Burnt Orange Report

1. Perry wins the GOP primary about 57 to 43

2. If Chris Bell is the nominee, it goes Perry 55, Bell 41, Kinky 4

3. If John Sharp is the nominee it goes Sharp 52, Perry 43, Kinky 5

To make my point clearer, Chris Bell has absolutely NO CHANCE of winning the race for Texas Governor. A guy whose last race was for the Democratic nomination for Congress as an incumbent and lost 70-30 ain't gonna win. Perry is a born politician (I hate the guy, but it is true) and Bell should have stayed on the City Council and hung up his spurs-- period.

Sharp, on the other hand, has done a better job of reaching out to independents and even some Republicans than anybody else in this state. In 2002 we had a horrific candidate for Governor, Bush was near the top of his popularity and Perry was still relatively liked in this state. Sharp would be the best possible candidate, Bush ain't doing so well and Perry is despised all around. Sharp will get every Democratic vote and a huge chunk of Strayhorn votes. He'll win.

If you want to keep the Democratic Party in the wilderness, vote for Bell. If you are sick of losing, vote for Sharp.

That'll be a perfectly valid point, you know, when John Sharp gets off his butt and actually lets us know what he's planning on doing next year.

I don't think you are giving the 'ol lady enough credit. Out here in the hinterlands and all over the state, people are fed up with Perry. Look at his poll numbers! This will be much closer than many people assume.

ZW Air,

Though I agree that Sharp has several advantages, the entire State of Texas is a bit different than Al Green's Congressional District. Democratic primary voters in a ~66% African American district had any white boy not named Bill Clinton beat from the start. Running against the former head of the Houston NAACP, Bell did about as well as anyone could expect.

I imagine he would have continued to do a good job on the Houston City Council if he wouldn't have been term limited out and had to look for new opportunities (this is why you heard Gordon Quan's name come up in DeLay's district as he's term limited as well).

That being said, I like Sharp's past statewide appeal. Perry is going to win this primary, and I believe that spells the beginning of the end for Texas Republicans. Whether it happens in 2006 or 2010, I'd put the smart money on 2010.

Gimme a hunnerd dollers on the Grandma at 3:1.

The primaries in Texas are in an important respect "open" in that you don't have to register beforehand as a member of a particular party to vote in that party's primary. The only restriction is that if you vote in one party's primary, you can not vote in another party's primary. So, people who have alwasy voted Demcratic could decide to go vote in the Republican primary for Strayhorn because they want someone more moderate than Perry in office. If there are not many, or any at all, hotly contested Democratic primary races, then many people may be drawn to the Republican primary for the first time, and then they may or may not go back to the Democratic party in November. I know a bunch of people who want to take two shots at Perry.

Sharp? Jeezy creezy, are we going to walk down that road to nowhere again?

If we want a guy who will run by himself, for himself, offering nothing to Democrats and getting us just close enough that we can say "gee, we don't suck too bad! With just a few minor alterations, we could win next time!", John Sharp is your man. He coulda been a contender!

I'm sick of running the same campaign over and over again and falling further behind. HOw many times do we need to hit ourselves in the face with a tire iron before we say: "shit, that hurts. I think I'll won't do that again."

Let's run as Democrats and start rebuilding. WE may not win, but we can at least develop an identity. Right now we have none. We stand for nothing. It is ludicrous to keep dragging the retread back into play with another cautious, "me-too" campaign platform that will do exactly nothing for us as a ticket in 2006 and do less than nothing in crafting a long-term message. Harsh but true.

Besides, I seem to remember Sharp saying my boy the Big Dog should resign when the GOP attack machine decided his consensual blowjob from a pleasant if slightly porky intern was the worst scandal since Teapot Dome.

Clinton should resign; Tony Sanchez is the perfect candidate for governor; I'm not going to endorse Mauro. Yup, all fine decisions that should be rewarded with our gubernatorial nomination.

No thanks.

