Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

President

Former Bloomberg staffers sue him

Okay.

Four former workers for Michael Bloomberg’s presidential campaign in Texas are suing him for fraud, alleging that he went back on a promise to pay them through the November election.

In lawsuits filed Monday in Tarrant County, the former workers say the Democratic candidate promised that even if he dropped out — as he did earlier this month — he would continue to employ them through November “no matter what.” Each is seeking $42,000 in wages in addition to lost health insurance benefits, for a total capped at $75,000.

The lawsuits are apparently the first of their type in Texas against Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York City, who faces a growing uproar nationwide from former staffers. They also come as the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread in Texas and across the country, an especially harrowing situation for the unemployed and for those without health insurance.

The former workers in Texas, who were all organizers, are Abdoulaye Gueye, Argunda Jefferson, Gregory Snow and Melinda Hamilton. All are from Tarrant County except for Snow, who resides in neighboring Parker County.

Each plaintiff says he or she agreed not to disparage Bloomberg while working for him or afterward. “If plaintiff knew that Mike Bloomberg would go back on his word much in the style of Donald Trump, he never would have agreed to not bad mouth Bloomberg,” the lawsuits say.

I think a lot of people would have made different decisions if they had known what Bloomberg was going to end up doing. I have a lot of sympathy for these folks, and I’d love to see the NDAs they all had to sign get thrown out, but I don’t expect this to go anywhere.

Bloomberg takes his money and goes home

Thanks for nothing, dude.

Back in the halcyon days of late January—before the Iowa caucuses melted down, before an ascendant Bernie Sanders was supplanted by a triumphant Joe Biden, back when Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar were viable candidates in their own right and not small parts of the Biden machine that sought to cruise its way to the convention—Tim O’Brien, senior adviser to Mike Bloomberg’s presidential campaign, came to the candidate’s South Austin headquarters to talk about the future.

O’Brien, a clear-eyed political thinker who spent most of his career as a journalist, explained to me that he saw Bloomberg’s path to the nomination running through Texas, and that its best chances of succeeding would come if you saw the delegates from the first four primary states split among a number of candidates. But he wasn’t worried about what it would mean if that didn’t happen—he and the campaign, he told me, where prepared for every possibility, including the one that exists right now.

“If Biden comes out of it as the clear leader, you’re going to see a lot of the party falling behind him, and that changes our calculus,” O’Brien said in the former taco-themed pop-up on South Congress, near St. Edwards University. “But, you know, for us—and we’ve said this a lot publicly now—we’re hiring people for a year. This office is going to be open till November. Everybody is being hired through the election.”

The campaign had indeed said that a lot publicly, but it still seemed worth confirming. Committing to people for nearly a year, even if your campaign is rejected by voters—especially at the salaries Bloomberg was paying even his lower-level field organizers—is unheard-of in politics, and for good reason: it would take one of the richest people on the planet to be able to afford that. Bloomberg, of course, is one of those people.

“You said everybody is?” I asked O’Brien.

“In every state. Every state. Full time. We’re paying twice as much as most campaigns pay for our team. And we’re signing them on for a year. This office is open for a year,” he stressed. “Because we’re building this big political machine that Mike wants to put at the service of the party, or ultimately whoever the nominee is. Because first and foremost he wants to see Trump beaten, and that’s really what informed his decision to jump in the race.”

On Monday morning, via a conference call, the Bloomberg campaign announced that it would be taking back its public and private commitments to that team. Staff at the South Congress field office, like all of Bloomberg’s offices in Texas, were told they could keep the shiny new MacBooks and iPhones they received when they took the job, and that they’d be paid through the end of March—but their jobs with Bloomberg were over, most of them effective immediately. (Some were asked to stay on for a few more days to wrap up administrative loose ends.) If they wanted to try to continue on with Bloomberg’s efforts to see Trump beaten in the fall, they were invited to apply for jobs in the states that the campaign says it’ll be focusing its efforts on.

What a guy. It’s his money and he can do what he wants with it. I’m sure he’ll still spend a ton to clobber Trump throughout the year, and that’s fine by me. But 1) he could have spent all that money and more without also dropping half a billion dollars on his ego-centered campaign, 2) he certainly could have helped the other efforts to build the party in Texas, and 3) that’s just a shitty way to treat the people who worked for him. Who, by the way, are all under NDAs and thus can’t talk about their experience, because that’s how Bloomberg rolls. No class at all. The Trib has more.

Let’s talk turnout

Just a few random bits and pieces about turnout from the primaries. On the one hand, I think it’s great that Dems got the turnout that we did, in Harris County and around the state. On the other hand, I spent a lot of time pooh-poohing the notion that Republicans’ 1.5 million to 1 million advantage in the 2018 primaries didn’t mean anything for that November, and I’m not going to change that tune now that Dems outdrew them this March. Primary turnout and November turnout are two different things, so let’s appreciate the turnout we got this March on its own merits.

There were 2,076,046 votes cast for Democratic presidential candidates, and 2,008,385 votes cast for Republicans. The crappy election night results pages do not break these out by vote type, so I can’t tell you how many early or mail votes were cast for each candidate, which also means I can’t tell you what Election Day overall turnout looked like compared to early voting for each party. I can give you that picture for Harris County:


Year    Mail    Early    E-Day  E-Day%
======================================
2008   9,448  169,900  231,560   56.4%
2010   7,193   33,770   60,300   59.5%
2012   8,775   30,136   35,575   47.8%
2014   8,961   22,727   22,100   41.1%
2016  14,828   72,777  139,675   61.5%
2018  22,695   70,152   75,135   44.7%
2020  26,710  114,501  180,692   56.1%

Final Harris County turnout for Dems 321,903, and for Republicans 192,985. Well short of 2008, and thus of my own projections, but still pretty darned strong.

Of some interest is turnout in other counties, though again that is not to be mistaken for a deeper meaning about November. Be that as it may, Democrats saw a lot more action in the suburbs.

Democratic primary turnout was up 59% across metropolitan Dallas-Fort Worth.

OK, so the region probably isn’t flipping blue anytime soon, not with Republicans in power and an incumbent president and U.S. senator up for re-election this fall.

But something unusual is happening.

In notoriously conservative Collin and Denton counties, Democrats doubled turnout and outvoted Republicans — in Collin, by 15,429 votes.

“I think the Democrats have been working real hard the last several years,” said Denton County Republican Chairman Jayne Howell, a rural Denton County realtor.
this huge Democratic turnout will wake some people up.”

Democrats saw hard-fought campaigns at the top of the ticket while Republicans only had to choose local nominees, so maybe the numbers aren’t surprising.

But overall, Democrats outvoted Republicans by 22% across the four core metropolitan counties, three of them traditionally solid red.

Republican turnout was down 43% from 2016, when the Ted Cruz-Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton-Bernie Sanders races ignited both parties.

Here are the Presidential numbers in select counties:


County        2016D    2016R    2020D    2020R
==============================================
Bexar       114,524  132,583  170,762   80,785
Brazoria     12,942   39,247   21,661   35,667
Collin       40,034  116,676   84,350   68,909
Dallas      159,086  175,122  231,688   83,304
Denton       32,506   96,060   67,092   66,621
El Paso      54,742   28,805   68,132   18,343
Fort Bend    39,206   68,587   69,540   57,212
Harris      222,686  327,046  321,903  192,985
Hidalgo      58,366   18,666   59,486   12,378
Montgomery   12,677   90,740   25,487   64,138
Tarrant     104,440  213,993  152,676  122,802
Travis      144,144   84,844  223,233   42,043
Williamson   31,141   67,392   60,677   43,868

Couple of points to note here. One is that Republicans really do get a lot of their strength in the smaller counties, since overall they had almost as many votes as Democrats in the primaries. Two, it’s very likely they didn’t have all that many races of interest, not just at the top but also fewer hot primaries for Congress, the Lege, and maybe county offices. Lots of things can drive turnout, and in their absence you mostly get the hardcore voters. And three, Travis County really punches above its weight. Respect, y’all.

I was to take a closer look at how the various candidates did around the state in future posts, but after a few minutes of poking through the Presidential numbers, I recognized it was pointless. The top counties by vote total for any candidate you looked at, from Biden to Tulsi, was basically just a recitation of the biggest counties. The best percentages for the non-Biden and Bernie candidates were generally in the very smallest counties – Bloomberg, for example, got 50% of the vote in King County. That represented exactly one vote out of two cast; Bernie got the other one. It just wasn’t worth a full post. I think there may be some more interesting info in the Senate race, but the SOS’ crappy election night returns site doesn’t have a county-by-county canvass yet. I’ll get back to that later, and of course after I get the canvass from our County Clerk, I’ll do my usual thing here as well.

DNC to target Texas

Game on.

The Democratic National Committee [added] Texas to its list of 2020 targets just days before Super Tuesday, vowing to invest heavily in the state to help Democratic candidates up and down the ballot in the latest sign that the national party is taking Texas more seriously than it has in years.

That investment includes getting more organizers on the ground as the party also seeks to take control of the Texas House from Republicans who have held it for a generation. While the DNC is focused on helping the Democratic presidential nominee beat President Donald Trump, the party also says it will help with the race against Republican U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, as well as efforts to win the nine seats needed to flip the state House.

[…]

“You’ve got a whole new era of Democratic politics in Texas, and you have a national party making a commitment to lift Texas up,” said Manny Garcia, executive director of the Texas Democratic Party. “This is a significant investment from the DNC to make sure we lay the groundwork necessary for a competitive and strong battleground presidential race.”

The party would not disclose how much the national arm plans to pour into Texas and said it will roll out more detailed plans for the funding in the coming weeks. But the investment will include additional staff and organizers.

The DCCC is already here in multiple races, and the DSCC is backing MJ Hegar, though what that might mean for November is unclear at this time. There’s enough polling to suggest that Texas can be competitive in November in the Presidential race, but the downballot rewards are great as well, including and especially at the legislative level where flipping the House would give Dems leverage for Congressional redistricting. The surprise here would have been if the DNC had decided to stay out of state for November.

2020 primary results: President

Before we get to the numbers, one last word about polls. As we know, polls released over the weekend were quite favorable to Bernie Sanders. However, there was more polling done since then, and both nationally and in Texas there was a big swing back towards Joe Biden. Obviously, a lot of votes were already baked in thanks to early voting, but there was still a lot more voting to do. And with that, we can sum up what happened in two more tweets:

You want another illustration of that, here’s the Bexar County early vote – Bernie has 25,847 and Biden 14,289. Now here’s Bexar County Election Day, and with about two-thirds of the vote in, it’s Biden 18,682 and Bernie 17,685. Yeah.

This was a very big night for Joe Biden, who won most of the Super Tuesday primaries (with the caveat that California’s vote-by-mail ballots will take several days to count) and who may have vaulted into the delegate lead by the time you read this. Michael Bloomberg is likely to drop out today, and while it may not be the end of the line for Elizabeth Warren, you feel like you can see it from here. (Full disclosure: I voted for Warren.) If nothing else, we have a lot more clarity now.

Six questions for today’s voting

In some semblance of an order…

1. How will the early vote differ from the Tuesday vote? I’m mostly talking about the Presidential race here. We strongly suspect today will be a very big day at the ballot box, in part because people have been waiting, to see what the latest developments have been, before deciding, You know, so they don’t accidentally vote for a candidate who has dropped out, or one who seems unlikely to get any delegates. Bernie has the poll surge, Biden has the South Carolina surge, which has earned him a number of late endorsements. Which will have the greater effect?

2. Who finishes second in the Senate primary? Every single poll has MJ Hegar in the lead, sometimes by a few points, sometimes by a significant margin, with every other candidate in a pack after her. None of the other candidates has raised much money, and in each of the recent polls at least one of the no-money-at-all candidates has been up in the high single digits, ahead of at least one candidate who has an actual campaign. If I had to guess I’d say Royce West and Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez have the edge for the second runoff slot, but in a race with 12 candidates and where fifteen percent might be enough to finish second, who knows?

3. What surprises are out there? Here I’m mostly thinking of the Congressional primaries for the DCCC-targeted seats where there’s one candidate with a lot more money than the others: CD02, CD21, CD22, CD23, and CD24. Do the candidates with the most money win, or at least lead the pack, or does that matter less in a year where turnout is super high and voters may not know as much about the non-Presidential candidates?

4. Do we have to have the “insurgents versus establishment” debate again? There are a few races where that’s on the menu, at least in a high profile way. I’ll check back on that sometime after tomorrow, I don’t feel like it right now.

5. How random is the bottom of the ballot? We have a lot of judicial races in Harris County, and in the primaries where you don’t have a party label to give you some guidance, we have a lot of voters who know diddly squat about a lot of these candidates. Here in Harris County, we have a number of challengers to sitting District Court judges, some of whom are more serious than others (the same can be said about the incumbents). Some candidates have racked up the endorsements and have been very visible, others not so much. Will there be any correlation between those who worked at is and those who won? History says at best a weak link, but maybe this year will be different.

6. Will the Republicans succeed at their diversity effort? They’d sure like to say they were successful. Maybe that’s good enough.

Four more polls say Bernie is leading in Texas

From Latino Decisions:

A new poll of Texas voters published Friday by Univision shows Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with a 6-point lead over his rivals in the crucial Super Tuesday state, particularly among Latino voters.

