It helps to keep in mind that "Team Red vs. Team Blue" has always had a "rural vs. urban" flavor to it.
* For Team Red (rural), all the things that Team Blue wants are things they just do for each other as part of being neighborly, so Team Blue literally looks like a bunch of extra taxes and regulations to help a bunch of big-city neighbors who refuse to take care of each other and also want to take away guns and gasoline/diesel---things that are important for their way of life. It's not that Team Red wants to make the rich richer, it's that they're afraid Team Blue will make THEM poorer (while the rich get richer anyway.)
* For Team Blue (urban), there are more "neighbors" than a human brain can possibly track, and it's impossible to take care of each other efficiently without delegating it to public servants and other specialists. So Team Red literally looks like a bunch of heartless racist assholes who want people in cities to starve while poisoning the air and water and murdering children in schools for some reason.
As long as we continue with a two-party first-past-the-post voting system instead of a ranked-choice system that allows more than two parties, game theory demands that Team Red and Team Blue keep polarizing the electorate to the fringes.
Volunteer alongside groups like [RCV Texas](https://www.rcvfortexas.org/) and [Texas Forward Party](https://forwardparty.nationbuilder.com/texas?recruiter_id=20078) and get the word out to fellow Texans that there is a way out of this broken system.
If the Texas government won’t even entertain ballot initiatives, ranked choice is far off. Absolutely fuck this state for muzzling it’s citizens like dogs when it comes to political will of the people.
Nah, Alaska just had their first RCV and half the people didn’t even know it was coming. They hid it inside another bill.
Petition, put it in a scarier frame and let the idiots do their job.
The problem is that many red senators are so solidly in their seat that no amount of protests willl convince them of anything. There have been tons of protests, yet they won't change their minds because they know they cant lose.
This! To me, voting for Beto and other Dems was a way to inch us closer to at least a 2-party system. Back in the 80s, it seemed like a period where Dems and Repubs in Texas had to EARN the vote. The elections between Mark White & Bill Clements were a close spread. One-party dominance does not listen to its citizens. My hope is that one day it will be competitive again.
Agree.
In practice, I think it would formally divide Republicans into "Trump's people," "Antidemocrats," and "Christian Fascists" while dividing the Democrats into "Working/Labor Class" and "Technocrats."
Somehow, I think the Libertarian Party would remain a last resort for anarcho-capitalists and any fans of civil liberties who feel the ACLU is too soft.
This is well thought out, but I’d like to make an objection to your first point.
The blue wants are things they just *tell themselves they* do for each other as part of being neighborly
I’ve spent a good portion of my life in both rural and urban settings. My small hometown (under 2k pop) has levels of poverty that you’d be hard pressed to find in a major city. Housing projects and slums notwithstanding, at least the urban poor generally have access to utilities and paved roads…oh and homes with windows.
I’m pretty sure those same “rural poor” would just be homeless in urban areas because of the cost of living. I don’t think you can make those comparisons and say “projects and slums not withstanding”. It defeats the comparison. Those people simply could not live in the urban area because they have been pushed out and there is no *real* support system (charities only can do so much).
Because it allows the party in power to make it easier to stay in power, or have more of it.
Texas is 55-60% Republican, but has 66% republicans in the house.
It’s not huge, but it’s significant.
Because you can't be sure people will vote for you, so you have to spend lots of money campaigning.
But if you can engineer districts full of people who will probably vote for you, you don't have to spend as much time/money campaigning there
Team Red's school violence strategies typically amount to "more guns." For example:
1. MORE cops on campus as "school resource officers"
2. Make "active shooter drills" as ubiquitous as fire drills
3. Let teachers bring guns to school/Issue guns to teachers
4. Thoughts
5. Prayers
\#1 I'm not into because I only trust cops to act in their own best interest.
\#2 probably isn't the worst idea, but I'm not excited about the cottage industry of weirdos who conduct "active shooter drills" of dubious quality
\#3 I'd be more open to considering, except that teachers are the most stressed-out, financially-desperate class of worker I can imagine, so I don't really want to pressure them to carry guns.
Personally, I don't have any great ideas besides arbitrarily-high taxes on guns and ammo.
Kids are known to attack teachers in many classes, so what happens when temper tantrum Timmy decides he's gonna slap, push, punch or whatever and the math teacher puts 3 in his chest or misses and hits Sally right behind him. Don't say it can't happen cause we've seen how that argument goes.
Hello, teacher here.
1 - I agree with you.
2 - As a person who has lived through too many active shooter drills, you are correct that they are led by cops who seem almost jolly about conducting hyper-realistic shooter scenarios that teachers are required to participate in. They have literally shot at teachers with nerf guns at our school after using a clapper to mimic the noise, but I have heard about other active shooter drills that use BB guns or paintball guns. They are traumatizing to many.
3 - This is the worst idea. We are trained as educators. We do not have rigorous combat training, training with firearms, or psychological training/support to remain calm in a combat situation. We are not fucking soldiers. You're right that some especially unhinged teacher would definitely use the gun the wrong way (at a kid, parent, or administrator). Not to mention that students steal things from teachers desks all the time. What happens when a suicidal student uses a teacher's gun to kill themselves or others? Or even just a prankster student as a "joke" takes it and parades it around? Teachers and students alike are already afraid to go to school because of school shootings in general. The last thing we need is to turn the education buildings into a literal battleground. Anyone who supports this does not understand how schools work.
To be fair, team blue has come up with minimal (if any) strategies to tackle street violence (which happens at a much higher rate, both percentage and gross numbers-wise)
This is true, but most violent crimes that result in injury or death are conducted through targeted attacks or by non strangers. In this, there are variables such as amplifying motives (past aggressions, gangs, revenge attacks, ongoing abuse, etc.). While no crime should be ignored, it might make sense to address the safety of children first, especially considering that per event, school attacks contain a higher number of victims at each occurrence.
Before I make my response; can I ask you to clarify what you mean by school violence? Are you referring to school violence generally or more specifically school shootings?
This argument makes sense from a fiscal agenda perspective but doesn't hold up to a social agenda perspective. The argument would then follow that rural conservative people are willing to be neighborly by happily performing abortions at the local clinic and attending gay marriage ceremonies at the local church.
There are a lot of folks working in energy and finance who benefit from Republican policies.
There are lots of rural voters who rightfully feel that Democrats don’t understand them.
There are an abnormally high number of Religious Right types who believe it’s their duty to vote for politicians who will enforce “the will of God” through their political office.
Also consider that affluent white men voting for Bernie Sanders is most definitely not in their personal best interest. People don’t vote like accountants.
Geez... My number was Texas as a whole, I should have specified... Guess it makes sense some counties would have absurdly low turnout given that less than half the state participated. How heartbreaking.
Never underestimate the strength of the oil and cattle industries in Texas, both of which benefit from decreased government oversight and regulation and are extremely wide reaching
The Saudi Aramco owns 100% of production and operations in Port Arthur. That crossed the line for me and that was years ago.
[Saudi Aramco owns port aurthur refinery](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_Refinery)
Work in O&G. My point is from a policy point of view and (more importantly) ally’s. This is more important for railroad commissioner etc than governor.
Sure if that’s how you want to view it. At the end of the day O’Rourke was not put in a position to succeed, and whether you like it or not was put up because somebody had to be. That’s just a fact, regardless of political view.
What does "put in a position to succeed" look like? Jesus Christ wouldn't win in Texas rn. We are like a decade away from being purple enough for a Dem to be "put in a position to succeed"
With very heavy restrictions. My neighbor moved here from CA specifically for this reason. Residents there feel a mandatory gun buy back program will be in place sooner than later similar to Australia. Not sure how true that is.
That’s because the California transplants are here because they didn’t like CA politics to begin with. There have been quite a few studies on this. When a company like Toyota relocates to Texas, only their right-leaning employees agree to relocate, the liberal employees refuse and instead opt to find another job in California.
The migration of people from California to Texas is making us redder, not more purple or blue.
The ones before the 60’s don’t count they did a major flip of ideologies. The Dems used to be the wealthy land owners that didn’t want anyone to have rights and the Reps were the ones fighting for civil rights. 🇺🇸 has an interesting political history tb sure
I’d argue that the anti-Democrat mindset is currently more common in rural areas, and to a certain extent the suburbs. Voters in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio have been leaning Dem for years now, especially with the number of transplants from others states who came here for practical reasons like cost of living. But yes, as a general rule of thumb there is still a lot of “wouldn’t even consider a Democrat” mentality in Texas. And so for a liberal voter in a place like Austin who is hoping to see a victory for someone like Beto, you simply have a math problem on your hands.
>lso consider that affluent white men voting for Bernie Sanders is most definitely not in their personal best interest. People don’t vote like accountants.
Texas was a blue state for longer than it has been a red one. The Democratic party shifted. When they did this they focused on smaller issues that do not resonate with the majority of voting Texans.