I read on Pink Dome last week that when both were in the legislature, John Sharp was more conservative than Rick Perry. More conservative than Rick Perry? http://www.pinkdome.com/archives/2005/06/a_sharp_rumor_w.html) All this time, when John Sharp was trying to out-Republican the Republicans, I thought it was a cynical strategy to appeal to weak Republicans. But maybe it was the truth. Maybe John Sharp really is that conservative and is taking Democratic voters for a ride. Maybe we are the ones being lied to and the Republicans are seeing his true self.

John Sharp should have switched parties in the 1990s when they recruited him. Then Democratic activists wouldn’t feel so bad about not trusting him. Face it folks, John Sharp is the reason we have the acronym DINO. You know how they say “John Sharp” in the Deep South? Zell Miller.

I think there should be a betting pool on whether Kinky even gets on the ballot. With a hot primary between "One Tough Grandma" and Mr. "Good Looking and Goofy" I think the odds are pretty long.

And I can't help but think: "Chris Bell? A looser? That's the *best* the Democrats can do? A congressional *looser*?" If he goes up against Perry, he's meat.

You know how they say “John Sharp” in the Deep South? Zell Miller.

You know how they say "Zell Miller" in the northeast?

Joe Leiberman.

Off topic but I thought you might like to help

"Florida Democratic Party Faces IRS Lien; $900,000 Shortage

POSTED: 4:55 pm EDT June 21, 2005

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- Broke and without enough money in the bank to pay its bills after the end of the month, the Florida Democratic Party has now been slapped with a lien by the Internal Revenue Service for failing to pay payroll and Social Security taxes in 2003.

The state party's budget and finance committee voted Tuesday to ask for a new audit to account for more than $900,000 it believes somehow disappeared from the books during the 2003-2004 calendar years when the party was led by Scott Maddox, who is now seeking its nomination for governor.

Maddox and successor Karen Thurman, who became the party's new chairwoman just last month, did not immediately return phone messages asking for comment on the findings."

http://www.local6.com/news/4635633/detail.html

Your friends back east need your help. They're standing on roadsides now. No wonder your candidates failed so badly. The national party starved a lot of states of funding. Wonder where all that money went? Out raised the Republicans for the first time and many state parties are failing. Terry, what did you do? Who got rich? Does this explain why Democrats didn't win last November?

The Sharp haters are ridiculous. Politics is all about adding and attracting voters not subtracting. People who pay attention know what the Dems in Texas stand for. I'm tired of hearing that crap. Ask Jim Dunnam or Garnet Coleman, Pete Gallego, or even Patrick Rose. They have all been leading the fight.

We have been among the walking dead since 2002 when the GOP could do no wrong. The political climate is getting much better than it was 4 or 5 years ago. The 35% of the electorate that showed up gave the GOP everything, and look what they have done with it.

I don't think a base Democrat can win anything for the next few years. I think you have to get indies and soft Repubs to win in Texas. Look at the numbers. John Sharp with a good ticket that doesn't have ethical problems can do better than most.

When insulting someone, I often find it useful to check my spelling. Just a tip, little free advice. Tuck that away and remember it for next time.

I agree with pc. Start with winning, then worry about the rest, because if you don't win, why does it matter?

For every person that says something about "indentity" or "message," let me suggest something: have you gone door to door, talking to voters about a specific candidate and found "message" or "indentity" problems?

The main problem with Dems in Texas is we think we can use our heads to win when we need to focus on using our feet as well. "Brains and boots" will do more to help us win that debating what our "message" should be. Go local, tell a good story about a great candidate, work harder and smarter than they do.

Sharp haters are ridiculous? As a proud Democrat, I will not vote for him. He has so angered me over the years that I will undervote in any race in which he is the nomineed. I'm not alone. Not by a longshot. He is a stop-gap that, if elected, would compromise progressive principles over and over and over again and not give us any chance at building the party. It would be, once again, all about John.

What on Earth makes anyone believe Sharp -- who has done absolutely nothing over the last 8 years to rally the Democratic base and build a message and a party -- could actually win? The man has been living in a bunker and then emerges, locust-like, every four years to add his name toward the top of the Democratic ticket. Oh, Perry is doing worse so automatically a two-time loser is going to be able to win, right? Please.