The poll, conducted by polling firm Latino Decisions for Univision and the University of Houston’s Center for Mexican American Studies, shows 26 percent of Texans support Sanders in the Democratic presidential primary, while former Vice President Joe Biden and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg are tied in second place with 20 percent support each.

A poll conducted by the same firm in September showed Sanders at 13 percent support.

No other candidate breaks the 15 percent threshold required to win delegates in the Texas primary taking place on Tuesday.

The poll also focused on Latino voters in Texas, a group that Sanders leads with 31 percent support, to Bloomberg’s 23 percent and Biden’s 19 percent.

[…]

According to the poll, President Trump and Sanders are in a dead heat in Texas in a general election match-up, with the support of 45 percent of respondents each.

Bloomberg comes in slightly ahead against Trump with 44 percent support to 43 percent.

Biden also matches up competitively with the president, with 43 percent support for Biden against 46 percent for Trump.

Warren, former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) all trail Trump by a margin wider than the poll’s margin of error.

See here for the September Latino Decisions poll, and here for the poll data. Trump gets a pretty decent 52-48 approval rating, including 38% approval from Latinos and 19% approval from African-Americans, both of which seem high to me. Regardless of what I think, that goes along with overall better re-elect numbers in Texas for Trump, who trailed a generic Democrat 42-47 in September.

Also in this poll, way down on the last page of the data file, is a question for the Senate primary. MJ Hegar has 20%, Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez and Royce West have 10%, Chris Bell and Michael Cooper have 8%, Amanda Edwards and Annie Garcia have 6%, and Sema Hernandez has 5%. There’s no head-to-head matchup, but on page 5, incumbent Sen. John Cornyn leads a generic Democrat 43-41.

From NBC News/Marist:

Bernie Sanders holds a double-digit lead over his closest Democratic rival in Texas, while he’s essentially tied with Joe Biden in North Carolina, according to a pair of NBC News/Marist polls of these two key Super Tuesday states taken before Biden’s convincing victory in South Carolina.

In Texas, which will award a total of 228 pledged delegates in the Democratic contest on March 3, Sanders gets the support of 34 percent of likely Democratic primary voters, and Biden gets 19 percent.

They’re followed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg at 15 percent, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., at 10 percent, former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 8 percent and Sen. Amy Klobuchar at 3 percent.

[…]

“North Carolina is a tossup between Sanders and Biden for Super Tuesday,” said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, which conducted these surveys for NBC News.

But when it comes to Texas, Miringoff adds, “Sanders is positioned to carry the state, although nearly one in four likely voters is still on the fence.”

The polls were conducted Feb. 23-27, before Biden’s lopsided victory Saturday in the South Carolina primary.

[…]

Under the Democratic Party’s delegate-allocation rules, a candidate who doesn’t get at least 15 percent — statewide and in congressional or state Senate districts (for Texas) — doesn’t qualify for delegates to take to the Democratic convention in Milwaukee.

As in past primaries and polling, Sanders overperforms in these two states among likely Democratic primary voters under the age of 45, self-described progressives, and Latinos.

Biden, meanwhile, does the best among likely Democratic primary voters over 45, self-described moderates, and African Americans.

The poll data is here, and I’ll get back to that in a minute. I’m not aware of a previous NBC/Marist poll of Texas. Three things to keep in mind for this one: One, lots of people haven’t voted yet, so the situation remains fluid. Two, most of the people who have voted so far (see page 6) are 50 and over. And three, Pete Buttigieg and now Amy Klobuchar have suspended their campaigns, with the latter endorsing Biden, which means at least some of their voters will move on to another candidate. Note I am not making any statements about how any of these factors may affect things today, I am just noting them for the record. I think they combine to be more an element of chaos and unpredictability than any one direction.

As for the data, Trump gets a 46-44 approval rating among all adults, and a 49-44 rating among registered voters. (Have I mentioned that registering people to vote for this election is A Good Thing To Do?) He led both Sanders and Biden 49-45 among registered voters, which is basically a recapitulation of the approval rating. NBC/Marist also polled the Senate primary, and gave two numbers, for “Potential Dem primary voters” and “Likely Dem primary voters”. In the former, MJ Hegar led with 13%, Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez and Annie Garcia each had 8%, Royce West had 7%, and no one else had more than 5%. Among the “likely” primary voters, Hegar was at 16%, with Tzintzún Ramirez at 9%, West at 8%, Garcia at 7%, and no one else above 5%.

From UT-Tyler/DMN:

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has roared into the lead in Texas in the Democratic presidential race, with Mike Bloomberg and Joe Biden locked in a battle for second, a new Dallas Morning News-University of Texas at Tyler poll has found.

Sanders, who trailed Biden among Hispanics in the same survey late last month, has vaulted to a 42% to 18% lead over the former vice president among Latino Democrats and Latino independents who lean Democratic, according to the poll. And unlike in previous UT Tyler polls, in which Sanders trailed Biden, he now leads among all Democrats, with 29%. Bloomberg has 21%, while Biden, in third, draws the support of 19%.

The margin of error for the latest poll, conducted Feb. 17-26, is plus or minus 4.05 percentage points for the 586 likely voters who indicated they would vote in the Democratic primary. For all 1,221 registered voters surveyed, it’s plus or minus 2.8 points.

In the earlier poll, Bloomberg was a distant fourth among Hispanics, with only 12% naming him as their first choice in the state’s Super Tuesday primary. But in the latest survey, the former New York City mayor is running second among Hispanics, with 20% support.

Among white voters, Sanders and Bloomberg overtook and now lead Biden. White Democrats and independents who lean Democratic broke 24% for Sanders, 23% for Bloomberg and 15% for Biden. In the earlier poll, Biden had 27%.

[…]

For Trump, the poll brings mixed messages from the Lone Star State. The all but certain Republican nominee leads in all six of the November matchups the poll tested — with Biden, Bloomberg and Sanders the most competitive Democrats.

All trailed the incumbent Republican by 1 percentage point, 44% to 45%, well within the margin of error, the poll found. Buttigieg was 4 percentage points behind Trump (41% to 45%); Klobuchar, 7 behind (38% to 45%); and Warren, 10 down (37% to 47%).

The UT-Tyler political science page is here, and as of Monday morning they didn’t have a link to the latest poll data. Their January poll was easily Biden’s best showing in Texas, so this would be a huge swing and a big blow to the foundation of the claim that Biden and Bernie are in a tight race. That said, this poll was conducted around the time of the Nevada caucus, and the story notes that Bernie got a big bump from that, and before the South Carolina primary. The head pollster notes in the story that (as with the NBC/Marist result), Bernie’s support mostly comes from younger voters who as of the time of the poll had not actually voted. In other words, today’s turnout really matters.

And yes, they polled the Senate race, too.

Barring a fluke, MJ Hegar has likely secured a spot in the Democratic runoff to challenge Republican incumbent Sen. John Cornyn. Her superior fundraising and competent campaign structure — compared to her primary rivals — has slowly but certainly given her an edge over the 11 other contenders in the contest.

While it’s easy to forecast Hegar as the front-runner, picking the candidate that will join her in the primary’s overtime period is a roll of the dice. An argument can be made for all of the other four major contenders, state Sen. Royce West of Dallas, Austin-based labor activist Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez, former Houston council member Amanda Edwards and former U.S. Rep. Chris Bell of Houston, to make the expected runoff.

A new poll by The Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler shows Hegar comfortably out front with 15% support. The rest are in a close fight for second place, with Bell, Tzintzún Ramirez and West at 7% each. Edwards, Houston lawyer Annie Garcia and Pasadena activist Sema Hernandez had 4% support.

Cornyn is expected to cruise to victory in the GOP primary over four challengers.

It’s as clear as it ever was.

Finally, from Emerson College:

A new Emerson College/Nexstar poll of Texas finds Senator Bernie Sanders leading with 31% of the vote. Former VP Joe Biden is next at 26% followed by former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg at 16%, Senator Elizabeth Warren at 14%, former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 5%, Senator Amy Klobuchar at 4%, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard at 3%, and Businessman Tom Steyer at 2%.

Compared to the last Emerson College poll of Texas in August, Sanders gained 15 points, Biden dropped two points, Warren fell three points, Klobuchar is up four points, and Gabbard moved up two points. Bloomberg had not announced his candidacy at the time of the previous poll.

Sanders’ strength continues to be among younger voters, as he garners 46% support from voters under the age of 50. Warren follows him among those voters with 15%, Bloomberg is at 13% and Biden is at 12% among under 50 voters. Biden has strong support from voters 50 and over with 40% support. Following him is Bloomberg with 20%, Sanders with 14%, and Warren with 13%.

Sanders does best among Hispanic or Latino voters, with 48% support. Biden follows at 17%, Bloomberg is at 15%, and Warren is at 13% among Hispanics. Sanders holds a much smaller lead among white voters with 26%, followed by Biden with 24%, Bloomberg with 17%, and Warren with 15%. Biden performs the strongest with African-American voters at 43% support. Following him is Sanders at 19%, Bloomberg at 14%, and Warren at 11%.

[…]

The plurality of Texas Democratic primary voters (39%) are undecided on who they will vote for this week in the primary election for the Democratic US Senate nomination. Sixteen percent (16%) plan to support MJ Hegar, 11% support Royce West, 8% Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez, 6% Chris Bell and 5% Cooper. All other candidates were under 5%.

The August Emerson poll was of all voters, while this one is of “very likely Democratic primary voters” only, so there are no head-to-heads or approval numbers. The writeup notes that Biden is leading among those who decided more recently, with 35% to Bernie’s 23%, so I refer you again to the likely size of the electorate voting today. As for the Senate poll, it’s in line with the other three. I came by this last poll via a Chron story with the headline “Day before election, many Texans still undecided on Democratic Senate primary, poll says”, and my first reaction was “WHICH POLL?!?!?”, which probably says more about me than anything else. If there are any more polls out there, it’s too late and I don’t want to know about them.

CNN/SSRS: The first big Bernie lead

We come full circle.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders holds substantial leads in the two largest states to vote in next week’s Super Tuesday lineup of primaries, according to new CNN polls conducted by SSRS in California and Texas.

In Texas, Sanders holds 29% support among likely primary voters, former Vice President Joe Biden has 20%, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg stands at 18% and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is at 15%. No other candidate reaches double-digits. Sanders (+14) and Bloomberg (+13) have posted the largest gains since a December CNN poll, while Biden has slipped 15 points. Warren has held roughly even.

The California results suggest the same four contenders hold the most support, though Sanders stands well ahead of the three contending for second place. Sanders holds 35% support, Warren is at 14%, Biden is at 13% and Bloomberg is at 12%. Sanders’ support in the state has climbed 15 points since December, while Biden’s has slid eight points. Bloomberg has gained seven.

Decisive wins for a single candidate in California and Texas — states which will award more than 600 of the 1,991 delegates needed to secure the Democratic nomination — could change the tenor of a race that has at times seemed headed for a protracted fight.

The December polls in the two delegate-rich states had shown Biden ahead in Texas with Biden, Sanders and Warren all vying for a win in California. Since then, most national polling has also shown Sanders taking hold of the frontrunner slot in the Democratic nomination battle, while his win in the Nevada caucuses boosted him to a lead over his rivals in the delegate count so far.

The California poll is here, and the Texas poll, which is obviously of greater interest to me, is here. I blogged about that December poll, which showed Biden leading Bernie 35-15, here. I’m not sure that I buy the huge swing, but Bernie has polled fairly well lately, and Mike Bloomberg has taken some support away from Biden, so it’s certainly possible.

Of greater interest:

A1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?


                      App  Dis No op
Total Respondents
February 22-26, 2020  43%  49%   7%
December 4-8,   2019  42%  50%   8%
October 9-13,   2018  41%  50%  10%

Registered Voters
February 22-26, 2020  47%  50%   3%
December 4-8,   2019  48%  47%   5%
October 9-13,   2018  47%  48%   6%

(Respondents who are registered to vote, N=1,003)
Q11. If (NAME) were the Democratic Party’s candidate and Donald Trump were the Republican Party’s candidate, for whom would you be more likely to vote?


                 Biden Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   48%   47%    1%      2%    2%
Dec. 4-8, 2019     47%   48%     *      2%    3%

                 Bloom Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   46%   47%     *      3%    4%

                 PeteB Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   47%   48%    0%      2%    4%
Dec. 4-8, 2019     43%   50%     *      2%    6%

                 Amy K Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   45%   48%    0%      2%    5%

                Bernie Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   46%   48%     *      3%    3%
Dec. 4-8, 2019     43%   50%    1%      3%    3%

                Warren Trump Other Neither No op
Feb. 22-26, 2020   47%   47%     *      2%    4%
Dec. 4-8, 2019     44%   51%    1%      2%    2%

That part’s pretty exciting, and an improvement in fortune for all of the candidates as Trump’s approval ratings remain lousy. I’m sure Joe Biden in particular would like everyone who hasn’t voted yet to see these numbers. I’m still not sure I buy this big a Bernie surge, but we’ll know soon enough.

Medicaid and hospitals

I have three things to say about this.

A proposed change in Medicaid rules could cost Texas hospitals billions of dollars, forcing many to cut services and some rural hospitals to close their doors, health care industry officials said.

