Rick Perry vs World

16 December 2013

George P Bush for...Newt?

AP filed a story on George P Bush that tried to put him in an ideological box. C'mon, you knew it was coming whenever there was a slow news cycle.

But rather than campaigning on the mainstream Republicanism embodied by the family name, Bush says he's "a movement conservative" more in line with the tea party.

As if to underscore the point, he says he draws the most inspiration not from the administrations of his grandfather, George H. W. Bush, or his uncle, George W. Bush, but from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who engineered the 1994 Republican takeover of that chamber.

That's really a point worth exploring, but unfortunately we got little insight from the AP article aside from a 94 mention. I don't remember "P" endorsing Newt's presidential run, although that's hardly dispositive: it's definitely possible to admire Gingrich as a prolific fount of -- occasionally brilliant -- ideas even if you don't think he has the temperament to be president.

The "movement" is accepting of P for a few reasons that I think the article missed or glossed over:
1) His father Jeb was a more conservative governor than his uncle George W, despite the fact that Florida was and is a much less conservative state than Texas.
2) P's endorsements in high-profile races have been conservative. The Cruz endorsement came early in July 2011, and while personal connections may have played a strong role (they founded MavPAC together) in the Cruz endorsement, the Cruz campaign found George P to be a pleasure to work with. Likewise, P officially endorsed Rubio relatively early in Jan 2010 against Crist, but had scheduled a fundraiser for Rubio at least a month beforehand. At the time, Rubio had traction but was about 10 points back, per public polls. By contrast, John Cornyn didn't soft-pedal (and never rescinded) his Charlie Crist endorsement until March 2010, at which point Rubio was clearly winning the primary.
3) He's done the work. MavPAC and Hispanic Republicans of Texas have both been P projects, plus the fact that he's been available for speeches and fundraising for a long time.

Posted by Evan @ 12/16/13 07:52 AM | Comments (2)

15 December 2013

Annise Parker sees sexism in Rorschach test

I am amused by Houston Mayor Annise Parker's recent tweet:

Really? New pro sports team for Houston & the paper buries it w/ tiny notice on page 9. Would that be cause it's women? Dash #NWSL.-A
— Annise Parker (@anniseparker) December 13, 2013

Yes, Annise Parker really thinks that sexism is behind lack of Houston Chronicle coverage for women's pro soccer. You. Can't. Make. This. Stuff. Up.

Here's a brief history of professional women's soccer in America over the last decade:

2003 -- A major attempt at a women's league named the WUSA folds with cumulative losses of $100 million over 3 years. $100 million! Keep in mind that these losses occurred despite the attention from the US victory in the 99 Women's World Cup. The WUSA featured those stars, plus the only women's soccer player to ever transcend the sport: Mia Hamm.
2003-2009 -- no first division pro league in America.
2009-2011 -- A new league, the WPS, tries to make a go of it with 7 teams. The logo is a silhouette of of Mia Hamm. It falls apart after the 3rd season. Average attendance is under 4000. For comparison's sake, the Sugar Land Skeeters (who? exactly!) averaged almost 7000 a game in 2009.
Spring 2013 -- Another league called the NWSL launches. Considering that the salary cap per team is just $200,000 for 20 players, it is tough to call this a "major league." Even less promising, the median attendance is just 3000 during the first season.

Yes, you read that correctly: the average player salary is $10,000 for about half a year's work, and the minimum salary is just $6000. Sure, as a women's soccer fan myself, I'd love it if people went to games and if the Chron covered it. But I'm not going to delude myself that the NWSL is a major league. Nobody would believe that spin.

Calling this a "pro" sports team almost seems like a bit of a stretch, and it hardly sounds like front page news...even for a paper like the Chronicle with a long history of boosterism.

Annise Parker's tweet reveals more about herself than it does about the Chronicle. I'm almost surprised she isn't protesting for a "living wage" for the NWSL players? I suppose I shouldn't give her any ideas.

Posted by Evan @ 12/15/13 02:21 PM | Comments (0)

11 December 2013

Does Stockman still oppose NAFTA?

The Club for Growth's press release on staying out of #txsen surprisingly didn't mention that Steve Stockman opposed NAFTA.

Does Stockman still oppose NAFTA?

Posted by Evan @ 12/11/13 11:06 PM | Comments (0)

Two #txsen primary links

1. John Cornyn's Texas Monthly interview. I may have more to say about this later.

2. Top 10 Bad Votes of John Cornyn.

Posted by Evan @ 12/11/13 10:13 AM | Comments (0)

09 December 2013

Stockman for Senate?

Steve Stockman filing for US Senate seems to fulfill the desire many on the right have to show John Cornyn that they aren't super happy with him.

There's a reason Stockman's name didn't come up when people mentioned primary challengers: it doesn't make sense. He doesn't have the name ID, can't raise the money, and lacks Ted Cruz's oratory abilities. Plus he's starting late, having originally filed for re-election.

Put me down as skeptical that Stockman ever gets within 25 points of Cornyn in a poll.

Posted by Evan @ 12/09/13 11:22 PM | Comments (0)

08 December 2013

Van de Putte will not materially increase Latino turnout

The dumbest thing I heard in the last week was: "Leticia Van de Putte will increase Latino turnout."

This is where I get to go back to my old standby:

[If you're enough of a pedant to point out that this should say "żen serio?," then you've missed the mark. Por favor, que sigas pensando.]

