Primary Battle for SD 10?

Hmmm... (5.00 / 1)

Without knowing who the presumptive candidates are, this discussion seems pretty pointless.  I'd suggest that we defer any primary discussions until there are truly announced candidates.

However, I will say that maintaining Senate Democrat's ability to kill disastrous legislation is paramount. We must be careful that we do not elect any DINOs in the Senate.  The Democratic caucus in the Senate must be resolute and firm.

---

by: JohnB @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 09:20:31 AM CDT

Disagree (0.00 / 0)

If a primary is to occur, is it good or bad for the SD10 race?  Seems to be a simple question and simple debate. 

Hopefully, if consensus is one way or another, those individuals who are potential candidates will consider what folks are saying and make decisions appropriately. 

Todd

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

---

by: Todd Hill @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 10:06:57 AM CDT

Knowing about the candidates would help (5.00 / 2)

I mean, primaries can be healthy, definitely serve a purpose, and there for a reason. Bt without knowing what the potential candidates are like, I think its hard to say categorically that a primary would automatically be good or bad.

------------------------
The Texas Blue - Advancing Progressive Ideas

---

by: Josh Berthume @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 10:13:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's not simple (0.00 / 0)

If one of the candidates is Gene Kelly, then yes, it's bad.  If you have two solid candidates, and they can stay above the trash-talking, it can be a good thing.  It's gets their names out there among the activists early, and sharpens their positions before going against the General opponent.

Unfortunately, it does cost money, and that sucks.

---

by: sccs @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 11:41:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh Gene Kelly (0.00 / 0)

He has built such a legacy in Texas politics!

------------------------
The Texas Blue - Advancing Progressive Ideas

---

by: Josh Berthume @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 11:45:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

ummm... (0.00 / 0)

Name a Democrat primary where trash-talking didn't occur? 

And you  make my point by "it does cost money."  Tarrant County can ill afford to spend thousands, if not hundreds-of-thousands, in a primary battle for SD 10 when the district is a huge promise of opportunity given a clean candidate, money in the bank, and Democrats united behind them.

in the case of the US Senate race, I believe a primary battle is a good thing overall for statewide Democrats.  However, when you scope it down to a specific district trending in "blue" favor in a county itching for political victories, it's bad.

Todd

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

---

by: Todd Hill @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 13:06:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

LOL (0.00 / 0)

Lt. Gov last cycle! :)  I'm not really sure what either side had as far as "message" and am pretty sure most everybody couldn't identify either candidate in a supermarket, but it does qualify as a Democratic Primary where no trash talking occured.  It's also an example that merely HAVING a primary does nothing to help OR hurt the chances come November... it's the TYPE of primary that happens.  If in SD-10 one candidate could gain momentum and could get a lot of free media (the equivalent of more media than was spent on the race), it'd be great.  If it got bloody and/or it cost money with no return whatsoever, it'd be a horrible waste.

In this particular instance, I tend to think if either candidate could have a fundraising quarter like Jaworski down south the other should back down to the more formidable challenger.  However, if both candidates have great fundraising quarters/neither candidate does, then they should probably fight it out.  If a lot of money is spent in the primary, that can only help to create a media buzz.  If no money is spent, then ANY publicity is better than NO publicity.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 15:22:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What if? (0.00 / 0)

And what if both are personally wealthy, or have access to cash to fight a hard, dirty primary, and don't need to rely on much fundraising....how would you define an SD10 primary battle then?

How would you handicap the race against Brimer should that type of scenario occur?  Which is likely.

Todd 

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

---

by: Todd Hill @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 21:40:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well... (0.00 / 0)

I think we can all agree that the democratic process is a good thing.  Without knowing more, there really isn't much to talk about. 

---

by: JohnB @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 11:06:55 AM CDT

Always beneficial (5.00 / 1)

I believe that contested primaries are almost always beneficial to help candidates form their message and really get on a campaign footing as early as possible.

Marcus Sanford
Ignite Consulting
Direct Mail, Printed Materials, & Automated Calling Services
for Political & Non-Profit clients

---

by: msanford @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 11:07:51 AM CDT

Brimer may be an SOB, but he's our SOB (0.00 / 0)

Whatever else Sen. Brimer is, he's an effective legislator for the official interests of Ft. Worth and Tarrant County. He's absolutely tenacious. Witness the toll road controversy, and the fact that he almost beat the entire US cement industry over advanced controls for the Midlothian kilns in the first piece of environmental legislation he's ever sponsored.