The change, aimed at increasing the transparency of how the program’s money is spent, narrows the definition of state and local funds that can be used to determine federal matching funds. That, in turn, would reduce federal funding and cost Texas hospitals an estimated $11 billion a year, industry officials said.

Houston hospitals would lose an estimated $500 million a year, said Tim Ottinger, director of governmental relations at CHI St. Luke’s Health.

A drop in funding would mean extreme hardship for many of Texas’ rural hospitals, which stand to lose some $900 million a year. The Texas Organization for Rural and Community Hospitals (TORCH) found that 46 percent of the state’s rural hospitals operate at a loss. Over the last decade, 26 rural hospitals have closed in Texas, the highest rate in the nation.

It’s unclear how many more rural hospitals could close if the proposed rule goes into effect as written, but it would be devastating to pull so much money from their budgets, said John Henderson, president of TORCH.

“A business can’t survive,” Henderson said. “But this isn’t just a business, it’s a service.”

1. I mean, you’d think that a policy that would cost the state billions of dollars and would have such a negative impact on rural areas, where access to health care is already severely lacking, would call for some kind of response from our state government. Turns out they like it, because they say it would let them cut costs. Just in the state budget, though. Counties and hospitals and the rest are on their own.

2. That said, some of those rural communities don’t seem to be too concerned about their hospitals. So maybe I shouldn’t be all that concerned on their behalf.

3. Of course, this proposed change will not survive the end of the Trump administration. None of the Democratic Presidential candidates, whatever their health care plans are, will allow this to stand. So, you know, make sure you vote for one of them this November.

Progress Texas/PPP poll: The Bloomberg effect

More primary polling data for you.

Super Tuesday marks the first time that Michael Bloomberg will appear on the Democratic Primary ballot. To measure his impact on the race, we polled likely Texas Democratic Primary voters to see preferences with and without Bloomberg on the ballot.

Biden and Sanders lead the field

In the poll, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are tied at 24% as voters first choice, followed by Michael Bloomberg at 17%, and Elizabeth Warren at 14%, while no other candidates come close to viability. As pictured in the graph below, Bloomberg has the biggest impact on Biden’s candidacy.

Warren is the strongest second choice

When voters were asked who their second choice was, Elizabeth Warren was the most popular choice.

Warren has the strongest approval rating, Bloomberg the worst

Warren leads the field with an approval/disapproval rating of 66/19, so it shouldn’t be surprising that she is everyone’s second choice. She is followed by Biden at 64/18 and Sanders at 60/27.

Conversely, Bloomberg, who has spent the most on advertising in Texas, had the worst overall approval/disapproval rating at 41/39. Of particular note are young voters, under the age of 45, who give him a 62% disapproval rating. These are remarkable numbers considering Democratic candidates have not aired a single attack ad against him. Given his struggles with the key Democratic constituency of younger voters, it is difficult to see how Bloomberg expands his base beyond these numbers.

Young voters are united, while Texans age 46 and up are divided

While Bloomberg is experiencing high disapproval among young voters, Sanders enjoys the most support from this constituency, followed by Warren.

Yet voters ages 46 and older are experiencing more of a divide, with their candidate preference divided largely among Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders, and Warren.

There are charts that accompany those other titled sections, which I have omitted for space, and there’s more to the poll, so go check it out. Full data and poll questions are here. Note that all respondents say that they are voting in the Dem primary, so there’s no general election aspect to this. One interesting bit of data from that PDF is that of the respondents, who all said they were voting in the Dem primary, 83% said they were Democrats, 2% said they were Republicans, and 15% said they were independents. Compare to the Derek Ryan analysis of the early voting data, which shows 64% of Democratic primary voters have an exclusively Democratic primary voting history, six percent have some of each, five percent have GOP-only history, and 25% have no primary history. Most of the latter have general election voting histories and are thus likely also Democrats in that sense, but overall there’s more political diversity to the Democratic primary electorate, and that is likely part of the reason turnout is up.

Anyway, that’s what it made me think about. Add this to the other primary polls we have, and the picture seems to be a close race. How close, and at what level the candidates who aren’t at the top cluster around, will have serious implications for the way delegates are allocated. Fifteen percent, statewide and in each State Senate district, is the magic number. We could get a couple of candidates walking away with a bunch of delegates, or as many as six candidates each getting some. We could be sorting through the aftermath of this for some time after the votes have all been counted. The Texas Signal has more.

UH Senate poll: Hegar leads, the rest scramble

Day Two of the UH Hobby School of Public Affairs poll, and a second result showing that MJ Hegar is in a strong position to make the primary runoff for Senate.

MJ Hegar

Hegar, a Round Rock Democrat who narrowly lost a 2018 Congressional race to incumbent Republican John Carter, is the best-known candidate among the crowded field. Still, more than half of voters said they did not know enough about her to have an opinion. Those numbers were even higher for the other 11 candidates.

Among people who indicated a preference in the race, Hegar was the top choice of 41%, more than three times the vote preference for state Sen. Royce West of Dallas, at 12.3%. Chris Bell, a former Houston city councilman and congressman, was in third place with support from 10.8% of voters, while Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez was fourth, with 8.3%.

The other eight candidates were led by Annie Garcia and Michael Cooper, each with 5.4%; Amanda Edwards with 5.0%; and Sema Hernandez with 4.5%

Renée Cross, senior director of the Hobby School, said the Senate race has been overshadowed by the Democratic presidential primary. And having a dozen candidates hasn’t made it easier for voters to sort out the Democratic Senate race.

“Texas Democrats were optimistic about their chances against Republican Sen. John Cornyn, especially after Beto O’Rourke came close against Ted Cruz in 2018,” she said. “But with so many candidates, it’s been hard for anyone to stand out.”

The poll, conducted between Feb. 6 and Feb. 18 among likely Democratic primary voters, found Hegar leading across all geographic areas of the state except for the border – although Bell came close in the Houston area – and across most generational, racial and ethnic groups. West drew more support from African Americans with 28.5%, compared to 18.1% for Hegar.

The full report is here, and the Hobby School landing page for their 2020 primary polling is here. I reported on their Presidential primary polling here.

I kind of hate the way they presented the data in that writeup, because it’s the result of an adjustment to the raw data that’s not clear unless you read this closely. Basically, what they did was take the initial response numbers, then recalculate them after throwing out the non-respondents. This has the effect of almost doubling everyone’s totals. They did this in the Presidential poll too, it’s just that there were just far fewer of these “don’t know/nobody” respondents, so the effect was much smaller. In the raw numbers, as you can see on that full report link, Hegar led with 22% (Table 2, page 3), followed by West at 6.6% and Bell at 5.8&, then the rest in proportionate amounts. It doesn’t change the big picture – Hegar has a significant lead, which is the same result that the UT/Trib poll got, with numbers similar to the raw totals here – it just looks funny.

To be fair, some adjustment is reasonable, because it really is the case that a non-trivial number of people who will vote in the primary will not vote in the non-Presidential races, as we discussed before. My estimate of the dropoff rate is around 25%, so if we assume everyone in the Hobby sample will vote in the Presidential race, more than half of those “don’t know/no one” respondents will still pick someone in the Senate race. You could take a crack at extrapolating from there, but honestly, I’d have just left it – and reported it – as it was. Like I said, the basic story was accurate. Why fudge around like that?

What is “safe”?

Saw this on Twitter, and it got me thinking:

AOC isn’t the only person I’ve observed referring to CD28 as “safe” Democratic. This WaPo story from 2019, reprinted in the Trib, calls CD28 “a strongly Democratic district…which gave the president just 38.5 percent of the vote in 2016”. This DMN story has a subhed that calls CD28 “Vast and overwhelmingly Democratic district”, and notes that “Trump lost here by 20 percentage points”. The American Prospect is a bit more circumspect, saying CD28 is “a safely (though not extremely) blue district, with a +9 Democratic lean”, and also noting the 20-point margin for Clinton over Trump in 2016.

But 2016 isn’t the only election we’ve ever had, and the Clinton-Trump matchup isn’t the only data point available. Here’s a broader look at the recent electoral history in CD28:


Year  Candidate    Votes    Pct
===============================
2012  Obama      101,843  60.2%
2012  Romney      65,372  38.6%
2012  Sadler      90,481  55.1%
2012  Cruz        68,096  41.5%
2012  Hampton     93,996  58.5%
2012  Keller      61,954  38.6%

2014  Alameel     41,901  46.6%
2014  Cornyn      42,010  46.7%
2014  Davis       48,451  52.7%
2014  Abbott      41,335  45.0%
2014  Granberg    45,658  51.7%
2014  Richardson  38,775  43.9%

2016  Clinton    109,973  57.8%
2016  Trump       72,479  38.1%
2016  Robinson    95,348  52.6%
2016  Guzman      77,590  42.8%
2016  Burns      102,778  57.1%
2016  Keasler     69,501  38.6%

2018  Beto        97,728  58.7%
2018  Cruz        67,483  40.5%
2018  Valdez      87,007  52.7%
2018  Abbott      75,939  46.0%
2018  Jackson     94,479  58.3%
2018  Keller      63,559  39.2%

Yes, in 2014, John Cornyn topped David Alameel in CD28. To my mind, if it is possible for a candidate of the other party to beat a candidate of your own party in a given district, that district is by definition not “safe”. It’s true that in Presidential years, most Democrats win CD28 comfortably, with the closest call being a win by just under 10 points. But in off years, even factoring out the crapshow that was the Alameel campaign, Dems generally win CD28 by smaller margins.

None of this is to say that CD28 is a swing district. It’s not, and I have no reason to be concerned about it in 2020. But if Trump-versus-Clinton-in-2016 is the gold standard here, I’ll point out that of the six districts Dems are targeting this year, four of them (CDs 02, 10, 22, and 31) were won by Trump by larger margins than Wendy Davis won CD28 by in 2014 and Lupe Valdez won it by in 2018. Different years, different conditions, and different candidates may provide a different perspective.

Another way of looking at this is to see how Democratic CD28 is compared to other Congressional districts represented by Democrats:


Dist  Clinton    Beto
=====================
CD07    48.2%   53.3%
CD32    48.4%   54.9%
CD15    56.2%   57.4%
CD28    57.8%   58.7%
CD34    59.1%   57.7%
CD20    60.2%   66.2%

All other Dem-held districts were at least 63% for Clinton and 70% for Beto. Again, none of this is to say that CD28 is vulnerable. Whoever wins the CD28 primary will be the strong favorite, like 99%+, to win it in November. This is not a comment on that race, but on public perception and objective reality. It’s why I generally try not to make blanket statements like “safe district” but try instead to put a number or two on it, so you have some context to my evaluation. I doubt anyone will adopt this as their style guide, but it’s very much how I prefer to operate.

And I have to say, I might have let this go by if I hadn’t also seen this little gem in the Chronicle story on the announced resignation of State Sen. Kirk Watson:

Abbott soon will have to schedule a special election for the remainder of Watson’s four-year term, which ends in 2022. Watson’s District 14, which mostly lies in Austin, leans Democratic.

“Leans Democratic”??? Here’s that same set of numbers for Watson’s SD14:


Year  Candidate    Votes    Pct
===============================
2012  Obama      193,112  60.2%
2012  Romney     116,001  36.1%
2012  Sadler     187,717  59.4%
2012  Cruz       109,877  34.7%
2012  Hampton    181,614  59.1%
2012  Keller     106,581  34.7%

2014  Alameel    123,058  56.2%
2014  Cornyn      80,818  36.9%
2014  Davis      140,602  63.3%
2014  Abbott      75,206  33.9%
2014  Granberg   127,108  59.7%
2014  Richardson  73,267  34.4%

2016  Clinton    249,999  65.3%
2016  Trump      106,050  27.7%
2016  Robinson   218,449  58.8%
2016  Guzman     124,165  33.4%
2016  Burns      223,599  60.8%
2016  Keasler    120,727  32.8%

2018  Beto       289,357  73.8%
2018  Cruz        98,589  25.1%
2018  Valdez     257,708  66.3%
2018  Abbott     119,889  30.9%
2018  Jackson    264,575  69.4%
2018  Keller     104,375  27.4%

LOL. SD14 “leans” Democratic in the same way that a wrecking ball leans against the side of a building. Data is your friend, people. Use the data. I know I’m tilting against windmills here, but at least you can see why I noticed that tweet.

UH poll: Biden, Bernie tied

One more primary poll.

Texans are split between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders as their choice in the Democratic presidential primary, according to a University of Houston poll released Monday.

The poll, from the university’s Hobby School of Public Affairs, shows the two candidates in a statistical dead heat, with Biden slightly edging out Sanders among likely Democratic primary voters, 22.5% to 22.1%.

Among the rest of the field, 18.3% of likely voters supported Elizabeth Warren, 13.4% supported Michael Bloomberg, 11.9% supported Pete Buttigieg, 7.2% supported Amy Klobuchar, 3.5% supported Tulsi Gabbard, and 1.1% supported Tom Steyer.

But a split between moderate candidates could still leave Sanders with the most delegates. The poll predicts Sanders earning 85 delegates in Texas, compared to Biden taking 80. Following behind, Elizabeth Warren is expected to take 61, with Mike Bloomberg and Pete Buttigieg winning one delegate each.

