SD17 Election Results Thread: Huffman Wins

Harris early vote (0.00 / 0)

If Huffman really did take 62% of Harris' early vote then this thing is over.

---

by: DallasDavid @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 19:34:00 PM CST

wrong total (0.00 / 0)

percentage doesn't matter depending on vote totals.

anyone have an inkling as to e-day turnout?

---

by: colin @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 19:42:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

not a good start (0.00 / 0)

but i've learned to never say die on election results.

not too surprising given the propensity of repubs to vote earlier than dems.

---

by: colin @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 19:36:46 PM CST

Notes (0.00 / 0)

There are no voters in the Chambers County portion of the district.  It looks like Galveston Co. has not yet reported, although it accounted for only 4% of the district-wide vote in November.

---

by: Byron LaMasters @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 19:57:33 PM CST

Compared to November (0.00 / 0)

In two words - bad news:

When you take the total Dem vote (Bell + Simmons) and the total Republican vote (Furse + Harpold + Huffman + Sherman) it provides a reasonable metric to compare today's results vs. November's results.  In November, the Dems had a total of 116,564 votes (52.2%) vs. 106,731 votes (47.8%) for Republicans.

So in order to win Bell needs to get at least -2% of the total Dem GE vote in each county on 11/4.  They were: Brazoria 39%, Fort Bend 49%, Galveston 62%, Harris 53% and Jefferson 84%.

Bell's EV + 20/211 pct's reporting is: Brazoria 31%, Fort Bend 30%, Galveston 70%, Harris 38%, Jefferson 83%.

The very large drops in Harris (-15%) and Fort Bend (-19%) are big problems....

---

by: Byron LaMasters @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:09:34 PM CST

Why (0.00 / 0)

does that SOS Election Page not give a county breakdown?  Is there one somewhere?

---

by: Elsbeth @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:20:11 PM CST

Go here (3.00 / 1)

https://voterinfo.sos.state.tx...

---

by: SADem @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:22:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thank you. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Elsbeth @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:44:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Jefferson County (0.00 / 0)

Jefferson is 100%.

Bell received 85% of the vote in the runoff and Total Dem vote last month was 84%.

---

by: DallasDavid @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:25:45 PM CST

good, but... (0.00 / 0)

Jefferson is only 4% of the district vote unfortunately, so I'm skeptical about how much it will move the overall numbers.

---

by: Byron LaMasters @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:32:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

More Votes In (0.00 / 0)

Bell    12,475  44.13
Huffman 15,788  55.86

---

by: SADem @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:31:05 PM CST

Brazoria (0.00 / 0)

Brazoria is 100% in.

Bell received 32%, Total Dem vote last November was 39%.

---

by: DallasDavid @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:41:10 PM CST

A trend? (0.00 / 0)

Since Obama won, we had the Georgia Senate race, the 2 runoffs in Louisiana, and now this state senate race.  Is it just me or have Democrats decided that since we won the presidency, we don't need to worry about electing Democrats to lower offices right now?  I understand, most of these races have been in Republican territory (aside from Louisiana 2nd), but hopefully this isn't the beginning of a trend, especially if there are any special elections for people being appointed to the cabinet.

Wonder what job the Republicans will give Stephanie Simmons?

---

by: SADem @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:48:35 PM CST

problem isn't necessarily the leadership (0.00 / 0)

The leadership knows very much so that we still need to win elections.  Unfortunately, many of the Obama voters don't realize that anymore.  it is a lot of the Democratic voters, probably, who think what you just suggested.

"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 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:53:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Why single out Obama voters? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:11:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The issue is our turnout (0.00 / 0)

for special elections, which has not been good.

Still hoping tonight...

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:55:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It is likely a trend (0.00 / 0)

The party holding the White House usually suffers in elections in other levels of government.  Look at the 1990's under Bill Clinton.  Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate and controlled about 60% of state legislative seats in 1992, but by the time Clinton left, Republicans had majorities in the House and Senate and Democrats were down to about 51% of state legislative seats.  

