Texas swing
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2024, 03:13:41 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2012 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Texas swing
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Texas swing  (Read 4776 times)
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2012, 11:17:24 PM »

There's a lot of Travis County that's very Republican, especially the western parts which are white suburbs. A Democrat can't really get much more than Obama did in 2008 there.

For a Democrat to win Texas, two things need to happen that are not happening right now: 1) Hispanics have to turn out a lot more, which is a problem of both the Texas Democratic party being underfunded and incompetent AND the Texan Hispanic population being disproportionately under-18 and non-citizen and 2) Democrats have to do significantly better with whites than Obama did.

Mikado's description of the TX Democratic Party is also very true. IIRC, our Senate candidate against Ted Cruz was a member of this class.

#2 is a VERY impossible feat at this point. The only hope is the whites from places like Illinois, New York, California, etc. that might have been moving into Texas a lot in the present that could help make up for it. I think that's what helped made Florida and North Carolina swing states.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2012, 04:08:11 PM »

I think the issue with migration to Texas is that a lot of those people are conservatives to begin with. Or they come to Texas and become more conservative. Florida is really 3 states in one, a southern state up north, a midwestern state in the middle of the state, and a northeastern state in the south. North Carolina had in migration of well educated people to the Raleigh-Durham area and they didn't work in industries which are favorable to the Republicans. In Texas many move to work in the oil industry in Houston or the telecommunications industry in Dallas. Even the software engineers seem conservative out there. Maybe the in migration that is happening in Austin will be different from that. Still, Texas is a mindset and it attracts a lot of conservative people and even those who are in the middle buy into the low tax and low cost living when they move there. Also, liberals will likely avoid moving there, but may not have as much of a problem moving to Atlanta or North Carolina.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2012, 05:41:19 PM »

I think the issue with migration to Texas is that a lot of those people are conservatives to begin with. Or they come to Texas and become more conservative. Florida is really 3 states in one, a southern state up north, a midwestern state in the middle of the state, and a northeastern state in the south. North Carolina had in migration of well educated people to the Raleigh-Durham area and they didn't work in industries which are favorable to the Republicans. In Texas many move to work in the oil industry in Houston or the telecommunications industry in Dallas. Even the software engineers seem conservative out there. Maybe the in migration that is happening in Austin will be different from that. Still, Texas is a mindset and it attracts a lot of conservative people and even those who are in the middle buy into the low tax and low cost living when they move there. Also, liberals will likely avoid moving there, but may not have as much of a problem moving to Atlanta or North Carolina.


I call BS on this one, the vast majority of them are liberal.

As for the rest of the post Florida is a low tax state and look what happened to that state in the long run, it became the biggest swing state in the union. Also I think liberals might enjoy Dallas and Houston, very ethnically diverse and less cowboy culture and more big city culture. There's a good reason why the Cities are blue and the country side is mainly conservative and red. The only thing that might make people conservative if people did move here might be if they all converted to Evangelical Protestantism or became 1%ers within a year or two (that is hardly ever heard of). However I do know there is a growing industry of religious publishing (making and printing Bibles) in Texas then again they were mostly conservative to begin with.

Most people don't think about politics when relocating, many of the liberals that I know that moved down here to Houston and Texas just moved here for the weather and jobs, and I know many conservatives who did move out to places like San Francisco or Boston and they didn't care as long as there was a job. You also forgot the mention there's a large movie making industry growing in the DFW area, and we all know a lot of them tend to attract liberals.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2012, 06:18:53 PM »

If the vast majority of software engineers are liberals, then Plano and Richardson wouldn't vote like they do. Maybe you are correct about Austin, but certainly not the Dallas area. Also, I do think those who are in the middle are going to be more likely to become Republican in Texas just due to it's reputation. If they like Texas better than their old state, they will likely credit the Republicans for that. That is not the case with Florida, Georgia or North Carolina. I know what you are going to say, but most people aren't political junkies. They don't know how most states vote regularly. They do know Texas votes Republican though, just like they know California and New York vote Democrat.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2012, 06:41:34 PM »

If the vast majority of software engineers are liberals, then Plano and Richardson wouldn't vote like they do. Maybe you are correct about Austin, but certainly not the Dallas area. Also, I do think those who are in the middle are going to be more likely to become Republican in Texas just due to it's reputation. If they like Texas better than their old state, they will likely credit the Republicans for that. That is not the case with Florida, Georgia or North Carolina. I know what you are going to say, but most people aren't political junkies. They don't know how most states vote regularly. They do know Texas votes Republican though, just like they know California and New York vote Democrat.