“It’s so early but Sanders is the front-runner now, and of course there’s a debate on Tuesday night. And I suspect all the contenders are going to go after him the way some of them went after Bloomberg in the last debate,” Hobby School executive director Jim Granato told Houston Matters host Craig Cohen on Monday.

Most important to those polled was picking a candidate who could beat Donald Trump in November’s general election. More than half of respondents said defeating Trump was their No. 1 priority, while a little less than a third said agreeing on the issues was most important. Just 11.1% found experience to be a major factor in their decision.

Here’s the Hobby School’s poll webpage, and here is the full report. I asked on Twitter if they did head-to-head matchups with Trump and was told No, but that they did ask voters if there were any Democratic candidates that they felt they could not support in November against Trump, and found that outside of Tulsi Gabbard, there were no significant differences among the contenders. The survey was fielded between February 6 and February 18 with 1,352 YouGov respondents, which is almost entirely before the Vegas debate that won Elizabeth Warren such plaudits, so it’s possible she has improved her standing since the questions were asked. We’ll have to wait and see on that. They did do a poll of the Senate primary, which should come out today. I’ll write that one up when I see it. In the meantime, the four recent Dem Presidential primary polls of Texas show Biden with a big lead over Bernie, with a small lead over Bernie, tied with Bernie, and slightly behind Bernie. You may now leap to your own conclusions about What It All Means. The Texas Signal has more.

Five questions for the primary

Five questions I thought of, anyway. With my own answers, some of which are admittedly on the weaselish side. Feel free to discuss/disagree/ask your own questions/etc.

1. What kind of turnout are we going to have?

The short answer is “a lot”. Texas doesn’t always get to be a part of a contested Presidential primary, but when we are, we go to the polls. Dems in 2008 and Republicans in 2016 both topped 2.8 million voters – hell, more Dems voted in the 2008 primary than in the 2004 general election. I think the bidding on the Dem side starts at 3 million, with at least 500K in Harris County (we had 410K in 2008). I think 3.5 million is in play, which means a lot of first-time Dem voters. It’s going to be really interesting to see people’s voting histories in VAN after this.

2. What does this mean for all of the other races on the ballot?

It’s really hard to say. I feel like when turnout is super low, it levels the field a bit for those who are challenging incumbents or maybe haven’t raised a ton of money because the electorate is limited to the hardcore faithful, who probably know more about the candidates, or at least pay attention to endorsements and stuff like that. In a normal high turnout environment, I figure incumbents and candidates who have raised more money have the edge, since they’re better positioned to be known to the voters. In a super high turnout election, where a significant number of people won’t be all that familiar with the many names before them, who knows? I still think incumbents will be better off, but even the high-money candidates will have to fight for attention as most voters are tuned into the Presidential race. I really don’t feel comfortable making any predictions. At least the number of goofball candidates is pretty low, so even with the likelihood of some random results, there don’t appear to be any Gene Kellys or Jim Hogans out there.

That said, some number of people who vote will just be voting in the Presidential race, so the topline turnout number will be higher, maybe a lot higher, than the size of the electorate downballot. I went and looked at primary turnout in recent elections to see what this factor looks like:


Year    President  Next Most    % Pres
======================================
2004 D    839,231    605,789     72.2%
2004 R    687,615    567,835     82.6%

2008 D  2,874,986  2,177,252     75.8%
2008 R  1,362,322  1,223,865     89.8%

2012 D    590,164    497,487     84.3%
2012 R  1,449,477  1,406,648     97.0%

2016 D  1,435,895  1,087,976     75.8%
2016 R  2,836,488  2,167,838     76.4%

“President” is the number of votes cast in that Presidential primary race, “Next Most” is the next highest vote total, which was in the Senate primaries in 2008 and 2012 and in either the Railroad Commissioner or a Supreme Court race otherwise, and “% Pres” is the share of the highest non-Presidential total. Some people could have voted for President and then skipped to a Congressional race or some other non-statewide contest, but this is a reasonable enough approximation of the dropoff. Bear in mind that context matters as well. In 2004, none of the Dem statewide primaries were contested, which likely meant more people skipped those races. The infamous Senate primary between Ted Cruz and David Dewhurst and other lesser candidates was in 2012, which is why nearly everyone also voted in that race. All but one of the Dem statewide races are contested, though none are as high profile as 2012 R Senate – we may never see a race like that again.

So my best guess would be that if 3 million people vote in the Dem Presidential primary, somewhere between 2.2 million and 2.4 million people will then vote in the Senate and other statewide primaries. That’s still a lot, but the downballot races will have a slightly more engaged electorate as a result.

3. What about that Presidential primary?

Again, who knows? The polling evidence we have is mixed. Before the UT/Trib poll, the evidence we had said that Joe Biden was the leading candidate, though whether he has a big lead or a small lead over Bernie Sanders depends on which poll you’re looking at. Throw that UT/Trib poll in there, and maybe he doesn’t have a lead at all. Who knows?

The primaries that take place between now and March 3 will have an effect as well – candidates may gain or lose momentum before March 3. Bear in mind, though, that a whole lot of Texas primary voting will happen before either the Nevada caucus or the South Carolina primary happen, so the effect from those states will be limited. And Texas is one of many states voting on Super Tuesday, so candidates can’t just camp here, they have other states to worry about as well. They do all have campaign presences, however, with some of them having been here for months. Finally, quite a few candidates who have already dropped out, including Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Julian Castro will still be on the ballot and will get some number of votes. That UT/Trib poll still had Andrew Yang in it, and he polled at six percent, higher than Amy Klobuchar. There are a lot of moving parts here.

To me, the X factor in all this is Michael Bloomberg, who has been carpet-bombing the airwaves (seriously, where do I go to surrender?) and has been ramping up his field presence in a way that other candidates may have a hard time matching. He was basically tied for third or just behind third but still super close in the UT-Tyler poll, and fourth in the UT/Trib poll, in double digits in each case. I won’t be surprised if these polls underestimate his strength. I mean, he sure seems like a candidate positioned to do quite well among those less-frequent Dem voters, and if your top priority is beating Trump, he did quite well on that score in the UT-Tyler poll, too. He’s now getting some establishment support, too. To say the least, Bloomberg is a problematic candidate, and the inevitable round of scrutiny of his baggage may drag him back down, but if you’re not prepared for the possibility that Bloomberg could do quite well in Texas in March, you’re not paying attention.

4. What about the runoffs?

Three statewide races – Senate, RRC, and Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 3 – as well as 15 Congressional races have at least three candidates and could go to runoffs, plus who knows how many other downballot contests. Runoffs generally get far less attention and participation than the main event, but this could be a year where a reasonable share of the initial vote turns out again in May.

Because that’s the kind of person I am, I looked at the recent history of primary runoff turnout. Here you go:


Year    President     Runoff    % Pres
======================================
2004 R    687,615    223,769     32.5%

2008 D  2,874,986    187,708      6.5%

2012 D    590,164    236,305     40.0%
2012 R  1,449,477  1,111,938     76.7%

2016 D  1,435,477    188,592     13.1%
2016 R  2,836,488    376,387     13.3%

There were no statewide runoffs in 2004 for Dems (those races were all uncontested) or in 2008 for Republicans. We already know that the 2012 GOP Senate race is a unicorn, and you can see another dimension of that here. There was a Senate runoff in 2012 on the Dem side as well, and that’s the high water mark for turnout in the modern era. This Senate race isn’t that high profile, but I think there will be some money in it, and there will be some Congressional races of interest, so maybe 300K or 400K in May for Dems? I’m totally guessing, but it wouldn’t shock me if we hit a new height this year. The bar to clear is not at all high.

5. What about the Republicans?

What about them? This is basically a 2004 year for them – incumbent President, a super low-key Senate race, no other statewide races of interest, with a few hot Congressional races being the main driver of turnout. They’ll have several of those to finish up in May as well, but my guess is they top out at about a million in March, and don’t reach 200K in May. There just isn’t that much to push them to the polls at this time.

Endorsement watch: Ogg and Moore

Two (*) big endorsements on Sunday, in the races for District Attorney and Commissioners Court, Precinct 3. Let’s do the thing.

Kim Ogg for District Attorney:

Kim Ogg

“We are in the midst of righting a lot of wrongs,” Ogg told the Editorial Board during a meeting with all four candidates in the race. “What needs to be done is the prosecution of the officers involved, the reform of the way we prosecute and, eventually, the reform of the way drug cases are investigated.”

That’s a lot of talk of change for an incumbent who has left herself open to attack over her apparent tepidness on bail reform, most notably her last-minute objection last year to the settlement in the lawsuit over misdemeanor cash bail. Two of her opponents — senior prosecutors who left the district attorney’s office last year — have centered their campaigns on arguments that she’s failed to live up to her own reform pledges.

It’s true — Ogg has expressed concerns about the way the bail reform agreement has been implemented. But voters shouldn’t mistake her calls to tap the breaks — even if her foot is sometimes a little heavy — as a disavowal of her record, which is overwhelmingly for change.

During her first term, she has supported bail reform, expanded jail diversion for low-level misdemeanor offenders with mental health issues, and implemented a diversion program for people caught with small amounts of marijuana, cutting pot arrests by more than half and saving the county millions. She was years ahead of other reform-minded district attorneys in America’s big cities, from Dallas to Philadelphia.

I would encourage you to go listen to the interviews I did with the three main DA candidates (Todd Overstreet isn’t running a visible campaign) if you haven’t done so already: Kim Ogg, Carvana Cloud, Audia Jones. The Chron endorsement does a good job of capturing what this race is about, however you feel about the candidates. Kim Ogg has made real progress, not as much as people might have liked or expected and not without some missteps and backsliding, in an office and a culture that was long overdue for that kind of change. Whether you think she can and should have done more, and whether you think she can and should be doing it at a more rapid pace, will inform your vote in the primary.

Michael Moore for County Commissioner, Precinct 3:

Michael Moore

Moore’s attention to detail and practical focus on flood mitigation, infrastructure, traffic, an underfunded hospital district and other challenges in a growing region are why we recommend him for Precinct 3 Commissioner in the Democratic primary.

Moore, 57, whose private sector work includes communications for BP and regional vice president for Texas Central Partners’ high-speed rail, is well-versed in the intricacies of issues and policies that face county government. Thanks to his communications background, he can also explain the stuff in plain English.

White, his former boss, vouches for Moore’s “servant’s heart and personal integrity.” And Moore is trying to prove that White’s brand of bipartisan pragmatism isn’t passé in this increasingly polarized political climate. His pledge to “work with anyone, anywhere to get results” may not charm partisans, but it’s a more productive mentality than sometimes prevails among Democrats on the court these days.

While Moore has insider cred, he pledges to govern with transparency and efficiency. Based on his six-year track record with White, we believe him.

Let me tout my interviews here as well: Diana Alexander, Michael Moore, Morris Overstreet, Kristi Thibaut. The Chron didn’t think Overstreet or Alexander had sufficient relevant experience, and didn’t think Thibaut articulated a good case for herself. You can listen to the interviews and judge that for yourself.

The endorsements we are still waiting for: US Senate, Congress (all races), Railroad Commissioner, Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals, SD13, Tax Assessor, HCDE, and County Commissioner, Precinct 1.

(*) – They also endorsed Brenda Stardig on the Republican side for Precinct 3, and Amy Klobuchar for President, which shocks me not at all.

UT/Trib: Two out of three polls say Bernie is moving up

This is Bernie Sanders’ best poll result in Texas so far.

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders has doubled his support among Democratic voters in Texas and now leads the race for that party’s presidential nomination in Texas, according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll.

Sanders had the support of 24% of the self-identified Democratic primary voters in the poll, up from 12% in October. Sanders passed both former Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the two leaders in the October 2019 UT/TT Poll. Early voting in the Texas primaries starts on Tuesday; election day — Super Tuesday — is March 3.

The field of candidates has changed since the earlier survey. Beto O’Rourke, who was third in October, has dropped out of the race. And Michael Bloomberg, who entered the contest late, landed fourth in the newest poll, ahead of Pete Buttigieg and U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, the second- and third-place finishers in this week’s New Hampshire primary. Warren finished fourth in that contest, with Biden fifth.

Andrew Yang, who dropped out of the presidential race this week, was behind Buttigieg and ahead of Klobuchar in the latest UT/TT Poll.

“Most of the movement has been Sanders and Bloomberg, with Biden [holding] still,” said Joshua Blank, research director for the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin. “To be unable to increase his vote share is pretty telling for Biden.”

While Biden’s support was static, Sanders was surging in Texas, and Bloomberg was rising on the strength of millions of his own money spent on advertising after a late start.

See here for more on the October UT/Trib poll. In the other two recent polls we’ve had, Biden led Bernie by two (Lyceum) and Biden had a commanding lead over Bernie (UT-Tyler). This poll was conducted from Jan. 31 to Feb. 9, so perhaps it better captures any momentum or friction that these candidates may have had following Iowa and New Hampshire. There’s a lot of moving parts so it’s hard to isolate any one factor, but the evidence now says that Sanders is in a stronger position in Texas than he had been before.

As for the general:

A slight majority of all Texas voters — 52% — said they would not vote to reelect President Donald Trump in November. Republicans remain solidly in his corner: 90% said they would vote to reelect Trump, including 80% who said they “definitely” would do so. Democrats feel just as strongly: 93% said they would not vote for the president’s reelection, including 88% who would “definitely not” vote for him. Independent voters were against reelection, but less so: 38% said they would vote to reelect Trump, while 62% said they would vote against him.

