Burnt Orange Report

May 19, 2004

Perry's Dismal Numbers May Provide an Opening for Texas Dems

By Andrew Dobbs

I don't know if y'all have seen the latest Texas Poll but I guarantee that the Governor in particular and Texas Republicans in general asses are sucking wind this morning over this

Texas Gov. Rick Perry's job-performance rating reached a new low as an increasing number of Republicans disapproved of his work in office, according to the latest Scripps Howard Texas Poll.

About 37 percent of Texans surveyed said they approved of Perry's performance -- the lowest marks since Perry took office in 2000 and the lowest for a Texas governor in nearly a decade, according to the poll.

Among Republicans, Perry's approval rating dropped 15 percentage points in the past three months, the poll shows.

But the Republican governor still outpaced most other Texas politicians -- with the Texas Legislature as a whole drawing a meager 23 percent approval rating. (...)

Although Strayhorn enjoyed the highest approval rating among the state's politicians at 39 percent, her ratings slipped 7 percentage points. Moreover, her disapproval rating of 30 percent increased 8 percentage points.

For a little more perspective, the Chronical:

The Scripps Howard survey of 1,000 adult Texans was conducted from May 3-15 as the Legislature met in a special session called by Perry. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The survey ended before the session, but the 30-day session's failure was evident.

Among Texans in general, Perry remains the most unpopular governor in 14 years -- with 37 percent approving of his performance as governor and 52 percent disapproving.

Perry's disapproval rating in the winter and spring Texas Poll surveys has been the highest of any Texas governor since Bill Clements was enmeshed in a pay-for-play football scandal at Southern Methodist University in 1987.

But the biggest sign that Perry's re-election may be in jeopardy is how his job approval among Republicans sank like a stone during the past three months.

Among Republicans, 66 percent said Perry was doing a good job in the winter poll. Now, 51 percent of Republicans approve of Perry's job performance -- a 15 percentage point drop.

That's right- about as many REPUBLICANS think that Perry sucks as think he's doing a decent job as governor and the only state elected who has as many or more people thinking that they are doing a decent job as think they are ruining things is Strayhorn, and even she has a majority unsure of her performance. The Republicans have dug themselves into a deep hole and I just don't see how there is anything they could do in the next two years that will improve things. Of course two years is an eternity in politics, but their problem seems to be less a problem of specific occurances and more a general inability to govern. From that liberal pinko rag the Dallas Morning News:

The GOP Challenge: Can Republicans govern Texas? (...)

The Legislature's failure to come up with a fix for school funding wasn't because Republicans and Democrats were brawling, although there were conflicts between the parties. The breakdown came because Republicans couldn't agree with Republicans. The GOP controls the governorship, the House and the Senate. And that's where the feuding has mostly taken place over the last month.

Now, some of the fight is about honest disagreements. But the real quarrel is about whether the Legislature should raise business taxes to put more money into Texas schools. Gov. Rick Perry hasn't wanted to do that, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst fortunately is willing, and House Speaker Tom Craddick is somewhere in between.

Republicans need to recognize the state needs a new pool of funds to improve schools. And they need to come to that reality fast.

Since 2002, when Republicans took over all parts of the state's government for the first time in 100-plus years, the Legislature has broken down into bitter fights over the state's budget, congressional redistricting and, now, school funding. If Texas Republicans don't fix this situation, then Texans will have a right to wonder if the GOP knows how to govern.

Republicans may want to check in with the state's Democratic elders on this point, too. They know what it's like for voters to take away their power.

The DMN, as usual, is being rather charitable to the GOP. It seems to me that Republicans are incredibly good at winning elections. They control the White House, both Houses of Congress, a majority of state legislators and a majority of governors. The Republicans are better than Democrats at winning elections, but they are awful at governing. I'm not saying this because I think that they enact programs I disagree with (though they do), but rather that Republican leadership typically means fiscal insolvency, stopgap destined-to-fail solutions to pressing problems and the imposition of ideology over proven solutions. Texas is no exception and now with the complete collapse of all respect for elected officials and no light at the end of the tunnel a "throw the bums out" sentiment exists for we Democrats to take a hold of.

