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.

Texas Senators Gallegos, Van de Putte Call Out DSCC on Noriega Race


by: Phillip Martin

Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 09:49 AM CST


I loved this.

Texas State Senators Mario Gallegos (D - Houston) and Leticia Van de Putte (D - San Antonio) wrote a strongly worded letter to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, criticizing them for their lack of support for Rick Noriega in his recently completed race against John Cornyn and urging them to drastically improve their attention towards Latinos in Texas.

From their statement (click here for the PDF):

We are offended by the lack of investment in Texas, specifically the lack of institutional support given to our colleague and friend Rick Noriega in the recent United States Senate campaign. The heat of election night had not cooled before the speculation began about DSCC support for several Anglo candidates in future races. This is not only disrespectful, it’s shameful. [...]

Chairman Schumer, when speaking at a 2007 Texas fundraising event in San Antonio you said, “The eyes of Texas are upon us, but the eyes of the DSCC are upon Texas.” During this same event, you also alluded to the fact that the DSCC considers Texas to be in play as a possible pickup state, noting that it would take $15 million to run a full-fledged campaign against Cornyn.

Institutions such as the DSCC continually raise millions from Texas contributors for the benefit of Democrats across the country. Texas Democrats, especially Rick Noriega, did not benefit from Texans’ generosity. Yet, in the 2002 race between the Democratic nominee Ron Kirk and candidate John Cornyn, the DSCC spent $4.5 million on ads in support of Kirk. Kirk was able to garner 43% of the vote. Rick Noriega was able to garner 43% of the vote in his race against Cornyn, the incumbent, without any financial support from the DSCC. If just half of the amount spent on Kirk had been invested in the Noriega campaign, we might well be discussing the transition of the first Latino US Senator from Texas. [...]

The DSCC’s decision is shameful and disgraceful, and we will do everything we can to prevent this disrespect from happening again. For the face of the US Senate to represent the true face of America, we must all work together to invest in quality candidates such as Rick Noriega, not take a walk when our candidate is not a member of the millionaires club.

We have invested in Texas, and will continue to do so. Please consider joining us in investing in these efforts as well.

Senator Leticia Van de Putte is head of the Texas Senate Democratic Caucus, served as Co-Chair to the Democratic National Convention in 2008, and is former President of the National Conference of State Legislatures. Senator Mario Gallegos, a true hero to his community, is most famous and remembered for defying doctor's orders and, after receiving a liver transplant, set up a bed just outside the Senate chamber in order to stop partisan-driving voter suppression legislation (the "voter ID" laws) in 2007.

Needless to say, they are two heavy hitters who should have the full attention of the DSCC. The recent announcement that John Sharp will run for U.S. Senate -- with implicit backing from the DSCC -- no doubt sparked the letter, in part.

The letter raises a serious point for Democrats -- how to capitalize on our growing Hispanic demographic in the state. It clearly takes a large investment of money, something the DSCC refused to do in 2008. The letter (which should be read in full) details how the DSCC sent $4.5 million for Ron Kirk in 2002 -- yet Kirk got the same percentage of the vote as Noriega did, and Noriega didn't get a dime.

In the Houston Chronicle story this morning, Noriega was quoted as follows:

Noriega said he was unaware of plans by Gallegos and Van de Putte to write the letter.

After being shown a copy, he said, "I am honored by their support and believe that their comments speak to a larger issue than a single election, or one individual, but rather an issue that affects all of Texas."

Noriega is absolutely correct on that. In their letter, Van de Putte and Gallegos point out the work they and the Texas Democratic Party has done in recent years to earn the trust of Hispanic families:

We are doing our part. The Texas Democratic Party and key allied groups spent illions of dollars in support of Democratic efforts in Texas. In the election which just concluded, our voter contact efforts included over 2.2 million pieces of direct mail and 1.4 million phone calls. Over 25 percent of our efforts were aimed squarely at Latino households.

In Harris County alone (Houston), 70,000 Latinos were targeted, receiving 5 mail pieces and 6 GOTV calls. In Dallas County, we used direct support for Sheriff Lupe Valdez, the only Latina sheriff in the United States, as a driving force to turn out Latino voters across the county, to the benefit of the entire Democratic ticket.

The DSCC and other Washington insiders trumpet the line that Texas is such an expensive state, they'd rather spend money on states that would get them more Senators for equal or less money. I don't buy it. It took Democrats tens of millions of dollars to win in Florida in 2008, and they aren't even assured that there is a growing base of support in the state.

