Texas Democrats launch largest voter registration campaign to hobble GOP's grip on the state

[Fawlty]

Aww cmon man don’t give me that. You’re going to actually write “regardless of the money” ....the money and the positive media view that it buys is very important. Francis was supposed to be the crown jewel on the “blue wav...puddle) in 2018. You don’t get 90M for nothing....against Cruz of all people too

Cruz raised and spent 45 million (vs. 78 million for Beto), which buys plenty of ads and exposure in an absolute sense. Yes, the money doesn't matter to a large enough degree at those high levels that it should unseat a Texas senator. And it's a bad argument anyway, because candidates from either party can raise that kind of money in the future, too. So the threat of blue Texas doesn't disappear- if anything it's much stronger now. It's also more true that winners attract money than it is that money makes winners. Money makes it possible to be in the mix, but it gets into diminishing returns pretty quickly.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Because Republicans are openly hostile to minorities like Muslims and Hispanics. This is the truth which you will ignore so that you can whip up some silly anti-white conspiracy theory.

Not in my area they are not. Traditional Republicans like money and for people to be loyal to the country they live and to somewhat assimilate. In some backwater places there could be some hostility to Muslims, so I understand your point is not ridiculous in all settings. I know down south is not always like MI. Here in SE MI we could care less.

It's not a conspiracy theory.

 

[ultramanhyata]

It's not a secret. It's not just not voting Republican. I have voted Dem more than Republican in my life. It's pretending to be friends of the "liberal movement" in the West. It's gross. We know what it is.

Do you believe that Ilhan Omar's progressive passion is all an act?

 

[TheFirstEMP]

Another nice free state, ruined by corrupt Democrats and liberals fleeing the mess they created in California.

 

[AlexDB9]

Cruz raised and spent 45 million (vs. 78 million for Beto), which buys plenty of ads and exposure in an absolute sense. Yes, the money doesn't matter to a large enough degree at those high levels that it should unseat a Texas senator. And it's a bad argument anyway, because candidates from either party can raise that kind of money in the future, too. So the threat of blue Texas doesn't disappear- if anything it's much stronger now. It's also more true that winners attract money than it is that money makes winners. Money makes it possible to be in the mix, but it gets into diminishing returns pretty quickly.

The sources I’m looking at all put Francis at nearly 90M. Either way my point is he was strongly pushed and losing by any margin was nothing but a huge defeat given said resources (nothing was closer than it should have been). Like I said he set an all time record so it’s not something any one can do. I personally don’t think Texas flips blue in our life time

 

[Islam Imamate]

Not in my area they are not. Traditional Republicans like money and for people to be loyal to the country they live and to somewhat assimilate. In some backwater places there could be some hostility to Muslims, so I understand your point is not ridiculous in all settings. I know down south is not always like MI. Here in SE MI we could care less.

It's not a conspiracy theory.

Your local Republicans don't matter that much, in today's age people's perception of the parties are largely based on their perception of the most visible national level politicians of the party like Trump, McConnell, Graham, Cruz and so on. And at the national level Republicans are absolutely hostile to Muslims and Hispanics.

 

[Fawlty]

The sources I’m looking at all put Francis at nearly 90M. Either way my point is he was strongly pushed and losing by any margin was nothing but a huge defeat given said resources (nothing was closer than it should have been). Like I said he set an all time record so it’s not something any one can do. I personally don’t think Texas flips blue in our life time

Maybe you just have problems understanding the scale and relativity of things because you look at a result and stop thinking.

For instance, if Beto, who lost by a polling margin of error, had instead squeaked out a win, everybody would be saying big things about the change in the state of Texas politics, and panicking. There isn't enough space between a two-and-a-half percent loss and a nail-biter win for the conversation about Democratic electability in Texas to change that much. The reality looms whether you acknowledge it or not.

For my part, I'm similarly pessimistic about Florida despite the 2016 presidential election being similarly close to the Texas senate one. It feels like Florida is out of play for Democrats now, but that's probably an overreaction by me.

