Home

About
- Who We Are
- Community Guidelines
- Right to Respond
Advertising on BOR
- Advertise on BOR
- Buy on all Texas Blogs

Advertisements

Search




Advanced Search


Follow Burnt Orange Report on Twitter (@BOR) and Facebook.

After Long Campaign, Obama and Clinton Delegates Come Together


by: David Mauro

Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 09:00 AM CDT


Ed. note: This is part of today's ongoing look back at the TDP Convention. 

It has been almost a year and a half since Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton declared their candidacies for president. In that time, supporters of both Obama and Clinton became extremely passionate and attached to their respective candidate.

The passion that may have come to an apex on the night of March 4 was still evident this past weekend at the Texas Democratic Convention in Austin.

For the Clinton delegates, whose candidate announced she would concede on Thursday and made her concession speech during the convention itself, there were a lot of mixed emotions.

Certainly, though she had begun the race as the absolute front-runner and failed, there is little doubt her candidacy accomplished something. It brought universal health care to the forefront of the domestic debate, broke down many barriers that had been placed before women candidates and helped create one of the largest instances of participation and activism in Democratic Party history.

The party building benefits of the Obama-Clinton primary will be felt in Texas and across the nation for years to come.

As I walked around the convention, no matter how many Clinton buttons and t-shirts I saw (and there were a lot considering she had dropped out of the race), there was still a sense of unity.

Many Clinton delegates I spoke with (including myself) looked, perhaps naively, at the State Convention as the last time Democrats would be divided. 

"Right now, we're still Clinton and Obama. Pretty soon, and I hope really soon, we'll all just be Democrats again," a Clinton delegate from Nueces County told me.

Even the most hardcore Clinton supporters, like Guillermo Mirna of El Paso, who I wrote about on Friday when he interrupted the Mexican American Democrats caucus with his cries of "No surrender!" recognized the need for Democrats to unite.

"We are Democrats," Mirna said on Friday. "We need to elect a Democrat, but we also need to have a voice that will be heard," alluding to his hope that the Obama campaign will do more to reach out to Hispanic voters.

The only Clinton delegate I met all weekend who emphatically said they would not vote for Barack Obama was Mike Kupka of Denison, who I also wrote about this weekend.

But even Kupka, who you probably noticed carrying around a sign that read (and I'm not making this up) "Small Town, Gun-Toting, Religious Democrat, Bitter About Obama," could envision a scenario where he could vote for our nominee. 

"I will vote for him if he puts Hillary on the ticket," Kupka said. "If he doesn't, I'm a pure down-ballot Democrat."

The good news is Kupka is the only person I met who was eager to talk about their opposition to Obama.  The bad news is that there are certainly others.

But there is a lot of time between June and November. I am confident that Barack Obama will do what he needs to do to bring close to 100% of the Clinton supporters into his column this November.

Anyone who was on the convention floor when loud chants of "United We Stand" emerged from smaller chants of "Obama! Obama!" and "Hillary! Hillary!" can't be too worried.

After all, we're Democrats and while we might have our disagreements we will surely unite for November. This year, with so much riding on this election at every level of government, our complete unity has never been so important. 

What is your story of party unity (or division) from last weekend's convention? 

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Party unity from outside the convention (5.00 / 1)
David thanks for posting this.  I think it's hopefully one of the methods to help bring about about the unity. I didn't attend the convention because ... I know y'all have heard me tell the story too much now so I'll forego it.

However I stayed as much in tune with the convention through BOR and contacts with friends at the convention.  I also monitored blogs from some of the other websites including the campaign websites.  I can tell you that if there was an attitude of unity coming out of the convention hall in Austin it's going to take some work to permeate the rest of the Democratic Party.

The candidates came together in Washington and walked out of the room laughing.  That was a good sign.  The campaigns are just now getting over their bad feelings towards each other.  Obama's campaign has already stated they are ready to hire on some of the Clinton staff.  That's a good sign.

