27 November 2010

Black Friday

I guess I spoke too soon. We lost our daughter today. RIP Zoe. We love you.

Although stranger things have happened, I doubt I'll be posting much for awhile.

Posted by Evan @ 11/27/10 12:28 AM | Comments (4)        


26 November 2010

Moving Public Integrity away from Travis Co DA should be a no-brainer

Paul Burka writes:

Will the DeLay verdict spell trouble for the Travis County District Attorney's Public Integrity Unit, which receives state funding? In a blog post dated April 15, 2009, I wrote that amendment number one to the appropriations bill was a proposal by Wayne Christian, then and now the chairman of the conservative caucus, to shift the Unit's funding to the attorney general's office.

It makes way more sense to put Public Integrity in the Attorney General office. It's frankly a no-brainer and shocking that the state entrusts such a unit to county government. It makes zero sense to leave the unity in the Travis County DA's office.

1. The Attorney General represents all Texans, and is elected statewide. By contrast, the Travis County DA is elected by a mere 4% of the Texas population.

2. Travis County is not representative. It underrepresents black and Latino voters. If you were moving Public Integrity from the AG's office to the Travis DA's office, you would arguably have a Voting Rights Act violation.

3. Putting Public Integrity in the AG's office increases accountability to voters. The Travis County DA race is effectively decided in the Dem primary, and it will be that way for the next few decades. Texas as a whole already has more competitive elections between Republicans and Democrats than Travis County does, and Texas' elections are likely to be more competitive on a partisan basis than those of Travis County.

To argue that Public Integrity should be under the Travis County DA is to say that Austin Democrats should get to decide who runs Public Integrity. That makes no sense from a practical or theoretical perspective.

Posted by Evan @ 11/26/10 01:12 PM | Comments (5)        


If Republicans want to beat Obama, they can't nominate Romney, Palin, Huck or Newt

I've said for a long time that Obama will be much tougher to beat than people seem to realize. Here's a data point: PPP just did a poll of North Carolina and found these results in a ballot test:

Obama 44
Romney 44

Huckabee 48
Obama 44

Palin 43
Obama 48

Obama 46
Gingrich 45

The poll is only of 517 North Carolina registered voters, and PPP's results sometimes lean a bit Dem.

The point isn't the individual numbers, but that the ballot test numbers are close. That says it all. While Obama eeked out McCain in NC in 2008 by .4% if memory serves, North Carolina is a state that must be red if the Republican nominee is to have a chance in 2012 (W won by 12-15%ish in 2000 and 2004 if I recall). With the economy as bad as it is and distaste for Obama's policies as high as it is, if none of these candidates can be solidly beating Obama in North Carolina right now, then they are very clearly not the right choice against Obama.

If Republicans want to win in 2012, they must look beyond the four current frontrunners.

Posted by Evan @ 11/26/10 01:01 PM | Comments (0)        


If Republicans want to beat Obama, they can't nominate Romney, Palin, Huck or Newt

I've said for a long time that Obama will be much tougher to beat than people seem to realize. Here's a data point: PPP just did a poll of North Carolina and found these results in a ballot test:

Obama 44
Romney 44

Huckabee 48
Obama 44

Palin 43
Obama 48

Obama 46
Gingrich 45

The poll is only of 517 North Carolina registered voters, and PPP's results sometimes lean a bit Dem.

The point isn't the individual numbers, but that the ballot test numbers are close. That says it all. While Obama eeked out McCain in NC in 2008 by .4% if memory serves, North Carolina is a state that must be red if the Republican nominee is to have a chance in 2012 (W won by 12-15%ish in 2000 and 2004 if I recall). With the economy as bad as it is and distaste for Obama's policies as high as it is, if none of these candidates can be solidly beating Obama in North Carolina right now, then they are very clearly not the right choice against Obama.

If Republicans want to win in 2012, they must look beyond the four current frontrunners.

Posted by Evan @ 11/26/10 09:56 AM | Comments (0)        


25 November 2010

Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving. I'm particularly grateful this year for my wife and my daughter, who will be born in February.