 

[Slick_36]

The sources I’m looking at all put Francis at nearly 90M. Either way my point is he was strongly pushed and losing by any margin was nothing but a huge defeat given said resources (nothing was closer than it should have been). Like I said he set an all time record so it’s not something any one can do. I personally don’t think Texas flips blue in our life time

As a Texan I have to say you have no idea what you're talking about. The result was a big win for the Democrats even with the loss, in fact that was the sentiment throughout that whole election that even a tight race would be a symbolic win and a step forward. No one expected Beto to just buy the election.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Cruz raised and spent 45 million (vs. 78 million for Beto), which buys plenty of ads and exposure in an absolute sense. Yes, the money doesn't matter to a large enough degree at those high levels that it should unseat a Texas senator. And it's a bad argument anyway, because candidates from either party can raise that kind of money in the future, too. So the threat of blue Texas doesn't disappear- if anything it's much stronger now. It's also more true that winners attract money than it is that money makes winners. Money makes it possible to be in the mix, but it gets into diminishing returns pretty quickly.

Having good funding in elections is like being able to wall-walk and defend takedowns against the cage in MMA. You need that to be competitive in the sport but that's not going to win you the title on its own.

 

[AlexDB9]

Maybe you just have problems understanding the scale and relativity of things because you look at a result and stop thinking.

For instance, if Beto, who lost by a polling margin of error, had instead squeaked out a win, everybody would be saying big things about the change in the state of Texas politics, and panicking. There isn't enough space between a two-and-a-half percent loss and a nail-biter win for the conversation about Democratic electability in Texas to change that much. The reality looms whether you acknowledge it or not.

For my part, I'm similarly pessimistic about Florida despite the 2016 presidential election being similarly close to the Texas senate one. It feels like Florida is out of play for Democrats now, but that's probably an overreaction by me.

I’m not one of these guys that will write to you in a passive agressive way and try to philosophy you to death every sentence. Just straight forward conversation. My simple point to you is 90M buys up a lot of attention and the media played up this “Beto” thing for Hispanics. By all means he should have won, but such a high amount of $$ resulting in a loss let’s me know that it was undoubtedly a fervor stocked up by said money and media. You take those away and Cruz takes this guy out to the shed. See his ‘rally’ outside of a Trump rally. ...those are his true numbers

 

[AlexDB9]

As a Texan I have to say you have no idea what you're talking about. The result was a big win for the Democrats even with the loss, in fact that was the sentiment throughout that whole election that even a tight race would be a symbolic win and a step forward. No one expected Beto to just buy the election.

This is the type of hot take I come to bored for. My oh my

 

[Slick_36]

You keep pretending not to understand. The first thing you quoted was as direct and clear as a sentence or two could be, and you pretended not to understand. It's like you need things made complicated so the truth isn't so obvious.

What don't you understand sweetheart? People that are beyong right-wing where they come from, who only want traditional families and enforced moral code, decide to side with Democrats when they come to the West. That is because they are viewing the normal native population who has pride in itself as the enemy, and joining the attack that has already begun from within. This is actually common sense. Families interested in forced modesty, religion, and less freedom of choice, amazingly aren't actually "liberal," of did you think they were? Do you think that being loyal to a country outside the West and having a permanent tan makes you a defacto liberal? Maybe it does.. Because maybe it's just about killing nationalism and native populations in the West.

I'll wait for an intelligent rebuttal as to why conservatives from other places who are often business owners decide to join with the liberal party when they come to the West, other than what I have indicated. I will not get one.

The first thing I quoted was you asking questions like we're all inside your head and know the answer. You constantly throw the word "common sense" around but you don't seem to have any understanding of what that even means. I assume you're just saying that they're anti-white or anti-west, however you want to put it, but you have literally nothing to support that but your feelings.

Your only response to them being treated like people by liberals is "not around me". That's not exactly conducive to a productive conversation. You live in your own bubble and think the world operates exactly like that. It's weird honestly, genuinely makes me think you have a personality bubble where you can't see past your own experience.

 

[Slick_36]

This is the type of hot take I come to bored for. My oh my

What?

 

[Slick_36]

Yeah, I had heard that line for years but was wondering why things like the Pink Tide and the constant electing of socialists/leftists in Latin America was a thing if they’re so conservative.

If you look at polls, they’re overwhelmingly in favor of government interfering to improve the lives of people and in places like Mexico it’s illegal for religious officials to hold office.

It seems like the only time a conservative is democratically elected in Latin America, it is only a response to a leftist regime that fucked things up and the pendulum swung back.

Probably the majority of conservative/right wing leaders of state in Latin America are American backed dictators who’s only redeeming quality was that they’re not communists.

