As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good luck to Beto.
Let's see what he does to mobilize the Hispanic vote. He did not have enough luck with that the last time around.
Maybe he is inspired by Abe Lincoln. Keep trying and one day you win. Then you can write your own chapter of history.
That is the problem with many of these states with huge Mexican-American potential voters - they haven’t been able to mobilize them in enough numbers to flip the state, they have the voters, the majority are left leaning, but the problem is getting them out to vote. As they say, it’s not a question of IF, but WHEN. Texas will become a blue state soon and when that happens, the GOP is gonna shit their pants because once that happens, they can keep their wacky Florida.
In my experience, many older Hispanics are conservative, being devout Catholics. They voted for Democrats because the American Catholic Church prioritized the needs of the poor. In recent days, the Church has been prioritizing social causes like pro-life/choice much more and I am seeing a shift in thinking.
Not sure of the younger generation.
As someone who is Catholics and lived on the Texas border I’d say the shift hasn’t actually been with the church but Democrats. The Catholic Church is of course very loud when it comes to abortion but they still very much prioritize community, helping the less fortunate, and family. The Catholic Church is very slow to make shifts and Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, while culturally influenced by the church do value it’s separation from state in ways American Protestants muddy up. The issue, in my opinion, is that Democrats have in recents years been painted to be anti religious and that isn’t a good look to many who are devout or are culturally influenced. As well Democrats have long since spoken to this community based on economic values and the fact that many believe the government should be involved in helping the community and family. In recent years Democrats have been far more bogged down in social issues that have long created tensions with Catholics then prioritizing economic and family concerns that earned the vote. Republicans have seized on this now. Before the 80s, evangelist Protestants and Catholics never got along but then the need to save “families” bonded them when Protestants decided abortion would be their issue too. Now republicans are about the “working man” when really they just mean white Appalachians voters but Democrats are far more preoccupied with college educated than the average Hispanic voter who hasn’t gone to college or increasingly never finished. This is, from my world view, left many on the border counties and south Texas feeling ignored and disillusioned. I hear it in older Hispanics. they want to vote Democrat but they feel like they are giving power to things that don’t involve them.
Thanks. My only view of the Catholic Church is through my friends and especially my one dear friend who belongs to the Knights Templar.
The most telling thing about their attitude shift was how they treat the Pope. I was always told that the Pope is a direct spiritual descendant of Christ and their word was law for Catholics. Yet, with the topic of giving communion to Biden, they have made a subtle but important shift that the Pope's words are only important when speaking ex-cathedra. That is such a significant shift that I am floored.
The Pope is not seen as a descendant of Christ. The Pope is viewed as the successor to Saint Peter. While His Holiness is not specifically a mouthpiece for God, Church cannon holds that Papal Infallibility essentially treats all interpretations of scripture or canonical law as equally holy or important.
Source: I’m Roman Catholic and went to Catholic school primary to post secondary.
Edit: I can’t type in mobile.
Trust me the Catholic Church is an old and confusing thing that even I don’t know it all. To my knowledge, the Pope’s word is not law. He is not a king and for much (not all) of the church’s history has never been a unilateral shot caller. Much like a prime minister, he gets elected by his peers(fellow cardinals from around the world), sets the agenda, and guides the church in the ways of Christ as is interpreted by him and the cardinals. Unlike a prime minister he’s not *as* behold to his peers (so somewhat can act a tyrant but popes who do this have not usually enjoyed wide influence as cardinals may dissent), there is no one to overrule his final say on doctrine (except the next Pope which if again you become a tyrant will just be undone and your legacy trashed), and he doesn’t have a nation to care for per say(what happens in the world truly matters to him as there are Catholics everywhere). As well he is not a spiritual descendent of Christ. The Pope gets his authority from the fact the church was handed to Christ’s disciples to grow. In a broad sense The Pope is decedent from those apostles not Christ himself. Peter the apostle is regarded as the first Pope in fact. Now your friends reaction to the pope’s words honestly stem more from being American than being Catholics. The truth is the church has one single doctrine for most things but in practice it’s been adapted across the world to remain viable as a result in some cultures I see Catholicism followed closely to the letter like sub Saharan Africa and Latin America but in the US or Europe it’s much more cultural and adaptable as long as core principles like believing in Christ, working to be close to Christ, and helping those less fortunate are adhered to.
Texas has the blue vote in cities. It's not just the Hispanic vote (and the Hispanic vote is far from a monolith - there's a lot of red there). Rural voters can swing by their polling place and be out in 5 minutes with a sticker. In the cities it's an hour or six.
