TX-SEN: True to Form

[NewYorkExpress]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

[Zaybay]

For my take on it, this logic has three scenarios.

1. Beto is losing by so much, +10, that he has decided to just F%&@ it, and become a national hero, hopefully to get him a VP slot or a PAC

2. Beto is close to winning in internals, and sees this as the issue to energize Dems and flip some suburbanites needed to secure victory

3. Beto has decided to just say what he wants, no matter how much his advisers rail against it. If it worked for Trump, why not Beto?

The third scenario is highly unlikely, as Beto has played rather moderate due to adviser influence. The first scenario is also a bit unlikely, as O'rourke has been keeping it in the mid-single digits, and has raised a butt-load of money.

But the second scenario, just seems odd. This would be the issue to push Texans to Beto? Im not sure.

My current theory is that Beto is playing the name rec. game. He knows that his main weakness is that no one knows who he is, so why not get some national headlines? It would help his campaign in the end.  But it does give Cruz easy fodder to throw at him. He may also be playing the enthusiasm game, trying to gel up Democrats in a midterm where only around 30% of registered voters actually vote. Or maybe hes just given up. I have no idea.

[TarHeelDem]

I think he's just expecting favor for impeachment to be a much more popular stance in November than it is right now and simply wants to be ahead of the curve.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Cruz father was implicated in the JFK assassination, it's indirectly related to that, Cuba and Russia ties. Menendez is Cuban as well.

[Mr. Smith]

Ron Johnson said some pretty ridiculous things in Wisconsin, and he still won it, despite Obama's blowout in 2008.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I think he's just expecting favor for impeachment to be a much more popular stance in November than it is right now and simply wants to be ahead of the curve.

[Calthrina950]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

[Zaybay]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

[Calthrina950]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

But impeaching Trump for words would be even flimsier then what Johnson and Clinton were impeached for.  And I don't think those impeachments were necessarily proper either. If we allow impeachment to become more of a blatant political weapon, then that will only further undermine the integrity of our political system.

[Zaybay]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

But impeaching Trump for words would be even flimsier then what Johnson and Clinton were impeached for.  And I don't think those impeachments were necessarily proper either. If we allow impeachment to become more of a blatant political weapon, then that will only further undermine the integrity of our political system.

I doubt impeachment would be about the words spoken. More likely, considering a good chuck of the Dem caucus is made of lawyers, they would find something, such as the trust issue, and use that.
Also, the last two uses of impeachment were blatantly political, so its not like this is new. And, from both times, the parties faced severe backlash, in elections and approval ratings. That's why so many are afraid to touch it, it could destroy them. Its unlikely to be widely used, and even then, I doubt impeachment is actually used by the Dems, as its just too risky.

[Calthrina950]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

But impeaching Trump for words would be even flimsier then what Johnson and Clinton were impeached for.  And I don't think those impeachments were necessarily proper either. If we allow impeachment to become more of a blatant political weapon, then that will only further undermine the integrity of our political system.

I doubt impeachment would be about the words spoken. More likely, considering a good chuck of the Dem caucus is made of lawyers, they would find something, such as the trust issue, and use that.
Also, the last two uses of impeachment were blatantly political, so its not like this is new. And, from both times, the parties faced severe backlash, in elections and approval ratings. That's why so many are afraid to touch it, it could destroy them. Its unlikely to be widely used, and even then, I doubt impeachment is actually used by the Dems, as its just too risky.

That's why I would hope impeachment does not become the tool utilized here. Calling Trump a traitor and demanding his impeachment are over the line in my view, just because of the wrong and misguided language he used at the conference. I would rather any impeachment, if it does happen, derive from the evidence and the charges generated by the Mueller investigation.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

The impeachment against Johnson was clearly justified, and the country would have been a lot better off had it succeeded.

[UWS]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

But impeaching Trump for words would be even flimsier then what Johnson and Clinton were impeached for.  And I don't think those impeachments were necessarily proper either. If we allow impeachment to become more of a blatant political weapon, then that will only further undermine the integrity of our political system.

I doubt impeachment would be about the words spoken. More likely, considering a good chuck of the Dem caucus is made of lawyers, they would find something, such as the trust issue, and use that.
Also, the last two uses of impeachment were blatantly political, so its not like this is new. And, from both times, the parties faced severe backlash, in elections and approval ratings. That's why so many are afraid to touch it, it could destroy them. Its unlikely to be widely used, and even then, I doubt impeachment is actually used by the Dems, as its just too risky.

