investigation in his brother's SA City Government Administration.  We don't need another ambitious attention monger who will later on embarass us with his excess baggage and scandals.  Lloyd has represented us well for decades.  I am Filipino, and I could care less if any one I vote for looks like me, I just want them to represent me with consideration and honor.

---

by: AustinFilipino @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 21:56:19 PM UTC

Your accusations are baseless (5.00 / 1)

First of all, comments like this appear all the time in the E-N commentary section by a person who goes by "jefsr." The person has had a baseless claim against COSA for years that keeps getting thrown out of jurisdictions.

Secondly, the issue of the River Parade is NOT a City Council event (as I posted to your comment in the E-N) and others always ride on the Council's River Parade float. Regarding any confusion that would be expected since they are twins. People mistake Joaquin for the mayor all the time in San Antonio.

The person may claims to be from Austin but posted as TheClivet in the E-N article on Castro.

I'm just trying to set the record straight on this comment.

Your claim that there are scandals against Castro is so baseless it devalues your comment.

---

by: RBearSAT @ Mon Jul 11, 2011 at 22:32:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

lies lies lies (0.00 / 0)

Neither of the Castro boys have been involved in any corruption scandals. (Notice the lack of links.)

There is no "ongoing criminal investigation" in SA.

This is a total fabrication and smear. I'm rating a zero.

We've all had spirited debate, but you are the first poster to fabricate lies about either candidate. You should really, truly be ashamed of yourself.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:30:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Castro is no Doggett! (2.00 / 2)

I know Dogget's voting record and public stands
I know Joaquin's voting record and public stands
And Castro is no Doggett!
Castro is too wishy-washy, too politically ambitious, too servile to San Antonio's oligarchy that have run San Antonio as their own little town for decades.
As far as the narrow-nationalistic argument being raised by some politicians in S.A. that Castro must have CD35 because  "he is one of us.... and thus he shares our values..."
Question:  Does General Ricardo Sanchez deserve our vote for U.S. Senate next year?   He is Latino and he lives in San Antonio.  

In case someone does not remember:  General Sanchez was the commander of all U.S. forces in Irak during the Abu Ghraib atrocities.        

---

by: R. Quijano @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 00:19:35 AM UTC

okay, explain (1.00 / 1)

wishy washy? based on what???
too ambitious? he's been in the house for 10 years. exactly where has this ambition manifested itself?
servile to oligarchy? really? name names. the Castro twins are so far outside the "oligarchy" (which doesn't even exist) the attack is laughable.

call me jaded, but what are the odds that two new posters of supposed filipino origin/descent (Quijano is a filipino name) show up on BOR today attacking Joaquin with wild-eyed, baseless attacks???

come on guys.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:40:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The central issue: Should Castro replace Doggett (3.00 / 1)

I'm not going to discuss who are the elites that rule San Antonio.  That's not the focus here.  
The issue is that the Castro brothers and others in San Antonio should be pointing out that yes, the quantitative increase in Latino population does call for a district that gives us a chance to select "our own" if we so choose. (FIY:  I'm a Latino...but a progressive).  
However,  true progressive/liberal/lukewarm Latino politicians should NOT be happy that such district comes  at the expense of a proven progressive man like Doggett.  That's playing right into the extreme right-wing Texas GOP.  It would be more principled to fight (united with Doggett) the obvious GOP strategy of dividing and conquering the Dems while also destroying a known ideological adversary like Doggett.  (while hoping that his replacement may be more.....hmmm...'manageable').
Personal political ambition should not supersede personal or political principles.  

---

by: R. Quijano @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 02:58:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Almost agree (0.00 / 0)

You make some good points but you still seem to feel Doggett deserves the district. Actually, as I've stated, the district is a Democratic district but I wouldn't gauge it as progressive. I think some moderates, like myself, will look at the two candidates and choose Castro over Doggett.

If manageable means moderate in your book, then I'd prefer manageable (to use your term).

---

by: RBearSAT @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 03:29:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Would Castro have run against Henry B? (0.00 / 0)

Joaquin Castro's stated reasons for running against Doggett could apply to Charlie Gonzalez as well. Would Castro have run against Charlie's father  because Henry B was  no longer "fresh"? I don't think so.

I'm not convinced Castro's run isn't a Karl Rove plan. .  I'll vote for Doggett like I have since  1972.  When I'm more knowledgeable about Castro, I hope to regret not being able to vote for both of them.

My cynicism dates to my first election in 1970 when I voted for Ralph Yarborough, and Lloyd Bentsen won with ads tagging Yarborough with the police riots at the Chicago Democratic Convention.

 Returning to San Antonio after 40 years in Austin, I'm glad the Good Government League is gone.  But King Antonio is still white, Gregorio Esparza only warrants an elementary school, while Crockett, Bowie, Travis, and Austin high schools abound.

Manageable doesn't mean moderate, it means blowing in the wind.

---

by: gpwebster @ Sat Jul 23, 2011 at 00:01:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's a cheap shot (0.00 / 0)

that implies that Castro would run against Doggett because he is white, while ignoring the others because he is hispanic.  It is not something that I will stand for in the Democratic party, and such comments should be condemned.  Castro has every right to run.  Nobody owns the seat -- hell, it is a brand new district.

Joaquin Castro is relatively young, but he is not an unknown quantity.  He is a good Democrat, and to suggest he is a Karl Rove plant is worthy of condemnation and contempt.

For the record, I support Doggett.  But Castro running in this race makes sense.  It is certainly a district that will favor him, and this is an opportunity for him to move up.  It is frustrating to have two good Democrats running in the same primary when we have other districts with no  

A word to Doggett supporters -- you have a very good legislator who can stand on his own merits.  Resorting to cheap shots against Castro is unnecessary, unwise, and unacceptable.  