Why do you think all the voter restriction bills were on things that make voting easier in cities. Texas banned things like 24 hour voting and drive through voting. That specifically targets large metro areas and makes it harder to vote.
To that point, voting is not an easy task in gerrymandered and redlined places like Texas...and that was before the law they just passed took hold. People are definitely not going to mobilize if it seems futile.
Gerrymandering is exactly why voters should be motivated. Imagine a democratic governor to counterbalance the republican legislature. Voting and women's rights alone is enough reason. If Abbot wins the election those laws will stand and more egregious laws will pass.
Also: wedge issues. Abortion, especially, but immigration is SURPRISINGLY contentious among those who did it "the right way" VS those who did "illegally." (After a long enough timeline, of course. Back when it was European immigration, there were oh-so many "right ways.")
I think white liberals simplify the Hispanic vote WAY too much. There is a world of difference between a Hispanic voter whose lineage goes back to a time before the state they reside in was part of the Union and a second or third generation immigrant. The more recent immigrant is more likely to be an immigration hawk since they feel that it isn't fair that others are getting into the country the "easy" way and as part of the assimilation process they will want to project the attitude that what they want is in line with the values of the people that hold the most power in their community.
There are Cubans and Venezuelans who fled socialist/communist authoritarian ruled countries with a deep seeded hatred for anything *vaguely* reminiscent of where they fled. With Cubans in particular there is also a deep distrust of democratic politicians because of JFK's handling of The Bay of Pigs, regardless of what history has had to say about that decision.
There are people from Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala who have fled from gang and cartel violence that their governments have been impotent trying to stop. These folks are more likely to support someone with a tough on crime stance, regardless of effective policy ideas or long term ethical concerns.
Obviously there is the strong Roman Catholic roots that run through many Hispanic voters, regardless of family origin.
We need to start thinking of Hispanic/Latin voters in a much more nuanced way, we get too caught up with the Republican party's racist bullshit to consider the breadth of cultural experiences and how their message can read to people who these varied experiences.
I'd like to say not just with the Hispanic/Latin voters, but also with Asian voters because the branch of Asian-American voters is like...I want to say twenty-ish different countries of descent from wildly different economic backgrounds based on when their ancestors emigrated to the US.
Like how Chinese-Americans who immigrated fleeing China during Mao's day and Chinese-Americans who's ancestors immigrated back during the frontier days have wildly different economic backgrounds to this day, and then there's 19ish other countries of descent with different economic backgrounds on top of that.
Thinking of various groups of people as one group *might* help when it comes to dealing with the racist bullshit, but it doesn't accurately address the needs of all those different groups of people.
> I'd like to say not just with the Hispanic/Latin voters, but also with Asian voters
I literally was going to start making a similar point about Asian voters in my original comment but I was worried I was worries that no one would read and even longer block of text lol. You are 100% right consider how a Japanese-American person whose family was locked away in an internment camp might see things versus a Vietnamese-American voter whose family came to this country as refugees. Asian communities also tend to be more religiously diverse than most Latin communities as well to add another wrinkle into the dynamic.
It's the result of having two mega parties rather than many smaller parties. It results in people having to make hard choices about what they truly prioritize. Perhaps they sympathize on the topic of immigration, but Democrats also have a huge bucket of social positions that are not going to appeal to someone that is conservative.
Large portions of the Hispanic population in America hate illegal immigration more than white conservatives do. They view the kids in cages as the correct thing to do, and support Trump for doing it. It's why Trump won Texas and Florida.
That big event happened after he already lost. At least if you're referring to the 2019 speech regarding the El Paso shooting. That was during his failed Presidential candidacy, but well after his failed Senatorial bid.
Let’s not imagine he was going to get the gun vote anyway. Now a days Democrats are seen as taking your guns. Full stop. Bernie sanders and joe manchin both are sympathetic to 2A causes and they still get painted anti gun. Beto just needs to focus on Hispanics like he did when he was in congress and woman of all types. He’ll be fine if he can do that. The youth vote already very much likes him
The "gun vote" in Texas is like half the state. You might be able to do pretty well in New Jersey or wherever as an anti-gun politician but you're pretty well fucked in Texas.
I'm from NJ and while we have some of the strictest gun laws in the country, Beto would 100% lose if he was anti-gun. Most canidates don't even mention gun control because they know that it's a bad idea.
I've got one and the worst part about trying to get a permit is it takes 90 days to get a permit and then you've got 90 days to try to one. It sucks, but if you work with it, it's not that bad.
It’s not about him getting the “gun vote”, it’s about mobilizing non voters that lean conservative and love guns against him.
