Burnt Orange Report

Scandalous!!!!! No wonder the slots group prefers John Sharp. Well thankfully Chris is taking the moral high ground, otherwise I would have to change parties.

Down with SHARP!!!!!

Good show. Now all we need to do is have some registered Democrat change his/her name to "Generic Democrat" and run him/her against Goodhair.

Just goes to show that no matter who the Dems nominate, it will not be as easy to scalp Goodhair as some might suppose, especially in a place where Kool Aid has apparently been adopted as the State Beverage by its no less apparently unhappy and dissatisfied citizenry. And believe me, I know. After visting the family in my hometown of Cowtown last week, which includes those of all political persuasions, I cannot recall seeing a more unhappy bunch (and I might even include myself under the circumstances, tho my spirits seemed to improve markedly after crossing the border near El Paso on the way back to La La Land--then I realized that our situation with the Gropenator is not really all that different, or better!).

Best wishes, nevertheless, to all Dems of Good Will (and opposed to Good Hair), wherever you may be.

Wait a minute. You mean I've never lost a statewide race, never sold out my party, never worked for Phil Gramm, and I'm doing almost as well as John Sharp against Rick Perry? His decades of political power gets him 3 extra points over me?

Anyone else think that the most important item on this poll is the Perry v generic Dem number? Even with Perry enjoying a 13 point "Katrina bounce" from last week's 39%, he only has a 4 point lead in the generic horse race? Are you kidding me? Why aren't we shouting this from the rooftops? The "Rick Perry is vulnerable" line is not just wishful thinking if this poll is even remotely credible.

So it is my impression that Sharp backers (who also like the Repugs) paid for this poll, yet he is still on the same level as Mr. Generic?

Putting John Sharp up against Governor Good Hair pretty much guarantees us more years of the same ol' GOP BS.

My stomach gets queasy at the thought of having Perry or Sharp as the only candidates with a real chance to win.

Why is it that everytime the Democrats have a candidate ready to do battle, like Chris Bell, we seem to always, come hell or high water, find some money grubbing wimp like Sharp to go for the post.

You know, Texas, I'm starting to think the only person out there with balls in Texas is Ann Richards.

Rick Perry is a closet case...and now Sharp is exposed for the grab and go politican he is. And don't we have enough Democrats who don't support a woman's right to control her own body?)

Can't the great state of Texas do better?

Bell is beloved around the country...and the very people we need to move him in to the position, it seems, are more interested in being part of teh consultant gravy train. Is it any wonder dopes like Perry get elected time and time again.

FIGHT BACK for Goodness' sake!

Life is NOT a dress rehearsal.

Ok, so how many elections has Sharp won in the last decade? (Remember - being close doesn't count.)

The guy is stale, folks. He's the Texas version of Bob Shrum. Guess what Sharp, you ain't winning this one either.

"Chris Bell has called the the slot machine lobby skuzzy and has taken $0 from slot machine interests."

I never saw a politician who returned a check he didn't have to. How many checks from the scuzzy wuzzys did he return? Or did the scuzzy wuzzys not send a check? Which explains why they suddenly became scuzzy wuzzys?

I don't believe in polls. But just the same, 32% to 11% tells you what?

"Rick Perry is a closet case."

Not that one again. Must be the way he combs his hair.

Well BS, it tells me that someone who's been on the ballot since the Reagan Administration can only get a third of the primary vote. Chris Bell, who hasn't ever attempted to run statewide has 11%. At this stage these numbers don't bode well for John Sharp, and does bode well for his declared opponents. You asked, just answering ya.

It also tells me that someone who has never been on a ballot, run for mayor of Texas largest city, been a Congressman, and gained nationwide media attention is beating that very same candidate 13%/11%. I wonder what those number will look like after, you know, Sharp stops "exploring" and is an actual candidate.

Oh wait, I've heard that before from a different camp already which can't use that excuse anymore...

I give John Sharp about as much chance of winning a race against Perry as I do Chris Bell. A 0% chance. And I disagree with the rationale of Bell not having run in a statewide race as explanatory of his receiving low percentages in the polls. He's a household name in Texas despite those who think he's not. Apart from the media coverage he garnered over the complaint against Tom DeLay, he's held political office locally and nationally. He's not an "unknown." A poll indicating that 11% of voters would vote for him is not exactly what I would call indicative of any real interest. But we are all entitled to our own opinions.

One Democrat polls in a statistical dead heat with Perry but is dismissed by you as a "has-been" with no chance of winning. Another Democrat is nearly fifteen points behind Perry with no resources to make up the difference and is annointed by you as the new hope of humanity. Pathetic. The real news in this poll is that Alvarado is likely to be the nominee if the "has-been" you so detest doesn't run.