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Sat Jul 23, 2011 at 03:25:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Forgive the man his cynicism ... (3.00 / 1)

It's well earned if misplaced. Too little discussion these days on BOR as it is without kicking a new user in the nuts.

Castro is no Rove plant, but the dilemma Lloyd finds himself in is Rovian, surely.

"The eyes of the people are fast opening! Fight on!"--Andrew Jackson

---

by: Al Stanley @ Sat Jul 23, 2011 at 06:37:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If someone is going to make a garbage accusation (0.00 / 0)

then I'm going to call it out, regardless of whether the person is a new user.  Quite frankly, it was insulting and unfair to Castro.

As a party, we say we want to reach out to Hispanics.  The comments of people such as thing run counter to this.  And I don't feel like letting that slide without comment.

You are right about the lack of discussion here at BOR these days.  I wish there was a lot more.

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Sat Jul 23, 2011 at 14:39:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

really stacy? (0.00 / 0)

every comment that doesn't back your guy is suddenly "unproductive"????

but "too wishy-washy, too politically ambitious, too servile" is excellent?

i actually thought the level of discourse had improved dramatically. i'm very disappointed to see troll rating supplant debate.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 01:53:47 AM UTC

77 comments to date on this thread, RbearSat 20 comments & colin 10 comments (5.00 / 1)

You two have been playing tag team with both your comments and you ratings for each other in this thread. A similar pattern was shown in a previous thread on this subject.

Apparently, no one can say anything positive about Doggett with some counter comment from either of you for the most part. Now in one day, you have labeled one first time commenter as "unproductive" and hide the comments of another first time poster.  

I think the discourse may have improved, in your opinion, because some potential comments are not being made because the commenter does not want to deal with your and RbearSAT's counter comments. So positive troll on and continue to dominate discussion on this thread. Or you can just get this comment hidden also.

---

by: ssuits @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 04:57:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Huh? (0.00 / 0)

I didn't know there was a quota or limit on comments. Many were just replying to other points.

Regarding the only hidden comments, read them again. They were baseless accusations on some pretty stupid rumors. Apparently you don't keep up with San Antonio politics because the "claim" against the city is a stupid claim that happened over 6 years ago by some disgruntled city employee. He can't get any jurisdiction to even investigate it because it's so baseless. Yet he trolls comment boards around the nation trying to shop it. Google "jefsr" and you'll see what I mean.

The River Parade issue? Please, people in San Antonio have moved on from that. It was a mistake but only "grassy knoll" kind of people bring it up as a scandal. That was plain dumb.

If you really thought those comments were productive to the discussion I've love to know why. Please enlighten me.

I've stated clearly why I support Castro in this race. I've actually tried to provide some reasonable comparative points on the matters to place perspective in the race. In this particular race I have a stake in the matter because it's my future representative we're talking about. Not a proxy rep like many in Austin claim with Doggett, but my actual rep. I've already said I'd be fine with Doggett. I don't agree with him on several matters but I'd be okay with him. I just prefer Castro for the three points I stated.

 

---

by: RBearSAT @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 08:03:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

ad hominem (0.00 / 0)

your ad hominem attack is fine on the surface, but not at all an accurate representation of this diary thread.

you are trying to sell that there is some form of collusion and that i'm only rating randy's remarks. that isn't at all true. i've rated several comments a 3 or 5 in this thread that i don't necessarily agree with, but i felt add to the discussion. furthermore, i've personally posted several remarks that are positive about doggett!! for you to say otherwise is disingenuous (at best).

i think if you'll calm down a little and review the remarks and ratings you'll see that i've been FAR more even-handed than you. at least i'm up-rating things i agree with and not just trolling along down-rating everything not in support of my position.

if you feel the two completely false, baseless smears that i voted to hide are worthy of BOR...then we have very different opinions on political discourse.  if someone dared to say 1/2 that crap about doggett i would be the first to vote to hide because it denigrates my entire position. the fact that you think it is worthy of your position is sad and disturbing.

but i'll be happy to stop posting on this diary if you'll stop crying and troll rating so that the discussion can continue on the issues (as it largely has).

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 14:50:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

finished (0.00 / 0)

just up-rated all of you remarks to a 5.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 15:00:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hello Phillip (4.00 / 2)

Since you used my comment in your diary, I do feel the need to clarify what I meant in that comment.

First, the purpose of my comment was not to compare Lloyd Doggett to Joaquin Castro in terms of their progressive credentials.  My purpose was merely to highlight why I support Doggett, and why he's the one I support.  

The Texas Democrats whom I refer to as not "walking the walk" do not include Joaquin Castro.  Rather, I was refering to the Chet Edwards and Charlie Stenholms of the world who cast votes and engaged in behavior that did not adhere to Democratic party values.

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 04:00:13 AM UTC

The Choice (4.00 / 2)

GOP redistricting has forced our party in a divisive choice. One, we all want to see more minorities in Congress. Tom DeLay's grand scheme was to marginalize the Democratic Party by ridding Texas of any white Democratic Congressman. Today, we are left with the choice of meeting our commitment to Hispanics are to stand up to the cynical ploy of DeLay and the GOP. Both candidates are good progressive Democrats. I wish we had such quality candidates all over the State. We need real Democrats not the Matt Angle GOP lite Dems like Nick Lampson and Chet Edwards. I hope Court fights will keep us from having to decide this divisive choice.

---

by: donaldbankston @ Wed Jul 13, 2011 at 16:03:55 PM UTC