However, an investment in Texas -- and specifically in the Hispanic communities throughout Texas (not just along the border, but in North Texas and the greater Houston area) would tremendously boost the Texas Democratic Party. Not only would we have more and better Democrats at local levels, we could regain some statewide seats that creates a stronger bench for our state, more Democratic Congressman in the U.S. House, and 34 electoral votes that, if won, would guarantee an election.

Senators Van de Putte and Gallegos demonstrated true leadership by issuing such an honest assessment of the facts regarding Texas politics and how Washington decision-makers view the Hispanic community in Texas. Here's hoping their letter makes some waves up north.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Van de Putte for U.S. Senate! (0.00 / 0)
She would be great and I don't think her state senate seat is up until 2012.

She's be one hell of a better candidate than Sharp. (3.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Did I hear a rumor on that this afternoon? (0.00 / 0)
I was listening to Texas Public Radio and I thought I heard her name mentioned in the list of Democrats possibly filing for that seat. Granted it was when I wasn't paying that much attention but I swear I heard Sharp and then her name mentioned in the same story.

[ Parent ]
Much too polite... (0.00 / 0)
The state and local parties bear just as much "responsibility" but of course Gallegos and van de Putte have to be careful about stepping on the state and local toes so they are being politically polite. Too polite.

There is something wrong when Arthur Schechter brings in Bill Clinton to raise funds for a race for a state office instead of a race for a national office.  

The problem with Rick Noriega is he's his own man. Not someones "boy" and of course that explains why he is not on the Clinton list for a cabinet position in the Obama adminstration. Which to some really is just another Clinton administration. With the exception of Paul Volker who probably won't last - he doesn't serve the people the Clintons serve.  


Yes, but (0.00 / 0)
There's some truth to the complaint, but it's overstated, and the comparison to 2002 is off the mark. That was the year of the "dream team", and everybody thought that Sharp was going to beat Dewhurst and that Kirk had a good chance at the open senate seat. Of course the DSCC sank money into the race, but when they saw that Kirk got trounced they wished they hadn't.

This year it was the opposite. Everybody thought that Texas way totally out of reach and the DSCC planned accordingly. Schumer did his job -- electing as many Democratic Senators as possible this year -- pretty darn well.

The real problem is that the DSCC is designed to think only about the next election. We needed more investment in Texas, not because we could win this year (we couldn't), but because it would help us win next time, or the time after. The DNC understood this (thank you, Howard Dean!) and sent resources our way. No, not as much as they tapped from Texas, but meaningful seed money all the same. Ditto for the Obama campaign. But the DSCC and DCCC are locked into short-term planning, and are useless in Texas.

This isn't about bias against Hispanics, or against Texans, or about Rick Noriega being seen as too independent. It's about changing the national campaign committee structure.

As for 2010, I can only guess that they like that Sharp is self-financed and would be a solid but inexpensive sacrificial lamb if overall trends don't go our way. 'Cause he's not our strongest candidate if things do go our way.  


"Everybody thought that Texas way totally out of reach"? (0.00 / 0)
Que pasa con eso, kemosabe?

Don't let the Blue Dogs getcha down. Primary them.

[ Parent ]
State and local parties did more with all they had (0.00 / 0)
In response to BS's comment above, the Senators' point is that the state and local parties raised and spent more this cycle than they had in a long time to turn out the base. In fact, I think their letter probably understated some of the contributions and voter contact effort undertaken by TDP.

Obviously, TDP, local parties and most of us know that more must be done, and we'll have to raise the funds and build an organization over the next two years to make statewide victories possible. But we've taken big steps the last two cycles, and it's time for our national leaders to do their part. Just a little follow through from national party leaders would lend credibility to our efforts to get national donors from Texas to play here in Texas and help us reach that next goal.

Just today, Texas Republican pollster David Hill wrote a column observing that Texas is hardly the reddest state, and suggested that demographic and political trends may make it impossible for Republicans to win statewide after 2014 unless they change their political approach. To the extent a letter like this one from two great Democratic State Senators wakes up Washington and shakes them out of their "Texas is just too expensive" perception, we should be thankful that they are speaking up. Given the possibilities, Texas should be too big a prize for the national Dems to pass up, especially with the resources available now with control of the White House and Congress.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: getreal @ Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 01:45 PM CST
[ Reply ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: you @ soon
To post this comment click here:  

Otherwise click cancel.