Why can Leticia Van de Putte do it if Tony Sanchez couldn't do it? If memory serves, Tony Sanchez spent $80 million in 2002. Wendy Davis and Van de Putte will be lucky if they can ~~scam~~ raise half that out of donors.

The fundamental premise behind Sanchez's candidacy was that he would increase Latino turnout enough to win. I've experienced an election or two in Latin America, and let me tell you: I heard more sound trucks around Houston during 2002 in both Spanish and English than I did in those. Sanchez had a monstrous amount of field staff trying to gin up turnout. Didn't work.

In the aggregate, non-voters are less motivated to vote, by definition. How likely is it that a non-voter will turn out to vote for someone named Van de Putte if they didn't turn out for someone named Sanchez? Not to mention that downballot races are not very motivating for non-voters. That's why 2002's so-called "Dream Team" of Sanchez/Kirk/Sharp hid their least inspiring candidate in the lite guv slot.

tl;dr: 1) Sanchez spent more than Davis/Van de Putte will. 2) Sanchez > Van de Putte for last names. 3) Very few non-voters start voting because of the lite gov.

There's really one fact-based counterargument, which is that poli sci academic literature suggests that Latino turnout is low in Texas because the Latino population of Texas is young. I haven't checked recently but my understanding is that the median age of Texas Latinos has increased a bit since 2002. But that's not a reason for why Van de Putte will increase turnout, just an argument that turnout might increase.

I know that the Austin press corps is almost entirely white folks who don't get out of Austin enough, but Ąen serio! Se puede hacer mucho mejor.

Posted by Evan @ 12/08/13 10:21 PM | Comments (0)

06 December 2013

Pauken exits

Tom Pauken dropped out. I'd gotten some flak from friends for not even mentioning Pauken whenever I mentioned the gubernatorial race.

I never really felt like he was running -- and he had no traction -- so I never bothered mentioning him. He had a big fallout with Rick Perry leading to him leaving the Texas Workforce Commission and deciding to run for governor. But he never really articulated a message, especially against Abbott.

Besides that, I heard was that his staff hires were less than stellar, and then he hadn't been great about trusting them anyway. He didn't seem willing to spend much on his own campaign.

With luck he will return to focusing on higher education reform.

Posted by Evan @ 12/06/13 10:18 PM | Comments (0)

04 December 2013

Looking for the perfect Christmas gift for the tycoon who has everything?

DMN:

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, ever attentive to the economy, has moved decisively to respond to disappointing Black Friday sales by announcing his very own Cyber Monday. Yes, he has opened an online store where you can buy swag from his re-election campaign.

You too can contribute to Dewhurst's campaign! Looking for the maximum value in your shopping dollars? You contribute $20, he'll contribute $20 million. But wait, there's more! If you act now, he'll throw in a Dewhurst coffee mug with that yard sign!

Posted by Evan @ 12/04/13 08:12 AM | Comments (0)

03 December 2013

Two interesting Houston races to watch

I haven't been paying very close attention to the candidate filings but there are two candidates who I am curious to see whether they get serious primary challenges: Sarah Davis and John Zerwas.

Sarah Davis is the most liberal Republican in Austin. She's a staunch supporter of Speaker Straus. She used to have a swing district until Straus -- thinking he could shore up a moderate in her seat by doing her a favor -- gave her more Republican votes in redistricting. 134 now has a pronounced lean to the right -- and definitely will in 2014.

Some might think that Republicans in this close-in west-side district are moderates. They'd mostly be wrong. Plus, there is no district in the state in which Republican primary voters want to have the most liberal Republican as their representative.

Sugar Land Rep John Zerwas wrote the bill to implement ObamaCare exchanges in Texas (see eg, Zerwas interview with the liberal Texas Observer). If there's ever a single issue that could imperil an otherwise safe seat, it's aiding and abetting ObamaCare's implementation.

Posted by Evan @ 12/03/13 09:24 AM | Comments (0)

02 December 2013

Dan Patrick: You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean

BigJolly had a rather odd post up today in which he criticized a recent Todd Staples campaign email as the "worst press release."

The Staples campaign sent an ICYMI email to call attention to Mark Jones' analysis of legislative voting records which found Todd Staples and Dan Patrick to be the same:

neither can credibly be considered noticeably more conservative than the other. In sum, Staples' voting record was as conservative as Patrick's, and vice versa.

Dan Patrick has been crying loudly -- without much substantiation -- that he is the most conservative. He seems to believe that he can convince people of his conservatism through stupid stunts like backing Ted Cruz for President. Nevermind the fact that Dan Patrick was the most strident voice opposing Ted Cruz for Senate just a few months beforehand. In fact, Dan Goeb/Patrick even went so far as to ambush Cruz on his radio show.

He's also called for an end to the filibuster in the Texas Senate.

Look, the Staples email was very poorly messaged. The message should have been something more like "Politician Dan Goeb/Patrick can't be trusted. Another of his claims shown false" instead of "Todd Staples is just as conservative as Dan Patrick."

But then again, the Staples email got people talking about how Dan Patrick is not the most conservative candidate in the race. No matter how often Goeb/Patrick likes to repeat it, it isn't so.

Posted by Evan @ 12/02/13 10:08 PM | Comments (0)

[Previous 10 Entries] [Next 10 Entries]

SITE MENU

+ Rick Perry vs World
+ About Me

+ Archives

+ Email:
perryvsworld* at *gmail dot com

ADVERTISING

SYNDICATION

DISCLAIMER

Rick Perry vs. World is powered by Nucleus.

Site design and Nucleus customization by Kevin Whited.