A standard of any campaign is atttempting to get milage out of the "debate over debates" issue. Will incumbent X refuse to debate candidate Z? Why? Are they afraid of their record or the issues? What do they have to hide?
It's the same for every campaign in any district in any state. In general, if an incumbent is secure, they blow off their opponents, if not, they are obligated to debate. It's partially a sign of the how much of a real battle races are as well as the feelings and mood of those already in office. There are good and bad ways to accept or deny debates.
Clever ways? Rick Perry- by accepting one gubernatorial debate the weekend of the UT-OU football game, when no one will watch, and every radio station will be covering that or high school football. He accepts one, disarms calls for more debates, and ensures that the debate doesn't change his status in the race.
Stupid responses? John Carter by declining in such a manner that makes him look like a huge prick.
But Carter, as the incumbent, typically has less to gain in responding to Harrell than he has to lose. Carter has said repeatedly he won’t get into full “political mode” until October, after Congress adjourns.
However, in a previous interview this summer, Carter went a step further, saying that Harrell or any other challenger aren’t guaranteed the chance to debate him, despite their candidate status.
"People earn the right to debate me," Carter said in the interview. "I will determine how and not them."
Asked what would qualify someone for a debate, Carter said “credibility."
Then again, Rep. Carter has a history of making stupid statements to allow his opponent Mary Beth Harrell to respond effectively.
(Today's case would not have happened without the Voting Rights Act. Matt does a good job at pointing out the connections and why we must fight Texas Republicans that stand in the way of getting the VRA renewed. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
Hours ago, the Unites States Supreme Court released their ruling in the Texas Redistricting case. It was a strong statement in support of hundreds of thousands of voters in the most diverse parts of the state.
In a time where less Texans are insured, education is failing, and the culture of corruption is sweeping our nation, it is troubling to have the court rule FOR an incumbent protection plan. With no test in place and no restrictions, state legislatures can legally choose to ignore the plight of children and seniors, teachers and doctors, veterans and first responders, and waste time by constantly changing the boundaries of a political district.
The High Court made it clear that political gerrymandering is legal and acceptable as long as voters have their rights protected. The court was troubled by the simple fact that in Congressional District 23 over 100,000 Latino voters were thrown into a new district to protect the incumbent Republican and weaken the voting power of the minority.
Currently the Voting Rights Act (VRA) is in jeopardy and the House of Representatives has refused to protect the civil rights of every American.
I thought that was the only way we'd ever get the local Austin paper to cover my Congressional race - if we could prove that my opponent, the incumbent Republican Congressman, John Carter was an alien. Nope, turns out he's only been marooned on Mars - and that was exposed by a Houston paper first.
So does that make him an illegal alien? ah, sweet irony... But I digress.
(John's in the top five! Let's keep voting him, and keep him there. Remember: order matters now folks. Let's keep 3 Texans in the Top 5 by voting the strategic ballot below! Voting is closed end of today... - promoted by Phillip Martin)
Let me just first say thank you for all you have done.
You have been part of a spirited contest for Party Chairman and now stories are being written across Texas about the unity that has resulted with Chris Bell hiring Glen Maxey to manage Field.
You have been part of the Texas Progressive Blog Alliance push to Activate ActBlue in Texas so every candidate can fundraise online and we can help them.
You have been part of Mark Warner's MapChangers contest and while we are not done yet, you have helped get Chris Bell and now Barbara Radnofsky into the Top 5!
In the next 2 days, you can show how 'relevent' Texas Democrats are, again, by helping to bump John Courage up a notch and into that 5th spot on the Map Changers contest.
The unified support of Texans across campaigns has made this happen at each step. Please vote and take information like the following into consideration.
Dear Fellow Texans,
Many of you have received emails or seen blog posts asking for votes for the Texan slate of candidates in the Mark Warner Mapchanger contest.
Thanks to the Texas Unity ticket, Chris Bell and Barbara Radnofsky have gotten into the Top 5, and appear poised to bring $5,000 to both of their campaigns. It appears they are secure to remain in the top five!
John Courage (TX-21) is sitting RIGHT OUTSIDE of the Top 5. We have an opportunity to bring another $5,000 to Texas if we can get him into that 5th slot. We also want to ensure that Chris and Barbara stay where they are. If John gets into the Top 5, we will have a unique "Texas Triple Crown" with not only having three candidates in the Top 5 of THIS contest, but it will make John Courage the Democracy for America Grassroots All-Star, the Feingold Progressive Patriot, and a Warner Mapchanger.