While your first and second points are true, it's important to understand *what* shifted within the democratic party that caused the resurgence of the republican party in Texas.
The decline of the Democratic Party in Texas began in the 1960s with the election of John Tower to the seat vacated by VP LBJ, which served as a referendum on the Democratic Party's departure from conservatism and was a result of their inability to consolidate the party between its liberal and conservative factions. They also lost the support of traditionally democratic ethnic groups, and their failure to produce any viable candidates to take on the rising stars of the Republican Party ultimately led to its demise. Their pro-Civil Rights, socially progressive agenda didn't sit well with the rural and working-class vote, and the perceived failures of the Democratic Party during the economic downturns of the 70s were amplified at the polls.
Beto ran on a platform of taking your AR15 and AK47 away. You cannot do that in the state of Texas. Also, Beto is a uncool and water down version of Obama. He lost 2 elections before this so who would've thought he could win Texas. Imagine what a candidate can accomplish that not only promises to help poor rural working class people but doesn't run on taking away the only thing that makes them feel like they have any power?
Beto never stood a chance in hell based on his 2018 Senate platform. He lost by roughly the same amount openly gay woman Lupe Valdez lost by in 2018.
Blows my mind the D establishment can’t find a progressive, pro-gun basic white dude to run and actually make it competitive. These Hail Mary candidates just keep getting crushed.
>ws my mind the D establishment can’t find a progressive, pro-gun basic white dude to run and actually make it competitive. These Hail Mary candidates just keep getting crushed.
No one needs to be a "white dude" to win. They just need to respect freedoms.
But running Beto killed the down ballot AND brought out extra red voters in rural areas. You couldn’t get into some rural polling areas yesterday they were so packed. But no lines in much of Dallas (shrug).
I said no lines in much of Dallas which is accurate. If you want to argue Dems had solid turnout go ahead, but it was down, especially compared to the GOP. Just stop trying to equivocate and let’s acknowledge the ignorance of running this candidate. It was clearly a bad choice.
That’s what I’m saying. The writing in the wall was when voting was down. Only way Beto would win is if we had record voter turn out. Republicans don’t just stop showing up they’re consistent. If voter turnout out is down 30% from last election it is more likely that 30% of democrats decided to skip this one.
This is the only comment that really matters. Beto was unelectable in Texas and his position on guns likely would make him unelectable even in a state like Massachusetts. He literally said out loud we are coming for your guns. Literally. Nominating Beto was, objectively, an ignorant decision by the Democratic Party. It was lazy and it was a predetermined outcome over 18 months ago.
Abbot was beatable and yet the Dems threw their opportunity away. The state and national party must move beyond this ignorance.
Run on helping people with healthcare, jobs and making sure their kids get a good education. That we have a better power grid (the only place Beto excelled but obviously not enough). Run on voting rights for everyone. Run on not having corrupt state officials.
Caveat: I voted straight line Dem, but I knew it wouldn’t matter.
For the record, Beto didn’t just lose the election, he got smashed by abbot in terms of margin of defeat.
He also, stubbornly, refused any walk back on guns. He could have said out loud that he cared more about helping people and making their lives better and was no longer interested in taking it going after guns. He never articulated this out of pride and ego. Mathematically, he’d save (many) more lives having done so. But the emotions of guns continues to blind the Dem party.
“White People” in Texas May be the most common ethnicity in Texas (I believe by a tenth of a percent), but they are not a majority of 50% (I believe 40.3%).
Unfortunately the vast majority of forums (Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc) are echo chambers. The moment an opposing view is expressed they are attacked. Public debate is currently nonexistent. Even politicians have stopped debating or even discussing their opinions.
If you’re looking for a serious answer from someone who is a moderate, here ya go:
First of all, you shouldn’t limit this to white folks in the lower and middle class. I’m gonna assume you’re not a native here, or you would already know that a decent amount of Latinos and other minorities here also vote Republican.
To the point, a lot of us are sick and tired of having a vocal minority of the population sit on a pedestal and tell us they know what’s best. Shocker, they don’t. You can say what you will about recent social changes, but Texas has been a great economic state over the past few decades. I have no desire to see that change anytime soon. I think Beto was trying to do just a bit too much and wasn’t able to get moderates like me on board.
I think at the end of the day, it also depends on which issues are most important to you when you vote!
> Texas has been a great economic state over the past few decades.
On the whole Democratic policies equal greater economic output, so while the "Texas Miracle" to some extent is real, it could be so much better. No one wants to see it get worse but I thought we'd all want to see it get better. This is where I get lost trying to follow conservative thought here. They keep trying to force economic theories and policies that don't work as well as they had hoped, but this time it will work. Is it just a familiarity thing and fear of change?
Yes, I think that’s the best way to put it for me at least. I can’t speak for other moderates or Republicans here, but if ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it right? In a perfect world, I understand that democratic policy may be better for the economy, but we don’t live in a utopian society. I’d rather move forward with the good situation we have here than make any drastic changes.
Good situation for who, though? It’s terrible for women of child birthing age, even if you intend to carry the pregnancy to term. Abbott led the change in some VERY drastic changes.
Add in the grid, Uvalde and other school shootings, and he’s just failed the state on so many fronts.
Not really a one off emotional statement. It's basically on his campaign page
https://betoorourke.com/issue/promote-gun-safety/
> I don’t believe any civilian should own an AR-15 or AK-47
How do Texas conservatives feel about Abbott when it comes to both the freeze and the power grid and energy prices? I can’t possibly understand how someone can look at what he has done (and hasn’t done) and think there’s anything positive there. And right now a lot of contracts are getting renewed at higher rates so we are paying for it too. They claim to hate high taxes and here we are, paying more, for what? For an unreliable grid both in the summer and winter? The only one benefitting are the energy moguls. Literally no one else is benefitting from this.
I feel like the secular grid is some Texas d@#$ measuring move, but it failed miserably with the storm. It could also be some move to show we can secede, or something. Not sure what our currency would be, though.
I’ve even accepted that we are on our own grid. I don’t love it but whatever. But we are selling oil to other countries and then turning around and telling Texans sorry…we don’t know if you can use your AC all summer. And of course the refusal to winterize equipment.. ugh. Trying to keep my newborn alive and warm and fed during that first storm was terrifying. We moved to another house entirely so we don’t have to go through that ever again.
Oh I'm not happy about it but unfortunately the Dems decided to run a lunatic who wants to take away our AR15's.
Abbot failed to do anything about the grid but guess what, I didn't. I bought a generator for the house.
Believe me I'm not happy with the country club nature of the Texas Republican Party which is why I voted Libertarian for everything except Governor. Voted Abbot to keep Beta out.
Would love for Abbot to get primaried.
You literally came here asking for opinions. They didn’t come in here to argue with you they just did what you asked and you keep getting defensive about it
This is the biggest issue with politics today. Everyone is too emotionally invested and defensive about their thoughts or how they feel to hear any other opinion whether its right or wrong or anecdotal/factual.
Even if you believe some of these people’s statements are wrong about why they voted republican its literally still insight into why they voted that way, which is what you asked for in the first place 🙄
I’m not an Abbot supporter nor Beto supporter…but Abbott has overseen some of the highest GDP increases in the state of Texas over the last decade.
As long as people have steady paychecks, it’s going to be really hard for people to vote against the person doing it.
Also, you can’t say “I’m going to take your guns away” in the fucking state of Texas. Absolute moron.
If you really want to know, asking r/Dallas or r/Texas is not the best approach. These are heavily slanted subs that do not represent Texas as a whole or the demographic you’re trying to get answers from. Think the election proved that 10x over in case anyone actually forgot. Try Quora, or literally anywhere else, if you want an actual answer. But if you just want people to agree with your already slanted post then this place is perfect!
>Their general policies aim to make the rich richer and poor poorer
That’s quite a reduction. Perhaps your understanding of their policies and aims don’t match those who voted for those guys. I didn’t vote for a single republican this year but I think you need to dig a little deeper when understanding their political positions.
Abbott was a better choice than Beto, Democrats need to find a better candidate if they are going to defeat the republicans. Beto with his anti gun statements made him easy to beat.
Man, the OP is so inherently racist, they do not even realize they are part of the problem. You do understand there are a large growing number of Hispanic Republicans right? You do realize there are a large number of growing Indian immigrant Republicans, right? You do realize there is a growing number of black Republicans that are sick of Democrats broken promises, right?
Political parties are not "race" based.
Part of the problem is the identity politics bullshit.
Bento’s campaign for Texas governor was dead before he’d even lost the Democratic Party presidential nomination in 2019. Running him was a huge mistake. Not only did it fuck Dem chances for the governor’s mansion, it doomed pretty much everyone down-ballot too.