Posted by Evan @ 11/25/10 01:35 PM | Comments (0)        


23 November 2010

HW and Barbara Bush all but endorse Mitt Romney

From Larry King Live:

GEORGE H.W. BUSH: If you asked me, who was the nominee be [sic], I couldn't tell you. We like Mitt Romney. We know him well and like him very much.

BARBARA BUSH: I'll go with George. Mitt Romney. I like a lot of them. But I like people who feel that you can respect other people's ideas. I like that a lot.

A strange non-endorsement endorsement. Romney was so inspired by Ronald Reagan and his VP HW that he called himself an independent during Reagan's presidency.

Posted by Evan @ 11/23/10 06:05 PM | Comments (0)        


No need for KBH tea leaves? She's running

When Senator Hutchison is writing editorials like this one in the Chron, everyone assumes she's running:

Republicans in the House and Senate recently took a historic step and voted to support a moratorium on Congressional earmarks. I supported this effort because it will give Congress the opportunity to make our nation's budget process more transparent and accountable, and it will allow us to focus on cutting spending.
I think I was the first one to remark after the primary that it looked like KBH was making moves to run for re-election in 2012. This move certainly makes it look likely. KBH has historically been a fairly prolific earmarker and had stood with McConnell in opposing an earmark ban. I don't know anyone who isn't interpreting this as a move to run for re-election.

Here's a fun parlor game: how many primary opponents will KBH get if she decides to run again? I'll put the over/under at 3.5. I'd put her at under a 50% chance to win re-election if she decides to run.

Posted by Evan @ 11/23/10 03:02 PM | Comments (0)        


I wouldn't call these tea leaves

It is amazing to me that every Austinite I talk to tells me that Perry is "definitely," "100%" running for president. I mean, almost every single person thinks he is running. I don't think so. If he is, he has the strangest way of running for president that I've ever seen.

On the other hand, Chris Christie joked that maybe comitting suicide was the only way to convince people he wasn't running, and NJ insiders remain convinced that he is running, so maybe this just means state capitol insiders like to have something to talk about.

Posted by Evan @ 11/23/10 10:40 AM | Comments (0)        


22 November 2010

Things I think about the race for Speaker (if there even is one)

1. Does anyone care about what RedState thinks? I don't. The anti-Straus narrative fits into Erickson's worldview, but that doesn't necessarily make it correct.

2. Joe Straus does not deserve credit for the 22 seat Texas House pickup on election day. That's silly. Straus and Craddick were both marginal influences in the partisan makeup of the TX House for the past decade.

3. The Texas media have really climbed aboard the Joe Straus bandwagon. I hope Straus is enjoying his encomium, because he may not have another moment like this one until his funeral.

4. Not sure that the announced speaker candidates are the best candidates, or even the most likely to be speaker if the Speaker isn't named Straus.

5. Pressure from third party groups is probably mostly about laying the foundation to challenge Straus in two years if they are not satisfied with this session. It doesn't seem like they've really given a reason to vote against Straus, except that Democratic machinations resulted in his speakership.

6. Races for speaker are probably some of the best experiments around in human individual and group behavior.

Posted by Evan @ 11/22/10 11:20 PM | Comments (0)        


11 November 2010


When I'm not blogging, I'm more likely tagging things in my Diigo feed, which also appears over by the ads on the right sidebar. Feel free to click.

I'd note particularly this article at Texas Watchdog, which seems to suggest that the Rice and UH administrations were practicing quite a bit of deception in the sale of KTRU.

Posted by Evan @ 11/11/10 08:57 PM | Comments (0)        


08 November 2010

Who controls redistricting

Via Politico, a chart of who control Congressional redistricting in each state, as well as a chart of who controls statehouse redistricting.

Posted by Evan @ 11/08/10 08:29 PM | Comments (0)        


Rick Perry vs Jon Stewart

I don't watch (m)any interviews on TV, but I am planning on watching the Daily Show tonight (10pm, Comedy Central) to see Jon Stewart interview Rick Perry.

Posted by Evan @ 11/08/10 06:26 PM | Comments (2)        


06 November 2010

The Olbermann suspension

Put me in the camp of people who don't understand why Keith Olbermann was suspended by MSNBC. He donated a few thousand dollars to Democrats. So what? He maxed out to Raul Grijalva, which doesn't even come close to the worth of the repeated media exposure he gave him.