You must enter a subject for your comment


Texas is a big prize (0.00 / 0)
When you have an economy as large as Texas and as much human resources as can be tapped in Texas it makes sense from a national perspective to invest in Texas politics. Unfortunately too many have written the state off in their minds. It has been the hard work of people like Sens. Van De Putte and Gallegos as well as the grassroots efforts in our communities that have started to change that perspective.

Texas will never be a CA, NY or IL (well, I don't think I ever want to be an IL until they get that mess straightened up) but we can show that Texas is in play. We need to make the national teams understand that this state has the resources to offer to the national effort PROVIDED you grow the local resources. When we truly believe that the DNC, the DSCC, and other groups are taking Texas seriously then the seeds planted by our local leaders will start to take deep root and grow.

Until then we're just a place to get money and people for other purposes. Thank you Sens. Van De Putte and Gallegos for calling attention to this issue.


There's more to the story (5.00 / 1)
1) I am not proud of the letter sent by Sen. Van de Putte and Sen. Gallegos saying we needed Noriega because we needed a HIspanic. Supporting Noriega due to race as the primary reason is wrong. Supporting Noriega because he was right on the issues and a great leader is correct.

2) The DSCC has the job of recruiting candidates and aiding candidates. The DSCC did not win a race for any single candidate. There was not a race that was "uncompetitive" before the DSCC came to the rescue. Yes, they recruited many of the candidates that ran this cycle, but most of these candidates did not start to far behind in the hole. Franken, Merckly, Begich, and Hagen made their races close through hard work. Noriega never made his race close.

3) If Noriega can not race the cash on his own to compete, why should the DSCC bail him out and spend a disproportionate amount of cash in 19 media market Texas when Jeff Merckly is already tied in Oregon. There's a bang for the buck aspect here.

4) What about the other good candidates that got snubbed? Where's the cries for Kleeb (NE) and Rice (OK). Both were great candidates, but got no DSCC love.

The DSCC is there to HELP win races, not to win them for candidates. Noriega didn't make the race close, and the DSCC is not there to be mom or dad and do it for him. The DSCC eventually disappeared from Maine, a state that they had hope for due to high numbers for Obama because Allen wasn't getting himself across the line. The closest race they were playing in and lost come election day was Mississippi where Dem lost 55-45, better than Noriega but with a candidate who had won statewide AND is one of the cheapest states in the nation to advertise in.

In short, before blaming the DSCC, blame Noriega for not finding his $15 million, cause Cornyn found his and then some.


Investment vs. silence (0.00 / 0)
I don't think the senators were screaming and hollering about the lack of support but there are trying to wake some people up at the national level. Personally I'm getting tired of national people begging me for money in states I don't give a flip about. You think a senator from Oregon is going to fight for Texas issues? Give me a freaking break.

Granted they need to be wise in their use of the money but quit coming into this state and begging for me to go someplace else or send money elsewhere and not even darken our doors for God sake. Honestly every time I get a letter from an out of state candidate I toss it and contribute locally.

I think the issue is investment in this state's Democratic resources to grow them for bigger things. At least Clinton saw that in Cisneros. It looks like the best we're going to get out of this administration is Sec. of the Navy. Yes it's a critical position and I hope Rep. Garcia gets it but we're starting to run out of categories. Honestly I feel like Texas has moved into the secondary Emmy awards now. You know, best music for an animal documentary shown on the Animal Planet.


[ Parent ]
What about Hillary? (0.00 / 0)
Do you have any idea how much the Clintons, Hillary in particular, have pulled out of Texas without putting a dime back in?  They are exactly what Gallegos and van de Putte are talking about.  The money goes out, the money does not come back in.  The people raising the money for the Clintons have NEVER raised the money for state candidates that the state candidates needed.  

[ Parent ]
I thought Bill and Hillary (3.00 / 1)
held events for Noriega?

in Dallas and in the Valley?

Didn't Bill say that he was disappointed that Noriega wasn't getting the support he needed. and if Im not mistaken Hillary fundraised for Noriega in the SouthValley and even sent out a email to her on-line list to get people to donate to Noriega.

Seems like you got your facts all shook up. The Clintons came back to TX for Noriega, no one else did.


[ Parent ]
How out of touch are you? (3.00 / 1)
Repeatedly saying something does not make it true.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton held fundraising events for Noriega.

Bill Clinton held a fundraiser for Chris Bell. The fact that a former president raised money for a state senate race is probably unprecedented.