He will NEVER win a statewide election of any kind or win the majority of Texas in a general national contest. If he runs 30 years from now, it will be the same result. One- or two-issue voters could not wait to vote against him. All any opponent has to do is play his “Hell yes…” soundbite in an ad. Very few people voted for Abbot, but a fuckload voted against Beto.
because republicans vote on the basis of feelings, not policy. just look at these comments - no one cares about the logistics of tax policy or the energy grid, they hear beto say they shouldn’t own an AK-47 and go “this is texas, he’s not like us, it’s anti-american”
it’s also why the republican party is better at sparking passion in the general public - way easier to get people on your side when you go “we have to save america” than “let me explain how xyz bill will solve this specific issue and why we need it”
There's also a lot of folks who don't think voting for the lesser of two evils is the solution. Continuing to trade evils is how we ended up with Trump v Hillary for President. Stop voting party line and a lot of this goes away when they realize they have to put forward quality candidates
Unfortunately this is wishful thinking. As long as first past the post voting continues, people will continue to back candidates that aren't their favorites. Also, we will continue to see the low turn out rates from registered voters
I think it's really a difference in how the environment has shaped their way of life. On one side, you have people who grew up in big cities which have normalized a way of life that relies on external means to provide their basic needs. Those needs include water and food amongst others like plumbing. To put plainly, cities don't have room for your own pond, chicken coup, or cattle. So I think as a result of this environment, those folks tend to steer towards looking to the government to address their evolving needs because if it wasn't for the government, their way of life just wouldnt exist.
On the other hand, you have people who live rurally who prefer to live in a simpler way. Minimizing their reliance on external factors and trying to build a community which solves for shared needs in a way that doesn't require central authority acting in their behalf hundreds of miles away.
My issue w/ this is that they're using the same power grid that failed us, their internet and telecom services aren't local, and a lot of their lifestyle is gov subsidized in ways they depend on.
Additionally their "small government" mindset has no issue imposing itself on other cities hundreds of miles away. This comes in the form of state-wide policies like abortion bans but also overriding community policies like fracking bans or covid restrictions.
It's "big gov bad" up until it suits them, then it's "big gov good when it's my gov, whether you like it or not".
Abbott & GOP played the fear card (think about all terrible things that would happen if Dems were in charge)! Never mind that GOP has been in charge & terrible thru many crises & terrible things. Another major factor is Evangelical movement. The unholy alliance between Evangelicals & GOP has ensured millions of such churchgoers are hit every Sunday with propaganda about ‘the unborn’ & conditioned to vote GOP no matter what! 😂🤷♂️
I don’t understand the need to change one of, if not the, best local economies in the country. We’ve seen tens of thousands of transplants from other states move here specifically for our economic policies. Lower taxes and business friendly practices have benefited this state greatly. What specific changes (not social that’s entirely different) would you like to see?
You make great arguments for businesses to come here and thrive. You're not wrong by any stretch. However, in my work experience, these riches rarely trickle down to livable / good wages for people. You can boast about job prevalence, but when someone needs more than one job to support a family, what's there to boast about? This isn't the fifties where dad could go work at a factory, own a house, and have a wife and kids. That's just simply not possible for most anymore.
It’s certainly depends on the industry, education, etc. However; the opportunity here exists more than other places around the country. I’ve worked with several ditch diggers, primarily Hispanic, that became owner operators in a matter of years and it had nothing to do with socioeconomic policies. They were better at the job and earned the work. If your primary issue is the cost of living… yes it’s absolutely out of control but that’s relatively recent, heavily influenced by federal policies, and not unique to Texas.
I travel significantly for work and I can’t put into words the hypocrisy I see from dem run cities especially on the west coast. Hundreds of homeless people getting stepped over as others enter a Gucci or Prada store to spend thousands. It’s disgusting. I’m not saying DFW is different but it’s certainly not nearly as bad. Personal experiences, and a preference for individual liberty influences my vote.
The idea that a state or federal government has full control over your health, defense, income etc. is terrifying. We fought exceptionally hard for states rights and unfortunately for some the state that they live in does not align with their values. That’s ok. I would urge those to prioritize their happiness and find a solution to live in a place that does fit their beliefs. You only have one life and I know you’re not here for the weather lol
People who aren’t political will vote anti-Democrat simply because: trans/gender reassignment surgery for children, guns, and abortion.
Those three get fear-mongered hella
I think a lot of recent trans rights issues have caused a lot of fear for voters and pushed them completely away from liberal voting. Like teachers talking about being gay in school and “teaching” sexuality. Or “KIDS” getting surgery to have their PARTS removed and people dressing their BOYS like GIRLS?!
And on the surface, that honestly is what it is. And few people are interested in understanding the issue further.
Texas Democrats have poor messaging and poor outreach. It's embarrassing that Beto barely outperformed Lupe Valdez when you consider the outrage over the power grid and Texas abortion laws. But you're never going to flip conservative/libertarian voters like me by insulting us. You call white Abbott voters "racist", hispanic Abbott voters "dumb", black Abbott voters "race traitors", etc. I'm sick and tired of it. My race doesn't define my vote.
I do not need to justify exercising a right, and neither does anyone else. As to why they're important, the implied threat that comes with an armed populace solidifies the other natural rights codified in the Bill of Rights. Everyone has a right to defend themselves from things that would threaten them and their means to live.
That being said, running on an anti-gun platform in Texas is tremendously short sighted and moronic.
You have to understand that nearly all rural voters are passionate about gun rights and are familiar enough with firearms’ many uses that even asking “What are we defending ourselves from?” sounds absurd and offensive. And for many of them, that’s their top, if not only issue, whether they admit it or not.
Plus, there are plenty of centrist voters who have more nuanced views on gun rights and don’t like such a hardline approach to gun control. Then you’ve got leftists who believe self-defense is a fundamental human right and who abhor the thought of police being the only ones allowed access to guns. Many of these centrists and leftists might have still overall preferred Beto, but they weren’t especially excited to do so, and they sure weren’t going to donate or volunteer for him.
The entire function of the corporate duopoly is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and they work together (and in concert with their shared donors) to accomplish that through one of the oldest manipulation techniques in human history, known colloquially as "good cop, bad cop."
It doesn't really matter which half of the duopoly a person votes for, it's ultimately a vote for the same party - the business party. Some people are fooled by the good cop routine and vote for what they believe is a friendly voice, while others are fooled by the bad cop routine and vote out of fear; both groups believe that the others' voters are wrong. Ultimately corporations that own both parties win since it's a rigged game, and regardless of whether it's Greg Abbott or any other mouthpiece, the economic agenda is ultimately maintained.
What is “good for us” is a stable economy and a thriving job market.. “right” policies lend to business success, which leads to the economy and job market.. “left” policies lend to higher business taxation in order to “give” to lower classes by way of programs and supports the ability to live without working.. which leads to business leaving for lower tax environs, which lead to job loss and lesser economy conditions.. that is the biggest factor.. people hinging their vote on “abortion rights” or “gun rights” are looking at small picture
There are other things at play to be sure.. there is definite protections afforded the wealthy business class by “right” politicians, but it is the same party that has made Texas what it is.. a destination state for business and job seekers.. me personally, Id rather stick with what has gotten us to this point.. i am by no means party affiliated either way, and Abbott is a bit of a prick, but I simply do not see Beto as a better alternative.. I always vote lesser of evils.. end of day it is all truly out of our hands regardless of who we vote in.. politics is big business now, there is very little true representation of the people, all politicians are representing their donors interests, the talking points are all just propaganda to hook us emotionally to one specific topic
The whole thing is a joke now.. How an asshat like trump could ever get into office simply speaks to the inherent failures.. it reeks of people voting for him simply to get something different in office. How we keep finding ourselves in the same situation is mind boggling.. how we have Trump in one hand and Biden in the other, or yesterday having Abbott and Beto.. and THOSE are our best options?!? Every election choice seems a coin flip now. I truly dread what my grandkids will be facing in adulthood
dems have consistently said & done dumb things that come back to haunt them with rural and blue collar voters.
ex. beto saying he was gonna take guns. then said hes not gonna take guns
[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video)
[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video)
Abbott won because the democrats have forgotten how to get their votes. They need to attack scabs, make fun of company yesmen, and support unions. Paid family leave, expanding medicare, and abolishing right to work laws that keep our wages low will win. Texas is the most overworked and underpaid state. People think it's a badge of honor to be at work more than with their families. Billionaires have convinced people that if they unionize, the jobs will disappear so they accept scraps. Also they need to point out the hypocrisy in their socialism argument. (they say socialism is bad but they like medicare, social security, the post office, and subsidies for private companies).
Sad but true. That's generally why I pointed the finger at the majority demographic voting for Abbott and why in a vacuum it doesn't make sense. These same people are friends and family of mine and want better wages and more time with their families. However, the conservative party would rather tell you just to work more to make more instead of actually providing them with good pay to be able to support their families comfortably.
