Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
January 24, 2006Dunnam Endorses Gammage: Your Thoughts?By Vince Leibowitz[Author's Note: I've updated this post as, after reading it, I realize it didn't say what I intended it to say and, in fact, inadvertantly insulted many Democrats I respect very highly. So, toward that end, to anyone who took this post wrong, I hope you'll forgive my momentary lapse in judgement and chalk it up to my fingers getting ahead of my brain-VL] House Democratic Caucus Chair Jim Dunnam (D-Waco) has endorsed Bob Gammage for Governor. And, although it's the only endorsement I've seen on Gammage's website (and the only one I'm aware of outside the other "Dirty 30" candidates), it is no doubt an important endorsement. However, does that single endorsement outweigh all of Chris Bell's endorsements? In my original post, I inadvertantly communicated that it did. Or, at least, I felt that way after I re-read the post. What I had intended to say is that, throughout Texas, Dunnam is probably better known, generally speaking, than many of the people who have endorsed Chris Bell. That said, there is no doubt in my mind that, while Dunnam's endorsement will play well for Gammage in some areas because of that, the endorsements of party giants like Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa and Molly Beth Malcom certainly play well for Bell, and I wasn't intending to downplay the lengthy and distinguished list of people who have endorsed Chris Bell. I guess what I was trying to say is that, while Chris Bell has numerous endorsements (there is someone who appeals to just about everyone on that list, from Pete Gallego to Max Sandlin), Gammage has only one, but it is an important one. Does that mean it is more important that Chris Bell's endorsements? No, not necessarily. Does it mean Gammage needs only one endorsement? No, it doesn't. Chris Bell's been endorsed by a wide spectrum of people from local officials to former Congressmen. The dialogue I was really trying to start is: what do readers think about endorsements in general? What about these endorsements specifically? What role do they play in a campaign? How much do they matter to you as a voter? Remember John Sharp's 'Endorsement Derby' with David Dewhurst in 2002? Sharp dozens more endorsements than Dewhurst, but he didn't win. Of course, those were groups and PACS, not individual people. Chris Bell, on the other hand, has more than a few Texas Democrats with major name recognition (either statewide or in their own areas of Texas). So, again, what do you think? And, this isn't meant as a free-for-all for people to bash Bell or Gammage. Simply, what are your thoughts on endorsements and they role they play in political races? Posted by Vince Leibowitz at January 24, 2006 01:49 PM | TrackBackComments
That is such a stupid question. Of course we're going to throw more weight behind the guy that owns Chuy's than behind Dunnam. I mean, c'mon. Caucus v. Queso? Queso wins everytime. Posted by: matth at January 24, 2006 03:07 PMThe Waco area is important to Gammage, so Dunnam's endorsement may help him there. But really - does anyone else in Texas really know Rep. Dunnam? We know who he is, but call your mom or your neighbor across the street and ask if they do. Most Democrats in Texas know who Jim Dunnam is since he led the boycott of the redistricting session. His title alone bears a lot of weight. House Democratic Caucus chair. His endorsement bears a lot more weight than the has-beens also known as the Dirty Dozen. One of whom turned around and showed up at a fundraiser for Kinky Friedman. Which doesn't say much for her endorsement of Chris Bell. The Dirty Thirty versus the Dirty Dozen. Most Democrats will go with the Dirty Thirty. And their successors. One of whom is Jim Dunnam.