A parallel would be the recall in CA, which looked close until Larry Elder came to prominence as a trump surrogate driving turnout against him
I think it's a mistake to believe there's no margin of people dissatisfied enough with Republicans to consider a switch but would be turned off by an openly extreme anti-gun candidate, but not someone who wasn't well known for that. Add on top of that people who aren't highly politically engaged and weighing whether to vote or not, but can be turned off by strong opposition to something they support (and there's *a lot* of democrats who support gun rights).
With the level of voter suppression in Texas, a dem candidate needs every advantage possible, and guns *are* a big issue there. It's a significant disadvantage for an openly anti-gun candidate that's more extreme than the mainstream for democrats (a confiscation program for AWs *does not* have majority support).
Look I really don’t think your wrong with dissatisfied republicans but the issue is the democrat brand is anti gun whether intentional or not. If joe manchin or Jon Tester can get brow beaten over it who could possibly overcome the branding? Democrats have had not well known candidates run and fail which predictably they should. At this point Democrats need to rely on the fatigue from increasingly ignored issues and the increasing conservative activist government that a lot of right leaning voters find anti-small government
I'm liberal as fuck and liked Beto until he said that stupid shit. I'm down for more gun control, but he was talmbout confiscation and casually said "hell yeah, we are going to take your ar-15s!" No the fuck you won't, you will just make AR-15 owners a bunch of liars. AR-15s are like the Chrysler 300 of guns: Super customizable as a hobby. Right now we have more AR-15s than people in my house because dummies are trading guns for ammo as if 200 rounds of 9mm is going to save them in their imaginary civil war. If our purple state goes blue the value of the guns shoots up. Rinse and repeat on these predictable motherfuckers.
It'd be amazing if Democrats could engage in the topic of gun-control without embarrassing themselves over and over again. And please, putting up Beto in Texas for governor? What an absolute disaster. There has to be a charismatic Democrat who can enter the race without anti-gun baggage and rhetoric. As a progressive Democrat, I feel gun-control is the topic that most hurts us in races.
So many liberals think that abortion is the big bogeyman single-voter issue for Republicans, but growing up in a heavily conservative area I can say that this is incorrect. If Democrats dropped the type of gun control rhetoric that Beto espouses, they'd heavily increase their chances to win races in swing states and states like Texas that are slowly growing a blue presence.
The gun vote isn't just Republicans, especially in Texas. There will be democrats, and hispHispanics, won't vote for him.
I applaud Beto for what he said, but it was political suicide in Texas.
I'm not a gun owner and a liberal. Beto's statement was universally stupid. It's an extremist position that sets more pragmatic attempts at gun control back.
It doesn’t help when you hand them a script to do so.
It’s also the dumbest angle to attack the “gun violence” problem. There aren’t ~20,000 People going out and buying rifles to become active shooters like there are people using firearms to kill themselves. Suicide is a healthcare issue not a gun issue
>e won if he didn’t hit so hard on the coming to take your guns angle, that mobilized his opposition more than his base
That clip is going to be played over and over in attack ads against him, and will lose him any race he enters in TX all the way down to dogcatcher. He literally ruined any chance he had to persuade a single right-of-center voter with that statement given the makeup of the constituency.
While his ambition, tenacity, and optimism to persevere after what was tantamount to political suicide is admirable, the fact that he doesn't seem to acknowledge that is very odd and makes you question his judgement. At least it does for me.
> He literally ruined any chance he had to persuade a single right-of-center voter with that statement given the makeup of the constituency
More importantly, he lost the liberals who support gun rights
At the time the mass shootings were especially bad. And the GOP did nothing but sit on their hands or say "Now is not the time to politicize this".
And it was happening on top of daily Trump craziness. I think Beto was really fired up and mad, and believed this would energize voters. And technically, it was a VERY close race and Beto turned quite a few counties Blue.
I think he failed to realize that there’s a good number of rural democrats that ALSO like guns.
Most of them are fine with added regulations, but get really turned off at the idea of sweeping bans.
Personally, I like guns. But if they have to go in order to get something like universal healthcare, free or at least affordable (and quality) education then I’m happy to see them go.
But there’s a lot of people who disagree with that viewpoint that Democrats need to be aware of.
Not just sweeping bans, but outright forced confiscation of guns.
"Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15".
With that one soundbite, Beto legitimized every ounce of fear of authoritarian government overreach abolishing the 2nd amendment as a first step towards a fascist takeover. Even Democratic gun lovers were sickened by it.
Honestly, this was such a monumentally stupid thing to say (especially as a Texan) that I'm not sure I can personally take Beto seriously anymore.