The problem we now have is how to accelerate that feeling of working together all the way down to those that will block walk and raise funds at the local level.  The attitude of healing is just not there.

I heard countless stories from the SD caucuses of people being just downright mean to each other over petty things.  There was so much power play going on from what I heard in some of the caucuses that it makes me ashamed for these people, some of which I know.

It's going to take more than talking a good talk in a convention hall or on a blog to heal these wounds.  Right now the issues have faces attached to them.  It's easy to work through an issue.  It's hard to work through it when it has a face attached to it.  Think about that a second folks.  You can't argue with an issue but you sure can argue with a person associated with the issue.  Remove the faces and the issues can be worked through.  In other words, don't take these issues personally.

Clearly the Clinton campaign wants to be heard and respected as we move forward.  That makes tons of sense.  Sen. Clinton did so much for women's rights that this was historic.  Her people also want to be considered equal in the fight to take back the White House.  I say bring the talent to the table and let's get this thing done.  No body should go wasted in this process.

The Obama campaign has a winning formula. The connected nature of the campaign is incredible.  Just take the blogs as an example.  Obama's blog was partially moderated.  There were positives and negatives. Just the trolls were removed with a notation when one was.  Clinton's blog was heavily moderated and spoke badly of Obama and claims of voting for McCain constantly.  No voice of reason existed.  The tone changed after her speech on Saturday and all the McCain support miraculously disappeared. Moderator choice I bet.

But the Obama campaign didn't corner the market on winning ideas.  There are many that can be pulled from other sources.  However those sources need to remember that this is Obama's campaign and not Edward's or Clinton's.  We stand behind him and work the way his campaign best sees fit.

So what's next? I have already sent an e-mail to our county chair to ask to help move this forward at the county level. I think others should do the same in counties across Texas.  Clinton supporters should walk into the Obama or County campaign office and offer to help, even if it means licking envelopes. No one is too good or too proud to help.  Obama supporters should find that Clinton talent and leverage it in every way possible.

Finally, let's put the issues of the convention (who was elected to what position or committee) behind us.  Honestly we acted like Republicans and Democrats (I'm talking about the division) during that convention instead of all being Democrats.  I now see why they want these things settled before the conventions.  If not, they make for really ugly experiences when we should be bonding together.

Now I know there are several kumbaya stories out there.  Heck my best one is my precinct convention which was an Obama majority at both the precinct and SD conventions.  When it came time to elect delegates to the state convention, they elected an Obama delegate and a Clinton alternate.  How cool is that? When I was able to get out of the bunker called Credentials to check on them they looked like happy campers just wanting to do the right thing next.  They really couldn't understand all this infighting going on.

Let's find more of these kind of stories and people and bring this thing together.  Thanks for the thread and thanks for posting.


great comment (0.00 / 0)
I agree: it is going to take every single member of the Democratic "team" to win this fall. I have more to say but I am typing on a phone so it'll have to wait.  

[ Parent ]
My thoughts of the Convention (4.00 / 2)
It's good to be blogging again here at BOR, I've been gone awhile while working on Hillary's campaign, and helping in Bastrop County.

My view of what happened at the Convention was pretty much the same.  I saw Mr. Kupka's sign, and while I thought it was a little needling and unnecessary, a small part of me thought it was a little funny.  Overall, I thought most everyone was cordial and 'Texan' to each other (polite and considerate, but watchful), but you could feel the emotions bubbling just under the surface.

I have several Obama supporters in the Mex-Am and Tejano Democrat meetings ask me "What are you doing here?", "You know she lost right?" as well "As what are you hoping to achieve by supporting her now?"

And during the Hispanic caucus there were several Obama delegates who were surprised and I would say even shocked at the Hillary turn-out and the margin by which they were out-numbered.

