TX-SEN 2018: McCaul courted to primary Cruz

[RogueBeaver]

Not ruling it out for now.

[Heisenberg]

Oh, please, please do it McCaul. He'll be termed out of his post as House Homeland Security Committee Chairman by then, so not much to lose. He's very wealthy, and could unite Trumpists, Establishment R's, Pragmatic/Contructive R's, and perhaps a small number of Cruzists who are disaffectioned. Please, I hope he does it and wins.

[Suburbia]

McCaul could beat Cruz. He is wealthy, and the Chamber of Commerce donors could support him over Cruz. He represents the Austin to Houston suburban area and lives in the wealthy suburbs near Austin. He could make it competitive. I don't know if Joaquin or Julian Castro can beat McCaul in a demographic-changing Texas.

[Green Line]

Endorsed.

[Heisenberg]

McCaul could beat Cruz. He is wealthy, and the Chamber of Commerce donors could support him over Cruz. He represents the Austin to Houston suburban area and lives in the wealthy suburbs near Austin. He could make it competitive. I don't know if Joaquin or Julian Castro can beat McCaul in a demographic-changing Texas.

They couldn't. True, maybe they could get a bump by turning out Hispanics (and getting them to vote for them), but Texas has few swing voters, and I doubt they'd get many Cruz 2012/Abbott 2014 voters to flip. Texas Hispanics have been far more Conservative than they are nationally. For example, TX-27 is 59% minority, yet R+13. Bush, Perry, Cornyn, Cruz, etc. usually get 40% or so of the Hispanic vote. I bet Trump this year gets fewer Texas Hispanic voters than McCain/Romney, but after, patterns revert to how they were before Trump. Texas won't become competitive until 2030 or so. Period.

[Maxwell]

Called it!

[IceSpear]

Cruz will be re-elected. If Hillary wins, Trump will go under the bus so fast it'll make your head spin, and he will look prescient/be vindicated. If Trump wins, nobody will care enough to vote him out 2 years later since everything turned out fine anyway.

[SATW]

I support Ted Cruz.

[evergreenarbor]

I endorse McCaul in the primary, just because I really hate Ted Cruz.

[Indy Texas]

There aren't any credible Democrats who can win that seat in 2018, so I would enthusiastically support McCaul in the primary.

[Vosem]

Cruz endorsed; not out of any great love for Cruz's ideology (especially since McCaul is probably closer to me), but out of respect for going to the Quicken Loans and poking all the Trumpies in the nose.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Cruz endorsed; not out of any great love for Cruz's ideology (especially since McCaul is probably closer to me), but out of respect for going to the Quicken Loans and poking all the Trumpies in the nose.

Agree with everything except the crossed-out part (they're both ideologically unacceptable to me obviously).

[Green Line]

Cruz endorsed; not out of any great love for Cruz's ideology (especially since McCaul is probably closer to me), but out of respect for going to the Quicken Loans and poking all the Trumpies in the nose.

He also enabled Trump for months and refused to attack him while Trump was gathering strength.  That is unforgiveable.  He's more responsible for Trump than anyone else.

[Orser67]

That would be a nice money sink for Republicans.

[Intell]

Is he a trumpist option or just a MUHHH FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BUTT MODERATE option?

[Bojack Horseman]

Endorsed.

[BaldEagle1991]

For example, TX-27 is 59% minority, yet R+13. Bush, Perry, Cornyn, Cruz, etc. usually get 40% or so of the Hispanic vote.

That's cause a lot of those Hispanics are actually mixed with White.

[Vosem]

Cruz endorsed; not out of any great love for Cruz's ideology (especially since McCaul is probably closer to me), but out of respect for going to the Quicken Loans and poking all the Trumpies in the nose.

He also enabled Trump for months and refused to attack him while Trump was gathering strength.  That is unforgiveable.  He's more responsible for Trump than anyone else.

Every candidate, with the notable exceptions of Fiorina and Walker, spent months enabling Trump. Cruz ultimately scored some of the most lasting hits on him. That's not something you can overlook.

Is he a trumpist option or just a MUHHH FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BUTT MODERATE option?

The latter, duh

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Cruz endorsed; not out of any great love for Cruz's ideology (especially since McCaul is probably closer to me), but out of respect for going to the Quicken Loans and poking all the Trumpies in the nose.

He also enabled Trump for months and refused to attack him while Trump was gathering strength.  That is unforgiveable.  He's more responsible for Trump than anyone else.

Every candidate, with the notable exceptions of Fiorina and Walker, spent months enabling Trump. Cruz ultimately scored some of the most lasting hits on him. That's not something you can overlook.

Is he a trumpist option or just a MUHHH FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BUTT MODERATE option?

The latter, duh

I'm not sure I'd put Jeb! in that category. I remember him always attacking Trump's proposals, particularly mass deportation.

[Mike Thick]

Called it!

[Del Tachi]

Endorsed.

[ElectionsGuy]

Good, can't wait to see him (McCaul) lose when it happens.

[Indy Texas]

Is he a trumpist option or just a MUHHH FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BUTT MODERATE option?

He's a pretty generic Chamber-friendly Republican. He was a state/federal attorney before he ran for Congress, but he's filthy rich because he married into the Mays family, which owns Clear Channel Communications (one of the largest radio station networks in the country). He seems mainly interested in foreign policy/defense issues and I think he just generally votes with leadership on everything else because he doesn't care all that much.

It would be interesting because Texas has never had a foreign policy-focused senator that I can recall. They tend to either be domestic policy ideological crusaders (Gramm and Cruz from the Right; Yarborough from the Left), pork farmers (Kay Bailey Hutchison, Lyndon Johnson) or party apparatchiks (Bentsen, Cornyn).

[Heisenberg]

It would be interesting because Texas has never had a foreign policy-focused senator that I can recall. They tend to either be domestic policy ideological crusaders (Gramm and Cruz from the Right; Yarborough from the Left), pork farmers (Kay Bailey Hutchison, Lyndon Johnson) or party apparatchiks (Bentsen, Cornyn).

From what I've heard, wasn't Gramm more of a fiscal policy focused Senator? He was a former economics professor, and was known for the Gramm-Rudman acts. And what about John Tower (the only semi-recent non-appointed Texas Senator you didn't mention). He was foreign policy oriented, having chaired the Senate Armed Services committee, and serving on Bush Sr's Intelligence Advisory Board.

[RogueBeaver]

Perry's not interested.