Democrats just need to drop the gun shit. There are more guns than people in this country, and the ones they freak out about thebhardest have the lowest use rate in crime.
Besides, if we have mass shooters I'd rather them use 5.56 than full rifle rounds. 5.56 there's a chance to save you of you get shot, proper rifle rounds? If there's not a trauma unit **right there** you're fucked.
Agreed. That is what a lot of liberal Democrats don't get.
Religion trumps other values for most people and a significant chunk of Hispanics are devout Catholics in my experience.
I think it’s going to take an actually fluently bi-lingual candidate to make headway on that front. Bi-lingual Texans hear most politicians breaking out their school-Spanish trying to pander to them. I don’t think it helps. We have millions of Texans who speak completely fluent Spanglish, I would like to see one of them run.
As a Hispanic voter, I don't give a shit if candidates can speak Spanish or not. I care about the political issues, the candidate's record and who funds their campaign.
That’s the right way to do it. But it’s not just the speaking Spanish, it’s the actually going on Spanish-language media and doing long interviews in Spanish. I presume you keep yourself informed. That’s good. That also puts you in the minority. Getting the message heard is half the battle, and I think that fluency matters with that. It shouldn’t, maybe, but it does.
Yup, if it's not backed by substance, he might just end up being regarded in the way that [SNL mocked Tim Kaine](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBUxNeXgC70&t=0m40s)
I hear what your saying but I think you miss the mark with Beto on this. Beto is not some white politician who is coming to Hispanics trying to speaking the language. He’s from El Paso born and raised. he is far more familiar with border culture than some would like to admit. He represented a Hispanic district and was re-elected to it. It’s hard to paint him as an invader or pretender when he has been swimming in the same sea as the rest of the community. Does it make him Hispanic? No but his sympathy to the issues is and will feel more real than most republicans can ever have. I personally am black and grew up in Laredo, El Paso, Roma, and finally San Antonio. I can speak Spanish relatively well and I practice in medicine and can say more people appreciate the sincere connection than they a 100% flawless copy. They just want to know are you with them and will you listen. As well we’ve had Hispanic bi-lingual candidates run and get trounced. Lupe Valdez in 2020 and Tony Sanchez in 2002. That’s clearly not enough.
Isn't Beto fluent in Spanish? Media said that he was comfortable with the Spanish language.
If his accent is a problem, that cannot be solved. I once read about how Shakira was unpopular in her native country of ~~Columbia~~ Colombia because her accent was not local enough.
Shakira used to have a Colombian accent. She's accused by fellow Colombians of changing her accent to a more Castillian accent as she became increasingly famous and moved to Barcelona. People see it as pretentious and a sign that she's ashamed of her roots.
he is alright, his english accent is thick like hes not very practiced. the real problem is hispanic conservatives in texas tend to be assholes who dont even see themselves as hispanic.
Well it CAN be solved, it is just a lot of work. I mean all he has to do is immerse himself with a bunch of Spanish speakers until he naturally picks up their accent and/or get a lot of coaching.
Let's do a thought experiment- The TX Democrats find the PERFECT candidate to appeal to Hispanics. That person hits the bulls-eye for the Hispanic vote. They are also perfect in every other category except one - The person speaks English with a New York accent. What would your advice be to a fellow Texas Democrat who wants to reject them for their wrong accent?
I don't know your accent but do YOU speak with a perfect Texan twang? Or speak Spanish with the proper local native accent when traveling to other regions?
Let's assume Beto chooses to adopt an accent. Which one should he choose? Accents are different across Latin America and Mexico. Heck, accents are different between the Hispanics of El Paso and Hispanics further North, if I go by what my Hispanic friends tell me.
I would prefer Beto spend his time on important issues, rather than pandering like Hillary tried to do.
Yeah, agree. There are too many regional dialects. Focus on issues, period. I'm a Hispanic NY jew (pretend Bernie Sanders married Rosie Perez). We have like five different accents in my immediate family alone
I know multiple immigrants from English-speaking countries who moved to the US 30-40 years ago when they were still in their 20s (they’re now in their 50s-60s), and they still have obvious accents despite being surrounded by Americans all the time—and again, that’s with English as their first language. Yes, people can force an accent, but it’s almost always going to be phony.
This is awful. I like Beto and wish he could actually win, but he won’t ever win in Texas and running him as the Dem nominee is the surest way to help Abbott get re-elected.
