Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 6/26 (374 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Oh I realize that wholeheartedly, but that's not (0+ / 0-)

    the point I'm trying to make.

    I'm saying imagine if the front-page was pushing hard for how extreme the votes taken by particularly offensive but defeatable Republicans like Mike Coffman were. Do you think they wouldn't generate enthusiasm based donations? And then crucially, money in the near term is worth a decent amount more than money in the election year fall when many candidates get added to orange to blue. Add time is cheaper, viability is better demonstrated to big donors, etc.

    But really, TX-Gov just isn't winnable barring a Perry renomination and even that is dubious on both counts. That's like donating to Louie Gohmert's opponent when Mike Coffman could very well lose.

    •  Well (3+ / 0-)

      The front page does do just that, and has every cycle since 2004, and will again this cycle. It's just hard to do it in an odd-numbered year. We'll see, though.

      We may want to start endorsing candidates earlier than ever for just that reason, though typically we've tried to avoid primaries except where there's a clear progressive option who is better than the rest of the field (or where there's someone awful like Ed Case).

      Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

      by David Nir on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:31:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Believe me I get all that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        it's just endlessly frustrating to see us donating at this early point to a 2014 race in Texas. What if Perry doesn't run? Polling shows Abbot, who has more than $10 million banked as quite popular among those that know him which means he's safe in such a red state. I guess what I'm bemoaning is this particular case, not Dkos and O2B in general which I think do more good than waste. I absolutely love how they endorsed Mark Begich in 2008 and how that might have just made the difference in such a close and cheap race.

        But I think there are certainly mid 2013-candidates like Begich or Schweitzer should he announce soon, or Andrew Romanoff or Ann Callis or Gwen Graham who are incredibly likely to be our nominees in their must win races who aren't any less liberal than Davis and I can't help but feel like this money is being wasted. Is the 'draft' money at least transferable to her reelection bid? I would be surprised if it were. At the end of the day I just hate that anyone would donate from gut level reactionism to an unwinnable race when there are plenty of winnable races with nearly equally vile opponents like the Mike Coffmans of the world.

        •  Did you click on the link? (3+ / 0-)

          Here it is. The money is for her state Senate account, hers to do with as she pleases.

          Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

          by David Nir on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:59:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for that immensely (0+ / 0-)

            no I did not, I've been busy writing a gay marriage response diary and between that and yesterday's and today's travel/family obligations I haven't had nearly as much opportunity to read DKos as I'd like to in full, though of course I made exception to read most of the DKE comments as I always try to.

            So I take back half of my previous comment and most of its full intent in that respect as I just figured it was raising for her as our gov nominee and that's it. Spending on Davis' reelection is definitely worth it barring her getting stuck in a  seat Romney won by 25%.

        •  I've alreaady seen people here (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          act like Callis is a conservadem compared to that other guy running.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:03:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think Texas is as hopeless (0+ / 0-)

          Now, it's not the lowest-hanging fruit or perhaps the wisest race to spend hard-earned money on, which I think was your point.

          But look - Perry got 39% of the vote in 2006 and got a lower vote share than John McCain in the most Republican year ever, 2010.  And that was before his disastrous presidential run.  If Perry runs again we should at least have a viable, well-funded candidate, and not a Some Dude Paul Sadler (who got 40% of the vote in the second largest state in America!).  Normally I'm against running the most liberal candidates possible, especially in conservative states, but we've never really run someone who's excited the Democratic base in Texas, so, y'know, we should give it a try.

          Yes, a majority of Texans are pro-life.  But they are not as rabidly pro-life as the legislature.  There are a lot of suburban women in Texas, Democrats and Republicans, who would sympathize with Wendy Davis.  And simply not being Rick Perry may be enough to get a lot of votes from Texans who usually support Republicans.

          I'm not saying I expect Democrats to win Texas, it's still a very long shot.  But it could be on the map.

          •  My response to this is incredibly simple (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Texas has an uber early March primary, so if Perry is renominated we have 8 months to nuke him and should.

            Aside from that though, there's zero legitimate reason to raise money for a Texas race 18 months out when there are so many better targets that deserve our attention and Perry's replacement is popular and well funded and it's Texas.

            Then you have the fact that despite Perry getting just 39% of the vote, Democrats for our gubernatorial nomination got just 30% the same year which to me demonstrates the fact that there were viable third party candidates, not that Perrry was toxic, but even in the year of 2010 when he got just 55% we got 42%. This is to say that statewide Texas prefers conservative candidates in their elections regardless of the costs; I'll give you a further example in that Democrats haven't won a statewide election since 1998.

            All of this isn't to say that either the state is hopelessly conservative or that we have no chance statewide, just that Texas is going to be a long term project at least until we see Latinos participate near the same rate as whites or blacks.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site