It's interesting to look at the national election history over the last 20 years.
Listed below is the departure from the generic race. Example: 2006 Kay Hutchinson won by 25 1/2 points, in a year where the D won the House vote by 8 points...so Texas was R+33.
2006 Senate: R+33
2008 Senate: R+23, Prez R+22
2012 Senate: R+18, Prez R+20
2014 Senate: R+21
2016 Prez: R+11
2018 Senate R+11
2020 Senate R+13, Prez R+9
2024 Senate R+6, Prez R+10
These numbers have steadily become less red. Now, will the trend continue? It depends greatly on the Hispanic vote. In 2024, Latinos in Texas went R+10. Lots were made of their flip red, and the Pubs in Texas redistricted based on it. But was that a mirage? Latino men in particular didn't like Harris, but the overall trend does not match.
In 2020, Latinos made up 23% of the electorate and were D+16.
2022 governor race: Latinos 21%, D+16
2018 senate: Latinos 26%, D+29
2016 latinos 24%, D+27
Clearly there is also a long-term trend for Latinos to the Pubs. However, 2024 surely seems like an outlier.
My prediction of the needed national Dem advantage for the seat to flip:
I just voted in that primary, and for Cornyn/Crenshaw and a lot of “none of the above.” Paxton is so clearly bent, I can’t figure how deeply anchored anyone’s priors could be to brush aside all of the muck Paxton is and has been in.
Reason for posting: Turnout. I got there in the mid-morning, in the most R-leaning “not rural” district in the US, and it was basically empty. The people working the polls said it had been quiet “but more people are coming, it’ll be busy soon.” Maybe, maybe not. Posting from somewhere over Kamchatka now, headed back to my second home in Asia.
I'll bite... what's the joke? I mean, I'm aware of the Democratic-Republican party founded by Jefferson. But, I've never really considered it an ancestor of today's Republicans, and either way I don't get the joke.
I feel like the same question of the Democrats needs to be asked. Can they blow it by not going with a candidate whose theory of the case is to turnout voters and win over former Trump voters. If republicans do get Hunt or Paxton, this race is much closer and winnable compared to if Democrats pick a turn out only candidate (I think it’s a pretty clear myth that if Democrats just turn out enough people then they’ll win, Trump in the general has helped disprove that theory).
Because Texas has an open primary season, Democrat voters can cross-over and vote in the Republican primary. There's a chance that if Crockett had stayed out of the race, Democrats in relatively large numbers might've crossed over to vote against Paxton. But, because she made the D primary competitive, she may have inadvertently helped Paxton.
For those who don't know, Texas has two weeks of early voting, and a small amount of mail-ins for people with a good reason. As of yesterday, 5 days into early voting, a total of 552,000 had voted in the Dem primary, and 521,000 had voted in the GOP primary.
In the 10 largest counties, excluding Fort Bend (which is not reporting for some reason), the Dems had 364,000, while the GOP had 209,000. This means in the remaining counties the Dems had 188,000 votes, while the GOP had 312,000.
So of the vote totals of the first five days, it's D+3 overall.
66% of the Dem vote comes from the larger counties, while 40% of the Pub vote does.
For reference, in the 2024 senate race, the GOP got 2.63 million votes in these 9 counties (43% of their total), while the Dems got 3.27 million (65% of their total). The Dems won these counties by 11 points; the Pubs won the rest of the state 3.36 million to 1.74 million (R+30).
So far in early voting, the Dems are winning the largest 9 by 28 points, and the Pubs are winning the rest by 25.
The thought has occurred that MAGA is at the point where Paxton's scandals give him an outlaw persona and make him a mini-Trump in their eyes. The Conryn campaign obviously doesn't agree if they're hammering the scandals in their negative advertising. Does anyone else wonder if they are right?
It's interesting to look at the national election history over the last 20 years.
Listed below is the departure from the generic race. Example: 2006 Kay Hutchinson won by 25 1/2 points, in a year where the D won the House vote by 8 points...so Texas was R+33.
