I love Lone Star Left in general and especially this post. Thank you for this spot-on analysis of the situation. As a precinct chair, I find your description of the hard work of grassroots Democratic Party organizing so accurate. We must stay focused. I'll vote for one of these in March but I'll also be ready to work equally hard for either candidate in November.
I see the division in my county right now (and the “small town” city council politics here is a ridiculous soap opera), but I am determined to not let it get to me. It may be unfollowing a few people on Facebook and a lot of positive self-talk, but I am really getting to know the candidates and making voting decisions on WHO is the best candidate to represent us in November. Forums, interviews, platforms and conversations.
I keep referring friends and acquaintances to your work, Michelle. It is a great resource for us here in Texas!
There are also newspaper interviews, League of Women voter’s guides, and more.
Yes we have to know something underhanded is going on behind the scenes. Like you I have worked long and hard to change the political atmosphere in Texas. I am still stunned from a recent exchange with a contact I have had in another state. She worked for Beto and I worked for her Senate candidates as I have for some other out-of-state candidates. This year I am staying home for our candidates. She dismissed it, said I was wasting my time, and I needed to help the five most likely to win with help. Saving Texas is still my mantra.
I know exactly what's happening, who the players are, and how it was orchestrated. Maybe after the Senate election, I'll expose it. It's too risky right now, but there are some serious bad actors in Texas politics at the moment, and believe it or not, they're willing to take us all down for their own ambitions.
I wasn't certain someone was up to something in the background, but I sensed something was up. My only social media is Substack, if that even counts, but the online wars break out here and in real life. Thanks for confirming the game is afoot.
Keep up the good work. Ignoring all the misinformation and drama is hard but this is a great reminder of who is doing the real work of turning Texas blue.
The Texas Tribune has a new poll today with Crockett ahead 8 points. So, there may be some utility in those online wars for her side. It makes it extremely difficult for Talarico when he (and his supporters) have to first prove the negative "I am not a racist". That is a game he cannot win. Undertake to prove that negative and you validate it was a thing in the first place. Fail to rebut that premise and it stands uncorrected. Meanwhile, no one is talking about the issues raised in this article which are literally life and death for us here in Texas.
100% with MIchelle on the thesis that we should be debating substantive issues rather than personal identity. The online drama is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out politically. If we would subtract the Not from Texas (NFT) contingent, forgo the schoolyard shouting and bullying and focus on the political fundamentals we would be a lot better off. The point of the primary is to figure who out which is the best candidate to kick the Republican's ass.
What can we do against this unfair, bad faith morass of politically unhelpful arguing about personalities rather than ideas, strategies and political realities? All I know is doing what Michelle just did. Reset the goal posts back to the issue of "who has a better plan for winning a statewide race?" Look at the resumes. Consider the sources of funding. Connect that funding to a potential conflict of interest between donor and voter.
Ultimately, let's remember that everyone has biases. The issue is not whether those biases exist and/or can be proven to have been purged. The issue is how likely will those biases be a conflict between the bias and equal representation of all voters? The criterion for a juror is not if they have biases, but whether they can set that bias aside and listen fairly with an open mind to all the evidence. I think jury service is a useful analogy to voting. We should have open minds about the evidence for and against each candidate. We should analyze whether each candidate will approach the job of representing people without prejudice and fairly. We cannot assess what is in people's hearts without getting to know them deeply, but we can assess whether they have done things in the past which indicate whether they can or cannot set their biases aside. And of course, we should analyze whether a candidate will set aside whatever biases they may have and do the will of all voters.
So, for example, Bill Clinton is a white Southerner. He probably grew up with racial bigotry. But, his actions show he didn't let that stop him from doing things beneficial for black people. See if Talarico can pass that test. Is Talarico more like Bill Clinton or George Wallace? What evidence is there for one or the other?
Both of you have been speaking truth to the issues at hand. Are we looking for or presenting the issues that make them the best candidates. We have enough bullying and misrepresentation from the GOP without engaging within the party.
I love Lone Star Left in general and especially this post. Thank you for this spot-on analysis of the situation. As a precinct chair, I find your description of the hard work of grassroots Democratic Party organizing so accurate. We must stay focused. I'll vote for one of these in March but I'll also be ready to work equally hard for either candidate in November.