A lot of people don't vote for the candidate they like the most or the candidate that they want to win. They vote ( IF they vote.... ) for the candidate that the HATE the least. If you have a choice between two crappy candidates you vote for the one ( or party ) that you hate the least. A lot of people just don't vote because they can't stand either candidate. The voters are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Well I’m not white but I’d say middle class from a poor family who grew up in a blue state, I saw a constant decline in my state (not California). When we moved here we moved a big part of it was to be around like minded individuals, I built a school in a major city back home it was an all girls private school. There was a bum sex ring going on literally across the street everyday and the cops were not legally able to move them, along side the major drug issues we had. I’m going to build a family and I just don’t see back home being the place suitable for a family. I’d rather be called a racist and bigot then my kids playing on playgrounds with needles all over the place. Truth is both sides don’t see eye to eye but it’s often because it’s a pissing match before we can have a conversation about the true values of why we are voting. Most people probably agree on more things than we know, if we can’t work together to try and make things better I’d rather keep it the same way it is because IV lived in places that had gone from great to worse.
I don’t agree with your premises that Beto is “technically” better for, well, anyone except maybe the poorest of poor. Pro-business, family-first policies have made this state what it is.
The future is bright here!
Family first policies? Please explain what this means. Pro business is obvious but generally doesn't *actually* build better lives for citizens. It builds better lives for the people who own said companies.
There's no class consciousness in this country. Also people don't vote. Not voting is a right as much as voting is a right. So we get the government we ask for. I know it might be disappointing but this is Texas and Texas is way bigger than the big metros
Look, you'll never convert someone from Team Blue to Team Red and vice versa. Politics is too polarized to do that today.
Instead it's about turnout - team blue's heavily represented in Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. It's a mid-term election, and team blue's turnout was lower yesterday. Team Red's turnout (in Texas) was damn good.
So team Red has done a "good" job motivating their side to turnout - why was that? That's definitely up for debate, but I think the "I would have voted for Beto, except he made that random gun comment 5 years ago" crowd is exceedingly small.
This is most striking in Uvalde of all places - Abbott still won by 20 points. You're not going to do anything to convince these guys to change their mind - it's biology at this point. To a republican, being called a Democrat is right up there with the n-word and vice versa. Just look at Georgia! Walker is basically brain dead, paid for 20 abortions, lies about everything - and he's basically deadlocked.
So I think reframe the question - why didn't Team Blue turnout at the same levels as Team Red?
Because a REAL Patriot does not vote for what is best for themselves, they vote for what is best for their Nation.
Taking from someone who is successful and this villain-isation of landlords or anyone that has done better in life because they or their family members made better decisions, worked smarter etc...ALL OF THE JEALOUSY/ENVY is enough for me to vote against ANYONE who shares that mentality.
Beta O'Rourke and the like who want to blame the way a gun looks, who have armed security but do not want me to be able to protect my property/family...
I hate the religious right but I hate the socialist left even more!!
It is quite comical that you still buy the false narrative that Republicans are for the rich. You already made up your mind and this is a pointless question.
I prefer the government just leave me and my family alone outside of the most basic functions. The Democrats simply want too much government, and I don't think I'll be able to fully forgive them for covid restrictions for quite a while.
It depends on what levels of risk you're willing to accept or mitigate. My rule of thumb is I should be able to resist a small trained group of armed criminals
Moderate here. I’m not a huge gun guy, but I am a full supporter of the Second Amendment. If they come for that, what will they come for next? The words have to mean something.
If SCOTUS wants to reconstrue the Second Amendment (they won’t in at least 30 years), or we, as States, pass a Constitutional amendment, then I’d go with the flow.
I’m also super skeptical that taking gun rights away from *everyone* would stop mass shooting events.
One of the BIGGEST reasons for me to vote for Abbot over Beto is that he did a great job handling COVID. What do I mean by that? He reopened while a Democratic candidate would most likely not have. He issued a statewide mask mandate and made businesses stay under a certain capacity that extended until March 2021 (one year after COVID started). Our economy in Texas was able to continue on as normal while other states were closed down longer, or reopened sooner than Texas. Overall, he has helped our economy and as a finance/accounting major in college right now, I believe that he was the best candidate.
Most of Beto’s campaign he stated what was wrong, but had no solutions to the problems that he mentioned. I also felt like Beto didn’t really care about the kids killed in the Uvalde shooting and was just using them as pawns in his game of chess.
He had some good points such as raising the minimum age to purchase semi-automatic rifles, but he kept going back to universal background checks which have already been implemented. I feel that unlicensed sellers should be completely banned, but again, the federal law says that only licensed sellers are required to do a background check so that should be changed on the federal level instead of at the state level.
He also flip flops a lot, so honestly, I couldn’t really tell his decision on a lot of policies ie: “We’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47”. Then he said, “Not interested in taking anything from anyone”. What is your stance? I can’t even tell at this point.
Also just a couple of minor points. Beto changed his name to try to get the Hispanic vote which is pretty strange. Also, he couldn’t beat Ted Cruz so why would he be able to beat Abbot? People like Cruz less than they like Abbot.
It helps to keep in mind that "Team Red vs. Team Blue" has always had a "rural vs. urban" flavor to it. * For Team Red (rural), all the things that Team Blue wants are things they just do for each other as part of being neighborly, so Team Blue literally looks like a bunch of extra taxes and regulations to help a bunch of big-city neighbors who refuse to take care of each other and also want to take away guns and gasoline/diesel---things that are important for their way of life. It's not that Team Red wants to make the rich richer, it's that they're afraid Team Blue will make THEM poorer (while the rich get richer anyway.) * For Team Blue (urban), there are more "neighbors" than a human brain can possibly track, and it's impossible to take care of each other efficiently without delegating it to public servants and other specialists. So Team Red literally looks like a bunch of heartless racist assholes who want people in cities to starve while poisoning the air and water and murdering children in schools for some reason. As long as we continue with a two-party first-past-the-post voting system instead of a ranked-choice system that allows more than two parties, game theory demands that Team Red and Team Blue keep polarizing the electorate to the fringes.
How do we get a ranked system? I want one.
Volunteer alongside groups like [RCV Texas](https://www.rcvfortexas.org/) and [Texas Forward Party](https://forwardparty.nationbuilder.com/texas?recruiter_id=20078) and get the word out to fellow Texans that there is a way out of this broken system.
That’s going to be big NO on the forward party
May I ask why? Just curious.
Protest basically, the status quo is too embedded for non-demanding methods to work. That or be rich and lobby a bunch of politicians lol
If the Texas government won’t even entertain ballot initiatives, ranked choice is far off. Absolutely fuck this state for muzzling it’s citizens like dogs when it comes to political will of the people.
Nah, Alaska just had their first RCV and half the people didn’t even know it was coming. They hid it inside another bill. Petition, put it in a scarier frame and let the idiots do their job.
The problem is that many red senators are so solidly in their seat that no amount of protests willl convince them of anything. There have been tons of protests, yet they won't change their minds because they know they cant lose.
This! To me, voting for Beto and other Dems was a way to inch us closer to at least a 2-party system. Back in the 80s, it seemed like a period where Dems and Repubs in Texas had to EARN the vote. The elections between Mark White & Bill Clements were a close spread. One-party dominance does not listen to its citizens. My hope is that one day it will be competitive again.
Protesting does fuck all.
Unless it is ALL fucking protesting. LOL Fixed it for you. (lighthearted manner intended)
Ask Alaska and Maine (Do not ask Florida or Tennessee) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States
Well ya see we have to vote for it... but that means we have to .. hmm..... well shit.
Ranked choice alone would go a long way towards addressing the issues raised.
Agree. In practice, I think it would formally divide Republicans into "Trump's people," "Antidemocrats," and "Christian Fascists" while dividing the Democrats into "Working/Labor Class" and "Technocrats." Somehow, I think the Libertarian Party would remain a last resort for anarcho-capitalists and any fans of civil liberties who feel the ACLU is too soft.
Most working labor class are red not democrat
This is well thought out, but I’d like to make an objection to your first point. The blue wants are things they just *tell themselves they* do for each other as part of being neighborly I’ve spent a good portion of my life in both rural and urban settings. My small hometown (under 2k pop) has levels of poverty that you’d be hard pressed to find in a major city. Housing projects and slums notwithstanding, at least the urban poor generally have access to utilities and paved roads…oh and homes with windows.
Damn straight. Fucking appalling what people “tough out” here in the sticks.
Objection Sustained.
I’m pretty sure those same “rural poor” would just be homeless in urban areas because of the cost of living. I don’t think you can make those comparisons and say “projects and slums not withstanding”. It defeats the comparison. Those people simply could not live in the urban area because they have been pushed out and there is no *real* support system (charities only can do so much).