The funniest part is that he is suspended for violating their standards of impartiality. Has anyone who has ever watched Olbermann for more than 3 minutes thought that he was impartial? Bizarre.

Posted by Evan @ 11/06/10 01:34 PM | Comments (0)        


The Texas Connection to Marco Rubio

Weekly Standard:

When he met with former Florida governor Jeb Bush in December 2008, Rubio left the conversation believing that Bush intended to run for the seat. The two men had become close over the previous decade, when Rubio, serving in the Florida House of Representatives, was a strong legislative ally of Governor Bush. If Bush was running, Rubio wasn't. The two men spoke again in January, and Bush told Rubio that he had decided against a run. Bush encouraged Rubio to consider entering the race. It didn't take much convincing.

On January 23, Rubio met with Heath Thompson and Malorie Miller, political consultants from the respected Dallas-based firm Scott Howell and Company. Miller had known Rubio from her days working in the Florida legislature, and she wanted to work for Rubio if he decided to run. They pitched him informally and began talking regularly with Rebull, Rubio's longtime confidant and a sharp South Florida Republican and former vice president of the Florida Marlins.

Given the relatively lackluster Republican options so far, how long until people start talking about Rubio for president?

Posted by Evan @ 11/06/10 01:28 PM | Comments (0)        


05 November 2010

Is Fort Bend turning blue?

Texas bloggers have liked to speculate about whether Fort Bend County is destined to become a blue county.

As of Tuesday, we have one more data point. Rick Perry beat Bill White 52-47 while the rest of the statewide offices went Republican by about 58 to 40.

Posted by Evan @ 11/05/10 04:03 PM | Comments (0)        


Chet Edwards: A lesson for cautious politicians

Chet Edwards was always a pretty cautious politician. He never voted with Democrats unless his vote would change the outcome, and was careful not to do anything that might link him to national Democrats. Until early 08, when there was lots of intra-party pressure to pick a side in the Hillary v Obama battle for superdelegates, including from Nancy Pelosi.

It looked risk-free. Hillary was the polarizing figure in Edwards' district back then, not Obama. He could make Pelosi happy, make liberals happy, and look like a moderate. Win-win all around, right?

It didn't turn out that way. Pelosi lobbying openly for Edwards to be Obama's vice president came back to haunt him. More than anything else, that was probably Edwards' ticket to defeat on Tuesday.

Final note: people who thought that the NRCC pulling its ad buy meant that Edwards was going to win the race were either spinning or not paying attention.

Posted by Evan @ 11/05/10 01:59 PM | Comments (0)        


The Texas leg of the Perry book tour

The schedule for Perry's book tour in Texas is below the jump.

[Read More]

Posted by Evan @ 11/05/10 11:45 AM | Comments (0)        


Should I stay or should I go now?, part II

With the election behind us, I am trying to figure out what I want to do with this blog. Definitely a decent chance it gets killed, as it seems unlikely that Perry is going to ever run for election to anything. No, I still don't think he's running for president. Never having worked in the legislature, I generally don't feel like I have much to say during the legislative session. We'll see though, I've thought about ending this blog before and somehow it seems to stick around.

As for the candidates, Bill White is presumably relaxing post-campaign and deciding whether he wants to run for Senate in 2012 or to be guv in 2014. I think he made it fairly clear that he'd rather be a senator than a governor, and I definitely think he made it clear that he'll be running again.

Rick Perry is on his book tour, visiting a variety of TV shows, including the Today show, Fox and Friends, and...a Monday visit to The Daily Show. Perry's interview with Jon Stewart will definitely be a must watch. Fed Up! is officially released November 15, but apparently it is already available in some places. George W. Bush's Decision Points is officially released on November 9. It will be interesting to watch the sales numbers on those two books by the last two governors of Texas.

Posted by Evan @ 11/05/10 10:51 AM | Comments (0)        


Final House number should be 64

Assuming that more ballots aren't found in South Texas, the final number of Republican pickups should be 64. That matters to me, of course, because I picked 70, so now 60 doesn't look like they picked better than me.