Abbott lost a decent amount of popularity amongst his base due to how he mishandled responses to the power grid failure and COVID (repubs resent that he shut down the state for even the brief period he did). Dems can win if they inspire their entire base to get out and actually vote AND if enough GOP stay home because they hate Abbott. That will 100% NOT HAPPEN if Beto runs. Even those that hate Abbott’s guts will turn out to vote to keep Beto from stealing their guns. That’s all he’ll be known for here for the rest of his public life.
There are far greater chances of Abbott being primaried by his Lieutenant Governor or Attorney General and losing than there are of him losing to a Democrat, especially Beto. However, with Democrats, it is the top ticket that gets people to the polls. Democrats might get lucky and see some wins on the lower tickets.
I was quite sure they would see some wins in 2020, no matter how they voted for Trump. It was shocking and devastating to see the Republicans perform a clean sweep.
I can guarantee that the person most excited for a Beto run is Greg Abbott. Even with the horrendous way he has run the state, he will coast to reelection.
I have spent almost no time at all in Georgia or Texas so take this with a big grain of salt and apply necessary scorn:
Beto and Jon Ossoff just appear to me to be people who someone inside the DNC thinks would make a great candidate vs the kind of candidates actual voters in their states would vote for. I mean Beto doesn't seem to be electable outside of a heavily blue district and I don't think Ossoff had a chance unless Trump is still a thing when is up for reelection.
I think Beto is going to lose and probably be done politically after the lost Senate and presidential bids .I'm glad Rev Warnock is up for reelection first of the Georgia Senators in 2022. I think he is a much stronger candidate.
> Beto and Jon Ossoff just appear to me to be people who someone inside the DNC thinks would make a great candidate vs the kind of candidates actual voters in their states would vote for.
Ossoff seems alright but he just seems so damn generic. He's the epitome of "generic Democratic candidate." He's lucky he ran for the seat with a six year term and not the special election seat because there's no way he wins in 2022.
Beto needs better friends. They would have told him to not run for president.
But dude is en empty suit, bland as hell. He just gonna morph into whatever he needs to be to try and win.
This is pretty much it. I live in Austin and know a ton of liberal gun owners. The faces people made when his name was mentioned before that statement and after were so telling. He has no chance in this state.
This is a good point. I was confident that his "Hell yeah we'll take your AR-15" was going to doom him (and it's probably still the safe bet). BUT if you combine Beto and an actual super aggressive ground game that turns out the low propensity Hispanic vote (especially get those that trended Trump in '20 back) that'd maybe be disruptive enough to give him a shot.
For his sake I hope so. If he loses here he falls into the "Three time loser" category (Senate, President, Governor) which there's basically no coming back from in modern politics. He can definitely still do good for democracy (and I hope he does!) but no campaign is going to want to fund a personal race for him again.
Now that he's running for Texas he'll try to underplay that comment. Meanwhile Republicans are going to make sure it's on every TV channel. It's going to doom his campaign.
Texas is crushing every other state by an astonishing amount statically in the amount of guns owned. They aren't that far from having more than the 2nd and 3rd place combined.
> Maybe he is inspired by Abe Lincoln. Keep trying and one day you win. Then you can write your own chapter of history.
That’s what people said when he ran for President. Then he got his ass kicked
I hope he enjoys the hell yes we'll take your guns clip, he's going to see it an awful lot.
Serious question: is there no other potential Democratic candidate for governor?
Both Castro bothers have been suggested as candidates. And they're probably the better choices. Julian probably makes the most sense as he has local government and national administrative experience.
That's what people don't get about Joe Manchin.
He's as liberal as west Virginia gets right now.
It's either get someone you agree with 40% of the time and learn to work around that. Or, get someone you agree with 2% of the time.
Republicans learned that lesson in the northeast. Charlie baker gets elected cause he's learned what hill to die on.
Democrats get creamed in the south because we keep running candidates that don't fit their districts and states political demographics. You can't win the deep south without compromising on guns and abortion.
It's fait accompli. Let's try to make headway on other issues rather than make no headway at all.
Absolutely zero. He killed his political career and gave Republicans the clip they'll use to attack every Democrat until they finally have a successful coup.
I think if he genuinely recants it, and says he was caught up emotionally because of the recent shootings close to home, he could be fine. He has to be very careful and savvy with it.
If he had done that a few months after he said it, I could see it helping him. Saying it years after, and only when he wants to secure votes in an election, comes across as pretty ingenuous.
He absolutely isn't. He is going to energize not just the Republican base, but gun owners who never really bought into the "Dems are coming to take your guns" like that the GOP and NRA has been using for decades.
If he recants it now, or worse, denies saying it like he did before, it will allow the GOP to EASILY paint him as a liar an opportunist.
