Gallup Poll Indicates Texas is a Swing State

Well good for Gallup (3.00 / 1)

But until the 18% of people in the middle not identifying with a party actually start splitting evenly (at best), this poll doesn't make us a swing state. Our problem in Texas as Democrats is not about getting that 42%. Out problem is convincing more than a quarter of the leftovers who haven't figured out the Republican Party is a dead end game for the future of Texas.

If Party ID equaled votes in the bank, I'd be thrilled.  

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 19:03:54 PM UTC

amen, brother (0.00 / 0)

we've got to get at that creamy center of the electorate.

number one we have to have a platform that makes sense.
number two, we gotta get the $ to communicate the platform.
number three, we MUST run a modern, professional, statewide coordinated campaign.

the voters are waiting.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 17:15:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

All those things are fine, but (3.00 / 2)

It's really about the candidates.  What are needed are candidates who connect with voters.  People who hate Sarah Palin do not understand her popularity.  Yes, she's dumb, but that's not the point:  she connects with voters.  Texas Democrats need some candidates who are equally adroit, but not as dumb.  That's pretty hard to find.  Look at our Senate candidates - White is smart, but an a$$hole.  Sharp is neither smart (OK, maybe he's just really good at hiding it) nor adroit.  Tom what's-his-name, the guy running for governor, has yet to leave any impression at all, so I'm guessing he's not a connecter either.

It's all about people, people.  Technical issues only matter if we have a candidate that people might like.  That's our challenge today.

---

by: Dale Napier @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 18:32:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

White is what? (0.00 / 0)

Dale, you formula doesn't make sense. If Bill White is the most popular mayor in the history of Houston, he has connected with the voters and can statewide. His connection is understated competence. Your pejorative description of him is wrong. Is he a harda$$? Yes. Is he a warm fuzzy? No. But that doesn't make him what you suggest.

---

by: McKinney @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 18:28:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Swing State or Battleground State? (0.00 / 0)

Well, gee, 42% is what Democratic statewide candidates have been getting and losing by for over a decade. Given that the GOP number is a "base" of (1) identified, (2) motivated, (3) mobilized, and, uh, (4) registered, individual voters, and the Democratic number is ...

... Just a number, a not very reliable statistic. I fail to see how this is such great news.

(1) IDENTIFIED

TDP consultants identify demographic, mostly racial, groups, not individuals.

We do not authenticate convention delegates or track individual primary voters. The party is largely an extension of government itself or of incumbent candidates. We wring our hands over non-voters but are indifferent to or hostile towards individual voters.

(2) MOTIVATED

The consultants run empty-suits who tell voters one thing but assure large donors of something else altogether.

By and large, Democratic office-squatters, hence, the party establishment , are indifferent towards or hostile to the President's economic, health care, and energy agenda.

(3) MOBILIZED

The consultants use the term "swing" for "likely voter" campaigns that leave the political participation rate low and biased against statewide or countwide Democrats.

They are protective of self-perpetuating Democratic incumbents in GOP-gerrymandered "safe seats".

(4) REGISTERED

The consultants do not make money from voter registration.

So, voter registration in Texas is low and biased in favor of "white home-owners" by design and default since the 1920's. That is the system Democrats protected up through 2002 and the GOP has since tweaked. There are actually no Democratic legislative, judicial, or executive challenges to that system -- a few complaints from losers but no action by Democrats who win elections or, more likely, who have safe seats and do not run at all.

As long as we have a cornpone, Jim Crow party that is not self-governing or self-sustaining, we will not be a battleground state. Indeed, as the LSP ramps-up a replay of the 2002 campaign, the TDP will likely drive these polls back to ... 2002 or worse, given ongoing subversion of the President's popular agenda by Democrats' largest donors.

We cannot capture the imagination of the center or hold the trust of the left by just demonizing the far-right. We have to show, where we actually hold power, that we are doing something other than just tending bi-partisan tax and bond concessions -- the source of most large campaign donations.  

---

by: JRBehrman @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 22:38:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Texas = Independents (0.00 / 0)

I would venture a guess that the true affiliation of most Texas voters would be independent.  Affiliation is nice however most Texans vote self reliance.  The current administration is all about government reliance.  Don't think even the 42% dems are very reliable  

---

by: sdhook @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 01:13:05 AM UTC

Excellent point Karl Thomas (0.00 / 0)

...it has always been the so called "Independents" that have killed us.  While identifying themselves as "Independent," they were reliably voting Republican up and down the ballot.  That's where much of the battle lies and when a poll comes out showing that the I's now lean D, it's game on.

---

by: politicsforjim @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 12:54:50 PM UTC

Good news (0.00 / 0)

Glad to see not only Texas trending blue, but also North Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas. Folks in the great plains states are waking up to the damage caused over the last eight years, and it'll be interesting to see which way these states break over the next few election cycles.  

---

by: Ian @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 14:31:38 PM UTC

Identification is not enough (0.00 / 0)

What really counts is actually turning out to vote.  The Republicans do so, and they vote a straight ticket.  The Dems turnout is lower, and they cherry pick the races they vote in.

---

by: Ted Ankrum @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 14:52:47 PM UTC

Ted's Right (0.00 / 0)

Ted is right: Republicans turn out a higher percentage of their voters, especially in off-year and special elections.  This isn't inevitable, but the state and local Democratic party organizations will have to mount serious registration and turn-out campaigns to off-set it.  Will that happen?

---

by: texun @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 15:04:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Burka makes similar points (0.00 / 0)

Here is the quote:

I don't see any reason to back away from what I have written previously.
1. The state Democratic party has no credibility.
2. Without a public face for the party, it cannot be competitive in statewide races.
3. What makes Texas competitive is that independents have abandoned the Republican party.
4. But, as the UT Poll has established, independents tend to break in favor of Republican on election day.
5. The Democrats cannot even generate turnout. Hispanics aren't voting.

Here is the citation.  

---

by: JRBehrman @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 22:56:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is why Dem's must take the House in 2010... (0.00 / 0)

Democrats MUST take a majority in one if not both houses of the State Legislature (and hopefully the Governors Mansion) in 2010.

With the 2010 census, we will pick up at least 1, if not 2, congressional districts.  Texas will be the largest swing block of electoral votes in the country.

Democrats need to control redistricting.

---

by: ProgressiveInTexas @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:00:43 PM UTC