Representative Dunnam's endorsement carries a great deal of weight, I think, with the people who matter the most at this point, i.e., the people who vote in the primaries. Marie is probably right about the importance (or lack thereof) of Dunnam's endorsement in the general election, but in a primary, where it's the activists who do all the heavy lifting, someone of Dunnam's stature within the Party makes a lot of difference. I'll say this much: I've been kind of sitting on the fence, and this certainly pushes me toward Gammage. That, and the fact that Bell is running such a crappy campaign. Posted by: davew at January 24, 2006 04:35 PMMatt - Chuy's blows... you need some http://enchiladasymas.com/. Posted by: original TREY at January 24, 2006 04:38 PMWhat makes you think it's the only endorsement Gammage has garnered. If I know Bob, it's just the first. Posted by: Texas_Kat at January 24, 2006 04:54 PMdavew--How can you say that Chris Bell is running a 'crappy' campaign? He's out there not only responding to everything that Democratic and Republican opposition throw out, but also creating new waves of his own, like on the voucher issue with Strayhorn. His campaign is getting headlines, and getting its message out to voters. That's far from a crappy campaign. Posted by: Vince Leibowitz at January 24, 2006 04:59 PMcrappy candidate Posted by: snrub at January 24, 2006 05:21 PMVince, what do you mean "He's out there not only responding to everything that Democratic and Republican opposition throw out?" Gammage directs all of his attacks against Perry; and I don't think I have seen anything where Jafer has attacked Chris. So what Democrat is attacking Chris? And speaking of headlines, you should check out the headlines Gammage is receiving. He has been in the vast majority of media markets during the **last 2 weeks.** Hello Vince, seems like that might be getting the message out when you see the cameras, papers, and radio stations he has been on or in. And the attacks have been on the real Democratic enemy - Rick Perry. and....ahhhh you are so right. Candidates need to be into wavemaking...so let's see what positive stuff Chris's opponent has been talking about...Hmmm, Gammage says he will fight for: * a Texas Excellence in Education Act to guarantee fair funding for every school district in Texas-with the standard set at “excellence” for all, not just an elite few * affordable Health Care for all families in times of illness and injury * a Prescription Drug Price Relief Act to regulate prescription drug costs and stop the gouging of consumers * strengthening campaign finance laws to prevent corporations and the elite from buying our elections * raising the state minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour. It is wrong for a man or woman to work 40 hours a week and take home only $840 a month----before taxes - something Chris voted against in Houston * passing a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing every Texan the right to clean air and clean water * passing an Ethics Reform Act to make it illegal for any state legislator or high agency official to become a lobbyist for at least two years after leaving state service * passing a Corporate Responsibility Act to strengthen Texas regulatory and consumer protection agencies to stop price gouging in gas and utility prices and protect our citizens from corporate fraud * passing a Texas Tax Reform Act. No more state taxes on the middle class unless we close the special corporate loopholes that save Rick Perry's corporate friends billions while ordinary families have to pay and pay. Seems to me these are positions we should require our Democratic candidate for governor to fight for. If you read the articles, not just the headlines, you'll see Gammage has been talking about these issues all over the state. So let's wrap it up with a bow. Gammage has been in more media markets than Chris has, especially during the last 2 weeks. He's making waves and has a Democratic platform we Democrats should be advocating for. He only attacks Rick Perry and his cronies. Gammage's campaign must be doing something right to create a message and deliver it across the stare. Posted by: RedDog at January 24, 2006 05:49 PMMary Beth Malcolm, a party giant? Oh, what a sad party this is if that is true... Posted by: Karl-T at January 24, 2006 05:50 PMBob Gammage is a dedicated public servant who has won a bunch of races and has class. Chris Bell lost to Chip Staniswalis. -30- Posted by: notgannatell at January 24, 2006 06:00 PMRedDog - if we look at it from the google news standpoint (and excise a professional athlete of the same name) we end up 3-to-2 more media for Bell than Gammage over the last month. We also have to take into consideration that Gammage has just launched his campaign (which should give him a flurry of headlines). this is unscientific, but even with a campaign launch he isn't winning the media war. Posted by: matth at January 24, 2006 06:30 PMKarl-T: whether or not people like Molly Beth Malcom, you have to admit she's a major player in the TDP even in retirement from her chairmanship. She's got her hand in a lot of political pies, especially in East Texas. Red Dog: Who cares, at this point, who has been in more media markets in the last two weeks. That's natural; he just announced his campaign; Bell has been doing this for months and months. Second, if you're trying to say that Bell doesn't have