Opportunity For Clinton Victory In Texas? Don't Buy The Hype

Although educated women in the Texas Republican heartland-- the suburban belts around Houston, San Antonio, Austin and Dallas-Fort Worth-- have turned against Señor Trumpanzee, the Washington Post/Survey Monkey poll released yesterday that shows Hillary leading in the Lone Star State shouldn't be taken to mean she's actually going to win Texas' 38 electoral college votes; she's not. "The massive survey," wrote The Post, "highlights a critical weakness in Trump’s candidacy-- an unprecedented deficit for a Republican among college-educated white voters, especially women. White college graduates have been loyal Republican voters in recent elections, but Trump is behind Clinton with this group across much of the country, including in some solidly red states... Trump is struggling in places Republicans have won consistently and that he must hold to have any hope of winning. These states include Arizona and Georgia, as well as Texas-- the biggest surprise in the 50-state results. The Texas results, which are based on a sample of more than 5,000 people, show a dead heat, with Clinton ahead by one percentage point."

An agile, nimble, energetic and competent DCCC should be on the warpath going after weak Republican incumbents tied to Trump-- red congressional seats in TX-21 (Lamar Smith's seat that takes in Austin and San Antonio suburbs), TX-10 (Mike McCaul's district that encompasses Austin and Houston 'burbs), TX-07 (John Culbertson's Houston suburban district), TX-22 (Pete Olson's district in the suburbs south of Houston), TX-27 (Blake Farenthold's minority majority district stretching from Corpus Christi north to Bay City and the exurbs south of Houston), TX-06 (Joe Barton's suburban Ft Worth district), TX-24 (Kenny Marchant's district in the suburbs around the Dallas-Ft Worth Airport), TX-25 (corrupt Roger Williams' district in suburbs stretching from Austin to Ft. Worth), and TX-32 (Pete Sessions district in the suburbs north of Dallas). But the DCCC is neither agile, nimble, energetic nor even remotely competent. In fact, the DCCC has no candidates in any of these districts and isn't encouraging the grassroots Democrats who are running, a particularly huge mistake in the case of Tom Wakely vs Lamar Smith in TX-21, where Clinton may well beat Trump and where the much-disliked Lamar Smith is the only House Republican in the whole country to have contributed cash to the Trumpanzee campaign.

The Dallas Morning News didn't take a position between LBJ and Barry Goldwater in 1964 but the staunchly Republican editorial board has endorsed every other Republican nominee since Nixon-- until now. Yesterday, they pointed out that Señor Trumpanzee is no Republican and doesn't deserve support from Republican voters. "Trump is-- or has been-- at odds with nearly every GOP ideal this newspaper holds dear. Donald Trump is no Republican and certainly no conservative... We have," they wrote, "no interest in a Republican nominee for whom all principles are negotiable, nor in a Republican Party that is willing to trade away principle for pursuit of electoral victory. Trump doesn't reflect Republican ideals of the past; we are certain he shouldn't reflect the GOP of the future. Donald Trump is not qualified to serve as president and does not deserve your vote."

If Texas is going to turn blue, it's not going to be because of one cataclysmic event for the GOP but because of hand work and careful planning over years, the kind of hard work and careful planning Pelosi's DCCC eschews entirely and isn't capable of even comprehending. Helping Tom Wakely beat anti-science House Science Committee chair Lamar Smith is a worthwhile effort and even if the DCCC doesn't "get" it, progressives nationally should help fund Tom's efforts, which is something we can do here, at the thermometer below:

UPDATE: Today The Dallas Morning News Endorsed Hillary

Yesterday the editors explained why they are repulsed by Señor Trumpanzee. This morning they endorsed a Democrat for the first time in 75 years! "There is," they wrote, "only one serious candidate on the presidential ballot in November. We recommend Hillary Clinton... Resume vs. resume, judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest." They wrote of her shortcomings but insist "they pale in comparison to the litany of evils some opponents accuse her of. Treason? Murder? Her being cleared of crimes by investigation after investigation has no effect on these political hyenas; they refuse to see anything but conspiracies and cover-ups. We reject the politics of personal destruction. Clinton has made mistakes and displayed bad judgment, but her errors are plainly in a different universe than her opponent's."

Trump's values are hostile to conservatism. He plays on fear-- exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny-- to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.

After nearly four decades in the public spotlight, 25 of them on the national stage, Clinton is a known quantity. For all her warts, she is the candidate more likely to keep our nation safe, to protect American ideals and to work across the aisle to uphold the vital domestic institutions that rely on a competent, experienced president.

Hillary Clinton has spent years in the trenches doing the hard work needed to prepare herself to lead our nation. In this race, at this time, she deserves your vote.