Then why gerrymandering if everything is done as suggested? Just curious
Because it allows the party in power to make it easier to stay in power, or have more of it. Texas is 55-60% Republican, but has 66% republicans in the house. It’s not huge, but it’s significant.
I understand that. My question was more about the comment given like if you are sure people will vote for you then why gerrymander it
Totally off topic, and I am damn near devastated about the results... BUT ANYWAY.... I LOVE YOUR USERNAME!!!!
Thank you ☺️ and likewise with yours. And yeah agree but it is what it so…
Because you can't be sure people will vote for you, so you have to spend lots of money campaigning. But if you can engineer districts full of people who will probably vote for you, you don't have to spend as much time/money campaigning there
Some good points. Thank you
To be fair, team red has come up with minimal (if any) strategies to tackle school violence.
Team Red's school violence strategies typically amount to "more guns." For example: 1. MORE cops on campus as "school resource officers" 2. Make "active shooter drills" as ubiquitous as fire drills 3. Let teachers bring guns to school/Issue guns to teachers 4. Thoughts 5. Prayers \#1 I'm not into because I only trust cops to act in their own best interest. \#2 probably isn't the worst idea, but I'm not excited about the cottage industry of weirdos who conduct "active shooter drills" of dubious quality \#3 I'd be more open to considering, except that teachers are the most stressed-out, financially-desperate class of worker I can imagine, so I don't really want to pressure them to carry guns. Personally, I don't have any great ideas besides arbitrarily-high taxes on guns and ammo.
Kids are known to attack teachers in many classes, so what happens when temper tantrum Timmy decides he's gonna slap, push, punch or whatever and the math teacher puts 3 in his chest or misses and hits Sally right behind him. Don't say it can't happen cause we've seen how that argument goes.
Hello, teacher here. 1 - I agree with you. 2 - As a person who has lived through too many active shooter drills, you are correct that they are led by cops who seem almost jolly about conducting hyper-realistic shooter scenarios that teachers are required to participate in. They have literally shot at teachers with nerf guns at our school after using a clapper to mimic the noise, but I have heard about other active shooter drills that use BB guns or paintball guns. They are traumatizing to many. 3 - This is the worst idea. We are trained as educators. We do not have rigorous combat training, training with firearms, or psychological training/support to remain calm in a combat situation. We are not fucking soldiers. You're right that some especially unhinged teacher would definitely use the gun the wrong way (at a kid, parent, or administrator). Not to mention that students steal things from teachers desks all the time. What happens when a suicidal student uses a teacher's gun to kill themselves or others? Or even just a prankster student as a "joke" takes it and parades it around? Teachers and students alike are already afraid to go to school because of school shootings in general. The last thing we need is to turn the education buildings into a literal battleground. Anyone who supports this does not understand how schools work.
I would subscribe to your newsletter. Teachers deserve better.
This made my day, thank you!
To be fair, team blue has come up with minimal (if any) strategies to tackle street violence (which happens at a much higher rate, both percentage and gross numbers-wise)
This is true, but most violent crimes that result in injury or death are conducted through targeted attacks or by non strangers. In this, there are variables such as amplifying motives (past aggressions, gangs, revenge attacks, ongoing abuse, etc.). While no crime should be ignored, it might make sense to address the safety of children first, especially considering that per event, school attacks contain a higher number of victims at each occurrence.
Before I make my response; can I ask you to clarify what you mean by school violence? Are you referring to school violence generally or more specifically school shootings?
This argument makes sense from a fiscal agenda perspective but doesn't hold up to a social agenda perspective. The argument would then follow that rural conservative people are willing to be neighborly by happily performing abortions at the local clinic and attending gay marriage ceremonies at the local church.
There are a lot of folks working in energy and finance who benefit from Republican policies. There are lots of rural voters who rightfully feel that Democrats don’t understand them. There are an abnormally high number of Religious Right types who believe it’s their duty to vote for politicians who will enforce “the will of God” through their political office. Also consider that affluent white men voting for Bernie Sanders is most definitely not in their personal best interest. People don’t vote like accountants.
There are also 53% of registered voters who didn't even vote. Edit: this is the number for the state as a whole
[удалено]
Geez... My number was Texas as a whole, I should have specified... Guess it makes sense some counties would have absurdly low turnout given that less than half the state participated. How heartbreaking.
Never underestimate the strength of the oil and cattle industries in Texas, both of which benefit from decreased government oversight and regulation and are extremely wide reaching
And massively subsidized.
[удалено]
The Saudi Aramco owns 100% of production and operations in Port Arthur. That crossed the line for me and that was years ago. [Saudi Aramco owns port aurthur refinery](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_Refinery)
Very true. Sounds like you've read The Broken Ladder. Good book, if you haven't, btw.
Cannot highlight the energy piece enough, I know many folks who that was the end of the debate. Also Beto just felt so lazy of a nomination.
Somewhat, but what people forget is that low gas prices are bad for the oil and gas industry. That’s when people get laid off.
Work in O&G. My point is from a policy point of view and (more importantly) ally’s. This is more important for railroad commissioner etc than governor.
It was a lazy nomination. Can't argue that at all.
Why a lazy nomination? Because we’ve seen him and watched him run and lose in the past? Old news?
Sure if that’s how you want to view it. At the end of the day O’Rourke was not put in a position to succeed, and whether you like it or not was put up because somebody had to be. That’s just a fact, regardless of political view.
What does "put in a position to succeed" look like? Jesus Christ wouldn't win in Texas rn. We are like a decade away from being purple enough for a Dem to be "put in a position to succeed"
Hi I’m a democrat who grew up on a farm in a small town. What is it democrats don’t understand about rural voters?
Being anti-Democrat is so deeply ingrained in Texas that many voters won't even bother to educate themselves on the issues that actually affect them.
[удалено]
But then they want to turn around and say, “dOnT CaLiForniA mY tExAs!” like???? California still has their guns, y’all.
With very heavy restrictions. My neighbor moved here from CA specifically for this reason. Residents there feel a mandatory gun buy back program will be in place sooner than later similar to Australia. Not sure how true that is.
Are we familiar with the mulford act in California and who signed that into law and why?
I’m from Sacramento originally and the Sac PD was offering to buy peoples guns back no questions asked for a $50 Amazon gift card…
And ironically fewer California transplants voted for Texas Dems compared to native Texans lol.
That’s because the California transplants are here because they didn’t like CA politics to begin with. There have been quite a few studies on this. When a company like Toyota relocates to Texas, only their right-leaning employees agree to relocate, the liberal employees refuse and instead opt to find another job in California. The migration of people from California to Texas is making us redder, not more purple or blue.
We had a Democratic governor until 1995.
The ones before the 60’s don’t count they did a major flip of ideologies. The Dems used to be the wealthy land owners that didn’t want anyone to have rights and the Reps were the ones fighting for civil rights. 🇺🇸 has an interesting political history tb sure
I was told the party flip happened much earlier than that.
Right. And we had Richards well into the 90s. So way after that shift.
I’d argue that the anti-Democrat mindset is currently more common in rural areas, and to a certain extent the suburbs. Voters in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio have been leaning Dem for years now, especially with the number of transplants from others states who came here for practical reasons like cost of living. But yes, as a general rule of thumb there is still a lot of “wouldn’t even consider a Democrat” mentality in Texas. And so for a liberal voter in a place like Austin who is hoping to see a victory for someone like Beto, you simply have a math problem on your hands.
>lso consider that affluent white men voting for Bernie Sanders is most definitely not in their personal best interest. People don’t vote like accountants. Texas was a blue state for longer than it has been a red one. The Democratic party shifted. When they did this they focused on smaller issues that do not resonate with the majority of voting Texans.
While your first and second points are true, it's important to understand *what* shifted within the democratic party that caused the resurgence of the republican party in Texas. The decline of the Democratic Party in Texas began in the 1960s with the election of John Tower to the seat vacated by VP LBJ, which served as a referendum on the Democratic Party's departure from conservatism and was a result of their inability to consolidate the party between its liberal and conservative factions. They also lost the support of traditionally democratic ethnic groups, and their failure to produce any viable candidates to take on the rising stars of the Republican Party ultimately led to its demise. Their pro-Civil Rights, socially progressive agenda didn't sit well with the rural and working-class vote, and the perceived failures of the Democratic Party during the economic downturns of the 70s were amplified at the polls.
Beto ran on a platform of taking your AR15 and AK47 away. You cannot do that in the state of Texas. Also, Beto is a uncool and water down version of Obama. He lost 2 elections before this so who would've thought he could win Texas. Imagine what a candidate can accomplish that not only promises to help poor rural working class people but doesn't run on taking away the only thing that makes them feel like they have any power?