“With Trump at the top of the ballot, in congressional and legislative races where candidates are running with margins of 5% or less, where the independent [voters] go could become a factor,” Henson said. “It adds uncertainty to those races.”

But when pitted against some of the top Democrats in hypothetical head-to-head contests, the president topped them all, if somewhat narrowly. Trump would beat Sanders by 2 percentage points, 47%-45%, within the poll’s margin of error. He’d beat Biden 47-43, Warren 47-44, Bloomberg 46-41, Buttigieg 47-42, and Klobuchar 46-41. Trump had 45% support against Yang’s 43%. The president, whose reelect number was under 50% in the survey, didn’t get a majority of the vote in any of the matchups, even while getting more support than each Democrat.

“The Trump trial ballots confirm what we’ve seen, that Trump is winning, but he clearly is under-performing, given the party profile in the state,” said Daron Shaw, a government professor at UT-Austin who co-directs the poll. “It is interesting when you put a flesh and blood Democrat up there, it drops that number, but here’s a Republican in a Republican state who’s not at 50%, which is a sign of weakness.”

That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying all along. For what it’s worth, Sanders was the closest competitor to Trump in the October UT-Trin poll, trailing him by five points, 45-40. Biden trailed 46-39, then-still-a-candidate Beto was down 47-41. We’ve seen these results all over the place as well, and it’s just as hard to isolate any reasons for the movement of one candidate or another. What has been consistent has been Trump’s inability to get and stay above fifty percent, as well as his mediocre approval levels and the significant “will not vote for him” totals. Again, I say compare to 2012 when Mitt Romney had a consistent double-digit lead on President Obama, who never got higher in the polls than the 42% he eventually received. We’re still early and the Democratic primary is still unsettled, but it’s clear the Republicans have reason to be worried. The Texas Signal has more.

We should get full delegate results on Primary Day

Good.

Texas counties have started seeing updates to the state’s election reporting system that will allow them to break out the vote totals needed to determine how many delegates are won by presidential contenders on Super Tuesday. The refinements to the portal used by the state’s 254 counties to report results come after Texas Democrats raised the prospect of a delay in calculating delegates.

A majority of the Democratic Party’s 228 pledged delegates will be apportioned based on how the candidates do in each state Senate district. The election system update will allow local officials to report returns broken out at the district level on election night, so party officials can calculate delegate totals for the myriad Democratic hopefuls. Election day is March 3; early voting begins Feb. 18.

[…]

State officials refuted Democrats’ claims that the data needed to calculate that delegate distribution wouldn’t be available on election night and said the data would be “reported in the same fashion” as it was in the 2016 presidential primaries, when local officials used a different reporting system.

But until last week, the state’s revamped reporting system did not allow local election officials to log that data at the state Senate district level.

In a Thursday email to county election officials obtained by The Texas Tribune, an election official with the Texas secretary of state’s office informed counties that an update to the reporting system that would address that issue would be added “in the next few days.”

Several county officials confirmed to the Tribune on Tuesday that the system has since been updated. The secretary of state’s office offered no comment on the update.

See here for the background. I don’t know if the complaints from the TDP forced this issue to be resolved, or if it was always on track but the SOS just wasn’t being forthcoming about it. Either way, as long as it’s been resolved, it’s good.

Will we get full Presidential primary results from Texas on primary night?

Maybe.

As their counterparts in Iowa reel from a disastrously slow election returns process, Texas Democrats raised the prospect Wednesday that a change in the way Texas reports election results could delay the final tally of delegates won by presidential hopefuls in the upcoming March 3 primary past election night.

Officials with the Texas Democratic Party said they were recently told by the Texas Secretary of State’s office that it will not be able to provide on election night the numbers needed to allocate a majority of the 228 delegates up for grabs in the state on Super Tuesday. In a Jan. 23 meeting, the Democrats said, top state election officials cited limitations to their revamped reporting system, which is used to compile returns from the state’s 254 counties.

“They basically said that’s not built out yet,” said Glen Maxey, the special projects director for the Texas Democratic Party who attended the meeting with state officials.

Late Wednesday, a spokesman for the secretary of state’s office, which initially had not responded to The Texas Tribune’s questions about the issue, contested that characterization, saying that “any allegations that delegate allocations will not be reported on election night are categorically false.”

At issue are 149 delegates that will be won by Democratic presidential candidates through a complex formula that divvies up those delegates based on the distribution of votes in each of Texas’ 31 state Senate districts. Maxey said he and other officials were told the state initially will collect election returns at the county level but not at the senatorial district or precinct level, which are needed to calculate how many delegates each candidate picks up. Party officials were told those more detailed numbers would be made available “the next day or so,” Maxey said.

In an email, agency spokesman Stephen Chang said the secretary of state’s office does plan to collect and publicly report votes for president at the Senate district level “in the same fashion” as previous primaries.

“In previous primaries, including the 2016 primary election, delegate allocations for both of Texas’ major parties on election night have been approximate allocations based on data self-reported by the counties,” Chang said. “The delegate allocations will be reported in the same fashion for the March 3rd primary election.”

An earlier version of the story did not yet have the response from the SOS office, so the answer to the question was looking like No. Part of the reason for this is that those delegates are doled out by Senate district, according to a formula that you can learn more about at the links in the story. Senate districts are of course all gerrymandered up, with many of them spanning multiple counties, so you can’t calculate the official delegate count until you have complete counts from all those counties. That could certainly make for a late night, but a reasonable estimate ought to be doable in the evening. If things are close, the allocations could be muddled, and there may not be a clear winner of the most delegates. In theory at least, we’ll have something. Hope for the best but be prepared for a late night. Still gotta be better than Iowa, right?

UT-Tyler: Biden doing better than Bernie

Poll #2 from this week stands in contrast to Poll #1.

Former vice president Joe Biden has stretched his lead in Texas in the Democratic presidential fight, buoyed by gains among Hispanics, a new Dallas Morning News-University of Texas at Tyler poll has found.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has the most enthusiastic backing of any of the major Democratic presidential contenders, according to the poll.

However, among Texas Democrats and independents who lean Democratic, Sanders is running further behind Biden than he did in two statewide polls by UT-Tyler last fall.

Biden now leads Sanders, 35% to 18%. In the East Texas university’s September and November polls, the front-running Biden bested Sanders by only 9 percentage points.

In the latest survey, former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren tied for third with 16% each. Bloomberg, who is concentrating on Super Tuesday states, has spent $24 million on ads in Texas, according to Kantar/Campaign Media Analysis Group.

The poll launches a new initiative for the 2020 election by The News and the UT Tyler Center for Opinion Research. It was conducted Jan. 21-30 with 1,169 registered voters — 305 surveyed by phone and 864 through online surveys — and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.87 percentage points.

[…]

Texans’ views of Trump’s job performance have improved slightly since the fall, and he leads all major Democrats in head-to-head, general election match-ups.

Still, if the November election were held today, Biden and Bloomberg both would be competitive against the Republican incumbent in Texas, the poll found.

Trump leads Biden, 44% to 42%. He leads Bloomberg, his bitter enemy from the Gotham business world, 45% to 42%. Both leads were within the poll’s margin of error.

In hypothetical general election match-ups, Trump leads Sanders, 45% to 39% and Warren, 46% to 37%. The president had double-digit edges over three others.

There’s more, including Senate race stuff, which as has been the case for the Democratic Senate primary, hasn’t been very useful. The UT-Tyler Polling Center page is here, but as of Sunday when I drafted this they have not posted the press release and full data from this poll. You can see their November result here, and it is a big difference, with Biden closer to Trump and Sanders farther away.

The point here is not that this poll is right and that Lyceum poll from a few days ago is wrong. It’s that we don’t have enough data to know which may be closer to the truth as it stands right now. They may both be inaccurate. This is why you don’t take one poll result as the whole story, because the next poll right around the corner may tell you something very different. We will get more data soon – at the very least, it’s about time for the next UT/Texas Tribune poll – and we can then consider the whole body of evidence that we have and see what that tells us.

I’m glad that this poll had a Trump/Bloomberg question, too. I hope all polls going forward, at least until he’s no longer a viable candidate, include him in the head-to-heads. Not because I like Bloomberg as a candidate, but because at this point it would be silly not to include him. I will also note that in this poll, Trump has a narrower lead over his top competitors than he did in November even though his approval rating has notched up. The UT-Tyler poll is also one where Trump has consistently failed to break fifty percent, though that appears to be a function of a sizable “don’t know/undecided” contingent. I expect that group to shrink once the Dems have a nominee, at which point we’ll get an indication of where those folks were leaning. In the meantime, I hope we get some more of these before we start voting.

Lyceum poll: Trump with a mostly modest lead

From the inbox:

Among the large pack of Democratic presidential primary contenders still vying for the nomination to be the party’s nominee for U.S. president, former Vice President Joe Biden is currently leading in the Lone Star State, with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders a close second. However, it is Biden who comes in second behind Sanders when matched against President Trump in a hypothetical 2020 general election match-up. This is according to new, independent polling results released today by the Texas Lyceum, the premier, nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide leadership group.

Just five days away from the Iowa caucuses, the traditional start of the presidential primary season, the Lyceum poll, which carries a margin of error of +/- 4.89 percentage points among potential Democratic Primary Voters (n=401), finds Biden leading with 28%, slightly ahead of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders with 26%. Meanwhile, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren tops the second wave of Democratic candidates at 13%, followed by late entrant and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg at 9%. South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg drew 6%, while Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar has 4%.

Sanders polls closest to Trump for the general election
The survey asked respondents who they would support if the November presidential election were held today between President Donald Trump and Vice President Biden, Senator Sanders, Senator Warren and Mayor Buttigieg, respectively. With fewer than nine months until Election Day, the Texas Lyceum poll shows President Donald Trump holds a lead ranging from 4 to 8 percentage points over each of the potential Democratic nominees, with Senator Sanders polling closest to the president, 50 to 47 among likely 2020 general election voters (n=520, margin of error +/- 4.30 percentage points).

Among the top remaining candidates, Biden trails Trump by 5 points, 51% to 46%, Warren trails Trump by 7 points, 50% to 43%, and Buttigieg is 8 points behind the president, 51% to 43%, in this early look at the November Elections.

U.S. Senate Democratic Primary Race – far from settled
Meanwhile, the race to determine the nominee to take on incumbent U.S. Senator John Cornyn next November is far from settled, as none of the 12 Democratic Primary candidates garnered more than 11% of the vote in the Lyceum survey. Air Force Veteran and 2018 congressional candidate M.J. Hegar is leading the field with 11 points. Trailing Hegar are Dallas State Senator Royce West at 8%, activist Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez at 7%, at-large Houston City Council member Amanda Edwards at 6%, and Beaumont car dealer and pastor Michael Cooper at 4%.

“Texas is always a difficult state for candidates to introduce themselves to the voters due to its sheer size and multiple, large media markets,” said Joshua Blank, Ph.D., research director of the Texas Lyceum poll, “but, in a year in which the political oxygen has been sucked up by the Democratic Presidential Primary and impeachment, it’s clearly been a major challenge for those seeking to take on John Cornyn to break through with the Texas electorate. These new results confirm that it’s still anyone’s race.”

Texans Split over whether the U.S. Senate should remove Donald Trump from office
The Texas Lyceum Poll found Texans split on whether President Trump should be removed from office following his impeachment in the House of Representatives. The poll was fielded Jan. 10-19, 2020 after impeachment proceedings in the House had concluded and before the U.S. Senate trial had begun. Overall, 44% of Texas adults say the Senate should remove the president from office, while 45% disagree. Not surprisingly, views on impeachment reflect party loyalty, as 77% of Democrats believe the president should be removed from office while 86% of Republicans believe he should remain. However, in what is expected to be a more competitive election year by Texas standards, self-identified independents were more inclined to say that the president should be removed from office, 46% to 31%.

Texans’ economic views improved slightly
Evaluations of the Texas economy appear to have improved somewhat over last year. The percentage of respondents who believe Texas is better off compared to the rest of the country increased by 4 percentage points from 45% to 49%. Asked to grade the national economy, a plurality, 39% say that the country is better off than it was a year ago, with 35% saying that the economy is about the same. President Trump job approval divided by party, while Governor Abbott’s marks remain high President Trump’s job approval rating remains remarkably consistent with September 2019’s Texas Lyceum Poll given the tumultuous political environment. Overall, 52% of adult Texans surveyed disapprove of the job the president is doing, while 47% approve. Again, party plays a big role in the president’s job approval rating, with 89% of Republicans giving him high marks. Among Democrats, 85% say the president is doing a poor job. A majority of independents also rate the president negatively, with 60% saying he’s doing a poor job and 37% giving him a positive review.

The executive summary is here, the poll questions and data are here, and the crosstabs are here. A couple of thoughts:

– Biden usually polls best against Trump among the gaggle – see this SNN/SSRS poll from December, for example – but not always – see UT-Tyler and the UT/Texas Tribune polls, both from November. Sanders would usually be a point or so behind when Biden did best, with the others generally a step back (Beto was an occasional exception to that). Here, Sanders is two points closer than Biden is. Both are in the high 40s, which is the figure of greater interest to me.

