Crap.
Ironically, 61% of Texans who voted in Tuesday's midterm elections specifically voted for somebody other than the winner, but an overly-fragmented field and lopsided resources made the difference. Bell, Strayhorn, and Friedman together spent about $20 million trying to unseat Perry, who had about $15 million to spend on his campaign alone, so you do the math; the divided field, rather than giving Texans more chances at change, only helped secure Perry's re-election. Perry, one of the few Republicans in the nation feeling fortunate right now, went into the election with about a 35% approval rating.
Speaking as an individual of limited means who donated significantly (for me) to the Bell Campaign, my frustration is also aimed at the lukewarm financial support Bell received from the Democratic Party. Maybe the Texas Dems were so used to losing that they decided to just save their money this time. Or maybe they'd been acting like overwhelmed invertebrates for so long they just forgot to bring their game to the election.
Whatever the reasons for his defeat, Chris Bell really deserved better. Bell's campaign was hurt more by by severely limited financial support than anything else, and it's always sad when we wind up accidentally electing a third-rate candidate largely because he had so much more money to spend, as well as the advantages of incumbency.
I'm not sure if we deserved better or not...
But I hope Chris Bell runs for Governor again. I admire his intelligence, his ethics, his values, his eloquence. And as soft-spoken and civilized as he always seems, he is no marshmallow; he was also the ONLY guy who had the backbone to bring the charges that eventually toppled the famously ethically-challenged Tom DeLay. And then-Representative Bell had ample reason to feel personally aggrieved, because in 2002, Tom DeLay engineered the Republican gerrymander of Texas congressional districts that caused Bell to lose his renomination.
As for those who stuck with their "Independent" candidates (actually Republicans who didn't have a chance within their own party, and who clearly had no chance of winning anyway), I can only assume that most of them never watched the news or read any papers, and therefore really didn't know that their candidates had no chance of winning.
Or maybe some people just didn't appreciate the reality of a plurality state like Texas, where there can be no runoff in a general election; whoever gets even one single vote more than anyone in the rest of the pack, wins, no matter how crowded or silly the ballot.
Some I saw interviewed on TV seemed to see their own votes as more of a vanity exercise of individual social expression, as opposed to the essential election components that they are. Whatever. But almost everyone (with the notable exception of Kinky Friedman, a legend in his own mind) realized by the time early voting started that neither of the Independents (again, just Republicans in Sour Grapes costumes) could possibly win. So why not throw support to Bell and have a real chance of actual change? Or to Perry if they couldn't support a Democrat.
Why blow a vote on a pointless gesture that guarantees the undeserved, undesired re-election of a governor whose approval ratings have hovered around 35% most of this year? Those who voted for independents obviously wanted change, but by refusing to face reality, they deliberately blew our only chance in years to take back Texas. (I'll bet a lot of them voted for Ralph Nader, too.)
Here is the sad evidence of exactly how Texas managed to re-elect a Governor that most of the electorate specifically did NOT want"
* Before Strayhorn's candidacy, who would have thought that the previously sweet, innocuous word "Grandmaw" would wind up sounding like fingernails raking a blackboard? (Sure hope it wears off by Christmas...)
No comments:
Post a Comment