Wake up, Wednesday
* Is Bill White ducking debates? Felix Alvarado thinks he is.
* I have some longish, more serious posts fermenting. Let's see if I get around to writing them out and posting them. I'm generally happy when I read this blog ("Not bad, Evan, for something you write on background while multitasking. But really, your longer posts...they sometimes make you seem only mildly literate?")
* AP:
Gov. Rick Perry is denouncing President Barack Obama's plan to let local school districts directly compete for federal education grant dollars that Texas has already rejected.Obama singled out Texas in outlining his proposal on Tuesday. He said local school districts "stymied by state-decision makers" would have a chance to pursue the money on its own.
My natural tendencies are to agree with both Perry's decision not to take the funds (Hutchison agreed for those who google this in the future) and with Obama's decision to let school districts apply.
Local control is good. The Founding Fathers liked it.
* Shami donated $150kish to Hank Gilbert after he dropped out of the governor's race. At the time, there were lots of rumors of a backroom deal. At the very least, you have to wonder why Shami would donate to Gilbert with those rumors swirling.
The link above was brief. Try Aman Batheja for more.
* I agree with Jason Stanford:
So who does Medina help more? When I asked Democratic consultant Jason Stanford that question Monday night, he replied, "She pulls anti-Washington, right-wing votes from Perry and anti-Perry votes from Kay Bailey. But since she pulls Perry down from 50 percent plus one vote and forces a runoff, then she hurts him more."I agree with Stanford: Medina hurts Perry in that she makes a runoff more likely. Now, Perry is more likely to win a run-off as his supporters are more dedicated, but any run-off always increases the variance. Politicians sometimes make mistakes, and incumbents are more likely to make them (and have them reported by the press).
I should probably mention that I also think I agree with Paul Burka's take, which is supposedly diametric. (Why is it diametric? Because that's what journalists do, but in this case Jason Embry thoroughly reported, and thus they aren't. Kudos to him.) Yet even if Medina draws more votes from KBH than from Perry, drawing votes in a 50% + 1 hurts Perry more.
* Even before seeing the date 9 days from now, I would love to bet anyone that Medina does not reach 12% on the only poll that counts on Election Day. It doesn't matter how well she does in the debate or how negative the campaigns go, she's not going to hit 12% at any reasonable odds.
* The Aggies are getting close to picking a new president. Given the history, how long until some folks accuse Perry of involvement?
Posted by Evan @ 01/20/10 03:05 AM
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
Comments
Add Comments
No flames or impolite behavior. HTML will be stripped. URLs will be transformed into hyperlinks.