Overall, I thought the Convention was going well, until right up to the end, when just before the caucus got going on Friday a small group of Obama supporters started chanting "Obama...Obama!!! and "Yes, we have...yes we have!"  The group grew larger and larger and were chanting toward Clinton supporters walking by, and that made many Clinton supporters chant back with both sides getting larger and more heated chanting back & forth, until an Obama campaign person interviened.  That was really the only 'divisive' thing I really thought stood out during Friday.  That is if you don't include the Mex-Am DEM meeting which got pretty contentious there for a bit.

In the end, I thought all speakers especially Gary Mauro were great and I really enjoyed seeing and meeting Chelsea on Friday.  I really think that in order to unite all supporters of both Obama and Clinton when they see or encounter those who are still venting, allow those people to vent but ask politely not to do so, or try to understand what they are complaining about.  The acrimony or "get over it" attitudes is what is going to lead to many more Kupka viewpoints and be soley down-ticket voters.

20% of 18M is 3.6M voters.  The margin of difference in the 2004 election was 3.5M voters.  We must unite, but allow each and everyone to do so at their own pace, and try to be understanding when people are "venting" their emotions.  We as DEM's are going to need ever single vote in order to really effect change, both at the National level and the State level for the betterment of America and Texas.  We can't afford to not have a "Big Tent" mentality right now.  The GOP will do what they do to unite us, we don't need to do their work for them.

Thanks, for letting me vent.


100% agree (5.00 / 1)
For anyone Clinton supporters still not sold on Obama, they need to consider the consequences of electing McCain.  We can't afford it and we have a great nominee who needs us to win.    

[ Parent ]
Elections do have consequences... (5.00 / 1)
One of the consequences of electing McCain would be to live with his appointments to the United States Supreme Court and their decisions. Hillary's supporters will have to decide whether they want McCain appointees or Obama appointees voting on cases involving our constituional rights including the right to choose.

[ Parent ]
Hispanic/Tejano Caucus (5.00 / 1)
I was not surprised by HRC's support amongst Hispanics.. it had been on the news for months.  I saw it with my own eyes at our precinct convention.  I was surprised, however, at Mauro's "we showed him" comment when discussing HRC's 75% take of the Hispanic vote.  There was no.. "let's get behind our candidate".. just "we showed 'em".  As a Latina and Obama supporter.. that was just picking at a scab for me.

And when one of our DNC candidates starts a sentence with "I don't want to offend the Anglos in the room..", well we all know something nice is not going to be said.

I think these actions perpetuate a rift within the party as well as a generational rift within our own race.

But, I'm still ready to stand alongside my fellow Dems and kick a__ this cycle.


[ Parent ]
not accurate (0.00 / 0)
the first line of Mauro's speech was "This convention is about creating a spirit of unity."

I'm ready to stand alongside you, too.


[ Parent ]
it was... (5.00 / 1)
but then he went on to say "we showed 'em".  And that was a little painful, but I understand you have to rally the troops when they have worked so hard for a certain candidate.  As a young(ish) Latina the overall tone in the those caucuses was very divisive to me and I just wish it didn't have to be that way... but I get it.  If the shoe was on the other foot, I might very well be the same way.

[ Parent ]
Democratic Women in that certain demographic (0.00 / 0)
I'm not sure who Mr. Mauro spoke to while at the State Convention, but I can easily think of 8 Clinton supporters at that convention who have not 'unified', and if I had to really sit down & ponder, that number would probably triple.  And of that group there are about 20% removing themselves from the roles of the Democratic Party completely.  While I am an unknown to the powers that be, I communicate with a number of voting women in my little world, so I'm not speaking hypothetically.

One of the issues these women have is tied to the manner in which the DNC did not rebuke the media for the constant misogyny seen during the campaign.  We each suffer through it personally on a daily basis, and to see it happen so blatantly to such a fantastic representative on a national platform without the DNC (or any other major Democratic organization) coming down hard on the media each time it happened is pretty tough to take.

