Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison has played her Charlie Brown’s Lucy-and-the-football trick one more time. Nope, she’s not resigning from the Senate. “AAARGH!” shout Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Attorney General Greg Abbott, and various other would-be GOP placekickers who are now forced to cool their heels.
Health care reform is up in the U.S. Senate. The economy continues its slow recovery. A jobs bill is on the way. Misled by Fox News, I guess, some doomsayers have, until now, thought 2010 wasn’t gonna be great for Democrats. But suddenly they remember: Gov. Rick Perry was elected with 39 percent of the vote in 2006.
Texas, meanwhile, is an incumbents’ nightmare, and all the incumbents are Republican. Why is it a nightmare? Because Hutchison is playing a practical joke, Perry is a practical joke, Dewhurst is a bad joke, Comptroller Susan Combs writes dirty jokes (bodice rippers, anyway), Abbott doesn’t get the joke, and House Speaker Joe Straus and Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson would rather be at the track or the gun range, respectively, no joke.
Oh, I almost forgot to mention that while teabaggers do their best to redraw a Mason-Dixon line along the Red River, most moderate Texans are alarmed that they can’t afford their kids’ college, they can’t afford health insurance, they’re losing their jobs, their mortgage company is knocking on the door, they pay tolls to a Spanish company for the privilege of waiting in traffic and breathing poisonous air. They can’t even get a glass of water when they stop at the diner because there’s a drought and nobody’s planned for the state’s water woes.
Watch out, because December is almost here, the deadline for filing for office just six weeks away, and there’s about to be a scramble among Democrats to see who is running for which statewide office.
Before very long, there will be either surprising new energy or a major shake-up of some sort in the governor’s race. That shake-up, and a general sense that somebody’s gonna get there first if they don’t move now, will energize potential down-ballot statewide candidates, in fact, it will energize more candidates than there are statewide offices. So behind the scenes there is going to be some serious arm-twisting, posturing, positioning, and all-around fun.
There’s also this often overlooked fact: Texas Democrats have a statewide organization that far surpasses what was in place before their legendary sweep of 1982, or Ann Richards’ victory of 1990, or certainly before the nationwide losses of 2002. It’s not even close. There’s more organization, more discipline, more capable leadership — almost all of it behind the scenes. All of it critical to potential 2010 successes.
There is an army of activists waiting to be mobilized. I have to admit, they are as nervous and impatient as Texas patriot/citizens were at Sam Houston’s dithering (to coin a word) before attacking (and beating) Santa Anna.
A couple of things have made Hungry Young Democrats wait for the whites of GOP eyes before deciding what to do. First, of course, is their youth. The storied 1982 ticket had seasoned incumbents Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Hobby at the top, and a bunch of them — Mark White, Ann Richards, Jim Mattox, Garry Mauro — wanted to get near the front of the line ahead of would-be competitors. They didn’t want to wait. Today’s young Democrats have, until now, figured they had years to go before they found themselves out to pasture.
But waiting is always a bad risk in politics. Just ask Hutchison. Or Henry Cisneros. This isn’t lost on the young bunch (I am leaving out names ’cause I’ll sure enough forget someone and I can’t afford the minutes on my cell phone for the angry calls from the overlooked).
There’s also: 1) All the downspinning of Democratic chances in 2010 was based on air. This is not to say the Eeyore gloominess couldn’t be self-fulfilling if it prevailed; 2) What exactly is supposed to happen between 2010 and 2014 that will make the latter a better year for Democrats? Uh…no one can answer that. There is no swinging pendulum. Democrats have to build their future.
With apologies to the Beatles, in politics the votes you take are equal to the votes you make.
I’m very aware that some so-called sophisticates remain skeptical about 2010. Some do so for self-interested reasons. Others are glass-half-empty types. As I’ve said before, sophistication is often the enemy of courage. So call me unsophisticated.
Nice post, Glenn. I appreciate especially the third paragraph from the top.
Despite all the team-building that you seem to think Texas Dems are doing, I remain very skeptical of their ability to take the Governor’s office next year. For one thing, Republicans seem to have a great talent at getting out the votes or, in some areas, denying the votes to those who would be expected to vote Democrat. Perry has an energized base of almost crazy people who will go to their voting places despite bad weather, pestilence, war, civil unrest or their own near-deaths. They are motivated in ways that I’ve never seen Democrats motivated.