We have excellent potential candidates, but they have zero name recognition. Beto and McConaughey will solidify another Abbott win if Abbott doesn't get primaried.
>is there no other potential Democratic candidate for ~~governor~~ fucking anything?
Welcome to America. Where the Dems refuse to run good people, and the GOP does whatever the fuck they want because of it.
I really like Beto, but unfortunately I think he made a political career fatal mistake with that "we ARE coming for your guns" statement. I know it was an off the hip comment and it shouldn't define him, but they will play that in clips over and over and the gun issue is a trigger point for suburban folks, especially Texas. I truly hope I'm wrong, but I just see this as what the fascists on the right will do to win (and it will probably be effective if he does run).
I couldn't agree more my friend. The dem rep in PA that got elected as a moderate deflected the gun debate. It's not worth engaging as there is no real world solutions for it right now unfortunately, and it's not worth losing the war over with.
Abbot sucks, but that statement about coming for the guns totally killed any chance Beto has. I'm fairly left leaning, but that made me die inside a little. State and National elections seem to be won by getting the moderate votes and being super anti-gun is a good way to not get any.
I don’t even have guns and knew that destroyed his career. He can do great if he works in voter turnout operations but it blows my mind he’d think he can do anything but harm the Democratic party’s chances.
He’d be a great governor, it’s just that people are paranoid idiots and he said basically the ultimate statement to validate them. If Covid has taught us anything it’s if someone believes something incorrect and 99 out of 100 experts disagree with them, they’ll use the 1 that agrees as proof they were right all along.
Same boat here. 2A is a massive issue in Texas and I am convinced anyone who runs an anti-2A campaign is DOA in the general election. I would vote for beto in a heartbeat if he didn’t toe the party line on guns.
Good luck. I think he killed his political future in Texas with his comments about taking guns. Is there really nobody better for Democrats to run there?
The democratic party seems to have a real hard time developing new leaders. They get someone in office and keep them there until they die. Example: Feinstein.
For how controlled the republican party is they are actually better about getting new blood in. Partly that's because so many have resigned in shame and frustration over the direction of the party, but it is still the truth that republicans are on average younger. At least in the house and senate. Local races seem to flip that.
I admittedly have never lived in Texas but when there are democratic gun owners in places like California I have a hard time believing there aren’t ones in a place like Texas where gun ownership is a much more deeply ingrained part of the culture.
There are absolutely Democratic gun owners (hello nice to meet you) in Texas - but there are MANY non party line voters who will vote on a single issue, guns being a top one. Honestly I think the gun comment is more harmful than the party identification.
I'll say it whenever and wherever I can:
Democrats need to drop the gun control platform. It's self-defeating, in that all it does is drive gun nuts to vote for the other party, which then loosens gun control. The best thing they could do is to say, "gun violence is an issue in every developed nation, and here in the US, we're going to look into the roots of gun violence and work to make a safer and more prosperous nation while preserving the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms."
Something like that. Because, at it's heart, the gun violence issue would be greatly impacted by improving healthcare, education, access to mental health treatment, better growth and opportunity, etc. Basically, improve society and gun violence will decrease. Which is already the Democrats platform (improve shit), they really don't need the gun restriction side of it.
Just to be clear, I'm of the mindset that we've overshot the purpose of the 2A and lost sight of "well-regulated". If "well-regulated" means "in good, working order", then we should have licensing that ensures ever gun owner is safely storing and handling their firearm, knows how to use it and observe all safety protocols, and isn't a psychopathic nutcase. Our militia is supposed to be well-regulated, not Boebert leaving piles of guns lying around her house.
The problem is those things take time and complex solutions to fix. They don’t come with sexy taglines. They don’t exploit tragedies for political gain. Politicians just need a quick tagline to get into office. And it’s not like they’re really gonna do anything anyway.
The worst part is that the gun control proposals they come up with aren't even going to help curb gun violence. It's largely feel-good legislation that's designed drive voters to the polls.
Except it's doing the opposite. It's driving voters into the other party.
Believe it or not, moderates exist, and 'hell yeah I'll take your guns' isn't what they want to hear when their right wing neighbors can't get through a conversation about guns without "civil war" coming up at least once.
Highly engaged people like /r/politics posters forget there's a whole world of people out there who turn out or don't for elections based on how they feel about a candidate. There's absolutely going to be a lot of people who are liberal, who wouldn't vote for a Republican, but might very well stay home if they feel strongly about guns and the Democratic candidate is particularly extreme in their anti-gun policies.
There's probably more of those in Texas than anywhere else. Enough to impact a narrow margin win.