Both the Clintons came to Texas during their presidency to raise money for Texas Democratic candidates.

Its time to put this stuff to rest. In a year where a lot of national Dems ignored Texas, the Clintons did their part.


[ Parent ]
Allocation of resources (5.00 / 1)
The DSCC did the right thing. Getting money from Texans and
putting it on races that are winnable was the smart thing.
Rick never had a chance. He was a great stalking horse though.

[ Parent ]
Those other candidates (0.00 / 0)
Oh, and the other candidates you mention? Other states remember. Let their state senators and reps raise some ruckus about them. I'm glad our folks stood up for us.

[ Parent ]
Other candidates/states did not raise a ruckus or whine (3.00 / 1)
they won their elections.  That is the name of the game.

Here, we are about excuses.  Every other Texas organization I am part of that is part of a national organization takes pride in its self-sufficiency.  We are Texas, after all.  We are supposed to be big and take care of business.  Candidates here can take advantage of the same large donor base that out-of-state campaigns are accessing.  However, our party keeps crying to the national party.  This is behavior I would expect from a small state with few resources.  Not Texas.

The DSCC's job is to increase the number of Democratic US Senators.  This year, the increase was from 51 to 58 (with one more still pending).  I won't argue with those results.


[ Parent ]
Not sure where this is going (3.00 / 1)
and personally don't care any more. I guess I have hit a frustration point with some Ds and their approach to this problem. This year in Texas we seemed to have the most fractured statewide approach to races along with somewhat of a snub from the national campaign that we ended up with mixed results.

Honestly this should have been the year you could have been shooting fish in a barrel because of all the screw-ups the Rs had on their watch. People were frustrated and still are. Even the Rs are frustrated with their own performance. In it all we still have mixed results. Noriega ran as good of a campaign as I think he could have. Granted he had some message issues but still he was running against a senator who was probably the most aligned with Bush out of the entire Senate. I mean the guy was a lapdog to Bush and still is.

After its all over we end up with the idiot governor in IL who as of this point has yet to resign. I mean, read the dang transcripts or maybe he doesn't seem to think that's bad. The word I heard today in one analysis was "sure there were statements but did a senator get appointed as a result of the conversations?" That whole family was screwed up.

Fortunately I'm represented by a great US rep, a great state senator, and a great TX rep. I also have good ties to two other great state reps. I have a great mayor but a lousy council member. My county judge is good but now his idiot R son sits on the commissioners court with him. How screwed up can that be? I'm stuck with an idiot and a hairdo for US senators but that's a statewide issue. In a little over a month one of the worst presidents in history is about to come back to Dallas and set up shop and a library. Why Dallas? Because his wife hates the freaking ranch, as if it was a great PR experience for them.

The senators are hacked off because there really is no strategy for winning and keeping Hispanics engaged. Obama ran a damn good campaign, one that will go down as textbook. Many mediocre candidates rode that coat tail. Don't even think it was because we had our act together in the DNC. We bickered and fought in the precincts, the SD and county conventions, and finally at the state convention. I've lost faith in my SDEC rep because of her behavior leading to the state convention and don't get me started about some of the "old guard" here in Bexar County.

I'm sorry but after reading some of your comments I wonder why I should ever support another race outside my locality or presidency any more. It's like "screw Texas" because that's just the way it is. "50 States" was a great marketing term that came out of a high paid consultants mouth. But it never really was reality. Folks Obama had $30M left in the bank after it was all over. That's $30M that wasn't spent even after the extravagant events in Denver and Chicago - in a recessionary year.

So when I get frustrated I go over and read the Rs blogs that I track through Google Reader just to see what they're saying. Freaky! That brings me back another day to fight for what is right, even if I sit in the neglected state.

Sorry for the long rant but some of the comments on this thread made me feel like we are eating our young.

Okay. Deep breath. Adequately vented. Back to your sanity. Thanks for your patience with me on this.


Thanks for the perspective... (0.00 / 0)
Actually, in spite of comment above, which I stand by, I am cautiously optimistic.

Here is the question -- what is the state party's strategy with regards to the state races?  I'm asking this as a serious question -- I'm not being sarcastic.  I don't know the answer.

In 2006, it was made clear that state legislative races were the focus.  To be honest, the state party completely ignored the state races.  