Most of them aren't there: They're mostly in East Dallas, Grand Prairie, and Irving. All of them are Democratic leaning areas. Heck even if they did credit Texas Republicans for being better than their old state, they're still aren't going to quickly change their social views, that's the big hole many of them are trying to bridge to the newcomers.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2012, 07:15:45 PM »

Of course they live in Plano and Richardson too! There are plenty of those jobs in the Richardson area, and it's a short commute up to Plano. Irvine has a lot of tech jobs as well, but it's not the software engineers that make the place Democratic leaning. Same goes with Grand Prairie (if in fact a lot of engineers even live there in the first place).
Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,831
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2012, 05:36:17 PM »

Texas unfortunately is a state of dueling trends and it looks as if parts of the state are moving faster to the gop than other parts are moving to the democrats.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: December 25, 2012, 07:20:24 PM »

Texas unfortunately is a state of dueling trends and it looks as if parts of the state are moving faster to the gop than other parts are moving to the democrats.


Sounds like recipe for a future battleground state.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,272
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: December 26, 2012, 03:23:03 AM »

and the party itself is effectively owned by old white trial lawyers who are only Democrats because the GOP is the party of tort reform.

I laughed slightly too much at this.

It's true, though. The TX Dems can't win any elections for two main reasons:

1. They have zero connections to any business or industry other than plaintiffs' attorneys. The Republicans have a monopoly on oil & gas.

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,923


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: December 26, 2012, 04:00:40 AM »

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.

Well Bill White was supposed to be that, but then he lost by double digits to Rick Perry anyway.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: December 26, 2012, 04:16:20 AM »

and the party itself is effectively owned by old white trial lawyers who are only Democrats because the GOP is the party of tort reform.

I laughed slightly too much at this.

It's true, though. The TX Dems can't win any elections for two main reasons:

1. They have zero connections to any business or industry other than plaintiffs' attorneys. The Republicans have a monopoly on oil & gas.

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.

Would Sadler have a chance if he was from, say, Dallas?  I was watching his debate against Cruz and I was really impressed.  And what really surprised me was how liberal he was (and I've read his positions on the issues on his website and he seems to be a real Democrat rather than a blue dog).
Cruz for example was talking about building a wall on the border with Mexico and he responded by saying that Mexico is our number 1 trading partner (I'm pretty sure they're number 2 but whatever), what kind of message does that send to them?

Edit:  they're actually our 3rd largest trading partner behind Canada and China.
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,316
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: December 26, 2012, 12:37:24 PM »

and the party itself is effectively owned by old white trial lawyers who are only Democrats because the GOP is the party of tort reform.

I laughed slightly too much at this.

It's true, though. The TX Dems can't win any elections for two main reasons:

1. They have zero connections to any business or industry other than plaintiffs' attorneys. The Republicans have a monopoly on oil & gas.

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.

Would Sadler have a chance if he was from, say, Dallas?  I was watching his debate against Cruz and I was really impressed.  And what really surprised me was how liberal he was (and I've read his positions on the issues on his website and he seems to be a real Democrat rather than a blue dog).
Cruz for example was talking about building a wall on the border with Mexico and he responded by saying that Mexico is our number 1 trading partner (I'm pretty sure they're number 2 but whatever), what kind of message does that send to them?

Edit:  they're actually our 3rd largest trading partner behind Canada and China.

I suspect he meant Texas's no. 1 trading partner, which I believe is true.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: December 26, 2012, 12:53:00 PM »

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.

Well Bill White was supposed to be that, but then he lost by double digits to Rick Perry anyway.


He ran in a Tea Party year. If he ran against Perry in like 2006, he would've won by a slight margin.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,272
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: December 27, 2012, 12:00:51 AM »

2. They can't find a Kathleen Sebelius-type candidate who can steal away enough Republicans to win an election. I'm not talking about Paul Sadler-types from rural East Texas. I'm talking about a centrist from a major city who has private sector connections to facilitate fundraising and who can win over white suburban voters.

Well Bill White was supposed to be that, but then he lost by double digits to Rick Perry anyway.

He didn't do nearly enough to court Republicans. Something like 30% of the GOP primary voters that year voted for Kay Bailey Hutchison (myself included). He should have gone after those people with reckless abandon.

And I never understood why he refused to release his tax returns. Perry refused to debate him as a result and it made him give off this vibe of being a mysterious, rich Mitt Romney type. If he had gotten Rick to have an "oops" moment during that election, who knows what might have happened.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 12 queries.