NOTE: This is instant runoff voting. If you don't put these candidates in this order, you can actually push John further down the list instead of into the top five. We are very confident from the rumors we've heard that Bell and Radnofsky are secure in the top five and that John is just below the bar.
The ideal ballot would be in this order (it only takes a second to vote) to show the country that Texas is more purple than it is red:
1st Vote: John Courage TX-21
2nd Vote: Ted Ankrum TX-10
3rd Vote: Mary Beth Harrell TX-31
4th Vote: Chris Bell TX-GOV
5th Vote: Barbara Radnofsky TX-SEN
Please take a minute out of your day and vote THIS all-Texan ballot by clicking here.
Democratically yours,
Glen Maxey
P.S.--You can also make a huge difference by telling your friends. You can easily do this by clicking here:
You can actually cast a Texas only slate in the Western column in round 2 of Mark Warners MapChangers contest (winner getting $5k from the Forward Together PAC) as there are 5 candidates. This was my ballot. I have to give major props to the Warner people, this tech stuff is awesome.
My MapChangers
WEST
TX-21 John Courage
Because Bush needs a brain, Cheney needs a heart, and Congress needs Courage!
Over at MyDD, a call went out for thoughts on candidates to consider adding to national Netroots Endorsed list. What started as a short comment, turned into a very long and detailed post which I have decided to post here in its entirety. Realize that these thoughts are meant for a national scale. Candidate that I don't argue for particular national focus, are ones that I am very much behind for garnering in state attention. So if you want to have some insight into how this blogger thinks, read on...
So let's talk Congressional seats.
Even though it is 2006, this will only have been the 2nd time that we have used the current map as Texas was victim to the DeLay re-redistricting scheme (the 2000, 2002, and 2004 maps were all different). Since 2004, Bush has become less popular in the state, as has the Republican Governor (drawing 2 independents in the race which may alter some downballot turnout).
We have 32 Congressional seats.
-21 Republican
-11 Democratic (counting Cuellar)
There are Democrats running in 31 of the 31 seats (with my hometown district of TX-11 going empty). The only Democrat with any serious challenge is Chet Edwards, last of the Blue Dogs that hung on in the 2002 'DeLay scrubbing' that knocked off 4 other incumbent Dems, which combined with the Party switch of Ralph Hall and the retirement of Democrat Jim Turner give us a list of seats that I describe as "if we can't win with scads of $$ and incumbent Congressmen, we ain't gonna win them with less money and the people put up this year". (which is why I look to areas we didn't fight for as hard last time where we have better candidates, changing demographics, and a less competition for dollars).
Let's look at the 4 seats we lost in 2004 and what we have this year, none of which I'd nominate for a national netroots candidate.
TX-1 Gohmert (Sandlin loss) - Roger Owen (crazy) TX-2 Poe (Lampson loss) - Gary Binderim (Dos has a report) TX-19 Neugebauer (Stenholm loss) - Robert Ricketts (even Stenholm lost by 58%) TX-32 Sessions (Frost loss) - Will Pryor (this was the most expensive race in 2004, over $8 mil, though Pryor is a good candidate and best of this bunch with some actual cash)
Outside of these, there are a select few candidates who have received netroots coverage among the Texas bloggers, then after that a smaller set that have maintained active fundraising in districts that are actually winnable.
Courage and Harris are Band of Brothers members. Harrell has a son in Iraq. Sklar is one of the few Dems to get the Texas Ag related endorsements.
Of these four though, Harrell is on the weak side of fundraising, and as of a couple of weeks ago, was still hunting around for a campaign manager. I fear that the netroots presence over at Kos that the campaign has built is about the only thing built, and little has changed about the district that makes an already difficult seat easier to pick up.
Of the remaining three, Harris (certainly engaged in the netroots as well) seems to have lagged behind in fundraising in comparison to Courage and Sklar as well, though the Net Neutrality issue seems to have raised the profile of his opponent Joe Barton of late, though I'm not sure if that is enough.
That leaves Sklar and Courage, probably our top two netroots targets among Texas bloggers. I will now attempt to run them through the 3 points given in this post. read on...