I see the division in my county right now (and the “small town” city council politics here is a ridiculous soap opera), but I am determined to not let it get to me. It may be unfollowing a few people on Facebook and a lot of positive self-talk, but I am really getting to know the candidates and making voting decisions on WHO is the best candidate to represent us in November. Forums, interviews, platforms and conversations.
I keep referring friends and acquaintances to your work, Michelle. It is a great resource for us here in Texas!
There are also newspaper interviews, League of Women voter’s guides, and more.
Thank you. 💙
Thank you for being a level head focused on the real threats and the data that can light our way forward.
Yes we have to know something underhanded is going on behind the scenes. Like you I have worked long and hard to change the political atmosphere in Texas. I am still stunned from a recent exchange with a contact I have had in another state. She worked for Beto and I worked for her Senate candidates as I have for some other out-of-state candidates. This year I am staying home for our candidates. She dismissed it, said I was wasting my time, and I needed to help the five most likely to win with help. Saving Texas is still my mantra.
I know exactly what's happening, who the players are, and how it was orchestrated. Maybe after the Senate election, I'll expose it. It's too risky right now, but there are some serious bad actors in Texas politics at the moment, and believe it or not, they're willing to take us all down for their own ambitions.
Yes after would be a good time to reveal it. I can pretty much name some involved but you would have some insight we do not.
I wasn't certain someone was up to something in the background, but I sensed something was up. My only social media is Substack, if that even counts, but the online wars break out here and in real life. Thanks for confirming the game is afoot.
Keep up the good work. Ignoring all the misinformation and drama is hard but this is a great reminder of who is doing the real work of turning Texas blue.
💙💙
Thanks for writing this, agree 100 percent. Guess the Republicans are really worried.
Amen. Thank you.
The Texas Tribune has a new poll today with Crockett ahead 8 points. So, there may be some utility in those online wars for her side. It makes it extremely difficult for Talarico when he (and his supporters) have to first prove the negative "I am not a racist". That is a game he cannot win. Undertake to prove that negative and you validate it was a thing in the first place. Fail to rebut that premise and it stands uncorrected. Meanwhile, no one is talking about the issues raised in this article which are literally life and death for us here in Texas.
100% with MIchelle on the thesis that we should be debating substantive issues rather than personal identity. The online drama is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out politically. If we would subtract the Not from Texas (NFT) contingent, forgo the schoolyard shouting and bullying and focus on the political fundamentals we would be a lot better off. The point of the primary is to figure who out which is the best candidate to kick the Republican's ass.
What can we do against this unfair, bad faith morass of politically unhelpful arguing about personalities rather than ideas, strategies and political realities? All I know is doing what Michelle just did. Reset the goal posts back to the issue of "who has a better plan for winning a statewide race?" Look at the resumes. Consider the sources of funding. Connect that funding to a potential conflict of interest between donor and voter.
Ultimately, let's remember that everyone has biases. The issue is not whether those biases exist and/or can be proven to have been purged. The issue is how likely will those biases be a conflict between the bias and equal representation of all voters? The criterion for a juror is not if they have biases, but whether they can set that bias aside and listen fairly with an open mind to all the evidence. I think jury service is a useful analogy to voting. We should have open minds about the evidence for and against each candidate. We should analyze whether each candidate will approach the job of representing people without prejudice and fairly. We cannot assess what is in people's hearts without getting to know them deeply, but we can assess whether they have done things in the past which indicate whether they can or cannot set their biases aside. And of course, we should analyze whether a candidate will set aside whatever biases they may have and do the will of all voters.
So, for example, Bill Clinton is a white Southerner. He probably grew up with racial bigotry. But, his actions show he didn't let that stop him from doing things beneficial for black people. See if Talarico can pass that test. Is Talarico more like Bill Clinton or George Wallace? What evidence is there for one or the other?
Both of you have been speaking truth to the issues at hand. Are we looking for or presenting the issues that make them the best candidates. We have enough bullying and misrepresentation from the GOP without engaging within the party.
Oh, and I like the jury analogy.
Excited to vote in a primary for the first time!