A majority of Texans cast their ballot for at least one Democrat in 2002. In 2002 Texans elected 17 Democrats to Congress (though one has since become a Republican), 12 State Senators and a majority of county level officials statewide. The number of counties without at least one Democrat in office is rather small and mostly concentrated in the suburban counties (though even such Republican centers as Fort Bend County have some Democratic representation) and in Far West Texas. If in 2006 we nominate Democrats that are of the variety these voters are used to voting for- moderate/conservative WD-40 types- and work hard on suburban outreach, we will be able to take back some of the state government and we will be able to build a new Democratic coalition in Texas.

We have to start now, so be sure to check out the Texas Tuesdays Blog Coalition's website and use its list of candidate contribution sites to give money to our candidates in 2004!

Posted by Andrew Dobbs at May 19, 2004 10:23 AM | TrackBack

Comments

Strayhorn just fried her own turkey though -- she denied tax-exempt status to the Red River Unitarians in Denison; religious groups all over the spectrum from across the state are up in arms right now!

It'll be interesting to see who the Rubs wind up fielding for Governor 2 years from now. I know who I'd like to see as our candidate though: State Sen. Royce West -- it's about time we had a brilliant orator of that caliber at that level of the ticket!

Posted by: Jeff at May 19, 2004 12:05 PM

IIRC, Carole Keeton *INSERT YOUR NAME HERE* did this to try to play to the bigot vote in her gubernatorial run.

Imagine her talking to a rabid fundie group and saying something about knowing what religion is, and that the Unitarians aren't.

BTW, the way you'll know that Perry's goose is cooked is when the rumors first appearing on BOR start hitting the press from Republican sources.

Posted by: Matthew Saroff at May 19, 2004 02:14 PM

Yeah... Royce West first emerged as Michael Irvin's attorney when he was smoking crack and screwing hookers in motel rooms. He also is something of a racial demagogue on several issues. Don't get me wrong, I'm okay with him but I think he'd be about the worst candidate we could run for governor. We need someone that is white, probably rural, moderate/conservative and squeaky clean. West fails all of those tests.

Also, we weren't the "source" of the Perry rumors. In fact, I first heard intense gossip about these rumors- from both Republicans and Democrats- at least 3 weeks before Byron's first post. Still, I think that we were one of only a handful of outlets to openly say what people were whispering in the corridors of the capitol.

Posted by: Andrew D at May 19, 2004 03:27 PM

Andrew -- I couldn't disagree more. Our last gubernatorial fiasco was Hispanic, rural (Laredo), a Rocky-con, and legally dubious. West is, of course, Black, urban (with ties to both Dallas AND Houston), moderate-to-liberal, and cleaner-than-you-think (he was an assistant DA felony prosecutor in Dallas County). We need to push for Texas to have its first Black governor -- it will do wonders to lift the tide of Democrats across the state and throughout the country; that Ron Kirk SHOULD HAVE run for the job two years ago (and let Ken Bentsen pursue his uncle's Senate seat) was one of the bigger strategic miscalculations our Party has made in recent memory. And like I said, it doesn't hurt that West is highly qualified (former prosecutor, State Senator for more than a decade) and one of the most brilliant orators I've ever heard!

Posted by: Jeff at May 19, 2004 04:43 PM

If Royce West is "one of the best orators" you've ever heard, you might want to get out more. Furthermore, this isn't the age of Ralph Yarborough or Farmer Jim- speaking ability is important but takes a back seat to several other qualities. Name the last good public speaker we had for governor- Ann Richards. Remember that she lost to a much less orator. Name the best public speaker to serve as governor before her. Umm.... maybe John Conally? Maybe? Oratorical skills are not nearly as important as

1. Money- Royce West doesn't have enough of it
2. Marketability- I don't care what you say, a Black, urban, liberal former defense attorney will go over about like a whore in church in Texas. If you believe otherwise you are an idiot- straight up.

