TX-SEN 2020 Megathread: Early Voting

[Calthrina950]

Cornyn is clearly favored, and I don't think he would have as difficult a time as Cruz. Cruz's personal unpopularity played a large role in O'Rourke's relative success this year. And given that it will be 2020, a presidential election year, I think that would give an advantage to Republicans as well.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Calthrina950]

Calthrina, for some odd reason (cough hackishness cough), seems to believe that Cruz was an exceptionally weak candidate (no evidence), that Lupe Valdez ran a competent campaign (not true), and that only people who voted in midterms can vote in the general election.

Once again, you distort my views. First off, I am very well aware of O'Rourke's campaign skills, and that definitely played a role in the closeness of his loss margin to Cruz. But it was not solely because of O'Rourke alone. He was helped by the national environment and by the dislike of many voters for Cruz, who had been hurt by the 2016 presidential campaign. Second, I am very well aware that Valdez ran a poor campaign, but you can't handwave the 400,000 Abbott-O'Rourke voters just like that. And third, I've emphasized repeatedly that turnout in 2020 will be higher than in 2016, and that is exactly why it will be difficult for Democrats to unseat Cornyn or to beat Trump in the state. Yes, more Democratic voters will come out, but so will more Republican ones, and there are still more Republican voters in Texas, as 2018 showed.

[Calthrina950]

Calthrina, for some odd reason (cough hackishness cough), seems to believe that Cruz was an exceptionally weak candidate (no evidence), that Lupe Valdez ran a competent campaign (not true), and that only people who voted in midterms can vote in the general election.

Once again, you distort my views. First off, I am very well aware of O'Rourke's campaign skills, and that definitely played a role in the closeness of his loss margin to Cruz. But it was not solely because of O'Rourke alone. He was helped by the national environment and by the dislike of many voters for Cruz, who had been hurt by the 2016 presidential campaign. Second, I am very well aware that Valdez ran a poor campaign, but you can't handwave the 400,000 Abbott-O'Rourke voters just like that. And third, I've emphasized repeatedly that turnout in 2020 will be higher than in 2016, and that is exactly why it will be difficult for Democrats to unseat Cornyn or to beat Trump in the state. Yes, more Democratic voters will come out, but so will more Republican ones, and there are still more Republican voters in Texas, as 2018 showed.

1. You are still saying that Cruz was unpopular when every piece of info points to that he wasnt. At all. Stop saying it.

2. Its very easy for a gubernatorial candidate to outrun the senate or house race, especially if they are popular.
Just in 2018: SD, MA, VT, NH, KS, MD, TX, CT, and AZ.

Of course, Cruz is still popular among the Republican base, but not necessarily so among independents. And there is a difference between approving of someone in their official capacity and personally approving of them. As to your second point, of course many gubernatorial nominees can run ahead of the federal ticket. But that is not always the case.

[Calthrina950]

It looks like this race along with IA, MT, and AL are starting to become locks for the GOP and CO, NH and MI are starting to become locks for the Democrats, and that the real battlegrounds will be ME, NC, AZ, and both GA seats.

Yeah, even if neither GA seats seem particularly competitive at this point.

Lucy McBath, who would have been a strong candidate for Democrats, decided to run for reelection to her House seat, and none of the other Democratic candidates running thus far (like Tomlinson and Ossoff) seem particularly impressive. Another star recruit for Democrats would have been Stacey Abrams, but she seems to be biding her time for a gubernatorial rematch with Brian Kemp.

And if Trump wins Georgia (which he probably will), then Perdue and the Republican nominee for the open seat will almost certainly win as well. Given how much ticket-splitting has declined in recent years, you can pretty much predict how most of these races will go, just basing off the presidential results. For example, my home state of Colorado. As I've said before, not a single statewide Republican won here last year. Assuming that this carries over to 2020, if Trump loses Colorado (which he will; the state is Likely Democratic, probably close to Safe, in my opinion), then Gardner will lose as well.

[Calthrina950]

I know this is probably because Texas has so many counties, a good number of which have very small populations, but it's amazing in elections like this and the 2018 Senate election how many more counties the winner carries than the loser despite the close margin.

This is a very valid observation. I remember reading a FiveThirtyEight article on the results of the 2018 Senate race. According to that article, Beto O'Rourke won the five largest counties (Harris, Dallas, Tarrant, Bexar, Travis) by 800,000 votes, while Ted Cruz won the remaining 249 counties by 1 million votes. Cruz's overall margin was 200,000, so the massive majorities which he garnered throughout much of rural and exurban Texas were enough for him to barely overcome O'Rourke's urban and suburban strength. However, as the state continues to trend left and as the urban areas explode in population, such majorities will not be enough for Republicans. And we may see that with the presidential race this year.