– I have not followed the primary polling closely, but Biden has easily topped the Democratic field in polls before now – he led Sanders by 11 in UT/Trib, by 10 in UT-Tyler, and by 20 in CNN/SSRS. Sanders’ closeness to Biden here feels like an outlier to me, but he’s doing well nationally, so who knows. Of course, most of the headlines I’ve seen in relation to this poll are about how Sanders is “surging” in the Dem primary in Texas. Have we learned nothing about polling in all these years? One result is not a surge, it’s one result. I expect we will see more polls in the coming weeks, as the primary draws nearer, and then we can evaluate whether this was an indication of a change or just an odd result.

– He has no more chance of being the Democratic nominee than I do, but I’d have liked to see a Trump-Bloomberg matchup polled, if only to get an idea of what 47 gazillion dollars in TV ads can do for you.

– Forty-four percent of registered voters said they were more likely to vote in the Democratic primary. Forty-three percent said Republican primary. Have I mentioned that Dem primary turnout is going to be off the charts?

– Trump continues to have bad approval ratings in Texas, though here he outperforms them in the general election matchups. Note, however, that the approval question is asked of the entire sample, which is 1200 adults (the registered voter sample is 920), while the “who will you vote for” sample is 520 likely voters. In other words, it seems likely there are a significant number of people in this sample who dislike Trump but either aren’t registered or aren’t seen as likely voters. That right there is a turnout issue. Keep registering voters, and keep pushing them to the polls.

– The pollsters gave the name of all 12 Senate candidates to the respondents. My eyes are glazing over just at the thought of sitting through a robot saying “Press one for Amanda Edwards, press two for Adrian Ocegueda, press three for Jack Daniel Foster”…you get the idea. I don’t even know how you poll in that race.

Anyway. This was our first poll of the year. UT/Trib usually does a poll in February, and UT-Tyler has been doing them every couple of months and may be due for another soon. With the primary looming, I’d expect to see even more numbers soon.

Looking ahead in CD07

This story is primarily about the Republican primary in CD07. I don’t care about that race or those candidates, but there’s some good stuff at the end that I wanted to comment on.

Rep. Lizzie Fletcher

Since she’s taken office, some Houston Republicans — old school, Bush-acolyte types — concede [Rep. Lizzie Fletcher is] an on-the-ground presence and a force to be reckoned with for whoever the Republicans nominate.

That assessment is, in part, thanks to her fundraising. She is the top Democratic fundraiser in the Texas delegation and only lags behind Crenshaw among U.S. House members from Texas. And while the Republican primary is expected to drag on into a runoff in May, Fletcher can watch from the sidelines while banking her money for the coming general election television ad wars.

Because of those factors, non-partisan campaign handicappers at Inside Elections rate the 7th Congressional District as “Lean Democratic.”

“She is formidable, as evidenced by nobody on the Democratic side running against her,” said Jason Westin, a rival from her 2018 primary fight who has donated to her campaign this time around. “She’s done an excellent job … and I think she’s been checking boxes and basically doing what she said she was going to do, which is what got her elected over an incumbent the first time.”

And there’s an urgency in GOP circles that if they are to defeat Fletcher, it must be this cycle. Incumbents are traditionally at their weakest during their first term.

But also, the next cycle will take place after redistricting. Even if Republicans hold the map-drawing power in the state Legislature, it will be difficult to shore up the 7th District into their favor this time around. Any attempt to draw nearby Republican voters into the district could risk destabilizing the other Republican-held districts in the Houston metropolitan area.

In the here and now, members of both parties privately acknowledge that for all the fundraising, campaigning and strategizing, the 7th Congressional district is likely to be the Texas seat most susceptible to national winds.

After all, it is Trump who is most credited with pushing this district into the Democratic column. In 2012, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney carried the district by 21 percentage points. But in 2016, Trump lost the district by one percentage point, giving Democrats the impetus to compete in West Houston.

As I’ve said before, I consider CD07 to be Lean Dem. Rep. Fletcher could certainly lose, but she hasn’t done anything to make her position any more vulnerable. She’s done the things she campaigned on, she’s raised a ton of money, she’s not committed any gaffes, and she’s been very visible in the district. As the story notes, she won by five points in a race that was expected to be a photo finish, and in which the polling we had tended to show John Culberson up by a small margin. Don’t underestimate her, is what I’m saying.

If there’s one thing that gives me a little bit of pause, it’s that while Democrats in 2018 exceeded their countywide totals from 2016, Republicans lagged theirs, by 70 to 100K votes. Their turnout will be up from 2018, and so it’s a question of how much Dems can increase theirs. I expect it to be up to the task, but it is a factor. I mean, Culberson got 143K votes in 2016 but only 116K in 2018, while Fletcher got 128K. I expect she will need more than that to win this year.

Of course, some of those votes Fletcher got were from people who had previously voted mostly Republican. It was those people, who voted for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump while otherwise voting GOP in 2016, that out CD07 on the map in the first place. These people voted for more Democrats in 2018, as precinct analysis makes clear, but they still voted for some Republicans. My sense is that those people will mostly stick with Dems in 2020 – if being anti-Trump drove their behavior in 2016 and 2018, it’s hard to see why it wouldn’t drive their behavior in 2020 – but that is a variable. And as for what happens in 2022 when we are post-Trump (please, please, please), that’s anyone’s guess at this point.

As for redistricting, I don’t know what the Republicans will want to do with CD07. First, it matters whether they have control over the process or if they have to deal with House Democrats, and second it matters if they’re seeking to protect a new incumbent or enact a strategic retreat, in which case they can use CD07 as a Democratic vote sink and shore up all three of CDs 02, 10, and 22. Or, you know, try to win back one or more of them – if Dems take at least one of those seats, they’ll need to figure out how to protect those new incumbents, too. I know that redistricting is at a basic level a zero-sum partisan game, but it’s also more than two-dimensional. There are a lot of interests to balance, and it’s not always obvious what the best move is. I mean, who would have ever expected that we’d be talking about this back in 2011, right?

A view of Texas and polling

The premise of this is sound, but don’t read too much into it.

In Texas, the nation’s biggest, most important red state, Trump’s disapproval rating has consistently lagged behind many of the 30 states he carried in 2016. This potentially puts the state — a must-win for the president if there ever was one — in play for 2020.

To think Trump’s unpopularity in Texas is because of Twitter, or Ukraine, or the media, or a smear job by the left is to underestimate the problem. The reality is that Trump’s signature policies are out of step with what most Texans want.

Take Trump’s threat of tariffs against Mexico as punishment for the flow of unauthorized immigrants across the border. While railing against Mexico might work at a campaign rally in the Midwest, Texans perceive it as a direct threat to their bottom lines. Mexico is Texas’s biggest trading partner, accounting for nearly 35 percent of state exports in 2018. In comparison, Mexico accounts for only 5.8 percent of exports for Ohio.

Polling from the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin found that roughly half of voters believe that tariffs against Mexico would hurt the Texas economy. Only 16 percent of suburban voters and 18 percent of women — coveted 2020 voting blocs — think tariffs on Mexico would benefit Texas.

[…]

Trump’s immigration policy is also unpopular. While one might assume that the state with the longest southern border, the largest share of Mexican Americans, and one of the highest rates of illegal immigration would appreciate Trump’s hard-line immigration approach, the opposite is true.

Texas has maintained one of the nation’s most moderate stances on immigration. It is one of only seven states — and the only red state — to provide in-state tuition rates and state financial aid to undocumented immigrants. Those provisions were signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry and a Republican-controlled legislature. More recently, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called the Trump administration’s separation of migrant families at the border “disgraceful.

While the United States struggles to adjust to a changing demographic makeup, Texas has been “majority minority” for more than a decade, with Hispanics expected to outnumber non-Hispanic whites in the next few years. Hispanics and non-Hispanics live by, work with, are friends with and go to school with each other, and this familiarity increases fondness. Which is why Trump’s fear and disparagement of immigrants — and Mexicans, in particular — falls flat here.

According to a Texas Politics Project poll, more Texans strongly disapprove of Trump’s immigration approach than strongly approve. Only 39 percent of Texans support additional federal spending on border barriers along the Mexican border, according to a November 2019 report by the U.S. Immigration Policy Center.

In the same poll, the majority of Texans — 60 percent — agreed that “We should find alternatives to immigration detention for families fleeing persecution and seeking refuge in the U.S.” And a majority, 65 percent, agreed that “unaccompanied children caught attempting to cross the border illegally should be placed into the care of child-welfare specialists, not border or immigration enforcement officials.” Turns out the cowboys are a bunch of bleeding hearts.

This article is in the Washington Post, and as you know I’m always interested in outside views of our state, partly to see how the perspective differs and partly to see what kind of dumb mistakes they make. In this case, the author is a Texan, an economist and pundit named Abby McCloskey who also writes for the Dallas Morning News. I’d not read anything by her before, and checking Facebook and Twitter I found almost no overlap between the political types I know and her. Doesn’t really matter, it was just curious to me.

Anyway. As I said up front, the basic premise is sound. Polling of Trump in Texas has been weak, in terms of approval, favorable/unfavorable, and re-elect numbers; as I’ve noted before, there’s some correlation between those things, though it’s not particularly strong. One way I look at this is that in the 2012 cycle, Mitt Romney was always above 50% in Texas, usually around 55%, while President Obama hovered around 40%. Trump is usually in the low-to-mid 40’s, occasionally nearing 50 but almost always below it. That’s just not great for him, and as we saw in 2018 if Republicans overall aren’t performing in the 55%-plus range, they have a hard time winning districts and counties they’ve been used to winning.

The rest doesn’t impress me much. There may be some Chamber of Commerce types who voted for Trump in 2016, mostly out of loathing for Hillary Clinton and a longtime affinity for Republican politics, who won’t vote for him in 2020 because of trade policy, but I suspect you could count them all individually if you put some effort into it. Immigration policy is a multi-layered subject in Texas, but the Republicans who voted for that 2001 bill to grant undocumented immigrants in-state tuition aren’t the Republicans that are in charge of the state now. The Texas GOP is far, far to the right of that cohort – the modern Texas GOP officially opposes that 2001 law (see item 134 from the 2016 platform and item 129 from the 2018 platform). Citing that 2001 law as evidence of “nuance” is to me ignorant in the way that people who still say that “the Texas Governor is only the fourth or fifth most powerful official in the state” is ignorant. Keep up with current events, please.

Julian Castro ends his Presidential bid

Sorry to see him go.

Julian Castro

Julián Castro has ended his campaign for the Democratic nomination for president, capping a nearly yearlong bid during which he distinguished himself as a progressive crusader but never found the polling or fundraising support to gain wide appeal.

“I’m so proud of the campaign we’ve run together,” Castro said in an almost four-minute video Thursday morning. “We’ve shaped the conversation on so many important issues in this race, stood up for the most vulnerable people and given a voice to those who are often forgotten. But with only a month until the Iowa caucuses and given the circumstances of this campaign, I’ve determined that it simply isn’t our time.”

The video highlighted some of the causes he championed during his campaign — in some cases, largely on his own — that endeared him to the progressive wing of the party but did not translate into the traction needed to thrust him into the top tier of the sprawling Democratic field.

[…]

After years of being regarded as a rising star in Texas politics, Castro threw his hat into the ring early, months before some of his fiercest competitors launched their respective bids. But he consistently raised millions of dollars less than his rivals and polled in the low single digits, failing to qualify for the two most recent debates despite launching a do-or-die fundraising drive before the first of them. He hit his $800,000 target and stayed in the race but still did not make the cut for that debate.

I’m sad to see him depart – Lord knows, I can think of several candidates I’d rather see get out. It’s a lot easier to stay in a race if your goal is something other than winning. Be that as it may, this is far from the end for Castro. He’d be a good VP choice – I thought that in 2016 as well, but that’s the way it goes – and h could certainly wind up in someone’s Cabinet. I for one will be rooting for him to run for Governor in 2022. I don’t think I need to explain that one. Thank you for running, Julian Castro. I look forward to seeing you on the trail again, hopefully soon. The Observer has more.

CNN/SSRS: Trump 48, Biden 47

Time for a non-Mayoral poll. The story is about results, primary and general, in both California and Texas, so forgive the abrupt opening sentence.

In Texas, however, it’s a different picture, with Biden holding wide leads across nearly every major demographic divide among those likely to vote in the primary there. The former vice president also tops as best able to handle each of the five issues tested by no less than six points.

Biden prompts the highest enthusiasm among Texas’ likely Democratic primary voters (44% say they would be extremely enthusiastic about a Biden nomination vs. 38% for Sanders, 31% for Warren and 23% for Buttigieg).

On the Republican side of the primary picture, Donald Trump appears unlikely to face a serious challenge in either state. In Texas, 86% of likely Republican primary voters say they back the President, in California, it’s 85%. Neither of his declared opponents reaches even 5% support in either state.

But Trump’s approval rating overall is underwater in both states. In California, just 32% approve of the way the President is handling his job, while 61% disapprove. In Texas, 42% approve and 50% disapprove. Trump’s numbers among independents (38% approve) and women (34% approve) in Texas would seem to suggest a warning sign for his general election prospects in a reliably GOP state.

But hypothetical general election matchups in the Texas poll point the other way.