Evan Smith interviewed Mike Baselice and Mark McKinnon. Great conversation.

TribLive Post-election re-cap 2010 from texastribune on Vimeo.

Posted by Evan @ 11/05/10 09:46 AM | Comments (0)        


02 November 2010

Did Bill White win?

People are hitting this blog for those search results.

Bill White lost. Right now the margin is 57-40...almost exactly the same as Tony Sanchez. I'd expect the margin to narrow.

Right now it also looks like Texas House Democrats are being washed away in this wave election.

Posted by Evan @ 11/02/10 09:52 PM | Comments (1)        


Live election chat tonight

I'll be participating in the live chat over at BlogHouston. Stop on by and help me balance out the Houston focus with some coverage of the rest of the state. Polls close at 7pm; I'll probably start participating at 8 or so.

Posted by Evan @ 11/02/10 02:54 PM | Comments (0)        


Isn't that what you say when someone loses?

Paul Burka says:

I think it is very possible that the Republican far right will splinter and cast its lot with the Tea Party. Rhetorically, at least, Rick Perry has already done this.

Broadly speaking, the Republican Party is comprised of pro-business and social Burkean wings. There's quite a bit of overlap between the two, but there are certainly moments of rupture.

I see zero evidence of such a fissure in Texas or in Perry's coalition.

Posted by Evan @ 11/02/10 05:38 AM | Comments (0)        


What I liked about Bill White's campaign

I disagree with alot of strategical and tactical decisions that Bill White made about his campaign. He's quite likely headed for a double digit loss, so now seems like the time when I would trash him since I write about strategy and tactics. In fact, the Texas media already have begun to do so. Recent Dem candidates haven't faired very well in the estimation of their Dem colleagues either: Chris Bell, John Kerry, Tony Sanchez, and Al Gore. All generally criticized roundly after their election losses.

Actually, I'd like to praise White. Bill White ran the campaign that Bill White wanted to run. He was genuine. If you put him in a different state, he might have won (Colorado?).

Now, let me make a list of the biggest failures*, so there's some context:

1) Failure to recognize that 2010 is not like 2008 or 2006, and thus never developed a strategy that might get to 50%.
2) Never broke with Democrats on any major issue, a necessity in Texas, especially 2010.
3) His micromanagement led to him writing TV ads that were, to be kind, pretty weak.

So why is Bill White still only going to lose by 10-11%, or almost defintitely somewhere in the 9-15 range? 'He kept his base and he was genuine.

Admittedly, Perry isn't the strongest Republican candidate, though he is an excellent campaigner. Even Perry seems to recognize this, as he implied to Politico a few weeks ago that his numbers were lower than a normal Texas Republican because he'd been around for awhile and pissed people off.

However, White's campaign was genuine. Bill White ran as Bill White. He was a little boring, but he was earnest. He talked about what he didn't like about Rick Perry and his tenure as governor, and there's alot that Bill White doesn't like. Through some quirks of Houston's 2003 mayoral race, he had won doing that, even though critics said he couldn't. So he was going to just be himself out on the campaign trail.

white didn't take positions that he might have contradicted: he's a pretty mainstream Democrat, albeit on the pro-business side, but he didn't try to pretend that he was a maverick Democrat. So he didn't have to worry about trying to be something that he wasn't. He didn't have to try to weave an ideological flip-flop and parse words. When asked if he'd promise not to raise taxes, he basically told the truth without hiding it behind much verbiage: he couldn't. That's a losing position in Texas, especially in 2010, but it will help a Democrat keep his base. It has a specific ceiling, but it also has a specific floor.

To tell you the truth, I think White did a reasonable job of keeping the Democratic base plus the people who really dislike Perry. Chris Bell couldn't do that, albeit under different circumstances. Tony Sanchez couldn't do that. This could have been a 20% victory (who knows, maybe I'll be wrong and it will be) for a Texas Republican in 2010.

* These will be a separate post at some point, I'm sure, though I've already covered them a bit over the course of the campaign.