The same happened to Republicans under Bush.  They started with Republican majorities in the House and Senate in 2000 and around 49% of state legislative seats.  Now they have huge deficits in the House and Senate and are down to around 44% of state legislative seats.  Democrats are likely to lose pretty much every special election in competitive districts for the next few years until Obama is out of office.  This is why I hope to god that Obama doesnt pluck any Democrats from tough districts to his cabinet, because Democrats would almost surely lose the district in a special election.  Thats what happens when you hold the White House.  

---

by: Floyd @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:58:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Races in Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas? (0.00 / 0)

how is this a trend?  All these states went for McCain and are southern states, which is the Republican base.  If they can't win here, where will they win?

1.  The Georgia race barely even made a runoff.  Chambliss got 49.8% on Nov. 4, with the Libertarian candidate getting about 3%.  Just a fraction of the Libertarian vote would push Chambliss over the 50% mark.  Even if we could maintain turnout percentages from Nov.4, it was going to be very hard, if not impossible.

Put it this way, the Georgia race was considered a SAFE seat for most of the year.  That we got to a runoff is a noteworthy achievement, if not a minor miracle

2.  In Louisiana-4 (Shreveport), this is a solidly Republican district.  Going into this election, the Republicans had held this seat for 20 years straight.  Yet we came within 356 votes (about 89,000 were cast) of winning.

3.  Louisiana-2?  Jefferson is crooked, and we will get the seat back in 2 years.

4.  Texas SD 17?  Turnout was an issue in the Georgia and Louisiana races, and I think it is worse in a state-level race (just because it is not as well known).  Plus it is 9 days before Christmas.  Think people have other things on their minds?

I worked on all of these races except Louisiana-2 and am disappointed by the results.  We definitely need to increase turnout in these elections with non-November dates.

But a trend?  I don't think so.  Rather, they are reminders that the south is still red and we have work to do to turn the tide.

---

by: v2aggie2 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:33:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

:( (0.00 / 0)

Can we please sue Simmons?

/clutches at straws

---

by: seven macaw @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:52:38 PM CST

Or just primary Republicans ... (0.00 / 0)

Let's just start funding primary challenges to Republicans.  

---

by: blank @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 20:59:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No excuses (1.00 / 1)

Maybe the problem is the candidate. Chris Bell keeps running and losing. Chris comes across as wonkish, aloof, and a little arrogant.  

---

by: Bluefish @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:18:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree (5.00 / 4)

that we shouldn't make excuses, but I don't think Chris Bell was the problem. He ran a hard race and I think he was probably the best Democratic candidate for this district.  

---

by: David Mauro @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:31:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Obama (3.00 / 1)

This race shows how strong Obama really was. Even in Texas, he pulled candidates with him.  Without him on the ticket, Chris struggled.  It didn't help that all of his money came from the trials.  In Texas, this is still bad news.

---

by: bob2750 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:41:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Does anyone know (0.00 / 0)

What the Presidential numbers were in this district?  I would imagine Obama lost pretty badly here.  Im pretty sure the part of Harris in this district is pretty damn Republican and well as Fort Bend and Brazoria.  The only Dem areas in this district are Galveston, Jefferson, and they make up little of the district.    

---

by: Floyd @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:49:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Chris Bell (1.00 / 4)

Chris is quickly becoming the new Gene Kelley. Do the party a favor Chris, quit.

---

by: Bluefish @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 06:29:59 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I have (0.00 / 0)

a small favor I'd like to ask of you...

---

by: Elsbeth @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 08:04:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

He was asked to run (3.00 / 2)

Difference is Gene Kelly doesn't actually campaign.  He isn't recruited.  Gene Kelly is a plague on the party.

Chris Bell was encouraged to run.  He ran an aggressive and hard race.  

Either you are blissfully unaware of the facts or you are trying to create a new meme against Congressman Bell.

In either case, not productive.

---

by: Matt Glazer @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 08:50:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

End result the same (1.00 / 1)

Chris Bell results 'bout the same as Gene Kelley's, only Gene doesn't waste thousands of dollars of campaign contributions. I doubt if anyone had to twist Chris arm to run.  

---

by: Bluefish @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 09:36:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Speculation Runs Rampant (3.00 / 2)

Myself and others actually talked to Congressman Bell about running. We encouraged him to run.  When we went to Denver for the convention and D.C. for meetings, all we could do is ask others to ask him to run.