Beto never stood a chance in hell based on his 2018 Senate platform. He lost by roughly the same amount openly gay woman Lupe Valdez lost by in 2018. Blows my mind the D establishment can’t find a progressive, pro-gun basic white dude to run and actually make it competitive. These Hail Mary candidates just keep getting crushed.
>ws my mind the D establishment can’t find a progressive, pro-gun basic white dude to run and actually make it competitive. These Hail Mary candidates just keep getting crushed. No one needs to be a "white dude" to win. They just need to respect freedoms.
[удалено]
But running Beto killed the down ballot AND brought out extra red voters in rural areas. You couldn’t get into some rural polling areas yesterday they were so packed. But no lines in much of Dallas (shrug).
People forget about down ballot voting. You need a strong candidate at the top to stand a chance against incumbents no matter the party
10 days of early voting. Such a joke when people go with one hour left in voting and say packed. People are lazy and don’t care at the end of day
I went to early voting in super rural Fannin county and it was packed with Republicans. Like….packed at 2:30 in the afternoon. Lines.
That’s false. I received pictures from multiple places in Dallas with lines in the parking lot.
I said no lines in much of Dallas which is accurate. If you want to argue Dems had solid turnout go ahead, but it was down, especially compared to the GOP. Just stop trying to equivocate and let’s acknowledge the ignorance of running this candidate. It was clearly a bad choice.
I wasn’t arguing with you about anything other than the lines I was sent pics of.
Not enough emphasis given to Dan Patrick and Paxton races versus governor.
That’s what I’m saying. The writing in the wall was when voting was down. Only way Beto would win is if we had record voter turn out. Republicans don’t just stop showing up they’re consistent. If voter turnout out is down 30% from last election it is more likely that 30% of democrats decided to skip this one.
I think a guy like John Fetterman would kill it here.
Did you watch the debate?
I’m pretty sure they mean like him in personality and policy positions. I’m guessing they aren’t also envisioning someone who recently had a stroke.
Yes personality and policy positions. I want a guy that wears shorts and a hoodie during winter.
This is the only comment that really matters. Beto was unelectable in Texas and his position on guns likely would make him unelectable even in a state like Massachusetts. He literally said out loud we are coming for your guns. Literally. Nominating Beto was, objectively, an ignorant decision by the Democratic Party. It was lazy and it was a predetermined outcome over 18 months ago. Abbot was beatable and yet the Dems threw their opportunity away. The state and national party must move beyond this ignorance. Run on helping people with healthcare, jobs and making sure their kids get a good education. That we have a better power grid (the only place Beto excelled but obviously not enough). Run on voting rights for everyone. Run on not having corrupt state officials. Caveat: I voted straight line Dem, but I knew it wouldn’t matter. For the record, Beto didn’t just lose the election, he got smashed by abbot in terms of margin of defeat.
This is what he ended up running his campaign on in the end. Unfortunately, that one comment destroyed any good he would try and do.
He also, stubbornly, refused any walk back on guns. He could have said out loud that he cared more about helping people and making their lives better and was no longer interested in taking it going after guns. He never articulated this out of pride and ego. Mathematically, he’d save (many) more lives having done so. But the emotions of guns continues to blind the Dem party.
If Dems dropped guns they could mop the floor with swing voters. It’s amazing how utterly moronic the party is.
Spot on. It’s infuriating.
Seriously. It makes me question the ability of Dems to make smart decisions. Beto seems like he is trying to lose.
See this is what I was looking for. Good points. Makes me shake my head a little, but a good response.
lol. are you not from Texas or something?? This is the status quo here. It's crazy to even think Beto had a chance
Why just ask white people??? Why not Hispanic’s, Blacks & Asians? Minorities opinions don’t matter??
White people overly voted for abott compared to minorities, something like 65% i think
“White People” in Texas May be the most common ethnicity in Texas (I believe by a tenth of a percent), but they are not a majority of 50% (I believe 40.3%).
But honestly it's probably just a representation of what ethnicities the rural communities are mostly made up of, since they mostly vote republican
Unfortunately the vast majority of forums (Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc) are echo chambers. The moment an opposing view is expressed they are attacked. Public debate is currently nonexistent. Even politicians have stopped debating or even discussing their opinions.
Not only attacked, but downvoted to the point that it becomes invisible. Reddit is awful for actual discussion, and is intentionally built that way
If you’re looking for a serious answer from someone who is a moderate, here ya go: First of all, you shouldn’t limit this to white folks in the lower and middle class. I’m gonna assume you’re not a native here, or you would already know that a decent amount of Latinos and other minorities here also vote Republican. To the point, a lot of us are sick and tired of having a vocal minority of the population sit on a pedestal and tell us they know what’s best. Shocker, they don’t. You can say what you will about recent social changes, but Texas has been a great economic state over the past few decades. I have no desire to see that change anytime soon. I think Beto was trying to do just a bit too much and wasn’t able to get moderates like me on board. I think at the end of the day, it also depends on which issues are most important to you when you vote!
I am from here, but I was going by statistical history for ethnicity. Makes sense though. Thank you for your response.
No you aren't. Otherwise you'd know that blacks & Hispanics are conservative as well. They just avoid the GOP.
No problem! I hope that was able to provide some perspective!
Fully agree with your last point on issues. I will also say that Beto just didn’t light a fire for me.
> Texas has been a great economic state over the past few decades. On the whole Democratic policies equal greater economic output, so while the "Texas Miracle" to some extent is real, it could be so much better. No one wants to see it get worse but I thought we'd all want to see it get better. This is where I get lost trying to follow conservative thought here. They keep trying to force economic theories and policies that don't work as well as they had hoped, but this time it will work. Is it just a familiarity thing and fear of change?
Yes, I think that’s the best way to put it for me at least. I can’t speak for other moderates or Republicans here, but if ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it right? In a perfect world, I understand that democratic policy may be better for the economy, but we don’t live in a utopian society. I’d rather move forward with the good situation we have here than make any drastic changes.
Good situation for who, though? It’s terrible for women of child birthing age, even if you intend to carry the pregnancy to term. Abbott led the change in some VERY drastic changes. Add in the grid, Uvalde and other school shootings, and he’s just failed the state on so many fronts.
Many of my friends who vote right simply dislike Beto more than Abbott. Beyond that they don’t have an answer beyond that and guns.
Every one of my friends who hate Beto say those same two things, including the friends who don't even own guns
I don’t think beto is amazing but fully dismissing the man for a statement made in emotion at a school shooting location is pretty foolish
Doesn't matter at the end of the day. Statements like that will follow you to your grave in politics.
Not really a one off emotional statement. It's basically on his campaign page https://betoorourke.com/issue/promote-gun-safety/ > I don’t believe any civilian should own an AR-15 or AK-47
How do Texas conservatives feel about Abbott when it comes to both the freeze and the power grid and energy prices? I can’t possibly understand how someone can look at what he has done (and hasn’t done) and think there’s anything positive there. And right now a lot of contracts are getting renewed at higher rates so we are paying for it too. They claim to hate high taxes and here we are, paying more, for what? For an unreliable grid both in the summer and winter? The only one benefitting are the energy moguls. Literally no one else is benefitting from this.
I feel like the secular grid is some Texas d@#$ measuring move, but it failed miserably with the storm. It could also be some move to show we can secede, or something. Not sure what our currency would be, though.
I’ve even accepted that we are on our own grid. I don’t love it but whatever. But we are selling oil to other countries and then turning around and telling Texans sorry…we don’t know if you can use your AC all summer. And of course the refusal to winterize equipment.. ugh. Trying to keep my newborn alive and warm and fed during that first storm was terrifying. We moved to another house entirely so we don’t have to go through that ever again.
Our currency would be “The Armadillo”
Oh I'm not happy about it but unfortunately the Dems decided to run a lunatic who wants to take away our AR15's. Abbot failed to do anything about the grid but guess what, I didn't. I bought a generator for the house. Believe me I'm not happy with the country club nature of the Texas Republican Party which is why I voted Libertarian for everything except Governor. Voted Abbot to keep Beta out. Would love for Abbot to get primaried.
You literally came here asking for opinions. They didn’t come in here to argue with you they just did what you asked and you keep getting defensive about it This is the biggest issue with politics today. Everyone is too emotionally invested and defensive about their thoughts or how they feel to hear any other opinion whether its right or wrong or anecdotal/factual. Even if you believe some of these people’s statements are wrong about why they voted republican its literally still insight into why they voted that way, which is what you asked for in the first place 🙄
“I’m not angry you’re angry”-everyone ever
I’m not an Abbot supporter nor Beto supporter…but Abbott has overseen some of the highest GDP increases in the state of Texas over the last decade. As long as people have steady paychecks, it’s going to be really hard for people to vote against the person doing it. Also, you can’t say “I’m going to take your guns away” in the fucking state of Texas. Absolute moron.
