Burnt Orange Report

It stands to reason that we can close the gap even faster if we can

(1) Increase turnout and registration in urban and minority-majority counties; and

(2) Cut our losses in rural counties.

Given that this has been conventional wisdom since before the 2002 election, I think that is a non-controversial assessment.

If we can get our act together, we ought to be able to give the Republicans a real run in 2006; although, sadly, the QR is probably right. The Republicans could nominate a mangy dog and still be (slightly) favored to win.

This inevitability of demographic change argument really frustrates me. Democrats could make gains faster than estimated if they would try communicating with and persuading voters, instead of just waiting around for areas to turn black and brown enough to elect them.

There are four state house districts in the Houston area, where Democrats could get in and compete NOW if they had a good candidate with a message. Instead of waiting until 2012 to take these seats, we could get one in 2006, two in 2008 and one in 2010. By then, others would become opportunities.

What this election showed me, is that Democrats in Texas are not yet willing to do the work necessary to win. Why did Hubert Vo and Mark Strama win? They were great candidates who worked their butts off and had something to say to voters. Why did Chet Edwards win in a district just as Republican as the other members who lost? Because he worked his butt off and had something to say to voters.

We've got to go precinct by precinct, and persuade. Start giving voters a reason to choose you, and they just might.

Yeah, well all these assumptions are based on voting patterns remaining the same. If Dallas and Harris Democrats can find a way to GOTV like Travis County Democrats... we can expediate this process a great deal.

Speaking as a Dallas County Democrat, there was a lot of enthusiasm here this year, though I wasn't able to participate much in first-hand organizing (such is the life of a tag-teaming parent of an infant). Moreover, even the judicial races we lost were VERY narrow defeats. This says to me that we've got more than a fighting chance in many races, and that we WILL win more of them, if we can get more Dems to run.

The next beachhead up here (to use an abused metaphor), will likely be the Texas Senate, where Republicans have run unopposed for awhile (including in 2004). If we can grab a few more statehouse seats, and mount a real run for Governorship (Perry, despite his looks, is certainly an unpopular, "mangy dog" if ever there was one; he can be taken by a sharp opponent), then we'll accelerate the "Blue-ing" of Texas by a decade or more.

IMHO, the transition of Texas from Rep to Dem should be among the DNC's highest priorities. If we can win back Texas, that's it, game over, at the electoral level nationally. There's no way they can possibly win without those 30-odd electoral votes. It ain't gonna be easy, but I think it'll have much more long-term impact that shaving off a New Hampshire here and a Montana there.

I hope Dallas and Harris can GOTV like travis. I think the problem is that there is a high number of non-citizens in Dallas or Harris than there are in Austin. It will make it tougher. But in 2006 most statewide Dems worth their salt win carry Dallas, and the higher caliber Dems could be able to win Harris and Bexar by then.

If current trends continue in Dallas, state Reps Tony Goolsby and Ray Allen should be talking to their retirement advisors after the session. It will be their last.

You will not be able to cut losses in rural counties unless the dems moderate considerably... In my county (Comal), the dems lost their only elected office - that of a county commmissioner in a solidly democrat precinct...