a platform, you might check again. I believe both candidates have formulated platforms. Posted by: Vince Leibowitz at January 24, 2006 06:32 PMAnd I feel that fact that MBM still is a big enough player at the TDP is also a sad state of affairs. You have a state party which ACTIVELY DISRECRUITED candidates from running statewide this year. Yeah, that's a real winner, by not having candidates. I'm not gonna ever defend actions like that. She can have her hand in as many pies as she wants, but I ain't eating them. Posted by: Karl-T at January 24, 2006 06:49 PMObviously Wesley Clark has endorsed him as well. The point about the party activists, the "movers and shakers" is well-taken and those are the ones who will be motivated by the endorsement by Jim Dunnam as well as Wesley Clark in both the primary and the general election. Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 24, 2006 07:05 PMThank you, RedDog, for helping me make my point. I'd just like to add some of the dumb stuff, like the food fight story, and the fact that the first thing out of Bell's mouth when Gammage entered the race was that BS about cut'n'run Bob. Plus, he's had nigh onto a year to get his message out there, and he's still a cipher to most Texans. I mean, having gone after DeLay is all well and good, but by the time the election rolls around, that will have been more than 2 years in the past. Posted by: davew at January 24, 2006 07:15 PMMatth honey, you've been spending too long at the keyboard, I think. Are you seriously suggesting that if google doesn't pick it up, it didn't happen? Wow, kinda says a lot about the pitfalls of being a keyboard warrior. I have family all over the Valley. Gammage was everywhere last week. TV, radio, UNIVISION for pete's sake. Only 5 people in my very large family regularly use the Internet -- but all of them do watch the local news. They're the ones who are so excited by him. I'd been leaning towards Bell, but anybody who can get MY family interested in voting for a Democrat again, I'll have to take a second look at. So, take a few minutes to repeat after me: The Universe is not limited to Google, the Universe is not limited to Google..... Posted by: ValleyGirl at January 24, 2006 08:05 PMValley girl - Grrlll... most girls don't start calling me honey until the second date. I like your style. The way the "google news" search works is it takes news stories listed on TV, newspaper and some blog sites. So stories that get filed by your local paper or tv station will appear on the google news site, thus addressing your issue. But I'm glad to see Dems getting people interesting in the Valley area. We need the votes. Posted by: matth at January 24, 2006 10:23 PMOOOh matth, you're cute. Thanks for the Google lesson. Tell you what... go type in "Bob Gammage" in Google News. See if you can find the love letter from the Laredo paper to Bob Gammage. Didn't find it? It was posted on their site (and published in the newspaper on January 21) and gets archived probably next week. Google may have missed it, but my 2 uncles and sister-in-law sure didn't. They read it in the local paper and sent it to me. It's a good thing the Gammage people saved it. http://www.gammageforgovernor.com/node/55 Posted by: ValleyGirl at January 24, 2006 10:43 PMY'all don't be too hard on Chris Bell. I haven't personally heard anyone call him a 'crappy' candidate. "Hapless' is the word they used. Posted by: RedStateDem at January 24, 2006 10:50 PMChris Bell a crappy candidate? You can say that again! There were any number of concerned people that considered getting into the Gov's race because Chris was so underwhelming..... I hear former Sen. Ted Lyon for one and former Ambassador Lyndon Olson for another. Hats off to Bob Gammage for rescuing us from Mossbacher's best boy Bell. Posted by: citizen at January 25, 2006 05:21 AMIm still up in the air on these guys. I dont like Chris Bell's stance on gay marriage. However, when I emailed the Gammage campaign on his opinion of any gay issue, they did not respond at all. Yeah thats not the only issue out there but its one that is unanswered so Id at least like an idea of what he thinks. Posted by: John at January 25, 2006 10:44 AMI don't want to come across as insensitive--I voted against Prop 2--but the "gay issue" is resolved for the moment. It sucks, but it seems ridiculous to focus on that now. We need to look at the relevant issues and decide which Dem candidate has the best plan for righting the wrongs we can still do something about--education, health care and reform. We need to unify behind the candidate that gives us the best chance of beating Perry in November--not nitpick over every stance on every issue. Gammage has my vote. Posted by: caleaelena at January 25, 2006 11:05 AMGammage will carry South Texas. Posted by: gringo at January 25, 2006 02:14 PMGammage will carry South Texas. Chip Staniswalis will lose South Texas. Posted by: notgannatell at January 25, 2006 02:54 PMJohn - I know that one because I asked as well. He was against prop 2 and thinks the government should allow whatever two people want to do. Call it marriage, union, whatever. Basically, it should be left to the two women, two men or one man and one woman to decide for themselves. Granted, it's moot now as the Amendment passed and to overturn it will be difficult. However, that's his position. Posted by: original TREY at January 25, 2006 03:53 PMPost a comment
|
|