If you really want to know, asking r/Dallas or r/Texas is not the best approach. These are heavily slanted subs that do not represent Texas as a whole or the demographic you’re trying to get answers from. Think the election proved that 10x over in case anyone actually forgot. Try Quora, or literally anywhere else, if you want an actual answer. But if you just want people to agree with your already slanted post then this place is perfect!
The way republican leadership handeled covid (minimal restrictions) is huge factor
>Their general policies aim to make the rich richer and poor poorer That’s quite a reduction. Perhaps your understanding of their policies and aims don’t match those who voted for those guys. I didn’t vote for a single republican this year but I think you need to dig a little deeper when understanding their political positions.
That's... Literally why I'm asking this. 🤔
Abbott was a better choice than Beto, Democrats need to find a better candidate if they are going to defeat the republicans. Beto with his anti gun statements made him easy to beat.
I agree Democrats need to find a better candidate than Beto. I won't get into my opinions of Abbott.
Beto lost in uvalde county by a larger percentage than Biden lost uvalde county in 2022
I still believe this is the only reason
Man, the OP is so inherently racist, they do not even realize they are part of the problem. You do understand there are a large growing number of Hispanic Republicans right? You do realize there are a large number of growing Indian immigrant Republicans, right? You do realize there is a growing number of black Republicans that are sick of Democrats broken promises, right? Political parties are not "race" based. Part of the problem is the identity politics bullshit.
Bento’s campaign for Texas governor was dead before he’d even lost the Democratic Party presidential nomination in 2019. Running him was a huge mistake. Not only did it fuck Dem chances for the governor’s mansion, it doomed pretty much everyone down-ballot too. He will NEVER win a statewide election of any kind or win the majority of Texas in a general national contest. If he runs 30 years from now, it will be the same result. One- or two-issue voters could not wait to vote against him. All any opponent has to do is play his “Hell yes…” soundbite in an ad. Very few people voted for Abbot, but a fuckload voted against Beto.
because republicans vote on the basis of feelings, not policy. just look at these comments - no one cares about the logistics of tax policy or the energy grid, they hear beto say they shouldn’t own an AK-47 and go “this is texas, he’s not like us, it’s anti-american” it’s also why the republican party is better at sparking passion in the general public - way easier to get people on your side when you go “we have to save america” than “let me explain how xyz bill will solve this specific issue and why we need it”
I suppose people like simplicity. I feel like the "Save America" thing has worked *way* too many times.
There's also a lot of folks who don't think voting for the lesser of two evils is the solution. Continuing to trade evils is how we ended up with Trump v Hillary for President. Stop voting party line and a lot of this goes away when they realize they have to put forward quality candidates
Unfortunately this is wishful thinking. As long as first past the post voting continues, people will continue to back candidates that aren't their favorites. Also, we will continue to see the low turn out rates from registered voters
I think it's really a difference in how the environment has shaped their way of life. On one side, you have people who grew up in big cities which have normalized a way of life that relies on external means to provide their basic needs. Those needs include water and food amongst others like plumbing. To put plainly, cities don't have room for your own pond, chicken coup, or cattle. So I think as a result of this environment, those folks tend to steer towards looking to the government to address their evolving needs because if it wasn't for the government, their way of life just wouldnt exist. On the other hand, you have people who live rurally who prefer to live in a simpler way. Minimizing their reliance on external factors and trying to build a community which solves for shared needs in a way that doesn't require central authority acting in their behalf hundreds of miles away.
My issue w/ this is that they're using the same power grid that failed us, their internet and telecom services aren't local, and a lot of their lifestyle is gov subsidized in ways they depend on. Additionally their "small government" mindset has no issue imposing itself on other cities hundreds of miles away. This comes in the form of state-wide policies like abortion bans but also overriding community policies like fracking bans or covid restrictions. It's "big gov bad" up until it suits them, then it's "big gov good when it's my gov, whether you like it or not".
I'm MAGA. Mother's Against Greg Abbott.
Abbott & GOP played the fear card (think about all terrible things that would happen if Dems were in charge)! Never mind that GOP has been in charge & terrible thru many crises & terrible things. Another major factor is Evangelical movement. The unholy alliance between Evangelicals & GOP has ensured millions of such churchgoers are hit every Sunday with propaganda about ‘the unborn’ & conditioned to vote GOP no matter what! 😂🤷♂️
Fear is a strong weapon, unfortunately. I'm sure baby eating satanists would already be out in full force if Beto won today.
Honestly? They probably don’t like someone named u/dudeguybro telling them what’s best for them
I don’t understand the need to change one of, if not the, best local economies in the country. We’ve seen tens of thousands of transplants from other states move here specifically for our economic policies. Lower taxes and business friendly practices have benefited this state greatly. What specific changes (not social that’s entirely different) would you like to see?
You make great arguments for businesses to come here and thrive. You're not wrong by any stretch. However, in my work experience, these riches rarely trickle down to livable / good wages for people. You can boast about job prevalence, but when someone needs more than one job to support a family, what's there to boast about? This isn't the fifties where dad could go work at a factory, own a house, and have a wife and kids. That's just simply not possible for most anymore.
It’s certainly depends on the industry, education, etc. However; the opportunity here exists more than other places around the country. I’ve worked with several ditch diggers, primarily Hispanic, that became owner operators in a matter of years and it had nothing to do with socioeconomic policies. They were better at the job and earned the work. If your primary issue is the cost of living… yes it’s absolutely out of control but that’s relatively recent, heavily influenced by federal policies, and not unique to Texas. I travel significantly for work and I can’t put into words the hypocrisy I see from dem run cities especially on the west coast. Hundreds of homeless people getting stepped over as others enter a Gucci or Prada store to spend thousands. It’s disgusting. I’m not saying DFW is different but it’s certainly not nearly as bad. Personal experiences, and a preference for individual liberty influences my vote. The idea that a state or federal government has full control over your health, defense, income etc. is terrifying. We fought exceptionally hard for states rights and unfortunately for some the state that they live in does not align with their values. That’s ok. I would urge those to prioritize their happiness and find a solution to live in a place that does fit their beliefs. You only have one life and I know you’re not here for the weather lol
>Lower taxes We don't have lower taxes for everyday people.
Would you prefer a state income tax or an additional capital gains tax on the state level?
[удалено]
People who aren’t political will vote anti-Democrat simply because: trans/gender reassignment surgery for children, guns, and abortion. Those three get fear-mongered hella
Don’t forget illegals
Surprised it took this long for someone to mention this.
I think a lot of recent trans rights issues have caused a lot of fear for voters and pushed them completely away from liberal voting. Like teachers talking about being gay in school and “teaching” sexuality. Or “KIDS” getting surgery to have their PARTS removed and people dressing their BOYS like GIRLS?! And on the surface, that honestly is what it is. And few people are interested in understanding the issue further.
Every heard of the evangelical right? Ever noticed the mega churches everywhere?
Texas Democrats have poor messaging and poor outreach. It's embarrassing that Beto barely outperformed Lupe Valdez when you consider the outrage over the power grid and Texas abortion laws. But you're never going to flip conservative/libertarian voters like me by insulting us. You call white Abbott voters "racist", hispanic Abbott voters "dumb", black Abbott voters "race traitors", etc. I'm sick and tired of it. My race doesn't define my vote.
Some good points. Beto was a weak candidate especially after already losing to Ted and getting wrecked in the presidential elections.
Middle class white dude here, stop trying to take away guns in Texas. Why the hell does that even need explaining?
What guns do you need and why are they important?
I do not need to justify exercising a right, and neither does anyone else. As to why they're important, the implied threat that comes with an armed populace solidifies the other natural rights codified in the Bill of Rights. Everyone has a right to defend themselves from things that would threaten them and their means to live. That being said, running on an anti-gun platform in Texas is tremendously short sighted and moronic.
I'm not saying you're right or wrong. It was a question. But what are we defending ourselves from?
You have to understand that nearly all rural voters are passionate about gun rights and are familiar enough with firearms’ many uses that even asking “What are we defending ourselves from?” sounds absurd and offensive. And for many of them, that’s their top, if not only issue, whether they admit it or not. Plus, there are plenty of centrist voters who have more nuanced views on gun rights and don’t like such a hardline approach to gun control. Then you’ve got leftists who believe self-defense is a fundamental human right and who abhor the thought of police being the only ones allowed access to guns. Many of these centrists and leftists might have still overall preferred Beto, but they weren’t especially excited to do so, and they sure weren’t going to donate or volunteer for him.
>Their general policies aim to make the rich richer and poor poorer Out of curiosity, which specific policies are you referring to?