That's why I would hope impeachment does not become the tool utilized here. Calling Trump a traitor and demanding his impeachment are over the line in my view, just because of the wrong and misguided language he used at the conference. I would rather any impeachment, if it does happen, derive from the evidence and the charges generated by the Mueller investigation.

This senate race in Texas is still a toss-up since according to a recent poll released last month indicates that 44 % of Texans approve Trump's job performance while only 47 % approve.

https://texaspolitics.utexas.edu/set/donald-trump-approval-june-2018

[Calthrina950]

Interesting

Beto calls for Trump's impeachment after Putin Summit

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/397469-cruz-challenger-calls-for-trumps-impeachment-over-putin-summit

Wonder what hes playing at? My guess is raising his statewide recognition.

And this is why O'Rourke is not going to win this year. Calling for impeachment over this is frivolous. What Trump said was wrong, and was rightly condemned, but his words do not rise to the standard necessary for impeachment.

Oh, so treason isn't a standard for impeachment?

Trump did not commit treason yesterday. His words were wrong, but he did not commit treason. Serious evidence is required, indicating an impeachable offense, before he can be impeached.

guys, the two presidents to be impeached, Johnson and Clinton, were done so by rather flimsy circumstances. In fact, the Radical Rs set a trap for Johnson so they could impeach him. Technically, Dems could impeach on literally any law set forward, such as the fact that he has not put his stuff in a blind trust. That is impeachable, its not just treason.

But impeaching Trump for words would be even flimsier then what Johnson and Clinton were impeached for.  And I don't think those impeachments were necessarily proper either. If we allow impeachment to become more of a blatant political weapon, then that will only further undermine the integrity of our political system.

I doubt impeachment would be about the words spoken. More likely, considering a good chuck of the Dem caucus is made of lawyers, they would find something, such as the trust issue, and use that.
Also, the last two uses of impeachment were blatantly political, so its not like this is new. And, from both times, the parties faced severe backlash, in elections and approval ratings. That's why so many are afraid to touch it, it could destroy them. Its unlikely to be widely used, and even then, I doubt impeachment is actually used by the Dems, as its just too risky.

That's why I would hope impeachment does not become the tool utilized here. Calling Trump a traitor and demanding his impeachment are over the line in my view, just because of the wrong and misguided language he used at the conference. I would rather any impeachment, if it does happen, derive from the evidence and the charges generated by the Mueller investigation.

This senate race in Texas is still a toss-up since according to a recent poll released last month indicates that 44 % of Texans approve Trump's job performance while only 47 % approve.

https://texaspolitics.utexas.edu/set/donald-trump-approval-june-2018

I view Texas as Likely Republican, maybe closer to Lean by this point than Safe. Cruz has been leading in the polls by mid to high single digits, which is where I expect the race to end up in the end. I still don't think calling for Trump's impeachment is the best means to make gains in the state's suburbs.

[riceowl]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

[wesmoorenerd]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

It's a gamble for Beto. Cruz is a famously good debater but Beto's biggest hurdle is name recognition and getting the word out. If Beto debates and comes out without getting completely crushed I'd say it still benefits him.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Debating Cruz is a net plus

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

Fall Fridays in Texas? Definitely a perfect time to hold some debates! Nothing else happening on Friday nights under the lights that's famously big in Texas. No siree!

[Doimper]

It's telling that Cruz now wants debates, though.

[President Johnson]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

I don't know. Most people are out on Friday nights and, unless they are political junkies, won't stay home to watch a senate debate.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

I don't know. Most people are out on Friday nights and, unless they are political junkies, won't stay home to watch a senate debate.

Which is why Cruz is proposing it.

[UWS]

Cruz counters Beto's proposed 6 debates with 5. Which sounds great, except that they're all scheduled for Friday nights and the proposal is "all inclusive and final."

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/25/ted-cruz-proposes-five-debates-beto-orourke-texas/

I don't know. Most people are out on Friday nights and, unless they are political junkies, won't stay home to watch a senate debate.

Which is why Cruz is proposing it.

Why not one debate during a week-end and then the other 4 debates set during the week (from a Monday to a Thursday), for example? That way, people will surely be at home to watch debates.

The only reason why Cruz wants it to be on Friday is because he's afraid that people learn more about his record.

[Zaybay]

 Beto released his first ad today: Showing Up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZUFA67aS1Q

[kyc0705]

 Beto released his first ad today: Showing Up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZUFA67aS1Q

When Beto said that his campaign was just about "human beings," I was instantly reminded of this: https://www.tedcruzforhumanpresident.com/