Trump and Biden run about even in Texas among registered voters, 48% back Trump to 47% for Biden. Against three other Democrats, Trump holds significant leads: He holds 51% over Warren’s 44%, and Buttigieg and Sanders each have 43% support to Trump’s 50% in their matchups.

You can find all of the poll data here. To summarize the important bits:

A1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?


Total Respondents
                   Approve Disapprove No opinion
December 4-8, 2019     42%        50%         8%
October 9-13, 2018     41%        50%        10%

Registered Voters
December 4-8, 2019     48%        47%         5%
October 9-13, 2018     47%        48%         6%

Q12. If (NAME) were the Democratic Party’s candidate and Donald Trump were the Republican Party’s candidate, for whom would you be more likely to vote?


                      Biden  Trump
December 4-8, 2019       47     48

                  Buttigieg  Trump
December 4-8, 2019       43     50

                    Sanders  Trump
December 4-8, 2019       43     50

                     Warren  Trump
December 4-8, 2019       44     51

Those are relatively bad approval numbers for Trump, and better overall levels of support, at least in comparison to other recent polls. The same poll as noted shows Biden with a big lead in Texas in the Dem primary; I’m less interested in that. Otherwise, standard disclaimers apply – one poll, snapshot in time, lots of Dems haven’t made up their minds yet, etc – and that’s about all there is to say.

Beto: Still not running for Senate

And as of Monday evening, we can stop talking about this.

Beto O’Rourke

Beto O’Rourke is reiterating that he is not running for U.S. Senate next year as speculation swirls ahead of the Monday filing deadline.

The former El Paso congressman has long said he would not challenge U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, but since he dropped out of the presidential race last month, some supporters have held out hope for a reversal and buzzed that he may be giving it new consideration.

“Nothings changed on my end,” O’Rourke told The Texas Tribune in a text message Thursday night. “Not running for senate.”

O’Rourke’s statement comes three days after the release of a poll showing he would fare much better against Cornyn than other Democrats who are running. The survey, commissioned by a group led by an O’Rourke booster, breathed new life into the speculation simmering since early November that O’Rourke could be convinced to make a late entry into the race.

[…]

The lineup for the Democratic primary includes Chris Bell, the former Houston congressman and 2006 gubernatorial nominee; Amanda Edwards, a member of the Houston City Council; MJ Hegar, the 2018 congressional candidate; Royce West, a state senator from Dallas; Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez, a progressive organizer; and Sema Hernandez, O’Rourke’s 2018 primary opponent who got a stronger-than-expected 24% of the vote.

So far, none of them has come close to replicating the massive fundraising or frenetic campaign pace of O’Rourke’s 2018 bid.

At least one of them, West, has weighed in on the prospect of an 11th-hour bid by O’Rourke.

“I’d be disappointed because one of the things that I did before getting into the race was to talk to Beto and ask him — not once, but twice — if he decided to get out of the [presidential] race, would he get in [the Senate race]? And he said no,” West recalled during at a Texas Tribune event last month.

You know how I feel about that poll. I don’t know why so many people have been resistant to taking Beto at his word, but here we are. It’s only for a couple more days. In the meantime, Beto is out there working to help flip the State House, and I think he’s doing fine.

Beto boosts State House candidates

Very nice.

Beto O’Rourke

A month after ending his presidential campaign, Democrat Beto O’Rourke has turned his attention to state politics — namely, an effort to help flip the Texas House of Representatives from Republican control to the Democrats.

With Texas Democrats nine seats away from retaking the majority of seats in the Texas House, O’Rourke is trying to convince his donor base to send money to an organization called Flip The Texas House, which has targeted 17 House Districts in which Republican candidates won by fewer than 10 percentage points last year. More than half are districts in which O’Rourke won the majority of votes as he ran for U.S. Senate.

“In 2018, I carried nine of the 17 districts now represented by Republicans. So we know that we can do this,” O’Rourke said in the email. “We just need your help to make sure that we make the most of this opportunity.”

Ten of the targeted districts are in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and five are in and around Houston. One is in San Antonio and one is in Killeen.

As always, my analysis of the interesting House races is here. Those five Houston-area districts are HDs 134 and 138 in Harris County, HD29 in Brazoria County, and HDs 26 and 28 in Fort Bend. HD26 is now an open seat after incumbent Rick Miller said some deeply stupid things that even Greg Abbott condemned. It’s not even 2020 yet, and things are already off the chain.

Let me just say, we’re really not ready for the amount of money that’s going to be spent on campaigns in Texas next year. Ads – on TV, on the internet, on Facebook and YouTube and Twitter and Instagram and everywhere else – and mailers and texts and calls and canvassers, it’s going to be nuts. We as a non-swing state for many years are not prepared for this. I feel like we all need to spend a week in Iowa or New Hampshire to get a taste of it. Just brace yourself, that’s all I’m saying.

Beacon Research: Trump 45, Biden 44

That’s not the headline of this story, but it’s what I’m leading with.

Beto O’Rourke

With just a week remaining before the deadline to run for office in Texas next year, some Democrats are still hoping to see Beto O’Rourke jump into the race to unseat Sen. John Cornyn.

Cornyn himself continued to raise money on Monday off the specter.

Poll after poll shows Cornyn would trounce the dozen or so contenders for the Democratic nomination at this point. None can touch the near-universal name recognition O’Rourke enjoys among Texas Democrats after his near-miss against Sen. Ted Cruz last year.

And a new poll commissioned by backers worried that the current crop of candidates would fall short shows that O’Rourke is by far the top choice of Democratic voters in Texas at 58%, with the runner-up, state Sen. Royce West of Dallas at 13%.

The poll also shows him in a near-tie, trailing Cornyn 46-42 at this point, which is far stronger than others already seeking the nomination.

[…]

The poll commissioned by the Democratic Policy Institute was conducted Nov. 9-21 – that is, after he ended his presidential campaign on Nov. 1.

“Beto has a strong statewide profile, certainly stronger than any of the other candidates at this point. He could certainly make this competitive,” said Chris Anderson of Beacon Research, a Boston-based Democratic pollster who conducted the survey.

“There’s no doubt that name ID is a huge asset for Beto, but it’s not something to be taken lightly,” Anderson said. “To have pretty much universal name ID across Texas is significant. And he has a loyal following that’s ready to reemerge for him. He really energized younger voters [against Cruz] and that means he could start with a leg up.”

You can see the poll info here. You may note there’s no mention of the Trump-Biden result in the excerpt I quoted. In fact, there’s no mention of it anywhere in the story, which as you can see is all about Beto. I’ll get to that in a minute, but in the meantime, here are the Presidential results from the poll:

Trump 45, Biden 44
Trump 46, Warren 41

Those are the only matchups they did. Biden does a touch better than Warren among Ds, Rs, and indies, and that explains the gap. The main takeaway here is that this is yet another result in which Trump tops out below fifty percent, and is in a tight race against all comers. And this is while the poll finds him even in favorability, 49-49. He’s had worse in other polls.

That was just an appetizer, because this poll was all about the Senate. Here’s what we get for that:

Cornyn 46, generic Dem 44 (broken down as definitely Cornyn 26, probably Cornyn 20, definitely Dem 26, probably Dem 18)
Cornyn 46, Beto 42
Cornyn 45, Royce West 33
Cornyn 44, MJ Hegar 30
Cornyn 45, Chris Bell 30
Cornyn 45, Sema Hernandez 29

For whatever the reason, they did not also test Cristina Tzintzun Ramirez or Amanda Edwards. I think the main difference between the Cornyn-Beto numbers and the Cornyn-other Dem numbers is, as evidenced by the Cornyn-generic Dem numbers, name recognition. I have no problem believing that some candidates may do better – or worse – against Cornyn than others. Candidates matter, and some people’s votes are up for grabs. We saw plenty of variance in the statewide vote last year among the races. But there’s Cornyn getting 44 or 45 against the four non-Betos; it’s a bit ironic, given the motivation for the poll, that he scores best against Beto, even if the margin is much smaller. Point being, Cornyn isn’t gaining at these other Dems’ expense, they just don’t have the consolidated support Beto has. Yet.

So make of this what you will. Beto isn’t running, and we’re going to be fine. The Texas Signal has more.

The latest UT-Tyler poll

A slightly more Republican sample leads to slightly better numbers for Trump in Texas, though they’re still not great.

Texas voters are split over whether President Donald Trump should be impeached, though only 43% of voters in the Lone Star State approve of the president’s overall job performance.

That divided snapshot comes from a new survey released on Monday by the University of Texas at Tyler.

With House impeachment hearings now underway, nearly 47% of registered voters in Texas do not believe that Trump should be impeached over allegations that he abused his office to pressure Ukraine to investigate one of his political rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden.

But nearly 45% of Texas voters do think Trump should be impeached.

The results are split mostly along partisan lines, with nearly 84% of Democrats supporting impeachment and more than 81% of Republicans opposing it. They also come as more Texas voters than not disapprove of Trump’s performance in the White House, per the survey.

The jumbled picture could loom over the 2020 presidential race, particularly as Democrats insist that Texas — and its 38 electoral votes — could be in play for the first time in decades.

“There is still much work left to be done in Texas” for Trump, said Mark Owens, a UT-Tyler assistant professor who helped conduct the poll. “It’s going to look to be a more competitive race in Texas than it was in 2016.”

See here for the September UT-Tyler poll, and here for July. The November press release from UT-Tyler is here, and the data is here. I’m going to highlight three things from these polls.


Dem or GOP?

       Dem    GOP
=================
Jul  35.7%  38.2%
Sep  40.0%  40.2%
Nov  35.0%  38.9%

Approve/disapprove

      Appr  Disappr
===================
Jul  40.3%    54.5%
Sep  39.6%    52.3%
Nov  43.3%    49.0%

Vote for Trump?

      Best  Worst
=================
Jul  38.6%  37.1%
Sep  39.7%  38.0%
Nov  46.3%  44.2%

The numbers are taken from each month’s poll results. The sample, which is one of those phone/online opt-in hybrids, was more Republican this time than previously. That’s likely going to fluctuate over time, but I’m noting it here as a way of showing that such changes can have an effect on the rest of the numbers. The “Vote for Trump?” numbers are the highest and lowest values he received from the various matchups against different Dems. My point here is simply that these numbers tend to reflect the approval number for Trump, though this time they were all a bit above it, and previously they were generally a bit below it.

We can also break the approval numbers down by partisan ID:


Approve/disapprove by party

          Appr  Disappr
=======================
Dem Jul   9.3%    87.8%
Ind Jul  17.0%    73.2%
GOP Jul  85.1%    10.8%

Dem Sep   5.0%    89.4%
Ind Sep  23.5%    59.8%
GOP Sep  81.9%    11.9%

Dem Nov   7.0%    86.5%
Ind Nov  33.6%    54.3%
GOP Nov  81.5%    12.2%

Republicans actually approve of Trump less than before and disapprove of him more, though both by small enough amounts that I wouldn’t read much into it. Independents are more favorable to him, though they started out way in the dumps and still aren’t at all approving overall. I don’t know that I’d make all that much of this either, but we’ll keep an eye on it. As always, these are just data points by themselves. I’m glad UT-Tyler is doing this as often as they have been, we should end up with a pretty good data series when all is said and done. The Texas Signal has more.

News flash: Republicans still like Trump

I know, I’m as shocked as you are.

As in any sports bar in Texas when the Dallas Cowboys are playing on Monday night, most of the TVs at a British pub in northwest San Antonio were tuned to the game.

But on one side of The Lion and Rose, the sights and sounds were just a little off. None of the fans wore silver or blue. Instead, about 50 people, predominately wearing red, gathered around a bank of big-screen TVs playing C-SPAN as they ate bar food and cheered with each applause line that President Donald Trump delivered on a stage in Kentucky.

Trump’s re-election campaign organized the watch party to connect with more potential volunteers as it seeks an army of campaign workers to help extract more votes, even out of Democratic-leaning areas like San Antonio. The event was part of the Trump campaign’s National Week of Action, essentially a dry run to “activate” thousands of volunteers needed next November to get out the vote.

It was the second San Antonio event in just three weeks — on Oct. 15 the president’s son Donald Trump Jr headlined a rally downtown aimed at firing up the party faithful as well as collecting names, emails and phone numbers of volunteers who can be deployed next fall. And President Trump himself was in San Antonio seven months earlier meeting with business leaders and holding a fundraiser.

“We’re not giving up on one single voter,” said Toni Anne Dashiell, the Texas Republican National Committeewoman from nearby Kerr County who was at the watch party last week.

Dashiell said the strategy is to mobilize while the Democrats are locked in a potentially long primary battle to determine their nominee. While the opposition is working on Iowa and New Hampshire, the Trump campaign is pouring resources into states such as Texas to shore up support.

The Democrats are convinced Texas is more in play that it has been in a generation, but by the time they get their presidential nominee, Dashiell said Trump will be way ahead in building the kind of ground game needed to hold the state.

Still, GOP optimism can be a tall order in Bexar County, which wasn’t kind to Trump in 2016. While Trump won Texas by 9 percentage points, his defeat in Bexar County wasn’t just bad — it was historically bad.

In winning just 40.7 percent of the vote, Trump did worse in the San Antonio area than any Republican Party candidate in nearly 50 years. Hillary Clinton won Bexar County by more than 79,000 votes — the biggest vote margin of victory for a Democrat in the county’s history.