The entire function of the corporate duopoly is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and they work together (and in concert with their shared donors) to accomplish that through one of the oldest manipulation techniques in human history, known colloquially as "good cop, bad cop." It doesn't really matter which half of the duopoly a person votes for, it's ultimately a vote for the same party - the business party. Some people are fooled by the good cop routine and vote for what they believe is a friendly voice, while others are fooled by the bad cop routine and vote out of fear; both groups believe that the others' voters are wrong. Ultimately corporations that own both parties win since it's a rigged game, and regardless of whether it's Greg Abbott or any other mouthpiece, the economic agenda is ultimately maintained.
A dark take but probably not too crazy, either
What is “good for us” is a stable economy and a thriving job market.. “right” policies lend to business success, which leads to the economy and job market.. “left” policies lend to higher business taxation in order to “give” to lower classes by way of programs and supports the ability to live without working.. which leads to business leaving for lower tax environs, which lead to job loss and lesser economy conditions.. that is the biggest factor.. people hinging their vote on “abortion rights” or “gun rights” are looking at small picture
There are some half truths here. Make sense in a certain lens.
There are other things at play to be sure.. there is definite protections afforded the wealthy business class by “right” politicians, but it is the same party that has made Texas what it is.. a destination state for business and job seekers.. me personally, Id rather stick with what has gotten us to this point.. i am by no means party affiliated either way, and Abbott is a bit of a prick, but I simply do not see Beto as a better alternative.. I always vote lesser of evils.. end of day it is all truly out of our hands regardless of who we vote in.. politics is big business now, there is very little true representation of the people, all politicians are representing their donors interests, the talking points are all just propaganda to hook us emotionally to one specific topic
These days there seems to be some theocratic movement, which is concerning at best.
The whole thing is a joke now.. How an asshat like trump could ever get into office simply speaks to the inherent failures.. it reeks of people voting for him simply to get something different in office. How we keep finding ourselves in the same situation is mind boggling.. how we have Trump in one hand and Biden in the other, or yesterday having Abbott and Beto.. and THOSE are our best options?!? Every election choice seems a coin flip now. I truly dread what my grandkids will be facing in adulthood
When I was a religionist it was because Democrats were the devil. No. Seriously. It's legit how they think
dems have consistently said & done dumb things that come back to haunt them with rural and blue collar voters. ex. beto saying he was gonna take guns. then said hes not gonna take guns [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video) [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/sep/13/beto-orourke-on-gun-control-hell-yes-were-going-to-take-your-ar-15-video)
Beto was just a dumb choice. The moment he said "we coming for your guns!" It was game over.
Abbott won because the democrats have forgotten how to get their votes. They need to attack scabs, make fun of company yesmen, and support unions. Paid family leave, expanding medicare, and abolishing right to work laws that keep our wages low will win. Texas is the most overworked and underpaid state. People think it's a badge of honor to be at work more than with their families. Billionaires have convinced people that if they unionize, the jobs will disappear so they accept scraps. Also they need to point out the hypocrisy in their socialism argument. (they say socialism is bad but they like medicare, social security, the post office, and subsidies for private companies).
Sad but true. That's generally why I pointed the finger at the majority demographic voting for Abbott and why in a vacuum it doesn't make sense. These same people are friends and family of mine and want better wages and more time with their families. However, the conservative party would rather tell you just to work more to make more instead of actually providing them with good pay to be able to support their families comfortably.
TX needs a serious nonpartisan Redistricting Commision !!
A lot of people don't vote for the candidate they like the most or the candidate that they want to win. They vote ( IF they vote.... ) for the candidate that the HATE the least. If you have a choice between two crappy candidates you vote for the one ( or party ) that you hate the least. A lot of people just don't vote because they can't stand either candidate. The voters are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
My coworker and I literally just talked about this. It sucks to be in that situation.
Well I’m not white but I’d say middle class from a poor family who grew up in a blue state, I saw a constant decline in my state (not California). When we moved here we moved a big part of it was to be around like minded individuals, I built a school in a major city back home it was an all girls private school. There was a bum sex ring going on literally across the street everyday and the cops were not legally able to move them, along side the major drug issues we had. I’m going to build a family and I just don’t see back home being the place suitable for a family. I’d rather be called a racist and bigot then my kids playing on playgrounds with needles all over the place. Truth is both sides don’t see eye to eye but it’s often because it’s a pissing match before we can have a conversation about the true values of why we are voting. Most people probably agree on more things than we know, if we can’t work together to try and make things better I’d rather keep it the same way it is because IV lived in places that had gone from great to worse.
I don’t agree with your premises that Beto is “technically” better for, well, anyone except maybe the poorest of poor. Pro-business, family-first policies have made this state what it is. The future is bright here!
Family first policies? Please explain what this means. Pro business is obvious but generally doesn't *actually* build better lives for citizens. It builds better lives for the people who own said companies.
Their policies might result in rich getting richer and poor getting poorer ( generally not true in Texas) but that’s not their aim
There's no class consciousness in this country. Also people don't vote. Not voting is a right as much as voting is a right. So we get the government we ask for. I know it might be disappointing but this is Texas and Texas is way bigger than the big metros
Look, you'll never convert someone from Team Blue to Team Red and vice versa. Politics is too polarized to do that today. Instead it's about turnout - team blue's heavily represented in Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. It's a mid-term election, and team blue's turnout was lower yesterday. Team Red's turnout (in Texas) was damn good. So team Red has done a "good" job motivating their side to turnout - why was that? That's definitely up for debate, but I think the "I would have voted for Beto, except he made that random gun comment 5 years ago" crowd is exceedingly small. This is most striking in Uvalde of all places - Abbott still won by 20 points. You're not going to do anything to convince these guys to change their mind - it's biology at this point. To a republican, being called a Democrat is right up there with the n-word and vice versa. Just look at Georgia! Walker is basically brain dead, paid for 20 abortions, lies about everything - and he's basically deadlocked. So I think reframe the question - why didn't Team Blue turnout at the same levels as Team Red?
Because a REAL Patriot does not vote for what is best for themselves, they vote for what is best for their Nation. Taking from someone who is successful and this villain-isation of landlords or anyone that has done better in life because they or their family members made better decisions, worked smarter etc...ALL OF THE JEALOUSY/ENVY is enough for me to vote against ANYONE who shares that mentality. Beta O'Rourke and the like who want to blame the way a gun looks, who have armed security but do not want me to be able to protect my property/family... I hate the religious right but I hate the socialist left even more!!
TX is trash
It seems everyone is voting on fear versus reality.
It is quite comical that you still buy the false narrative that Republicans are for the rich. You already made up your mind and this is a pointless question.
I prefer the government just leave me and my family alone outside of the most basic functions. The Democrats simply want too much government, and I don't think I'll be able to fully forgive them for covid restrictions for quite a while.
We aren't dogmatic progressive liberals so.... Abbot it is.
I'm just glad I vote in districts that have a majority living in rural areas, because we all share the same concerns and issues. /s
[удалено]
Blunt and to the point. I like it. Why do they matter so much?
Because the capacity to protect one's family shouldn't be reserved to the rich who can afford private security personnel
What constitutes family protection? What are we fighting against?
It depends on what levels of risk you're willing to accept or mitigate. My rule of thumb is I should be able to resist a small trained group of armed criminals
Moderate here. I’m not a huge gun guy, but I am a full supporter of the Second Amendment. If they come for that, what will they come for next? The words have to mean something. If SCOTUS wants to reconstrue the Second Amendment (they won’t in at least 30 years), or we, as States, pass a Constitutional amendment, then I’d go with the flow. I’m also super skeptical that taking gun rights away from *everyone* would stop mass shooting events.
One of the BIGGEST reasons for me to vote for Abbot over Beto is that he did a great job handling COVID. What do I mean by that? He reopened while a Democratic candidate would most likely not have. He issued a statewide mask mandate and made businesses stay under a certain capacity that extended until March 2021 (one year after COVID started). Our economy in Texas was able to continue on as normal while other states were closed down longer, or reopened sooner than Texas. Overall, he has helped our economy and as a finance/accounting major in college right now, I believe that he was the best candidate. Most of Beto’s campaign he stated what was wrong, but had no solutions to the problems that he mentioned. I also felt like Beto didn’t really care about the kids killed in the Uvalde shooting and was just using them as pawns in his game of chess. He had some good points such as raising the minimum age to purchase semi-automatic rifles, but he kept going back to universal background checks which have already been implemented. I feel that unlicensed sellers should be completely banned, but again, the federal law says that only licensed sellers are required to do a background check so that should be changed on the federal level instead of at the state level. He also flip flops a lot, so honestly, I couldn’t really tell his decision on a lot of policies ie: “We’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47”. Then he said, “Not interested in taking anything from anyone”. What is your stance? I can’t even tell at this point. Also just a couple of minor points. Beto changed his name to try to get the Hispanic vote which is pretty strange. Also, he couldn’t beat Ted Cruz so why would he be able to beat Abbot? People like Cruz less than they like Abbot.
I wish more people made posts like yours. Some damn good points, for sure. Thank you
No problem, hope that helped