2006 Senate: R+33
2008 Senate: R+23, Prez R+22
2012 Senate: R+18, Prez R+20
2014 Senate: R+21
2016 Prez: R+11
2018 Senate R+11
2020 Senate R+13, Prez R+9
2024 Senate R+6, Prez R+10
These numbers have steadily become less red. Now, will the trend continue? It depends greatly on the Hispanic vote. In 2024, Latinos in Texas went R+10. Lots were made of their flip red, and the Pubs in Texas redistricted based on it. But was that a mirage? Latino men in particular didn't like Harris, but the overall trend does not match.
In 2020, Latinos made up 23% of the electorate and were D+16.
2022 governor race: Latinos 21%, D+16
2018 senate: Latinos 26%, D+29
2016 latinos 24%, D+27
Clearly there is also a long-term trend for Latinos to the Pubs. However, 2024 surely seems like an outlier.
My prediction of the needed national Dem advantage for the seat to flip:
Cornyn v Talarico: D+9
Cornyn v Crockett: D+13
Paxton v Talarico: D+6
Paxton v Crockett: D+9
Your Texas 2020 and 2024 numbers are off.
2020:
Sen: R+9.6, Pres: R+5.6
2024:
Sen: R+8.5, Pres: R+13.7
I just voted in that primary, and for Cornyn/Crenshaw and a lot of “none of the above.” Paxton is so clearly bent, I can’t figure how deeply anchored anyone’s priors could be to brush aside all of the muck Paxton is and has been in.
Reason for posting: Turnout. I got there in the mid-morning, in the most R-leaning “not rural” district in the US, and it was basically empty. The people working the polls said it had been quiet “but more people are coming, it’ll be busy soon.” Maybe, maybe not. Posting from somewhere over Kamchatka now, headed back to my second home in Asia.
Could the Republican blow the Texas Senste Race?
Only a party descended from the Democratic-Republican Party could mess that up.
...
For those of you who don't get the joke, thats a yes.
I'll bite... what's the joke? I mean, I'm aware of the Democratic-Republican party founded by Jefferson. But, I've never really considered it an ancestor of today's Republicans, and either way I don't get the joke.
I feel like the same question of the Democrats needs to be asked. Can they blow it by not going with a candidate whose theory of the case is to turnout voters and win over former Trump voters. If republicans do get Hunt or Paxton, this race is much closer and winnable compared to if Democrats pick a turn out only candidate (I think it’s a pretty clear myth that if Democrats just turn out enough people then they’ll win, Trump in the general has helped disprove that theory).
Because Texas has an open primary season, Democrat voters can cross-over and vote in the Republican primary. There's a chance that if Crockett had stayed out of the race, Democrats in relatively large numbers might've crossed over to vote against Paxton. But, because she made the D primary competitive, she may have inadvertently helped Paxton.
For those who don't know, Texas has two weeks of early voting, and a small amount of mail-ins for people with a good reason. As of yesterday, 5 days into early voting, a total of 552,000 had voted in the Dem primary, and 521,000 had voted in the GOP primary.
In the 10 largest counties, excluding Fort Bend (which is not reporting for some reason), the Dems had 364,000, while the GOP had 209,000. This means in the remaining counties the Dems had 188,000 votes, while the GOP had 312,000.
So of the vote totals of the first five days, it's D+3 overall.
66% of the Dem vote comes from the larger counties, while 40% of the Pub vote does.
For reference, in the 2024 senate race, the GOP got 2.63 million votes in these 9 counties (43% of their total), while the Dems got 3.27 million (65% of their total). The Dems won these counties by 11 points; the Pubs won the rest of the state 3.36 million to 1.74 million (R+30).
So far in early voting, the Dems are winning the largest 9 by 28 points, and the Pubs are winning the rest by 25.
Thank you, love when Eli posts an article for me to read in the morning while sipping my coffee
The thought has occurred that MAGA is at the point where Paxton's scandals give him an outlaw persona and make him a mini-Trump in their eyes. The Conryn campaign obviously doesn't agree if they're hammering the scandals in their negative advertising. Does anyone else wonder if they are right?
Great post, McKown.