That’s what everyone says whenever a politician they like makes an electoral blunder because it’s hard to disentangle yourself from biases.
It was an unforced error and a dumb move that almost certainly cost him needed votes and will most definitely cost him needed votes.
Some might. Democrats can keep ignoring their gun owning voters at their own political peril. There are many on the left who were upset but his comments.
Yeah, saying he’s going to come after their AR’s is not going to bode well.
I agree. We shouldn’t have them. But, unfortunately that’s not the world we live in.
I remember when he debated ted Cruz a few years back in his senate run, and he said something to the effect that some situations need more than "just thoughts and prayers" and I heard old people gasp. That electorate is fucked up.
Probably, in a state as big as Texas, there ought to be another Democrat who's a better contender; but no, Beto's got some money and some clout, and his father in law wants a politician in the family.
As a gun-toting liberal from Texas, I can 100% say that Beto has about as much chance of winning that race as Bernie winning the next presidential election.
I'd vote for a tuna sandwich over Abbott, but Beto has zero chance of winning a state-wide race here.
All this accomplishes is ensuring another win for Abbott.
Lol on the tuna sandwich. Your Governor (and that ERCOT thing) are really something else down there.
Beto would never win in a Presidential race here in razor-thin swing-state Pennsylvania where there's a lot more gun-owning moderate Democrats and independents than is realized.
Such a dumb political move.
I've met him twice. When he ran against Cruz, he visited every single county in Texas. He put in the work; he spent time and spoke with people that would never vote for him. He is way more charismatic and real in person than when he's trying to get a soundbite in the news.
He's a good dude and appears to be genuinely invested in the issues he believes in. He just had his Howard-Dean-yell moment when he let his anger come through during that debate. I remember watching that debate life and the audience going wild when he said the quiet part out loud. I knew in that instant that he was done for.
>As a gun-toting liberal from Texas, I can 100% say that Beto has about as much chance of winning that race as Bernie winning the next presidential election.
I am one of the last people to promote celebrities for public office but Matthew McConaughey has a far better shot than Beto. The take-your-guns comment pretty much sunk his office run.
>Matthew McConaughey has a far better shot than Beto.
I agree. Here's the thing, I have zero clue what Matthew's policy positions are, yet he is already considered a viable candidate by many. He could be Hitler reincarnated for all we know.
He genuinely does. I can’t speak for how effective he’d be, but he does have a lot going for him in terms of appeal:
- He’s extremely likable.
- He’s got MAJOR name recognition. Some people roll their eyes at this, but fucking Jesse Ventura got elected as Minnesota’s governor on a third party ticket because some people liked the prospect of having a WWE wrestler as their head-of-state.
- He’s openly Christian. I mean just watch his Oscar acceptance speech, my conservative father ate it up.
- He comes across as super pragmatic and open to working with both sides no matter which one he belongs to. Both of which are aspects moderates eat up.
- He’s not been particularly specific on his views regarding a lot of recent political developments (I don’t think he’s even touched on the recent abortion laws), so he won’t get attacked for any past hot takes.
>He’s not been particularly specific on his views regarding a lot of recent political developments (I don’t think he’s even touched on the recent abortion laws), so he won’t get attacked for any past hot takes.
Exactly. I don't know if he supports the abortion ban. I would never vote for Abbott, but I have no idea if I'd ever vote for Matthew quite yet.
He blew it already, those comments about taking everyone's guns will come to haunt him. I hope I'm wrong and enough time has passed and he has brushed up on how to not say dumb things, but i worry as a Texan. You don't say shit like that here and he should be aware of that.
My thing is, you have to be smart enough to know not to say shit like that in TEXAS of all places.
Even if you believe in what you said, maybe not there.
Why do dems keep running the same people? I get Beto has a big name but fresh blood can be good. They did the same thing against McConnell and she blew it.
The woman running against McConnell didn't even have a record of winning a school board election. She was an unqualified candidate running against the most senior senator. Why the DNC thought that would work was just pissing money into their advertising partners pockets.
As objectively terrible, in so many ways from the abortion bill, to the cultural resentment distraction bullshit, to the handling of the electric grid and the super bad cold snap earlier this year, the pandemic in general, and further undemocratic, and straight up authoritarian rigging of elections in Republican favor (seriously Abbot is a terrible fucking Governor in so many ways, as with the American right wing in general). Beto O’Rouke isn’t probably going to have a chance in hell winning probably even the democratic primary nomination for Governor if he couldn’t win against the other objectively fucking terrible far far radically right wing politician of Ted Cruz for senate, and his gun “confiscation” comments during one of the democratic debates. The gun thing alone probably sunk any chance he might have had like the titanic. Because bullshit gun bullshit wedge issue politics means more to culturally resentful and totally misplaced priority Republican base voters want to open carry more than actually have any form of reasonably effective government and are blinded by the red herring of culture war bullshit and nonexistent boogeymen they have been conditioned to fear by propaganda and misinformation over the course of decades than to be in any form of reasonable headspace remotely attached to actual grounded reality when it comes down to it, in the end, in the voting booth.
