TX-SEN 2020 Megathread: Early Voting

[JG]

Beto opts not to run for Senate, will likely announce Presidential bid in the coming weeks.

Disappointing.

[Brittain33]

Beto opts not to run for Senate, will likely announce Presidential bid in the coming weeks.

We should note this is still in the rumor stage.

[Bidenworth2020]

Do you guys think Cornyn would be more beatable in 2020 than Cruz was in 2018?

No, Cornyn will outrun Trump almost everywhere in the state and win by 8-9 points.

Ah yeah, the voters who will vote/have voted for a Democrat for president in 2016, a Democrat for state legislature in 2018, a Democrat for House in 2018, a Democrat for Senate in 2018, and a Democrat for president in 2020 are certainly going to support John Cornyn for Senate because he’s more "likeable" and less "extremist" than Cruz, right?

Cornyn will win Hays County. I hear thousands of Lupe Valdez voters are itching to vote for him.

With the rate at which it is growing, I doubt that'd even be enough.

[Sestak]

Is it reasonable to assume that Colin Allred would probably be the best candidate here in O'Rourke's absence?

Would Allred be better than MJ Hegar?

[SnowLabrador]

Beto is incredibly selfish.

[Zaybay]

Wasted Potential. Hopefully MJ Hegar shows Cornyn the door.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Beto is incredibly selfish.

It would of been a gamble anyways, moves backe to Safe R

[aaroncd107]

Wasted Potential. Hopefully MJ Hegar shows Cornyn the door.

ba dum tsss

[Xing]

MJ Hegar is probably the Democrats' best bet here, now.

[IceSpear]

Beto would obviously be the best, but I don't think Hegar would be that big of a downgrade honestly. She seems like a pretty great candidate.

[Calthrina950]

What makes people on here think that O'Rourke could beat Cornyn? Or Hegar? Not a single statewide Democrat won in Texas in 2018, and Cruz still defeated O'Rourke by more than 200,000 votes. Yes, Texas is trending Democratic, but in 2020, there is going to be presidential-level turnout. Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked. He also seems to be taking his reelection seriously.

[MT Treasurer]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

[lfromnj]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

[Zaybay]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

[Zaybay]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

[lfromnj]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

How can D's make a 200k vote deficit? Simple turn up GOTV. Once a person votes for the first time they are much easier to reach. Beto set up the infrastructure for GOTV and the texas GOP has lost precious resources after losing so much ground in the 5 largest counties. In 00 all of them voted for bush but in 18 all of them voted for Beto.All of those Dallas Lawyers and Houston Oil executives dont have any Republicans to donate to anymore so they have to donate to Democrats now.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

[lfromnj]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

and thats why LG AG and Agricultural commissioner were within 5 points. The only reason Abbot even won by that much is because Loopy Valdez was a complete joke. Despite her being a complete joke she still won Hays and almost won Fort Bend county which used to be Safe GOP counties. Using the gubernatorial as the benchmark is like using Ohio senate and supreme court elections as the benchmark race for Ohio. If the D candidate was better than Loopy Valdez and actually campaigned they would have gotten within 6-8 points.

[Zaybay]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

Alright, first off, you are arguing on a false premise, that Cruz was unpopular. As both Exit Polls showed, along with general polling that was done, his approval was around 55-45, or even sometimes 55-40. Of course, this pales in comparison to Abbots Godlike approval, which sat around 60-30. He was much more popular than Dan Patrick, and Patrick's large margin can highly be attributed to the fact that low-info voters voted for Abbot and his Lt. , not Abbot and Patrick.

Second, if there is any philosophy I subscribe to when it comes to politics, its that popularity is the best indicator of success. But only victoriescan be gleamed by popularity, not margins. Cruz was more popular than Patrick, but both had a positive approval in the state, and they both won. Cruz's margin wasnt because he was more unpopular, but because he was facing Beto, while most Texan Dems didnt know the Dem Lt. facing Patrick.

Anyway, the Ds can definitely make up the ground needed to beat Cornyn, especially since he suffers from Nelson syndrome of being old, boring, and rather unknown to the state. It will take a lot though, especially since Beto is probably not running for the senate seat.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

and thats why LG AG and Agricultural commissioner were within 5 points. The only reason Abbot even won by that much is because Loopy Valdez was a complete joke. Despite her being a complete joke she still won Hays and almost won Fort Bend county which used to be Safe GOP counties. Using the gubernatorial as the benchmark is like using Ohio senate and supreme court elections as the benchmark race for Ohio. If the D candidate was better than Loopy Valdez and actually campaigned they would have gotten within 6-8 points.

I'm not denying that there has been a definite Democratic trend within Texas. The fact that Valdez won Hays County, and nearly won Fort Bend County, shows that her share was artificially boosted by the 2018 environment, and by O'Rourke's candidacy. Demographic and political trends are changing the state, but it is still a gradual process. I can see Texas voting Democratic at the state level in the next decade, and at the presidential level by the 2030s. But 2020 seems too early for me.

A 200,000 vote deficit will still be very difficult to overcome, and especially so in a year that will have higher turnout than 2018. I would still consider Trump a favorite to win in Texas, and if he wins, Cornyn almost certainly will as well. In fact, Cornyn will probably outperform Trump. The closest I can see a Democrat (i.e. someone like Hegar or Castro) coming against him is ~3 points, the same margin that O'Rourke lost by.

[lfromnj]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

and thats why LG AG and Agricultural commissioner were within 5 points. The only reason Abbot even won by that much is because Loopy Valdez was a complete joke. Despite her being a complete joke she still won Hays and almost won Fort Bend county which used to be Safe GOP counties. Using the gubernatorial as the benchmark is like using Ohio senate and supreme court elections as the benchmark race for Ohio. If the D candidate was better than Loopy Valdez and actually campaigned they would have gotten within 6-8 points.