Now two years later, in 2008, I imagine the state party did more for Rick Noriega.  Can someone define what this was.  Again, I'm being serious -- my apologies for being ignorant, but I didn't see it here in Northeast Texas

Based on the importance given to the 2006 races within the Texas Democratic Party, why would DSCC be confident about getting involved in the 2008 race.  Did that much change in 2 years?  And what was being done in Texas to encourage that confidence?

I am not necessarily disagreeing with the state party's priorities.  But if the state party does not look at statewide races as a top priority, why should anybody else outside of Texas?  We haven't won a statewide in a long time (I think 1994).  So why would the DSCC be encouraged by this and give money.

As has been noted earlier in the thread, the DSCC is not designed to be the fund-raising operation for a candidate.  The candidate has to raise the bulk of his or her money on their own.  The DSCC provides money in races that they see as close or where they see that the donation will be enough to put the Democrat over the top to win.  This isn't anything new.

Finally, with respect to Hispanic outreach, I don't recall the Texas Democratic Party making this a priority until a couple of years ago.  It was long overdue, and I was shocked it took as long as it did.  But hey -- better late than never.


[ Parent ]
Statewide strategy? (0.00 / 0)
I think the strategy was to use Noriega as a face to persuadable voters to vote straight ticket. It was "check out this solid candidate running for senate, we're all just like him!"

However, I also believe that strategy was limited to areas with large urban populations (Harris, Dallas, Bexar) the valley, and areas with top state house seats.

I dunno, unless Bill White runs for anything in 2010 I think the strategy will be to finish off the last few Rs in Dallas, Continue wiping through Harris (and the 1st and 14th Court of Appeals), convincing Bexar county voters to hit straight Dem and get complete control of county govt, getting those last seats for control of the state house, AND if we're lucky a state senate seat or two will be targeted along with Fort Bend County will be heavily targeted with some efforts beginning to flow into Tarrant county.

Just my guesses for 2010 and what we will see, State House races will be most important (again) unless something amazing happens to a statewide race.

Once we got the urban areas firing on all cylinders for us the statewide stuff should being to play out nicely (2014?)


[ Parent ]
Valid questions (5.00 / 1)
I think you have some valid questions on how the state party attacked these races. We made gains but one has to ask was that a result of a strategy or all boats rising?

I'd be interested to hear from some of the others in here what they saw.


[ Parent ]
A casual look at the results (0.00 / 0)
seems to indicate that Obama's results and Norieiga's were very similar (Obama losing 55-44 and Noriega losing 55-43).

The judicial results vary a little more (both numbers and margin) but not too much.

Personally, I think "all boats rising" is a big part of it.

I felt that Obama drove the overall results.  I think straight ticket voting was a big factor in this.

To me, if Noriega was driving the results, he would have had a better to chance to win.  That was the necessary dynamic.  But it didn't seem to work out that way.

In Virginia and North Carolina -- states Obama won -- the results for the US Senate candidates were better than Obama's results.  Plus, in both states, Democrats won races in the years leading up to the 2008 presidential election.



[ Parent ]
I feel like this hasn't been said (2.00 / 1)
so I may just be wrong, but am I the only one that thinks John Cornyn actually ran a good campaign?

Compare to Rick Perry who was all sorts of over the map and ridiculous with his ads.  I mean, Cornyn had slip ups and we had opportunities to pounce, and there was the whole Bush albatross around his neck, but the guy who embodies Washington cronyism and Bush lapdogism somehow managed to run a campaign against Washington.

Aside from his moron staffer that posted on here, his staff was good on the campaign fundamentals and had a crack rapid response operation that was in my inbox, on my newspaper blogs and on my TV within hours of something happening.  He knew how much money he needed to raise and how much he needed to spend and how much of a sap he needed to be on TV and how he needed to not say the word macaca.  And he did it all.

We knew over a year ago that this was going to be an uphill battle and that even if we ran a top notch campaign we might still need a little magic (rape joke, macaca, felony conviction, something) from the other side to put us over the edge.  I guess I'm saying that Cornyn didn't screw up enough to give up his seat.  It sucks and now he's a partisan attack dog on top of the meager Republican caucus.  He'll spend the next six years throwing wrenches into good government bills instead of working to get things done for Texas.  The hypocrisy isn't lost on me, but he was successfully able to campaign one way and govern another.

I mean honestly, he sat on my TV, standing next to cows and said "things in Washington shouldn't be this way."  Then he flew back to Washington on November 5th, became the top Washington consultant for Republican Senators, and kept doing things the same way as before.  Any guy that can do that with a straight face is a damn good campaigner/politician/liar.

