TX-SEN: True to Form

[JG]

Surprised no one posted the actual poll:

Cruz 47, Beto 40

From what I can gather this is quite impressive for Beto but not 'Scott Walker "we need to wake up"' impressive. If this was TN or CO or another more elastic state I'd be willing to say Beto is within striking distance. As this is Texas, however, I can't help but think that even a perfect storm would leave Beto 3-4 points short; not because he's somehow inadequate, more because those last few points are particularly sticky for a Texas Dem.

According to a 2012 538 article, Texas and Tennessee are very close in term of elasticity and they are middle of the road compared to the rest of the states. Of course, this may have changed in the past few years.


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/swing-voters-and-elastic-states/

[JG]

Lying Ted Cruz up to his old tricks again:

https://www.twitter.com/TexanTruth42/status/1000838395898232832

Is it me or it's a terrible strategy to get people to fund your campaign?

[JG]

I really really like Beto as a politician, but I feel he might be a terrible fit for Texas. While I don't think red state democrats have to play the republican-lite card, there is a middle between opposing Trump's harmful policies and calling for his impeachement. Even solid blue states progressives senators like Gillibrand or Sanders haven't directly called for Trump's impeachment.

[JG]

I think your conclusion regarding name recognition has merit. I disagree with your conclusion that a strong ad campaign will probably not benefit Senator Cruz though. Videos like this one get the message across very well and shorter versions which follow the same basic themes could be very effective, I think.
https://youtu.be/rLCQJg1x0Hg

Cruz doesn't need to speak in his ads... his voice is a little grating.  That ad has a good backing audio... which he should stick to.

That said- I really think Beto has a much better shot than anyone is giving him... I know that most view winning Texas is fools gold etc... But Beto seems to be catching steam- and more importantly, I think he seems very good at campaigning (his X Factor)- and he will work harder that any other senate candidate in the country (which will make the most of these campaign skills).

I appreciate the comment. Do you think it will be beneficial for Cruz if Trump began to make a concerted effort to retract his criticisms of Cruz which he levied at him during the campaign? In other words, by professing that he was wrong about Cruz during the campaign and saying that since he has been able to work with him and has gotten to know him that Senator Cruz is really the furthest thing from being dishonest or disingenuous. That he was wrong to brand him as "lyin' Ted."

The reason that I ask is that President Trump has a positive popularity rating in Texas and so it does seem to me that a concerted effort from the President on this front could be advantageous for the Cruz campaign. I recognize, of course, that Senator Cruz would probably defeat Trump in an election contest between them in Texas, as he did decisively in the 2016 Republican primary, including with the general electorate, but it does nonetheless seem to me to be something which would be helpful for Cruz in his re-election campaign.

While it could help Cruz, Trump is simply unable to admit he can be wrong. This will never happen.

[JG]

Beto was interviewed on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert last night.

He did all right, I guess. He's very telegenic and came off as sort of adorkable in the first few minutes. That said, he also seemed kinda nervous and snapped into what I assume is his stump speech for most of the interview. He delivered his lines well but seemed like a garden variety politician to my ear. Maybe people from Texas would respond to this sort of thing better?

I agree he did seem pretty nervous, but I think he didn't do bad at all.

[JG]

I like Beto, he’s a good man. But this race was winnable with the right person with the right campaign, I agree with the GOP on that. But Beto and his campaign are not the chosen ones. He’s run as an ultra liberal, and as such, he will pay the price for it tomorrow.

We've seen that most moderates in the South lost because they failed to excite the base. Beto has run on positions supported by a majority of the American people or Texans. All this name calling and slamming is a GOP game because they' ve nothing to run on. Just because DINOs work in WV, that doesn't mean it works in TX as well.

Doug Jones ran a moderate campaign and won against Roy Moore. Archie Parnell ran a moderate campaign in 2017 and nearly beat Ralph Norman. Phil Bredesen has run a moderate campaign and is competitive against Blackburn.

Quist and Thompson didn't and nearly defeated Gianforte and Estes, with margins far more impressive for their districts.

And Ossoff managed to do worse than the run-off after running such a campaign.

Also, Jones ran a distinctly leftist campaign. Try again.

Montana has a strange thing for Democrats at the bottom of the ticket, so Quist isn’t surprising. All of these candidates outperformed 2016. No surprise.

Ossoff was overhyped from the beginning so the national attention was gonna turn out Republicans against him.

Jones didn’t run a leftist campaign lmao. He literally ran an ad about an Alabama Confederate General and called him brave (and brogressives lost their scheiß over it). You’re just saying he ran leftist because he actually won and progressives want to take credit for it. Try again.

Well, while he certainly didn't run as a Warren or Sanders-like progressive, he certainly ran as a fairly mainstream liberal in the mold of Kaine. The way he campaigned is certainly to the left of a moderate like Donnelly or Manchin (unlike his voting record which is clearly moderate).