So, don't think 'Unity' will happen easily among Democratic Women of a certain demographic.  We are a very large group that need to see how Obama and the Obama camp will handle Hillary and her supporters.  We can vote downticket only quite easily.


Very interesting (5.00 / 1)
and disappointing.

I do not claim to understand the pain that many women feel over Hillary's loss, but I hope they can put it aside and vote for the only candidate who comes close to representing Hillary's vision for America.

Guess I should have spoken to you!


[ Parent ]
<b>Please recognize this...</b> (0.00 / 0)
One phrase seems to have been overlooked in the responses, which simply perpetuates the problem.  

"We each suffer through it (misogyny) personally on a daily basis".  THIS is the point.  

It's not just the pain many women feel over Hillary's loss... it's that this behavior will go on and on and on and on.  It's so institutionalized and imbued in our society that even when it's the topic, it's not seen.

So please, read outside the box.  And keep up the discussion.  Thanks.


[ Parent ]
Matters beyond the primary (4.33 / 3)
This primary was a historic primary.  We have the first woman as a strong contender for the presidency.  We have an African-American who will lead our ticket in the general election.  We had another governor from my home state of Arkansas who made a pretty darn good run, albeit on the wrong side of the road in many ways (what's up with governors from Arkansas and bands).

These firsts helped shape a list of candidates that brought to the front a lot of the issues that had been shoved aside in prior races.  I understand the struggles of a female candidate in a presidential primary are more than most might understand.  But I also know the struggles of an African-American running as the Democratic nominee are just as tough.  There is no corner on the market in this election for who has the most struggles.

In speaking with a close friend in Arkansas and a personal friend of Sen. Clinton (I mean personal, not shake your hand kind) he and several friends have reconciled the issues and will be supporting Sen. Obama.  However he also informed me several of his friends will not be for the reason we don't like to mention.  Sad but true.

Threats of down ticket voting get us no where in moving the ideas of the Democratic Party forward.  They serve as threats not dialogue.  I think a lot of people want to have dialogue on these issues.  But forcing yourself to the discussion by "I will not vote or I'll vote for McCain" do nothing for a good conversation.  We're not in negotiations here.  We're in a race where the alternative is four more years of a party that cares less for equal and civil rights than we have ever seen.

If you can truly tell me that not voting for Sen. Obama furthers the cause of women in America then I'm game to listen. But it appears that not voting which would be like voting for McCain only creates more setbacks to the rights and opportunities for women.  Am I missing something here?


[ Parent ]
What would mom do? (4.00 / 2)
I can't claim to have found this.  My good buddy Eugene Sepulveda posted the quote and I found the article later.

Cecile Richards on the presidential campaign

Mom would have said that women voting for John McCain would be like chickens choosing to vote for the Colonel.

Full article on the Huffington Post


[ Parent ]
HA! (0.00 / 0)
And amen.

"I wonder now what Ernest Hemingway's dictionary looked like, since he got along so well with dinky words that everybody can spell and truly understand." -- Kurt Vonnegut

[ Parent ]
Dem Women (5.00 / 1)
As a Clinton supporter and a woman of a certain age let me say that I support the Democratic ticket. I may or may not vote only downballot. What I do know is that I am not ready to listen to "unity" speeches.  I wasn't this weekend and I don't have to get on board for quite a while.

Yes, the media played misogynist. If you didn't notice, you weren't paying attention. But that's not why I am holding back.  

Obama has a lot to prove still.  For those who did not like the long primary, it was the long primary where Clinton challenged Obama in debate and elsewhere that forced him to clarify and hone his positions.  Hope and change is not a policy position and experience always counts.  


[ Parent ]
Victim politics (3.50 / 2)
That's the kind of identity-group victim politics that ended up losing the Dems a generation of voters (the Reagan Democrats) - and back then, the victim stuff was actually justified.