Places like Peru, Colombia, and Mexico until the last election have been moving in the right direction (in the political sense and also because it’s a good thing) with leaders that are in favor of privatizing the economy, with great gains in GDP growth and GDP per capita growth.

Note: I’m excluding Brazil from my generalization, I know nothing about their politics or culture.

I do think that those who immigrate here believe more in the American system and are going to be less liberal than those who stay back in their home country. With American politics being so identity based these days, the right could still win a lot of them over with little effort. I have to wonder how often they vote. I'm assuming illegal votes are practically non-existent but legal votes I'm very interested in knowing the number.

 

[Fawlty]

Having good funding in elections is like being able to wall-walk and defend takedowns against the cage in MMA. You need that to be competitive in the sport but that's not going to win you the title on its own.

Whoa, that's a pretty good analogy. I don't think most people will believe that money plays that sort of role, though. It's especially hard to make a convincing argument when spending is so correlated with winning.

 

[Mendacious]

Because Republicans are openly hostile to minorities like Muslims and Hispanics. My dad, a business owner, was a registered Republican up until Bush's first term and the start of the War on Terror after which he registered as independent.

This is the truth which you will ignore so that you can whip up some silly anti-white conspiracy theory.

Come on, Muslims are conservative. What do you mean that white identity politics are not appealing to non-white people?

 

[Amerikuracana]

Your local Republicans don't matter that much, in today's age people's perception of the parties are largely based on their perception of the most visible national level politicians of the party like Trump, McConnell, Graham, Cruz and so on. And at the national level Republicans are absolutely hostile to Muslims and Hispanics.

Well an appropriate return of hostilities for the hostility shown in the West is appropriate. The bataclan could have been reason to throw half the Muslims out of France, to be honest. That's not America, but there was a wee attack on us as well, and then one at a military base like 2 weeks ago. Are we going to ignore that? Are you considering that when you come up with your "poor Muslims" narrative? America isn't Europe, but the rapes and stabbings and attacks on our close allies by Muslim immigrants kind of have to have SOME response, don't they? If theer are hundreds of terror cells working to get terrorists in, then a temporary ban (I wasn't in favor) is not some ridiculous idea from those assigned to protect us. Sorry.

As for the Latinos, gimme a break. It's about stopping the ridiculous flow of illegals across the border. Sorry countries have borders. Their countries do, and so does ours.

 

[Fawlty]

I’m not one of these guys that will write to you in a passive agressive way and try to philosophy you to death every sentence. Just straight forward conversation. My simple point to you is 90M buys up a lot of attention and the media played up this “Beto” thing for Hispanics. By all means he should have won, but such a high amount of $$ resulting in a loss let’s me know that it was undoubtedly a fervor stocked up by said money and media. You take those away and Cruz takes this guy out to the shed. See his ‘rally’ outside of a Trump rally. ...those are his true numbers

The media saying "Beto" isn't the result of outspending Cruz, but is more the media recognizing that it's a real race, which attracts media attention, which in turn attracts more money. If you tried to artificially create a Democratic senator somewhere like Oklahoma or Idaho, no amount of money is going to manufacture enough support. But if a candidate was polling very well above average in a strongly red state, then you could help that candidate out by spending money to raise their exposure. Money has that sort of role. It's not sufficient by itself, you need a strong candidate and you create a snowball effect. It's no more important than a candidate being a strong candidate, yet people act as if it's more important than being a strong candidate. That just isn't how it works.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Do you believe that Ilhan Omar's progressive passion is all an act?

It's part an act.. She's been acting long enough that it might have become a part of her by now. If she went to her native land, she could easily revert to supporting some Muslim ultra conservative. These politicians just want easy jobs and influence like everybody else.

 

[Amerikuracana]

The first thing I quoted was you asking questions like we're all inside your head and know the answer. You constantly throw the word "common sense" around but you don't seem to have any understanding of what that even means. I assume you're just saying that they're anti-white or anti-west, however you want to put it, but you have literally nothing to support that but your feelings.

Your only response to them being treated like people by liberals is "not around me". That's not exactly conducive to a productive conversation. You live in your own bubble and think the world operates exactly like that. It's weird honestly, genuinely makes me think you have a personality bubble where you can't see past your own experience.

I have nothing to support that Muslims integrating into Europe and America are often anti-West?