I agree, start with winning. Sharp isn't the key to that equation.

His campaign slogan should be: John Sharp -- Been there, done that.

Perry at the top of the ticket is the best thing we could hope for. It ain't about winning the governor's mansion (remember we actually want to have influence in State Government), its about maybe winning the open Agriculture commissioner slot (pleaaase Charlie), picking up seats in the TX house and Senate, and picking up congressional seats. We want Perry at the top of the ticket because he is so far right and with the publicity he will get he makes all of the R's look bad. As for Strayhorn winning, there was a reason Kay "Baby Killer" Hutchison didn't run, and it was because her poll numbers among likely Republican Party members were not as good as everyone thought. On that note, I happened to run into Carol Keeton Strayhorn leaving a Planned Parenthood event on her way to an event for the Homeless

The only thing less likely than winning the governor's manse with Bell is winning Ag Commissioner at all. Down ballot races have nothing to do with candidates: perhaps Stenholm would be able to do better than others, but it is all about party votes down there. If Jesus Christ ran as a Democrat for Ag Commissioner (Jesus Christ versus Todd Staples, what a race!) he'd probably lose by about 15 points or more.

State House seats will have to be contested, but they should work in tandem with the statewides. Turning out voters for state rep races will drive up statewide numbers, excitement about the statewide races will drive up turnout for state rep races. We shouldn't focus on one or the other, but make them part and parcel of the same effort.

And for all of the Sharp haters, a few things. First, he's not a raging right winger. Listen to the guy's message and while it has been moderate, he's supported common sense fiscal reforms, free college education for every qualified student, etc. Secondly, he doesn't just "hole up" for four years. You can see him at Dem events all the time and the guy is also busy working for his day job. He's a good man who can win and that is all that matters right now.

Finally, Mr. Stanford, I don't think that anyone insulted anybody except for your quip about my spelling. I said that your man isn't going to be governor, and you respond by picking on my spelling. That petty and childish behavior is what will cost you this election, sir.

Sharp will not win and he will not help us win in four years either.

ZW,

By your own logic, Kay Bailey should never have gotten elected statewide after her 1982 defeat in the GOP Primary to Steve Bartlett for a Dallas Congressional seat.

I don't think we should say KBH got cold feet about a match up with Perry: she just got "a lot of political capital" for basically doing nothing. She's likely to spend it, and I believe it might be on the GOP national ticket.

I agree that Rick Perry at the top of the ballot is the best thing for Democrats. Personally, I think Jesus would be a great Ag Commissioner, but I'd settle for Charlie as well.

Think about this for a moment: Democrats run a campaign against the GOP that they can't govern. Hell, we can use KBH's and Carol Keeton Rylander Strayhorn's sound bites: no property tax relief, no school funding plan, no leadership on issues for children, seniors, or middle class Texans. That's not a GOP message, that our message. I could sell that door to door.

The big key is good local candidates.

JIM TURNER FOR GOVERNOR!

anyone else willing to start a "draft turner" campaign? he's moderate, partisan (spoke at the national convention) and can energize the yellow dogs in east texas.

does anyone know what he's up to these days, anyway?

Bill,

Completely agree with you. Don't know how many people who have wanted to get together for regular 'strategy or message meeting' on various campaigns, but ask them to commit to a regular blockwalking schedule and it becomes...

"Well I have work, and you know, the kids..."

People are so worried about message, that they forget about what is the most important thing. The messenger.

Everyone wants to be a strategist/media consultant nowadays, no one wants to actually get the requisite experience to get there.

As far as downballot statewide races, ZW Air is generally correct, but come on, if you don't think Charlie Stenholm would do well against Todd Staples or any other Republican, how the hell do you think we win any other statewide race?

Right on Cincinnatus! (You too Bill!)

I think Turner for Gov would be great. But I heard after leaving congress he has been making really good money as a lobbyist.

I think Charlie would be great but he's also making good money as a lobbyist.

I thought that once you left Congress, you had to wait a year or two before you could become a lobbyist?