As long as there's a Republican Senate, one could make the case that the City's and County's official agenda are better served by a Republican who can get things accomplished, rather than a Democrat sitting on the sidelines.

Without names to go along with this speculation, I don't think Brimer's in trouble. There are a lot of people locally - and not just Republicans - who want him to stay put as long as the Senate is red.

---

by: stacksucker @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 11:35:11 AM CDT

Who is we? (0.00 / 0)

Tell me again how the Senate will ever turn blue if we don't challenge incumbent Rs, especially those holding seats we could win.

Brimer never met an tax break he didn't like.  His HB 1200 school property tax abatements are costing the state hundreds of millions of dollars every year, mainly so that businesses that were going to locate in Texas anyway don't have to help support our public schools.

---

by: david siegel @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 14:51:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Normally Good, but.... (0.00 / 0)

I'm gonna say "bad" right now. Tarrant Dems can't afford a schism over a primary like this if they want to win it in the general. The County Chair or someone should lock them in a room and not come out until they've agreed on who runs.

Vince Leibowitz

---

by: Vince Leibowitz @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 12:38:33 PM CDT

Spot on (0.00 / 0)

That's the answer I was looking for. 

It doesn't matter who is running, Tarrant County can't afford a primary battle, especially running in SD10 right now.  It hurts us more then it hurts them at this point.

Todd

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

---

by: Todd Hill @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 13:01:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"It doesn't matter who is running" (0.00 / 0)

Uhhh...yes it does...

---

by: JohnB @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 14:08:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Throw Everything at Him (0.00 / 0)

I agree that a primary battle is bad, but only if the Tarrant County doesn't cover it.  The candidates vying for SD 10 don't have great name recognition and the media coverage of a primary would certainly help.  However, the Tarrant County media is not exactly far reaching.  I rarely find much on primary battles in the news, so a primary probably wouldn't help in this case.

In addition to the rumors you've mentioned, I've also heard that some potential candidates are hesitant to jump into this race.  I've even heard that one is considering waiting until 2012, thinking that SD 10 is trending blue.  I've also heard others make similar arguements as stacksucker made above, though not by anyone in person. 

The hesitancy about SD 10 is unbelievable and naive  That seat will not exist in 2012 unless we win it in 2008.  The Republicans will likely control redistricting in 2010.  If Brimer still holds SD10, then they will make him safe, probably by adding more of the mid-cities from SD 12 and taking out parts of Northwest Fort Worth, possibly certain homes of potential candidates.  Our best hope is to beat Brimer and convince the Republicans that in order to hold onto their Senate majority they should make a safe Democratic seat by including East Arlington and West Grand Prarie from SD 9 and taking out either Colleyville or the southern parts of Tarrant County unincorporated and West Mansfield.  The idea that the Republicans are just going to let Brimer sit on an unsafe blue trending seat defies everything that I know about them. 

Plus, there is also the congressional redistricting.  Based upon census data and the possibility of the new seats in DC/Utah, Texas will get at least 2 new and possibly a third new CD in 2012.  Tarrant will probably get a good chunk if not all of one of them.  Whomever has SD 10 will have a huge advantage on this seat. 

That's why we need to win this now!

So, let's cut the crap on the "I'll wait until 2012" and the "he has some good environmental positions" and the "I am worried that my boss won't let me" and the "I'm waiting to run for something else" and the "I've taken the cure", and let's throw everything and the kitchen sink at Brimer. 

---

by: blank @ Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 13:47:32 PM CDT

I'm a waffler... (0.00 / 0)

I agree in principle that a primary is bad - but only if the value earned from the money spent is less than might have been earned outside the primary exercise, AND/OR if the damage inflicted during the course of the primary is greater/worse than the value earned through the process. (Not overly complex mathematical function - will sit down with you sometime with my calculator and your beer...)

As I believe I know both the purported Democratic contestants in this battle and the battleground intimately, would suggest that the total expenditures for the primary will run in the $40-60k range. That because the grassroots in Tarrant has been deliberately stymied by the current leadership, organization at any level is weak, and neither has a solid foothold within the Democratic primary electorate in a hotly contested presidential year.  That said, both have pretty decent name recognition, solid fund-raising capability, in-built enemies and supporters, halos and warts.

The downside is that both are extremely experienced political operatives and neither will get in with anything less than the intention of winning, regardless of the cost. From a political standpoint, neither can afford to lose the primary - either could survive a general defeat assuming a solid showing. If both stay in, the blood will flow...no quarter once the gauntlet is dropped.