Posted by Evan @ 11/02/10 05:09 AM | Comments (0)        


01 November 2010

My Texas-centric predictions

Without thinking about it too much, I had this:

Perry 53
White 43
Green 1.5-2
Libertarian 2-2.5

Republican gains in CD23 (Rodriguez) and in CD17 (Edwards). If the wave is quite big, CD27 (Ortiz) too, and if it's a real tsunami then maybe CD25 (Doggett).

Texas House = 10 seat GOP gain. Of my predictions, this is the one I've followed least, by far.

I already picked +9 Republicans in the Senate and +70 in the House.

(I am planning to continue thinking about this and am very likely to edit this post as the night goes on)

Posted by Evan @ 11/01/10 09:17 PM | Comments (0)        


House +70, Senate +9

I've already laid out my House predictions, now it's time to lay out my Senate predictions. The topline numbers are +70 House and +9 Senate.

Arkansas -- R. This race has actually been decided for about 4 months, yet shockingly a few pundits kept it on a less than safe Republican rating.

Connecticut -- D. Margin of error could be surprising.

Colorado -- R. Michael Bennett has probably run one of the better Dem campaigns, but I don't think it's going to be enough to hold off Buck.

Delaware -- Republicans nominated a bad candidate. Even a generic conservative R might have had a chance here -- which is truly remarkable -- but O'Donnell doesn't. D

Florida -- R. Crist probably made the right move by trying to engineer a Meek dropout, even though it was a long-shot. I think it may have hurt his final numbers though. I think it's a closer question whether Meek beats Crist than whether Crist beats Rubio.

Illinois -- R. Polls show Kirk ahead, though it's a blue state and voters are very unhappy with their choices. I think Kirk pulls it out, though some Green support in polls will likely melt into Democratic support just enough that it might put the Dem nominee over the top. Again, the enthusiasm gap probably gets Kirk there.

Nevada -- Harry Reid v Sharron Angle really tests the theory of just how far voters will go to vote against an incumbent they despise. Angle is historically incompetent as a candidate, with a plethora of gaffes and her current avoid-the-media-at-all-costs strategy. Harry Reid is despised by Nevadans, but while he is not a candidate who is made for TV, he does know how to punch and campaign. If this were any other election -- even 1994 -- I think Reid might pull it off. But this is 2010, and I predict Angle squeaks it out. R.

New Hampshire: R. Paul Hodes rode the wave into the House, and now he's going to ride the wave out. Investors often talk about beta, I think Hodes is a great example of beta in a politician: he moves with the market.

Ohio: R. How amazing is it that one of the closest House members to W (and later joined the administration) basically just had his D opponent give up against him? Wow.

Pennsylvania: R. How amazing is it that Pat Toomey is the likely winner? Watching Toomey's moves over the next six years will be very interesting. He wins in 2010, he wins in 1994, but in very few other environments can a politician of Toomey's reputation win a statewide federal race in Pennsylvania.

Wisconsin: R. Feingold is just a very weird fit for Wisconsin who had gotten a little lucky until now. If I were him I'd move to New York and try again.

* Finally, the really difficult races to predict. *

Alaska: R. This is the rare race which is less affected by national trends. Miller seems to be trying to lose; meanwhile at a local talk show host's urging, a few hundred Alaskans put their names on the ballot as possible write-ins, including several Lisa M. That step probably increases Miller's chances to win...but also increases McAdams's chances, which is a net gain for Democrats. Strategic voting might change the voting decision of a small but significant portion of the swing and Dem electorate. The most likely case is still a Miller win (60-65%?), but Dems probably have like a 10-15% chance of fluking this seat, just like they did with Alaska's other Senate seat in 2008. Give Murkowski a 25% chance or so, even given that legitimate write-in candidates probably run 10-15% behind what they would if their name was on the ballot. A truly awful campaign from Miller is what gives her a remarkably high possibility for a write-in candidate.