It isn't now. I was paying attention. Only somebody with a truly tin ear could claim that a black man had an easier path to the nomination from the media than a former first lady with so much establishment support going in.


[ Parent ]
Ratings policies (3.67 / 3)
I haven't been a long-time commenter here on BOR but I when I did come on I read the community guidelines first which include ratings policies.  The last comment did nothing to deserve a 1.  It had content, was not abrasive in my mind, and did not slander anyone.  AHThompson, I 've noticed you've been giving anyone who counters your argument a rating of 1.  Before you go hit the one on this comment I suggest you re-read the Community Guidelines for BOR.

This is a great blog for dialogue.  It has a pretty good set of guidelines and rules that have been well thought out.  If you participate in the comments, participate like the rest of us.


[ Parent ]
Oh Thank You (5.00 / 1)
All fixed.  I hope this meets with your interpretation of the ratings policy and view of any particular comment.  Take care and have a great day, RBearSAT.

[ Parent ]
Another candidate that believed in hope (5.00 / 2)
Before we write off Obama let's not forget the last candidate that walked into this race with no experience in Washington and limited experience at the state level.  Yes, that candidate was barely known at the national level and many thought he didn't have the stuff to lead a nation.

Well, he defied a lot of the skeptics, talked about things like hope and change, and pretty much went into the election with what a lot of people thought was very little substance.  The difference was we Democrats rallied around him when he won the nomination, took that message and carried it across the nation.

I remember watching the scene in Macy's restaurant adjacent to Madison Square Garden.  Less than a year before my best friend from Arkansas called me and said "we're making a run for it regardless what the skeptics think."  A month later I walked into the assembly hall at Market Square in San Antonio with about 60 people to greet a good friend and my next president, Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary.

You see the same arguments you use against Obama lots of people used against Pres. Clinton.  By recollection he turned out to be a darn good president.  So why do the rules all of a sudden change?

Here's a column by John Whiteside of the Houston Chronical that makes a lot of the same arguments.

I ask you, didn't the primary do enough to help clarify that the positions of Sen. Obama and Clinton were very, very close together?  Doesn't the history of some of our prior presidents help dispel the myth of experience?  Granted the last one walked in with little experience and it showed.  But I can tell you the last one has nothing on Sen. Obama in terms of policy and intelligence.

Come to think of it, Sen. Obama kind of reminds of someone else who believed in a place called Hope.


[ Parent ]
limited experience at the state level? (0.00 / 0)
I could be wrong, but I thought Clinton had been Arkansas Governor for 12 years, making him one of the longest serving governors to ever become president.

[ Parent ]
Experience (5.00 / 2)
He came in with 2 years in the AG slot then 12 years in the governor's office (1 term, lost, came back for 5 terms).  Obama has been in the IL state senate for 12 years.  Before that he was in the private sector as an attorney.  Before Clinton was AG he was an educator with the U of A (Go Hawgs).

The point is they have equitable time in seat in state offices.  However people still viewed Clinton as not having the experience for Washington.  Obama at least has some experience in Washington before the run for president.

My bigger point is that when Clinton won the nomination, and it was a tough win, the party rallied around him.  I'm seeing too many Democrats using the old arguments against Obama as a reason to not vote for him.  Those are excuses to hang on to old issues.

If I were to compare the two candidates at the same time I'd have a hard time picking between the two (well, maybe not since I would vote for someone from my home state).


[ Parent ]
not that any of this matters at this point (0.00 / 0)
but there was a couple of major differences in 1992.  The biggest one was that GHWB was seen as a lock in 1991 so the Democratic big guns such as Sam Nunn stayed out of the race in order to save themselves for 1996.  Bill Clinton had to beat also-rans Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown to win the nomination, so experience was not as big of an issue in the primary (obviously it was in the general, but there was a stark difference in policies and of course Perot was helping out).  Plus, as David mentioned, he had plenty of experience at a higher level than Obama (including executive).  During his last few years as Governor, he became head of the DLC and spent several years traipsing across the country building up a national perspective and support base that helped him tremendously.

