The Jeffersonian: Politicks, Sports, and Culture

Monday, February 20, 2006

Sour Grapes?

Look for light posting (one or two a day) from here through March 7, maybe March 8. Depends on how bad the hangover is.

I've been really wanting to write about this for quite a while though, just haven't had the time. I, alongside alot of other people, received the two e-mails sent from surrogates of the Gammage campaign ripping Chris Bell for his voting record in Congress and for receiving the Dallas Morning News endorsement. Actually, let me clarify a few things first. You'll notice there's been a lack of Gov race coverage on this here blog, and that's for two reasons. One, lots of work. Two, I don't know very much about Gammage but his background is impressive. So even though Bell is my guy, I thought I'd take the high route this race and limit my posting to only advocating for Chris Bell.

I hadn't written a thing about FISA or votes against government-funded abortions or anything about all of Chris Bell's 'Republican' votes in Congress for the exact same reason. No freakin' time to research them. And we're gonna leave those particular subjects to other bloggers. But we will take on other tasks.

Like this idea that Bell is 'Republican-lite.' First off, let me tell you how extremely annoyed I am at how overused that phrase gets. Martin Frost, Chet Edwards, Chris Bell? NOT Republican-Lite. Henry Cuellar, Ralph Hall (before his 2004 conversion)? Republican-Lite. Let's get it right. How a guy who had a 100% rating from NARAL, a 90% rating from the NAACP, a 100% rating from the NEA, and a 93% rating from the AFL-CIO- all in 2003- could ever be called 'Republican-Lite' is beyond me. And if you're gonna talk about Republican-Lite, make sure your candidate- whose voting record is older than I am- has better ratings than the candidate your attacking.

Or this idea that it's now kosher to target the Dallas Morning News because they didn't endorse your candidate. Bell's been courting these boards for a year, he's pandering to them because he's Republican-Lite blah, blah, blah. Yet your candidate sat right beside him at every single one of these newspaper endorsement, and you'd be pimping these endorsements too if you're candidates won them. Stop being hypocrites. Your guy lost that endorsement, move on.

And yes, the Dallas Morning News endorses alot of Republicans. But over the past 18 months they've also endorsed Katy Hubener in HD-47, Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez (a Democratic, Lesbian, Latina- which in some influential circles in Dallas means she heading back to the dugout before even seeing a pitch), a no vote against Prop 2, Chet Edwards and Martin Frost. Willing to call a majority of those endorsements 'Republican-Lite'? Didn't think so.

Of course, Gammage hacks will also point to a Rasmussen poll showing a nonsignificant difference in support between Bell and Gammage and completely undermine a DMN poll show a clear statistical lead for Bell in the primary race. Maybe that's why the Gammage campaign has decided to go on the attack recently. For a campaign that was so intent on ripping into Rick Perry, Inc so early, their drastic change at the beginning of the month is something to be noticed. You go on the attack when you have ground to make up. You change strategy only a couple of weeks before early vote when it starts to get hairy.

I'll leave you with one question. One of Gammage's primary reasons for running is 'putting a firebrand on top of the ticket to draw the base out'. Our base is Latinos, African-Americans and a sprinkling of white liberals in urban areas. Gammage is an older white man. Bell is a middle-aged white man. What makes Gammage appreciably better than Bell in turning out the dumbasses in my family?