I have a good deal of respect for Todd and tend to agree with his initial analysis. However, I can tell you that voters in Tarrant County would be shocked, SHOCKED!!!, I say - to see two highly visible Democrats (rare breed up this way) fighting tooth and nail for the chance to run against an incumbent Republican with a cool $1M in his armory...

You tell me, how much is that message worth?

---

by: cowtown_mark @ Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 22:52:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Easy to Say (0.00 / 0)

....when it's not your lungs or butt on the line. Things always look more black and white in the abstract than they do in the specific.

In my experience, a Democratic governor or legislature is as likley to screw the folks on the ground as easily as this current crew. Ask Lon Burnam about Committee Chairs under Pete Laney. Quiz a grassroots envionmentalist about the Chemical Council's hand puppetry of Ann Richards when push came to shove. Simply "voting Democratic" is not a panecea for many of us. 

---

by: stacksucker @ Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 01:16:48 AM CDT

But, it is my butt (0.00 / 0)

Easy to Say ....when it's not your lungs or butt on the line.

Without knowing who I am, that's a bold statement.  I'm a professor in the UT system and the only breadwinner in my family of four.  So it's not just my lungs or my butt, but the legislature implicitly decides my family income and benefits.  My 2-year old daughter almost certainly has allergies, so it's not just my lungs, it's hers that keep me up at nights.  My 4-year old son simultaneously has ADHD and PDD-NOS, and the legistlature determines both the public services we receive (which are currently none) and whether his treatments are covered by insurance (which are now currently some).  So, the legislature profoundly affects my family.

Simply "voting Democratic" is not a panecea for many of us.

I never claimed or even implied that.  But, just because Brimer introduced a good environmental bill but failed to pass it in his 5th year of being in the senate and his 20th year of being in the legistlature, and well after the problems with the cements kilns had been established, I'm not going to give him a free pass.  If he gets it passed in the next session, then good for us.  But, other topics affect my family too, like plummeting state higher education funding and public services for special needs kids.  And, I can say having dealt with the state legistlature over both of these issues, some Republicans are okay on them, but overall, the Democrats are substantially more receptive.

---

by: blank @ Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 11:57:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

SD 10 Primary (2.00 / 1)

Dems need to get together and find the best candidate to win the general against Brimer.  That does not mean that we need the guy (or gal) who can best rally the Democratic faithful with red-meat ...

We need a candidate who is respected, a moderate, and a proven vote-getter if possible.  Why a moderate?  Because the candidate needs to pull across soft Republicans and conservatives who find Brimer's ethical lapses abhorrent.

We don't need a primary for a very good reason:  Brimer has a printing press for campaign dollars in his downtown condo, our Dem nominee will need to husband resources for the fall campaign.

"Put the jam on the lower shelf where the little fellow can reach it." Sen. Ralph Yarborough

---

by: FWDem @ Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 23:23:35 PM CDT

RE: Brimer is just a suck up to the powerful (0.00 / 0)

I tried to meet with Brimer for 5 minutes to talk to Brimer about a bill this past session.  Blew me off, but had time to talk to any lobbyist.

Brimer is a poster child for what is wrong with the system.

Depends on who the folks in a primary would be, but generally primary battles make better candidates for the general election.


"Be kind to dogs - and vote Democratic!" -Senator Tom Eagleton

---

by: mondalejones @ Sat Aug 04, 2007 at 19:17:11 PM CDT

I tend to agree... (0.00 / 0)

...that primaries can generate stronger general election candidates. Of course they can also prove utterly destructive if not waged in a civilized fashion. It would be a shame if the result of such a contest were to render the primary victor unelectable in November...

More critically, having spent a fair amount of time yesterday visiting with some quite savvy folks regarding this particular race, I am not convinced that if the two known aspirants fight this out as hard as they are capable of - and no reason to be believe they won't, it could easily burn through $200-300k. That's too much ammo that needs to be saved for Brimer to be burning it up that early.

If they insist on having the fight, wouldn't it be cool to have a voluntary limit agreed to publicly - maybe force them to show their creativity at stretching a buck and their ability to do some down and dirty shoe-leather heavy grass-roots politicking instead of having a conventional slash and burn mail and phone bank campaign.

Yeah, right...as if...

---

by: cowtown_mark @ Sun Aug 05, 2007 at 21:02:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]