[ Parent ]
AR vs. IL (5.00 / 1)
I would contend (and remember, I'm from that state) that the affairs of IL are much more complex than the affairs of AR.  AR pretty much runs itself without the governor.  Granted he did some good things in there with regards to education but people long before him (Dale Bumpers and David Pryor to name a few) put that state on autopilot for him.  You can't operate in AR without a balanced budget.  The system doesn't allow it.

He did build a national base of support which I think Obama has done also as US Senator.

Look I'm not trying to elect Bill Clinton here.  I'm just saying the arguments against Obama for experience are weak at best.  If we want to keep dragging down our nominee that's fine.  However, I think we need to have compelling arguments when these things come up.  Debate me all you want amongst the family.  Let's get a good Democratic debate going when we start talking to indepedents and Republicans.  I argued hard for Clinton in 1992 because I thought he was the right person for the country.  I'm going to do the same for Obama this year.

Remember in this debate I haven't even mentioned Sen. Clinton in the discussion nor do I plan ever to from this point forward.  She is currently (barring any changes in the ticket) on track to become a great senior Senator, in line with Sen. Kennedy.


[ Parent ]
I agree with you (5.00 / 1)
the arguments that John McCain will throw at Obama about experience are weak and are designed to distract from the real issues.

One correction: Obama was only in the state senate for 8 years.

Comparing Obama and Clinton's (that is Bill) experience at the state level probably comes out in favor of WJC, but Obama has impressive accomplishment and a pretty solid voting record as a US Senator.

Bottom line: the inexperience line will be thrown at Barack Obama just like it was thrown at Bill Clinton. It didn't stick in 92 and I don't think it will stick now.


[ Parent ]
Perot didn't help (5.00 / 2)
He hurt. An oft misrepresented fact from that election - Republicans have kept that myth alive; Dems shouldn't fall for it. The majority of Perot voters said they would have gone for Clinton, not Bush.

[ Parent ]
Mike is 100% correct (5.00 / 1)
Perot voters would have gone for Clinton or not voted at all.

Mike could not have said it better: don't keep the GOP myth of Perot handing Clinton the election alive.


[ Parent ]
For what it is worth (5.00 / 2)
Here is an analysis from Fair Vote

http://www.fairvote.org/plural...

In a nutshell, Perot took evenly from both sides per this link.

The best case for Bush in the electoral college without Perot was 281-257 in favor of Clinton per Fair Vote

In any case, it is obvious that Clinton would have won in 1992 and 1996 with or without Perot

So I repeat what Mike and David have already said:  
Don't buy into the GOP myth


[ Parent ]
that may be true (0.00 / 0)
if the only function of a candidate in a race is to take votes.  Perot played an important role in agenda-setting that helped shine the light on 12 years of Republican economic stewardship and gave credibility to Clinton's alternative.  Even the voting analysis linked below warns against such facile analysis as simply polling voter's second preference.

btw, Nader claims the same thing about 2000.


[ Parent ]
Nader's lying (0.00 / 0)
Independent polls in Nader's case show most had a Gore 2nd choice. Perot never made any public claims about who he hurt more, in my recollection; the independent polls show it was Clinton (if they show anything; as you note they're not conclusive proof).

[ Parent ]
BTW (0.00 / 0)
I voted for Perot. Not once, but TWICE. The second time after I KNEW he was crazy!

I gave him a lot of credit for being the only candidate willing to stand up to seniors in Florida about Social Security (I remember vividly a caller on the Today show who said she was on a 'fixed income' and wondered why he advocated taxing her social security. Perot's proposal at the time was something like 'make SSI subject to some income tax if your total income is greater than $50K' which is more like $80-$90K in today's dollars). Perot made the excellent point that this old lady likely burned through all of her husband's contributions, plus interest, a LONG time ago, and now she was living off the payroll taxes of the kid flipping her burgers - and, yes, she ought to pay taxes on it (he's paying a lot more taxes than she is with far less income).