I don't know how you beat someone like that, but a token contribution from the DSCC wouldn't have hurt.


to clarify (0.00 / 0)
I realize that kind of came off as rambling.  I guess I'm saying it's ok to have our catharsis as we gear up for (sigh) another senatorial campaign years out from the election, but in addition to complaining about everything our side did wrong can we at least admit that the other side did a lot of things right?

[ Parent ]
Well I mean (0.00 / 0)
I sort of agree with the letter.

When it comes down to it, if Noriega had the money we would have won.

Now why we got ignored is not at all understood, polls showed us competitive with Cornyn so I wouldn't say that it was a lost hope to supply funds into it. It is curious to see the DSCC supporting Sharp when just a couple of weeks ago they largely ignored the state, and I tend to agree with the assessment that its disrespectful to say the least.

Now speaking as a Hispanic, I did want to see Noriega become senator largely because I thought he was perfect for the job, he would have represented TX well but the fact that he would have been the first Hispanic sentaor from TX was icing on the cake. Noriega's election race was like Obama's, it would have symbolized change not just on a political basis but a cultural one as well.

Honestly, I just think people are afraid of the challenge that TX poses [we have lots of organizational work to be done]. Florida is huge but we are pouring money into it, we need to apply the 50 state strategy regardless of what challenges we face in the state, that includes TX. I agree that its not fair that we get dissed time and time again. Im disappointed. we could have done so much more, the DSCC could have done so much more. This was our shot to bring change to TX and we blew it.


Florida gets money (0.00 / 0)
because the state is very close and actually has a Democratic US Senator

If Republicans were winning by 10-15 points every year, the national money would dry up.  It is up to the state parties to become competitive, not rely on handouts


[ Parent ]
we got to start somewhere (0.00 / 0)
lets not disqualify ourselves from resources because on a more general level we dont have democrats in office. Democrats have strongholds in every major metro area, in the east, south, west and north.  We are gaining every time we run, we are showing that we can make progress. Progress that could be advanced if more time and money went into it. Obviously we're not looking for a handout but a handup when the right candidate comes along, when the chances of us winning are there.

My resoning as to why the state party is not competitive is due to organization, that being said why should Texas democrats or rather Texans at the most basic level have to suffer because of that. The DSCC could have stepped up and done what they could but they didn't and thats fine, it only affects Texans in the long run.

No skin off their back, just keep sending them cash so that they never return the favor.

Secondly, the 50 state strategy is about putting resources into red states [not just traditional dem states] in hopes they will become bluer, thats what us donors have been told. I guess they forgot.  


[ Parent ]
Reality check (0.00 / 0)
Barbara Radnovsky got 36% of the vote in '06. A state rep. that no one outside of the Houston area decides to run for
Senate in '08. A sitting US Senator with a giant war chest of cash. Outside of a few metro areas this state is red. And people are angry that the DSCC didn't throw money
into Texas. Lay off the hydro. You twist perception, reality won't budge.

[ Parent ]
we have to do the job first (0.00 / 0)
"My resoning as to why the state party is not competitive is due to organization, that being said why should Texas democrats or rather Texans at the most basic level have to suffer because of that."

______

Well, those problems have to be solved before worrying about what the national people will do.



[ Parent ]
DSCC was correct (0.00 / 0)
Despite how much we all like Noriega, his operations were fundamentally flawed in very serious ways.  And, unlike other states, there was no strong state party-driven coordinated campaign to play safety valve.

Bad campaign, no plan to win, no strong state party?

That doesn't quite meet the funding standard in a cycle where we're trying to win 60 seats nationally.

White, Sharp or anyone else is going to need to prioritize getting a solid framework in place before the nationals are going to seriously consider big money for a senate race.

The challenges we face cannot be addressed by demographics (we've been hearing that argument for 6 years).  They can only be addressed by doing the basics that every successful state party in the country does: develop a farm team, raise money, coordinate campaign efforts, look for new ways to exercise and communicate our values year-round (especially with legislative efforts, interim studies, task forces, etc).


Mobile Blog Reader - powered by Notice Orange

Burnt Orange Reader

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Poll
Which of the following do you think will win in November?
Bill White
Linda Chavez Thompson
Barbara Ann Radnofsky
Hector Uribe
Hank Gilbert
Jeff Weems
Jim Sharp
Bill Moody
Blake Bailey
Keith Hampton
None

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
- Grading Texas
- 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
- 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