[Calthrina950]

This will clearly help her

I think this exemplifies Texas's dramatic shift towards the Democrats in recent years. Hegar, a college-educated suburban white woman, is exactly the kind of voter that Republicans have been shedding in recent years, and Williamson County-where she is from-is a formerly Republican stronghold that is now moving into the Democratic column. This should help Hegar win votes from other suburbanites who have clearly soured on their old party.

[Calthrina950]

Note how Cruz basically got his final percentage, if Cornyn gets 48%, I don't think he wins

This is a good point. Democrats are just as likely to overperform polling as Republicans in Texas. I only rate TX-SEN as Lean R, and my hot take is that Hegar is actually more likely to win than Greenfield in IA.

Eh. Anecdotally, I know a bunch of Biden/Cornyn voters. Also anecdotally, no one is *excited* about Hegar. I like her, and I've voted for her, and my friends have too, but then they're like "So...if she wins...we get a Democrat in the Senate for 6 years.......and it's her??"

Sad. I really wish that Beto or Julian Castro had run. They would probably be running even with Biden.

People were very excited about Beto in 18. Same spirit just isn't there. I'll be pleasantly surprised if she can pull it off on the coattails.

Cornyn is not hated the same way as Cruz. That's not to say that Hegar won't win. But hatred of Ted Cruz helped Beto. Abbott performed much better than Cruz on the same ticket.

Of course Abbott in 2022 might have a harder battle than he had 2 years ago due to his handling of COVID and his voter suppression.

Isn't it true that Abbott is already facing a primary challenge from the right because of the mask mandate he imposed a few months ago? I wouldn't be surprised if he's in for a tougher fight during the next cycle, though given that it will probably be a Biden midterm, he should be favored for reelection.

[Calthrina950]

Note how Cruz basically got his final percentage, if Cornyn gets 48%, I don't think he wins

This is a good point. Democrats are just as likely to overperform polling as Republicans in Texas. I only rate TX-SEN as Lean R, and my hot take is that Hegar is actually more likely to win than Greenfield in IA.

Eh. Anecdotally, I know a bunch of Biden/Cornyn voters. Also anecdotally, no one is *excited* about Hegar. I like her, and I've voted for her, and my friends have too, but then they're like "So...if she wins...we get a Democrat in the Senate for 6 years.......and it's her??"

Sad. I really wish that Beto or Julian Castro had run. They would probably be running even with Biden.

People were very excited about Beto in 18. Same spirit just isn't there. I'll be pleasantly surprised if she can pull it off on the coattails.

Cornyn is not hated the same way as Cruz. That's not to say that Hegar won't win. But hatred of Ted Cruz helped Beto. Abbott performed much better than Cruz on the same ticket.

Of course Abbott in 2022 might have a harder battle than he had 2 years ago due to his handling of COVID and his voter suppression.

Isn't it true that Abbott is already facing a primary challenge from the right because of the mask mandate he imposed a few months ago? I wouldn't be surprised if he's in for a tougher fight during the next cycle, though given that it will probably be a Biden midterm, he should be favored for reelection.

He's going to have primary challengers should he choose to run again.

Supposedly, some far-right cowboy comedian name Chad Prather was talking up a big game but he is a joke.

Then there is Allen West who is a sociopath.

If Paxton and Patrick seek re-election the democrats will show up in full force. I doubt Paxton can seek re-election at this point.

Judging on the outcome of his corruption scandal, Paxton may not even be in office by the time 2022 comes upon us.

[Calthrina950]

Note how Cruz basically got his final percentage, if Cornyn gets 48%, I don't think he wins

This is a good point. Democrats are just as likely to overperform polling as Republicans in Texas. I only rate TX-SEN as Lean R, and my hot take is that Hegar is actually more likely to win than Greenfield in IA.

Eh. Anecdotally, I know a bunch of Biden/Cornyn voters. Also anecdotally, no one is *excited* about Hegar. I like her, and I've voted for her, and my friends have too, but then they're like "So...if she wins...we get a Democrat in the Senate for 6 years.......and it's her??"

TBF, when the GOP finally broke through in Texas and elected a senator, it was John Tower - a diminutive college professor who'd lost a House race and a Senate race before and was regarded as a retread Generic Republican. And he ended up being in the Senate for four terms.

And ironically enough, this is the same Senate seat that was once held by Tower. It would be astonishing if Hegar took it back for the Democrats tonight, since it has been in Republican hands for almost sixty years, since Tower won the 1961 special election. It's also ironic that this was Lyndon Johnson's Senate seat before he became Vice-President.