California: D. If the marijuana initiative wasn't on the ballot, I might be inclined to think that Fiorina could beat Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer. Boxer might be the most underwhelming member of the Democratic Senate caucus who has essentially won previous races in California by yelling "Democrat! Roe v Wade!" ad nauseum. Her closing TV adbuy is Obama's endorsement speech of her. A recent poll had Obama under 45% job approval in California, but even if it were in the 50-55 range, I think it's a weak ad. The average undecided or least-committed-to-Boxer voter probably neutral to lukewarm on Obama, so it doesn't really persuade them. The argument is that Boxer is ineffective, and the ad doesn't fight that. I think the race is likely to be closer than polls indicate, although I think the marijuana initiative might bring out some younger voters who will vote for Boxer.

Washington: R. In a recount? If history is a guide, Rossi probably has a disadvantage in a recount, and he's now on the ballot statewide for the 3rd time in 6 years without winning, so I subtract a few points for that too. Obama won by 17 points here in 2008 while Rossi lost his rematch by 7. Patty Murray is a pretty undistinguished incumbent, probably a point or two behind a generic D. This is truly a tossup, and if I could fudge and predict 8.5 seats instead of 9 seats, then I probably would. But forced to pick, I think the enthusiasm gap will just barely tip the scales in Rossi's favor. That's an awfully tough pick to make in an Obama +17% state.

West Virginia: D. Dem Manchin's approval rating is something like 72/24, while Republican Raese's is something like 47/47. WV is a unique state in that it's really not a Republican state -- a generic D is a favorite over a generic R in a gubernatorial race. However, WV is a very anti-Obama, anti-cap-and-trade state. Manchin is super popular as governor -- does Manchin = Obama Rubber Stamp work? I'm inclined to think not, as Manchin has very clearly delineated himself from Obama, although Raese is airing some clips of Manchin supporting ObamaCare. The average WV swing voter at this point strongly dislikes Obama, thinks Manchin is a good governor, and is lukewarm about Raese. At one point in my predictions, I wrote "Democrats will win one and Republicans will win one of the West Virginia and Washington races. I just don't know which one." This race could surprise and be an R, but my best guess is Manchin squeaks it out.

Senate: +9. As I already called, House +70.

Races that are most likely that I called incorrectly: West Virginia and Washington. California if the wave is truly large. For idiosyncratic reasons, Nevada and Alaska. If the wave is smaller -- which I doubt -- Illinois and Colorado too.

By the way, what's with my stringing-all-my-words-together recently? No idea.

Posted by Evan @ 11/01/10 07:18 PM | Comments (2)        


The final countdown

1. Bill White and Rick Perry were in upper-middle class suburbs. White is trying to keep Perry's margin down, rather than come up with a game changer. According to the Austin press corps, Perry is running for president.

2. The Tea Party seems to be energized to stick around post-election. How will that impact the Texas Legislature?

3. 95% of insiders predict a Perry victory, says the TT. Who are those other 5%? I bet they wouldn't be willing to be identified.

4. Excerpts from Rick Perry's new book are available.

5. I happened to notice that someone from a US House computer has spent their day going through my archives. Umm...hi.

* From a Vanity Fair article on the talk show wars, where Conan told this joke about how he was getting removed:

'"I'm trying very hard to stay positive here, and I want to tell you something. This is honest. Hosting The Tonight Show has been the fulfillment of a lifelong dream for me. And I just want to say to the kids out there watching: you can do anything you want in life. Yeah, yeah -- unless Jay Leno wants to do it, too.

At NBC, the joke represented the point of no return. All throughout the legal wrangling, even after the manifesto, Jeff Gaspin maintained a quiet wish that Conan would examine his options one more time and decide that staying at NBC still made the most sense.

After the joke, that dream vaporized.

Gaspin got a call from Jay about the joke. This one did not strike Jay as funny. He asked Gaspin, Why the **** am I giving up a half-hour for this guy?

Asterisks added so Google doesn't put me in the safesearch filter.

It's pretty amusing to me how the late night show hosts make a living pillorying politicians, yet one small joke about each other is seen as a huge, massive deal. That's something to keep in mind when demonizing the politicial opposition: they put themselves out there and take insults that make normal people (to the extent that talk show hosts are normal people) take umbrage.

Title brought to you by Europe:

Posted by Evan @ 11/01/10 02:36 PM | Comments (0)        


Call this a reminder to myself

In my judgment, 538 has made some significant model errors as well as questionable political assumptions. I think I'll write a detailed piece about this after election day. Even if his numbers are closer than mine, my points are still valid.