But it didn't help that I had a real hard time voting for Clinton because he was going to keep sending young people to jail for doing precisely what he did (drugs). I continue to be frustrated how infrequently people bring up this component of the hypocrisy angle - it's not that they're just SAYING "don't do what I did"; it's that some kid ends up in jail for years for doing it.


[ Parent ]
Burnt Orange Reader

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Poll
Who would you vote for in the Democratic Primary for Ag Commission?
Kinky Friedman
Hank Gilbert

Results

Advertisement

Best of Texas Left
- (Complete Directory)
- A Capitol Blog
- As the Island Floats
- B & B
- Bay Area Houston
- Blue Bloggin
- Bluedaze
- Brains and Eggs
- Capitol Annex
- Collin County Democrats
- Collin County Observer
- Community Forum
- Dog Canyon
- Dos Centavos
- Easter Lemming Liberal
- Eye on Williamson County
- Feet to the Fire
- Greg's Opinion
- Grits for Breakfast
- Half Empty
- Houtopia
- In the Pink Texas
- Kiss My Big Blue Butt
- Letters from Texas
- McBlogger
- Mean Rachel
- Musings
- North Texas Liberal
- Off the Kuff
- Panhandle Truth Squad
- Para Justicia y Libertad!
- Pink Dome
- San Antonio Mayor
- South Texas Chisme
- StoudDemBlog
- Texas Clover Leaf
- Texas Kaos
- The Caucus Blog
- There..Already
- Three Wise Men
Best of Texas Right
- Blogs of War
- BlogHouston
- Boots and Sabers
- Lone Star Times
- Publius TX
- Rick Perry vs the World
- Safety for Dummies
- Slightly Rough
- Urban Grounds
Other Texas Reads
- Burka Blog
- D Magazine
- DOT Show
- Statesman Elections
- Strong Political Analysis
- Texas Monthly
- Texas Observer
- The Texas Blue
- Quorum Report Daily Buzz
Around Austin
- Austin Bloggers
- Austin Chronicle
- Austin Contrarian
- Austin Metblogs
- Austin on Two Wheels
- Austin Real Estate Blog
- Austin Statesman
- Austin Texas Bike Shit Stuff
- Austin Towers
- Austinist
- Capital MetroBlog
- Daily Texan
- Do512
- Downtown Austin Blog
- East Austinite
- Elise Hu
-
Flash Mob Austin
- Keep Austin Blue
- M1EK
- Travis County Democrats
- University Democrats
TX Progressive Orgs
- ACLU Legislative Blog
- Atticus Circle
- Criminal Justice Coalition
- Equality Texas
- Latinos for Texas
- NOW Texas
- PFAW Texas
- Public Citizen
- SEIU Texas
- Tejano Insider
- Texas AFT
- Texas HDCC
- Texas Watch
- TFN
- TSTA
- TSEU
- Texas Young Democrats
- United Ways of Texas
TX Elections/Returns
- TX Returns 1992-present
- TX Media/Candidate List

- Bexar County
- Collin County
- Dallas county
- Denton County
- El Paso County
- Fort Bend County
- Harris County
- Jefferson County
- Tarrant County
- Travis County

- CNN 1998 Returns
- CNN 2000 Returns
- CNN 2002 Returns
- CNN 2004 Returns
- CNN 2006 Returns
- CNN 2008 Returns
Traffic Ratings
- Alexa Rating
- Quantcast Ratings
-
Syndication

Burnt Orange Reporters
Publisher - Karl-Thomas M.
Editor-in-Chief - Matt G.
Staff Writer - David M.
Staff Writer - Katherine H.
Staff Writer - Michael H.
Staff Writer - Todd H.
Man of Mystery - Phillip M.
Founder - Byron L.

Powered by: SoapBlox