Trump campaign officials say the 2016 returns are a symptom of “having left votes on the table.” They are convinced that if they can begin working now in Republican pockets in San Antonio, Houston and Dallas, they can far exceed their 2016 showing.

On the bright side, Trump did do slightly better in Bexar County than Ted Cruz did in 2018. I mean, we know that Republicans are going to work for the 2020 election. They’re trying to register voters, they’ll spend a bunch of money, that sort of thing. What makes that newsworthy, of course, is that they feel they have to do that. It’s not just that Republicans came close to losing several statewide races last year, it’s also that they got annihilated in urban areas, lost numerous suburban counties that had long been their strongholds, and saw Democrats at every level set turnout records. All of that was driven by Donald Trump, and the strong need so many people felt to put the brakes on his destructive reign. Polling data we have so far suggests none of that has abated.

Now having said all that, Republicans should expect to get more votes statewide in 2020 than they did in 2018. I say that because they got more votes in 2016 than they did in 2018. Some number of Presidential year Republicans did stay home in 2018. That’s true of Democrats as well, even with the record-setting turnout, but it’s fair to say that Republicans start with a deeper well to dig into. Not that much deeper – we know that a lot of people with Republican voting history went Democratic in 2018, again as a response to Trump. I don’t see any evidence to suggest that has changed. But there are voters out there for the Republicans to reach, likely more in the rural and exurban areas than the urban areas, and I expect they will mostly succeed in reaching them. Democrats have the harder task, which is not only reaching their 2016-but-not-2018 voters but also finding the new voters, and they have more ground to make up. That’s the challenge we have to meet.

By the way, in regards Engage Texas, the right wing-funded voter registration project: Tiffany and I each received a mailer from them last week, urging us to get registered. Which is hilarious, because we are the very definition of vote-in-every-election people, and we are not the people that Engage Texas is looking for. I mean, even a third-rate data processing operation would have figured that out. Maybe the ROI for this extreme blanketing approach is worth the presumably high cost per new registration that they manage to generate. It’s fine by me if they want to waste their money like that, though. Send us more mail, Engage Texas!

UT/Trib: Trump 46, others 39

It’s Election Day, so I’m going to be brief about this.

None of the top Democrats seeking the presidential nomination would beat President Donald Trump in Texas in an election held today — and neither would either of the Texas candidates in that race, according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll.

Joe Biden of Delaware, the former vice president, is running 7 percentage points behind Trump in Texas, as is U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont falls 5 percentage points short in a head-to-head with the president among Texas voters. And the two Texas candidates also lag behind Trump: former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke of El Paso (who dropped out of the race Friday, after the poll was completed) by 6 percentage points, and former U.S. Housing Secretary and San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro by 13 percentage points.

In each matchup, significant numbers of Democrats are holding back their votes — possibly a sign that while they oppose the Republican incumbent, they favor a different Democrat. For instance, 89% of Republicans say they would support Trump over Biden, and 5% say they would favor Biden, leaving 6% unwilling to pick. But in the same race, 82% of Democrats favor Biden, and 4% favor Trump, leaving 14% who either like another Democrat more or don’t want to pick yet. The biggest gap was in the Trump-Castro matchup, where 93% of Republicans have a definite choice and only 71% of Democrats do.

“I don’t think this is a reflection of what’s going to happen in the election, but as we move from registered voters to likely voters in Texas, we tend to get more Republican [results],” said Joshua Blank, research director of the Texas Politics Project at UT-Austin.

While Trump is doing well against those Democrats in Texas, he’s not faring as well when voters are asked whether they will vote for his reelection. Slightly more than half say they “definitely” (46%) or “probably” (6%) will not vote for Trump in 2020. Meanwhile, 40% say they will “definitely” vote for the president’s reelection, and 8% “probably” will.

“That seems to be the durable feature of this poll — that Trump’s durable core is about 40%,” said Daron Shaw, a government professor at the University of Texas at Austin and co-director of the poll. “It’s lackluster, but it’s not fatal. He’s running 5 or 6 points better in Texas than he is nationally.”

For what it’s worth, in the June poll, the “would vote for/would not vote for” numbers were exactly 50-50, and here they’re 48 would and 52 would not. These numbers are actually the most favorable Trump has had for re-election in Texas in recent months – he’s been behind in several other polls. Doesn’t mean this poll is wrong and the others are right – I did find some of those other polls a little weird – just that this is another data point, as those polls were. I do think the bit about Dems holding back a bit on candidates who aren’t their preferred choice is accurate, and I think that will go away once we have a nominee. Ultimately, Trump is the favorite to carry Texas, but the fact that that doesn’t go without saying is saying something.

UT/Trib: Impeachment inquiry more popular than not

Seems like a big deal.

Not quite half of Texas registered voters agree that “Congress is justified in conducting impeachment investigations into actions Donald Trump has taken while president,” according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll.

Almost as many — 42% — disagree with that statement. Republican and Democratic voters are predictably partisan in their responses, while independent voters are more likely than not to say the investigations are merited: 46% agree, while 32% do not.

“The rank and file is still mostly solid behind the president,” said Joshua Blank, research director for the Texas Politics Project. “But among voters who identify themselves as conservatives first, there are some reservations.”

Texas registered voters are evenly divided — and strongly partisan — about whether Trump ought to be removed from office before the end of his term, according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll.

Although Trump hasn’t been impeached or tried, voters are drawing some conclusions. To the question, “Based on what you know, do you think that Donald Trump has taken actions while president that justify his removal from office before the end of his term?” 43% of registered Texas voters say yes and 44% say no. Again, the partisan splits are what you might expect — 79% of Democrats say early removal is justified, while 79% of Republicans say it’s not. Independents were divided, 34% yes, 33% no and 24% unsure.

Democrats in Congress are more likely to get good marks on the impeachment proceedings than Republican members, but both groups have more detractors than cheerleaders. While 25% of voters approve of the way Republicans are handling the investigations, 49% don’t. For Democrats, it was 40% approval and 45% disapproval. Trump’s numbers are in the same neighborhood: 39% approve of the way he has responded to the impeachment investigations, and 45% do not.

“The difficulties Republicans in Congress are having in dealing with this are evident here,” said James Henson, who co-directs the poll and heads UT’s Texas Politics Project. “Republican voters are split on Congress, and Republicans in Congress are trying to figure out how to defend the president without defending his conduct.”

This all tracks with the national numbers, though there a plurality already support impeachment and removal. Pollsters Jim Henson and Joshua Blank share their thoughts about the poll here. The poll also showed Trump with 47% approval and 48% disapproval, which are actually better numbers in that department than he’d had in September. The June UT/Trib poll doesn’t directly ask the approve/disapprove question, but the partisan breakdown on who will or won’t vote for Trump net year look a lot like the approve/disapprove numbers for the impeachment inquiry. All of this is just more evidence that Texas is in play next year. Trump is a drag on the Republicans, and while we’re a long way out from anything, it doesn’t look like that’s going to get any better for them.

Beto ends his Presidential campaign

It was fun while it lasted.

Beto O’Rourke

Beto O’Rourke is dropping out of the presidential race.

The former El Paso congressman announced the decision Friday evening, ahead of a major Democratic gathering here in Iowa.

“Though it is difficult to accept, it is clear to me now that this campaign does not have the means to move forward successfully,” O’Rourke wrote on Medium. “My service to the country will not be as a candidate or as the nominee. Acknowledging this now is in the best interests of those in the campaign; it is in the best interests of this party as we seek to unify around a nominee; and it is in the best interests of the country.”

O’Rourke’s decision ends a White House bid that began with much anticipation in mid-March, months after his near-miss loss to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz. O’Rourke’s campaign launch coincided with a splashy article on the cover of Vanity Fair, and he reported raising $6.1 million in the first 24 hours of his bid — at the time, the largest announced first-day haul of any 2020 Democratic contender. Soon after, he showed double-digit support in multiple national polls.

But O’Rourke never lived up to the high hopes, and after the initial fanfare of his entrance, he sunk into the low single digits in polls and saw his fundraising come back down to Earth.

He was facing the possibility of missing the cut for the next debate, which is Nov. 20 in Georgia. As of Friday evening, he had gained only two out of four qualifying polls, and the deadline is Nov. 13. A poll of likely Iowa caucus participants released Friday showed he had 1 percent support in the critical early state.

After O’Rourke’s announcement — “a decision we made so recently and so reluctantly,” he said at an event in Des Moines on Friday evening — a person close to him reiterated that his future will not include running for U.S. Senate next year in Texas. Some supporters have been encouraging him to challenge the state’s senior senator, John Cornyn, but he has long said he is not interested. A massive Democratic field has already assembled to take on Cornyn, but so far no candidate has been able to match the excitement O’Rourke created in his 2018 bid.

We all owe Beto a debt of gratitude for his 2018 Senate campaign, which has done more to inject life in the Democratic Party in Texas than anything I can think of. He had his moments during the Presidential race, especially after the mass shooting in El Paso, but that field was too deep and too talented for him to gain traction. He’s not running for Senate next year – you know how I feel about that – but maybe Governor in 2022 is on the menu, especially if Julian Castro is busy in Washington DC at the time. Take some time off and spend it with your family, Beto. Then do everything you can to help Democrats get elected next year. Daily Kos, Slate, Texas Monthly, and the Texas Signal have more.

Warren’s interest in boosting Texas Dems

I heartily approve of this.

Elizabeth Warren

As Elizabeth Warren climbs the polls — threatening Joe Biden’s lead in the Democratic primary — her campaign is turning its attention to Texas, a state she called home for a decade and a place her campaign has deemed the “future of our party.”

Warren announced this week she’s soon to dispatch staff to Texas, and her campaign manager says her commitment to the state includes pouring money into down-ballot races here, part of a broader national strategy to help candidates in other races.

“We’re targeting our resources to invest in places that will be critical to keeping the House, taking back the U.S. Senate, and regaining ground in key state legislatures in 2020,” Roger Lau, Warren’s campaign manager, wrote in a strategy memo this week. And he vowed that the campaign is “continuing to build the future of our party by investing in states like Texas.”

The memo comes as Warren rises in the polls, surpassing Biden to take the front-runner spot in several, including a Quinnipiac University poll released this week that showed Warren with a lead of 2 percentage points over the former vice president.

It’s also the latest example of national Democrats paying serious attention to a state they long saw as a Republican stronghold beyond their reach. The party picked Houston to host a presidential debate earlier this month. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has opened an office with senior staff in Austin and has operatives working in the half-dozen GOP-held congressional districts they’re targeting for the 2020 election. And the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a Washington entity headed by former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder, has said it plans to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in hopes of seizing the nine seats that Democrats need to take back the Texas House.

Warren’s campaign manager summed up the effort: “If we want to make big, structural change, we need to make sure Democrats control the U.S. House and Senate and win important gubernatorial and state legislative races across the country.”

That was from a couple of weeks ago; I forgot I had it in my drafts. We don’t know what the shape of this effort will be, but so far Team Warren is saying all the things I’d want a Democratic frontrunner to say. She has already endorsed in the CD28 primary, which is either bold or meddling, depending on one’s perspective. This is a different type and level of commitment, and it won’t be clear what it means till some time next year. I’ve said before that putting real resources in Texas is a must-have for me in a Presidential candidate. This is a good example of what I’m talking about. Well done.

Julián Castro will not be running for Senate, either

In case you were wondering.

Julián Castro

Julián Castro said Saturday at the Texas Tribune Festival that he would not seek the Democratic nomination to challenge U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, in 2020 even if he were to drop out of the presidential race.

“No, I’m not going go run for the Senate, that’s never what I intended to do,” Castro said in an interview with MSNBC’s Katy Tur in the penultimate event at the Paramount Theatre, preceding the closing keynote address by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

While Castro is guaranteed a spot on the next Democratic stage in Ohio in October, his chances of qualifying for the November debate are dicey. Castro is at 1.7% in the RealClearPolitics polling average. The raised threshold requires that a candidate earn 3% support in at least four early state or national polls that meet the Democratic National Committee’s methodological requirements — up from 2% for the September and October debates — or at least 5% in two early state polls. The early states are Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

Tur noted that Castro had sent out a note to funders saying if he doesn’t qualify for the November debate, he would drop out of the race.

“If that happens would you consider running against John Cornyn?’ Tur asked Castro.

In explaining why he would not do that, Castro, a former mayor of San Antonio and secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said, “People ask me, `Why are you running for president?’ My experience is actually as an executive. I actually have some of the most relevant experience in running for president. When you’re a president, you’re a chief executive. I was a chef executive of a federal agency with a $48 billion budget. I’m running for what’s relevant to my experience.”

Castro as a Senate candidate has been discussed before, though not nearly as often as “why won’t Beto run for Senate again?” has been discussed. You know how I feel about that, so I’ll just say again that I have always assumed “Castro for Governor 2022” is the backup plan, assuming 1) Castro isn’t in someone’s cabinet, and 2) he actually wants to run for Governor. It is an executive position, he could get an awful lot done, and it would put him in good position to run for President again in 2028, following (God willing) two terms of one of his current opponents in the primary. Not that beating Greg Abbott would be easy, but that would be the time to try. The Current has more.