Posted by Evan @ 11/01/10 01:58 PM | Comments (0)        


Starting off the week

* In my opinion, it is harsh, but before the race is even over, pundits are already speculating over who the Democrats will nominate in 2014 for governor. Will it be Julian Castro, as floated by Evan Smith? Paul Burka says "all there is to [the idea]" is that he is "the most prominent Hispanic politician in the state." Jan Jarboe Russell doesn't seem enthused by the trial balloon either.

* The AP reports on Perry and White's last minute campaigning. Including this about the campaign finance reports:

Meanwhile, both candidates received a big infusion of campaign cash last week. According to the San Antonio Express-News, telegram reports to the Texas Ethics Commission show that $5.1 million poured into Texas political campaign accounts in four days last week.

Most of the cash went to influence a dozen state House races, the Perry and White campaigns got about $911,000 combined. Perry received 58.5 percent of the money, while White got 41.5 percent, the Express-news reported.

Sounds like Mostyn or Matt Angle found a better bet. Meanwhile, DallasBlog says that Texas House Republicans still have the financial edge.

* Major Garrett on a Boehner speakership style.

* Dallas is key in the gubernatorial race, says the DMN.

* Is this a sign of a prescient prediction or Democratic consultants managing expectations?

* Nat Gas drilling not really much of an issue here like in other states.

Posted by Evan @ 11/01/10 12:43 AM | Comments (0)        



+ Rick Perry vs World
+ About Me

+ Archives

+ Email:
  perryvsworld* at *gmail dot com



All content © Rick Perry vs. World and the respective authors.

Rick Perry vs. World is powered by Nucleus.

Site design and Nucleus customization by Kevin Whited.


+August 2017
+July 2017
+June 2017
+May 2017
+April 2017
+March 2017
+February 2017
+January 2017
+December 2016
+November 2016
+October 2016
+September 2016
+August 2016
+July 2016
+June 2016
+May 2016
+April 2016
+March 2016
+February 2016
+January 2016
+December 2015
+November 2015
+October 2015
+September 2015
+August 2015
+July 2015
+June 2015
+May 2015
+April 2015
+March 2015
+February 2015
+January 2015
+December 2014
+November 2014
+October 2014
+September 2014
+August 2014
+July 2014
+June 2014
+May 2014
+April 2014
+March 2014
+February 2014
+January 2014
+December 2013
+November 2013
+October 2013
+September 2013
+August 2013
+July 2013
+June 2013
+May 2013
+April 2013
+March 2013
+February 2013
+January 2013
+December 2012
+November 2012
+October 2012
+September 2012
+August 2012
+July 2012
+June 2012
+May 2012
+April 2012
+March 2012
+February 2012
+January 2012
+December 2011
+November 2011
+October 2011
+September 2011
+August 2011
+July 2011
+June 2011
+May 2011
+April 2011
+March 2011
+February 2011
+January 2011
+December 2010
+November 2010
+October 2010
+September 2010
+August 2010
+July 2010
+June 2010
+May 2010
+April 2010
+March 2010
+February 2010
+January 2010
+December 2009
+November 2009
+October 2009
+September 2009
+August 2009
+July 2009
+June 2009
+May 2009
+April 2009
+March 2009
+February 2009
+January 2009
+December 2008
+November 2008
+October 2008
+September 2008
+August 2008
+July 2008
+June 2008
+May 2008
+April 2008
+March 2008
+February 2008
+January 2008
+December 2007
+November 2007
+October 2007
+September 2007
+August 2007
+July 2007
+June 2007
+May 2007
+April 2007
+March 2007
+February 2007
+January 2007
+December 2006
+November 2006
+October 2006
+September 2006
+August 2006
+July 2006
+June 2006
+May 2006
+April 2006
+March 2006
+February 2006
+January 2006
+December 2005
+November 2005
+October 2005
+September 2005
+August 2005
+July 2005
+June 2005
+May 2005
+April 2005
+March 2005
+February 2005
+January 2005
+December 2004
+Acton MBA
+Ethereum News
+ICO Calendar
+How to prepare for CFA exams