The Independents who the Dems will need to win are historically and notoriously fickle. And lackadaisical about going to the polls. If the weather is bad, or the kids have something to do at school, or the drive is too long or too crowded, they will do something else rather than vote. Really, if they have a choice between a Democrat they don’t know anything or much about, or a Republican they do, they’ll probably vote Republican.
Thanks for the kind words, Doran. Realistic appraisal of strategic shortcomings is absolutely essential, of course. If you will permit me to make a point not in response to you, but on the subject of skepticism: I have never seen the point of a generalized skepticism in the struggle for justice. No movement ever succeeded that was permeated by it, for obvious reasons. I think of all the successful movements of recent years — Poland, Czechoslovakia, South Africa. None succumbed to defeatist thinking, not even imprisoned leaders.
Houston mayor, Bill White, certainly hasn’t been shy. I started noticing his advertisements all over most of the progressive sites a couple of weeks ago.
I do hope the D’s have a deeper bench in 2010 than they did in 2006. Remember Fred Head, the D nominee for comptroller? His chief — indeed, only — claim to fame in that race was his accusation that Ag Commissioner Susan Combs, the R nominee for comptroller, had written a pornographic romance novel some years earlier.
As a working journalist back then, I tracked down the book (“A Perfect Match”) from an online seller and forced myself to read it. It was poorly plotted and not much better written, but it was surely not pornographic. Although I voted for almost all of the other D’s on the ballot then, I did not vote for the silly Mr. Head.
Almost four years later, references to Combs’ silly romance novel tell us absolutely nothing about her job performance as the comptroller of public accounts or why the as-yet-unknown D nominee would be better.
It is all well and good to talk about changing demographics, but the saddest political factor in my life is that, from the late 1960s on, “the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
I know what you mean, but it’s not really true that “the best lack all conviction.” Maybe it’s true of some of the best, but not all. I know some of ‘em with plenty of conviction, and they’ve made plenty courageous sacrifice on behalf of those convictions.
Glenn, as usual you nailed it.
Keep up the fine work, man.
Todd
Glenn, a healthy, realistic skepticism is not the same as defeatest thinking. The former can lead to clarity of thought, realistic expectations, meaningful action, and eventual success.
Defeatist thinking leads, of course, to defeat. And so will a generalized, unrealistic appraisal of what exactly can be achieved. I think it unlikely that Mr. White can take the Governor’s office. I doubt that people/voters know him. He has little, if any, State-wide exposure or experience, so far as I know. Is it true that he was at one time a Republican? If he was Bush Repubican like Rick Perry was a Bush Republican, why not vote for Sen Hutchison?
If I may, I want to piggy-back on your reference to “…all the successful movements of recent years — Poland, Czechoslovakia, South Africa.” As I recall, none of those movements concentrated on storming the palace/governor’s mansion/whatever as their first or primary target or effort. They organized. They took postions in local or regional offices. They did the hard work of building from the bottom up.
There are seats to be had by Texas Democrats. In the Courts, and in the executive branches of State government. There are local seats to be taken. Those are the positions where the Democrats need to concentrate their efforts and money. Take enough of them, and the electorate State wide will start to pay attention to giving the Dems the top offices.
That local district focus has been the Dem focus — with great discipline — in 2004, 2006 (to Chris Bell’s dismay), and 2008. This includes local judicial offices. It’s been very successful. We still need a much more focused effort on school board races etc. This year is a bit different. I’ll give a reason, but it’s not the only reason, nor the main reason Dems will have a great candidate for governor. If Rick Perry is allowed to use his resources down-ballot because he’s not opposed, well Dems will have an uphill struggle in some of the tougher districts. We have been building from the ground up as you suggest, but we now have to do more.
By the way, Bill White was never a Republican to my knowledge.
You’re correct: Bill White is not the Republican turned Democrat. But there is, or was, some member of George Bush’s cabinet who is, or was, considering a run for office as a Democrat in 2010. Help me out, someone. Who is that person?
There’s no member of the Bush cabinet running as a Democrat. Unless I’m missing something. Tom Schieffer was an ambassador appointed by Bush, and had earlier been in private business with Bush.