I'm not denying that there has been a definite Democratic trend within Texas. The fact that Valdez won Hays County, and nearly won Fort Bend County, shows that her share was artificially boosted by the 2018 environment, and by O'Rourke's candidacy. Demographic and political trends are changing the state, but it is still a gradual process. I can see Texas voting Democratic at the state level in the next decade, and at the presidential level by the 2030s. But 2020 seems too early for me.

A 200,000 vote deficit will still be very difficult to overcome, and especially so in a year that will have higher turnout than 2018. I would still consider Trump a favorite to win in Texas, and if he wins, Cornyn almost certainly will as well. In fact, Cornyn will probably outperform Trump. The closest I can see a Democrat (i.e. someone like Hegar or Castro) coming against him is ~3 points, the same margin that O'Rourke lost by.

Beto got 180k more votes than clinton in a MIDTERM. It won't be an easy GOTV but there certainly is a path.

And does anybody forget that one of the main reasons Texas trended D so hard was ironically because of the 2016 primary itself.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, Cornyn is more entrenched than Cruz is and is much less disliked.

People keep saying this, but I don’t think it’s actually true.

The second part is true because literally no one knows him.
>can't be disliked if no one knows you. Taps head

How can Democrats make up a 200,000 vote deficit? Particularly in a presidential year? And Cruz only won by that narrow of a margin because of his unpopularity. Every other statewide Republican did better than him.

With Beto running for President, this races moves from Tilt D to Tilt D.

What? Texas has not suddenly become a "safe" Democratic state. It is a long way from that.

You're right. How do Democrats, who do well with minorities such as Hispanics, do better in a presidential year, when Hispanic Turnout is usually at its height, compared to a midterm, when minority, especially Hispanic turnout craters? How can Democrats get those 200,000 voters? Its not like TX is a rapidly changing state with a rather obvious population boom in Urban metros with large suburbs that are swinging their way. I have no idea

Also, Cruz wasnt unpopular. All polling data showed him to be rather popular. Margins /=/ popularity, otherwise Bill Nelson would have won by 15 points.

Many of the people who voted for O'Rourke did so because of an intense personal dislike for Cruz. Bear in mind that 400,000 Texans split their tickets between O'Rourke, who lost by 3 points, and Abbott, who won by 13 points. It's very plausible to assume that those Abbott-O'Rourke voters approved of the Governor but disapproved of Cruz. And as I've already said, Cruz ran behind every other statewide Republican; even the controversial Dan Patrick did better than he.

As for your overall argument, polls indicated that Heitkamp, Donnelly, and McCaskill were underwater by Election Day, as was Heller. And they all lost. Manchin's approvals were close to a tie, and Tester was just above water, if I recall correctly, and they both won reelection. Patrick Morrisey's loss was, in part, due to his own extreme disapproval ratings: he was underwater by 20 points. And every incumbent who had a positive approval rating otherwise won reelection.

and thats why LG AG and Agricultural commissioner were within 5 points. The only reason Abbot even won by that much is because Loopy Valdez was a complete joke. Despite her being a complete joke she still won Hays and almost won Fort Bend county which used to be Safe GOP counties. Using the gubernatorial as the benchmark is like using Ohio senate and supreme court elections as the benchmark race for Ohio. If the D candidate was better than Loopy Valdez and actually campaigned they would have gotten within 6-8 points.

I'm not denying that there has been a definite Democratic trend within Texas. The fact that Valdez won Hays County, and nearly won Fort Bend County, shows that her share was artificially boosted by the 2018 environment, and by O'Rourke's candidacy. Demographic and political trends are changing the state, but it is still a gradual process. I can see Texas voting Democratic at the state level in the next decade, and at the presidential level by the 2030s. But 2020 seems too early for me.

A 200,000 vote deficit will still be very difficult to overcome, and especially so in a year that will have higher turnout than 2018. I would still consider Trump a favorite to win in Texas, and if he wins, Cornyn almost certainly will as well. In fact, Cornyn will probably outperform Trump. The closest I can see a Democrat (i.e. someone like Hegar or Castro) coming against him is ~3 points, the same margin that O'Rourke lost by.

Beto got 180k more votes than clinton in a MIDTERM. It won't be an easy GOTV but there certainly is a path.

And does anybody forget that one of the main reasons Texas trended D so hard was ironically because of the 2016 primary itself.

No, I don't. And of course O'Rourke got more votes than Clinton. Midterm turnout in 2018 was generally high across the country, the highest in at least a century, if I am not mistaken. But it still doesn't change the thrust of my argument.

[Zaybay]

Im not going to start a quoting chain with the two of you, so Im just gonna lay down my points here:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You cant pick and choose what race you want to use as the benchmark for a state, thats just ridiculous and only serves to prove a narrative. You should always use the most partisan/top ballot races possible, which are, most of the time, senate. Gubers are the worst to use because of how non-partisan they can become, which is why New England has 3 R governors while LA and MT have Ds.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Its not that slow.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As Ifromnj pointed out, Beto was able to get 180,000 more voters than Clinton in 2 years. This wasnt the Rs collapsing, the Ds were able to get 180,000 more voters in a midterm compared to the previous presidential race, which was already one of the best results for Ds in a long time.

It should also be pointed out that higher turnout benefits the Ds in TX. This is because a good portion of the D base, Hispanics, dont show up in low turnout elections. These voters would actually make the state likely D if they bothered to vote. This is why polls of adults in the state of TX get Trump's approval in the mid to high 30s, while registered voter polls get it in the high 40s to low 50s. In fact, that was Beto's whole strategy, to get turnout as high as possible. A presidential year is exactly what the Ds need to win TX, as that will juice up Hispanic voters to come to the polls.