Burnt Orange Report

Here's some more information on HD122 (just for general reference)

Your numbers show this is the most Republican district in San Antonio. This is a waste of time.

I honestly believe we must run in every race. How can we affect real change if we selective promote change?

Nobody has run against Corte since 1992. In 2004 Bush's approval rating were still about 50% in most polls (now it is about 35% depending on the poll you look at). In 2004 the legislature had not failed in education reform 3 consecutive times and had not failed to insure the elderly or the children of Texas.

You say this is a waste of time race, but I look at the fact that there are candidates up and down the ballot and applaud Stallings for running.

If everyone who said a race was a waste of time, just spent 5 minutes telling people to vote Democrat or to make lasting change... we would be further along in rebuilding the party.

The difference between an opinion and a belief is action, and Larry Stallings is working hard to change Texas from red to blue.

This is a sticky situation -- and with all things being equal, I'd agree that every race, every politician should have a challenger - it makes them more responsive (or at least, it should, in theory).

However, warp to 2005 -- our districts are drawn in such a manner that one party will always win, barring some major disaster, and then, if a D does win in an R district, when that person runs the next cycle, they typically lose (look at the SA Dem pick up and the Waco Dem loss).

The real question then is, not whether or not to run in every district (that should always happen) but as Democrats, where do we focus our limited resources? In a district that has been drawn 70-30, or the few districts that remain competitive?

You can focus your resources wherever you want, but you can bet that the Republicans will too, and they'll have more money to throw at them.

I think people are locked into false ideas..

1) There is limited money.
2) Any money is transferrable.

If Stallings runs against Corte, it's doubtful that the 100 kachigers that the TDP might have will ever go there, and they probably shouldn't. So his candidacy won't affect the "targeting" of resources. Stallings campaign would likely generate money, volunteers, party building within HD-122.

The next school of thought (which is wrong) is to assume that the people who volunteer their time and especially money in HD-122 because Stallings is running, would be just as ready to export that to a different district or race somewhere else in the state. An overwhelming percentage won't. Therefore Stallings running doesn't affect the "targeting" of other races. And if not, then who cares...his running in HD-122 is a net benefit. Plus, the new volunteers and donor inspired in that district this cycle will show up on fundraising reports, and then every statewide Dem has that many more 'potential' donors years out from now, because if people got activated locally, it's more likely they will start to share the wealth in the future.

It's really irritating when the "Run Almost Nowhere" crowd thinks that every new Democrat that announces a bid is doing it because they are out to drain away some "limited" pool of resources. Come on people, that pool is dwindling over time and is only there because the candidates and campaigns of the past made them a pool to begin with.

Who gets to declare what seat is winnable and what race is a waste of time?

the party leaders? they have done such a good job so far!

Under this pick just the seats you can win plan why should anyone support Tinker Bell or any other statewide lamb in waiting? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Aw, Sheila! Why can't you just let them get their hopes up? It's so fun to see those sad faces on the 10 'o clock news on election night!