Royce West not only would be a disaster, he wouldn't run in the first place. The people you should be thinking might run for the Dems are John Sharp, Jim Turner, John Montford, Roy Spence, maybe Bill White and that's about it. Maybe a few others will emerge as time goes on but I would be surprised. Royce West isn't within 1000 miles of that list.

Posted by: Andrew D at May 19, 2004 05:21 PM

The numbers just don't support what you are saying: Kirk only polled 127,000 fewer votes than Sharp, in a race with fewer total votes cast, against a MUCH stronger Rub opponent, and without Nolan Ryan doing his TV spots. Moreover, he outpolled everyone else on our ticket in statewide non-Judicial races: Sanchez, Watson, Akins, etc. Black and urban CAN win in Texas, at least as much as any other Democratic configuration statewide.

While you're right, things like fundraising have risen to altogether too much undeserved importance, I think you underestimate both West's personal war chest, and level of financial support from the Democratic community in and around Dallas: realize, he personally underwrote much of the cost of the buses to the Texas 11 rally last August.

And I'm really tired of this business of selecting candidates because of "marketability" -- I'm committed to the philosophy brought forth by the Dean campaign -- you fight the good fight standing by your liberal principles, and you win if you earn it.

Posted by: Jeff at May 19, 2004 05:57 PM

Royce West would be more interested in running for Dallas County DA in 2006 than runnig for Governor. I doubt ethically challenged Bill Hill will run, and the county is 50-50 and getting more Democratic.

Posted by: phillytx at May 19, 2004 06:03 PM

Sorry, running.

Posted by: pc at May 19, 2004 06:12 PM

You point out that Kirk got only 150,000 votes fewer than Sharp like it proves your point and not mine. Newsflash- he lost. That is the sign of an unsuccessful campaign!

Furthermore, our previous preoccupation with ideological/organizational purity over marketability really got us far, now that Howard Dean is the Democratic nominee. Oh wait...

Posted by: Andrew D at May 19, 2004 08:35 PM

Guys, one thing we learned is that you can read way too much into the experiences of specific black candidates when seeking white votes. Is Kirk the standard fro a black running? Or is it Morris Overstreet? Kirk ran for the US senate, for an open seat, with no legislative voting record. Royce West won't have that opportunity:

TV ad: "When things don't go Royce West's Way, Royce West goes to Albuquerque."

The day has not come when a black Democrat can win major statewide office in Texas. If Perry is so weak, you'll see him get knocked off in the primary.

Posted by: Keith G at May 20, 2004 06:04 AM

Keith, that's sad but true. Even Georgia is ahead of us in that department: Attorney General Thurbert Baker, Labor Commissioner Mike Thurmond.

Posted by: pc at May 20, 2004 08:37 AM

Nevertheless, Sharp was running against Dewhurst, who had, AFAIK, never previously appeared on a statewide ballot. OTOH, Kirk was running against John Cornyn, who was the sitting AG.

Posted by: Jeff at May 20, 2004 08:55 AM

Yeah, Mike Thurmond was my state representative when I was in grad school at UGA. His district was only about 32% black, so he knew how to do outreach to whites and had a moderate voting record. Baker was appointed to the job, and ran as a quasi-incumbent.

Georgia also has four black congressmen, and might have had a fifth had Champ Walker not been such a lousy candidate (never run for Congress when there is a mugshot floating around).

Sharp got 47.3% of the two-party vote, which was the high-water mark for any statewide Democrat that year. Unless there's a tide I haven't noticed hear north of the Red RIver, I don't see ol' Royce wowing those suburban and rural swing whites.

You guys are fun. Oklahoma Democrats are sometimes boring by comparison (shock), though we're about to impeach the Insurance Commissioner.

Posted by: Keith G at May 20, 2004 01:06 PM

Royce West for Governor? Has this become burntorangereport-on-crack.com?

A realistic shot at winning ANY statewide office is likely 6-8 years away.

Posted by: Ginger at May 20, 2004 03:10 PM

nice

Posted by: Deleter Spy at July 11, 2004 02:09 PM

News, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas

May 19, 2004

Perry's Dismal Numbers May Provide an Opening for Texas Dems

By Andrew Dobbs