What a way to spin the resuls of a poll.
So, someone that has not even declared about running has a third of the democratic primary supporters, and you all say that he's doomed. While the candidate that has been extremely hyped here and other blogs gets just 11%, and obviously you don't even mention that.
I think BOR should try to be more impartial to maintain the status it has achieved. I don't like BOR just being an outlet for Chris Bell's campaign.
Dudes, you represent the future of Texas Democratic Party. Stop being that naive. You won't win back the state with extreme left candidates - that's not how things work. Chris Bell is totally unelectable (gosh, he couldn't even win his primary), it's obvious even for someone who is not even from here, like me.
I have no idea if Sharp is a good alternative or not, but clearly Bell is not.
Perry is totally vulnerable, and after the summer 2 sessions fiasco, the Democrats have a unique opportunity to win back the state. But, the way to do it is getting rid of naive idealism and find someone strong.

Chis Bell, like John Sharp, has been on the ballot since the Reagan Administration, too. Only difference: Sharp was winning while Bell was losing to a lightweight future inmate.

By my count, Sharp has been on the ballot 13 times and won 11 (running far ahead of the ticket in his two loses for lite guv and batting .500 when running without any advantage of incumbency). Bell has been on the ballot eight times (soon to be nine) and won four. Two of the loses were downright embarassing blowouts when he was running as an incumbent.

Neither can claim to be a new face on the political scene. But one has a proven fundraising base and an organization that includes business, rural and South Texas voters while the other seems to want to re-invent himself as a MoveOn.org/Camp Casey activist after previous bids to run as a country conservative and an urban moderate failed miserably.

You be the judge.

It's time for a new face. Sharpis old and tored and UGLY and it's beeen estalbished that the best looking candiate wins about 70% of the time.

Chris Bell? He has the smell and scent of a Loser. And political money flees whenever this scent is detected. No money, no victory. That's the way politics works.

There's still time for an alternative - a new face with clean hands, an unblemished record who has a built in constituency amassing behind the phrase "Generic Democrat."

The question is, where are you Prince (or Princess) Valiant?

If only there were an independent candidate who supported video lottery terminals and offered a progressive alternative to a sure loser democratic nominee.

www.votekinky.com

Someone I know has suggested that Democrats get out and vote in the Republican Primary for whomever runs against Perry to insure he isn't on the Governor ballot. Then vote in the final election for our best Democrat.

"Someone I know" must be named Carole Strayhorn. That's her strategy. Democrats will not give up their right to vote in their own primary for their own candidates for sheriff or county commissioner or state rep -- or governor -- just to play in the other primary with a woman who makes their teeth hurt. It's a stupid strategy, doomed to failure. Perry will be the GOP nominee. And Democrats had better field the strongest possible challenger or get used to four more years of this intolerance and corruption.

What is interesting to me is that so many people making comments on this post are so concerned about poll numbers and money rather than being concerned with who has and hasn't figured out what ails us and how, exactly, to move forward. As far as I can tell only 1 (one) declared candidate has uttered a peep about those issues and honed a message that seeks to build a strong consensus based on progressive values. That candidate is Chris Bell.

My question to you folks is, have you learned anything at all from 2004? I might remind you all that it was "winnability" and fear of what the press would say and poll numbers that pushed Democrats to embrace John Kerry--a strong progressive, but a complete wimp politically.

Texans want a serious alternative to Republican rule, not a poll-tested, pol-tested, conglomeration of political positioning. As far as I can tell, if the only reason why you don't support Bell is because you think he can't poll and he can't raise money, why not donate a bit to his campaign and start making the case to other Democrats that he is the one to support? Since when did the Democratic Party become so infected with this destructive pack mentality?

Many here need to overthrow the consultocracy in their minds.

Umpire, you are obviously not well informed. Alvarado has been speaking out about the issues facing Texans. He was also the first person to announce his intent to run without any hesistancy, unlike Bell, and Sharp who has not even declared he will run. What we need in a governor, is someone who will not hesistate to speak out when things are not right. Bell is out for revenge, that is a fact that is well known, and some democrats may support him to console him for losing his seat because of redistricting. Sharp cannot even get elected to LT Gov. Why do we continue to support candidates that are obligated or sold out to deep pockets? Why do we have to vote in someone whose only qualification is his notarity? We might as well keep Republicans in office. The media and the Democratic Party are not giving equal time to all the candidates, why? because we always want something we are familiar with, even though it has been proven to not work.

IAM,

I've reached out to the Alvarado Campaign on many occasions. I've not received one press release! Now, I will admit that I am probably not the "media" that you refer to, however, we have web traffic that averages between 15,000 and 17,000 hits a week. I would be more than happy to give Mr. Alvarado as much space here at BOR as he wants, but I've not received one phone call, one press release, or one IM. They do respond to my weekly request for campaign events, but that's it.

I welcome the Alvarado Campaign to add me to their press list and see more of what he has to offer to the debate.

Damon C,
Contact Frank at franka@felixalvarado.com, and he will make sure you get on the list.

So where is Henry Cisneros? Sure he said Sharp should run, but why not Henry? He'd have the best shot at taking 'em all out.