You continue to speak without any background or any direct knowledge.  You are wrong. Chris was encouraged and given support to run, Gene Kelley is not.  

The beginning, middle and end are all different.  Comparing any candidate to Gene Kelley is naive at best.  At least Jennifer Gale actually campaigns when she runs.  Same with Rhett Smith.  That is a huge difference.

By the way, you are referring to the same Gene Kelley that refuses to do interviews, has never campaigned a day in his life and files every year and usually forces runoffs in the Democratic primary.  Wait, doesn't that sound more like Stephanie Simmons?

---

by: Matt Glazer @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 10:01:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

save your breath, matt (3.00 / 1)

clearly this person doesn't know anything about Chris Bell or Gene Kelley.

no reasonable person would compare the two...and you can't argue with crazy people.

Bell clearly entered a thoughtful process and require substantial convincing prior to deciding to run.  It was good that he ran...we just don't have the infrastructure or organization in place just yet.

---

by: colin @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 10:12:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Sad but true (3.00 / 1)

on both parts.

---

by: Matt Glazer @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 10:13:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

True but beside the point (0.00 / 0)

Say what you will, Bell loses.  Four major campaigns out of five in this century.  Before he chose to run this year it was widely said that he only had one more losing campaign left in him.  You can't run for everything under sun, and practically always lose, and be taken seriously by serious people.  So it's not completely unfair to compare him to Gene Kelly.  How many races has Kelly run and lost this century?  As many as Bell?

You want to see a serious guy, look at Bill White.  I believe White would be better as governor than senator, but he made a hard-headed decision based on reality, and went for the race he is more likely to win.  Bell gives the appearance of someone who is just desperate to hold office, any office, because he is never happy any other way.  His desperation makes it impossible for him to wait for the right moment to run, if such a moment exists.  That's not a trait I can admire, or a candidate I can respect.  

---

by: Dale Napier @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 15:32:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

nice to know (0.00 / 0)

we're so wealthy we can now fund primaries in two parties. ;)

This district was a long shot to begin with. I agree with Matt, though, about Ron Wilson and the Potemkin Democrat. The general was definitely his only shot.

---

by: davew @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 21:41:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

specials are tough (3.67 / 3)

we lost 2 big ones in late 96 and very early 97 that ultimately cost us control of the senate.

the trials did their part, as did BOR.

it is hard to get folks back out after the insanity of the presidential we just suffered.

too bad the state's congressional delegation didn't take this race as a top priority.  we sure needed this pick-up.

i was really inspired by the BOR calls to action. 10 years ago, there was literally no way to do something like that (even when the inclination was there).  very impressive.

---

by: colin @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 22:09:10 PM CST

This is why I'm pessimistic about KBH's Senate seat (0.00 / 0)

Unless the US Senate election is on the regular November 2010 election day, I don't see how Bill White or John Sharp can win. And there's no way that Perry will give us a gift by scheduling the Senate election for November.  :-(

---

by: LSadun @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 23:15:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree (0.00 / 0)

Winning statewide in November 2010 would be tough enough, but a special election would probably kill any chance of it.  In 1993, when Lloyd Benson left for the Clinton administration, we lost the June 1993 special election to replace him by a two to one margin.  

---

by: Floyd @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 23:26:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

specials require special strategy (0.00 / 0)

you can't treat it like a normal campaign.

in a typical campaign you want to spend 2/3 to 3/4 of total funds raised on paid communications.

in a special election like this you need to spend 2/3 or better of total funds raised on FIELD FIELD FIELD.

we're not talking about persuading folks...we're talking about turning out DEMOCRATS.  to hell with persuading anyone.

i don't know how Bell spent his money, but it will be interesting to see.

the senate race would be a unique challenge.  unless there is a concerted effort by the state party, the congressional delegation and our legislators of both chambers to fund and execute a comprehensive, professional, coordinated campaign...it ain't gonna happen captain.

it can be done, but it requires a lot of growth for our party from top to bottom.

---

by: colin @ Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 09:24:41 AM CST

[ Parent ]