Nate Silver is now projecting... Hillary has a better chance of winning Texas than Donald has of winning the Presidency.
Yes, but neither or really likely. Demographics wise, Texas is similar to Florida, but it's never a battleground state, and Florida always is.
Demos will change in Texas. It's only a matter of time. His article mentioned all the transplants moving to Texas for work from Northen states and Cali. Pair that along with second generation latino millennialsband you get purple real quick
Two polls showing a close race. Likely still a loss, but suddenly voters in Texas might matter a little. Texas going blue - or even being close - is a real problem for the GOP going forward and makes it more likely they reject the Trump wing of the party. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...rump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-6104.html University of Houston 10/7 - 10/15 1000 LV 3.0 41 38 4 1 Trump +3 WFAA-TV/SurveyUSA 10/10 - 10/12 638 LV 4.0 47 43 3 1 Trump +4
Yeah, my wife sees these things on Lawrence O'Donnell and gets excited, maybe thinking our votes will be something more than symbolic, but for a Democrat to win in Texas, EVERY person of color would have to register and actually vote. All while having a candidate like Trump for the other side. As Jon Stewart put it, "Being a Democrat in Texas is like being that dude who goes to the same bar for twenty years and hits on the same woman every night, KNOWING she's a lesbian." We will vote, but I'd be stunned (elated, overjoyed) if I knew I helped throw Texas to the electoral college for Hillary. And I don't really think it'll happen. Maybe in 4 years, but by then, who knows if the Republicans find a more palatable option (unless their party implodes thanks to Trump).
Harris, Bexar, Travis, and Dallas county voted blue last election. The reason why this is a red state is all those little towns like la grange voted overwhelming for Romney. What do these little cities like LaGrange even do to survive? What do they produce?
Don't forget the wealthy suburbs, that is where the political power on the right is firmly ensconced. Just in Houston and DFW: The Woodlands, Plano, Katy, Friendswood, all of mid and north DFW save Denton, Sugarland, Allen, to name a few. They are educated, have means and an axe to grind. If the suburbs flip, its all over for the GOP in its current configuration.
I've heard a rumor spreading around in that Texas town about some shack outside La Grange? You know what I'm talking about? Just let me know if you wanna go to that home out on the range. From what I understand, they got a lot of nice girls.
I will throw up these hands if you denigrate Hruska's in Ellinger. I do not think this is a harbinger of Texas' immediate political future. Democrats haven't won a statewide office in this state in over 20 years. What we see here are the ramifications of the GOP nominating the most horribly unqualified and repulsive candidate in modern American history; conservative voters refusing to say they'll vote from Trump in surveys, some minor defections to Gary Johnson and perhaps a few more energized Democrats responding. Our voter turnout is among the worst in the country and a Clinton victory would require depressed GOP turnout, waves of traditionally conservative suburban women voting against Trump and every minority voter in the state to voter for her. My only hope is that a narrow Trump victory in Texas, of all places, will show the GOP that they need to take governing seriously for the first time in eight years and stop taking for granted that even their few remaining bastions will keep putting up with their bullshit if the end result is Donald Trump.
The state isn't even close to to turning blue. Purple maybe but not blue. All the republicans have to do to cement the state in deep red is to run a moderate/compassionate republican like GW. Unfortunately, the tea baggers has polarized the party for now, but it won't last long.
What if Republican party split after this election into a wing nut party and a more moderate conservative party?
Its definitely trending towards purple, I agree. Example: as recently as a couple of years ago, Dallas had only one republican holding a county level office due to the solid blue voting block in the city. We already know that Houston, Austin, San Antonio and El Paso are blue within the city limits or at least purple. Its the suburbs, they hold the keys to the state. http://keranews.org/post/successes-and-setbacks-dallas-county-democratic-party
no doubt, just as it was a big "if" for Bill Clements to be the first republican governor since reconstruction which marked the flip to "red". Anne Richards was the dead cat bounce as she ran against Clayton Williams. Big shifts can happen quickly, but I hold no illusions that it will turn within the next four years.
Clinton winning Texas is like John Tower winning his Senate seat way back in the day. It didn't change the fact that Texas was solidly Democratic at the state level for another 20 years (really until Clements won the first time around). And after Tower won, Texas still voted Democratic at the presidential level. So its a nice accomplishment if Clinton wins but it won't change the fundamental character of the electorate. Texas has the numbers already to be competitive but has one of the worst voter participation rates in the US and the voters that do participate are skewed heavily to rural areas of the state. Hispanic turnout in particular is pretty bad and is one of the worst among border states.