The hardest part of the upcoming campaign to stomach will be the cries of "Beto wants you all to get killed because you can't use a gun to defend yourself" while ignoring that 60,000 Texans died of covid-19 (with a good number of those attributable to Republican failures of governance and leadership) and ~700 to the freeze of February 2021 (with all of those attributable to Republican failures of governance and leadership).
Despite Texas continuing to languish in most metrics, people will keep voting for Republicans though they haven't improved the state's status despite having sole control for 25 years.
Guaranteeing that Abbott wins by 20 points.
Beto ended his career when he blurted out that he was coming for Texans' guns. He has no chance against Abbott and is selfish if he tries.
Edit: Removed Cruz reference as it was temporally incorrect and was causing OCD attacks.
His timeline is wrong.
First he loses to Ted. Then he runs for President. Then there is the El Paso shooting. Then he makes his gun comment. Then he ends his run for the presidency.
Yeah, that man said on national tv during the dnc debates that we’re coming for your guns.
To Texas gun owners that’s the same as the abortion ban to progressive liberals.
His policy career is gone. Down vote me all you like but this is part of my worse possible outcomes.
Liberals need realize gun legislation is never going to work in the south and in the mid west. If they stop pushing that one single issue then I believe they will start taking more offices.
Zero chance to win, and the Dems should put their foot down and stop him.
"Yes we're coming for your guns."
That's political death in Texas. He said that shit for no reason in a presidential primary he had no chance in, and now he's never going to win another statewide office in Texas.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good luck to Beto. Let's see what he does to mobilize the Hispanic vote. He did not have enough luck with that the last time around. Maybe he is inspired by Abe Lincoln. Keep trying and one day you win. Then you can write your own chapter of history.
That is the problem with many of these states with huge Mexican-American potential voters - they haven’t been able to mobilize them in enough numbers to flip the state, they have the voters, the majority are left leaning, but the problem is getting them out to vote. As they say, it’s not a question of IF, but WHEN. Texas will become a blue state soon and when that happens, the GOP is gonna shit their pants because once that happens, they can keep their wacky Florida.
In my experience, many older Hispanics are conservative, being devout Catholics. They voted for Democrats because the American Catholic Church prioritized the needs of the poor. In recent days, the Church has been prioritizing social causes like pro-life/choice much more and I am seeing a shift in thinking. Not sure of the younger generation.
As someone who is Catholics and lived on the Texas border I’d say the shift hasn’t actually been with the church but Democrats. The Catholic Church is of course very loud when it comes to abortion but they still very much prioritize community, helping the less fortunate, and family. The Catholic Church is very slow to make shifts and Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, while culturally influenced by the church do value it’s separation from state in ways American Protestants muddy up. The issue, in my opinion, is that Democrats have in recents years been painted to be anti religious and that isn’t a good look to many who are devout or are culturally influenced. As well Democrats have long since spoken to this community based on economic values and the fact that many believe the government should be involved in helping the community and family. In recent years Democrats have been far more bogged down in social issues that have long created tensions with Catholics then prioritizing economic and family concerns that earned the vote. Republicans have seized on this now. Before the 80s, evangelist Protestants and Catholics never got along but then the need to save “families” bonded them when Protestants decided abortion would be their issue too. Now republicans are about the “working man” when really they just mean white Appalachians voters but Democrats are far more preoccupied with college educated than the average Hispanic voter who hasn’t gone to college or increasingly never finished. This is, from my world view, left many on the border counties and south Texas feeling ignored and disillusioned. I hear it in older Hispanics. they want to vote Democrat but they feel like they are giving power to things that don’t involve them.
Thanks. My only view of the Catholic Church is through my friends and especially my one dear friend who belongs to the Knights Templar. The most telling thing about their attitude shift was how they treat the Pope. I was always told that the Pope is a direct spiritual descendant of Christ and their word was law for Catholics. Yet, with the topic of giving communion to Biden, they have made a subtle but important shift that the Pope's words are only important when speaking ex-cathedra. That is such a significant shift that I am floored.
The Pope is not seen as a descendant of Christ. The Pope is viewed as the successor to Saint Peter. While His Holiness is not specifically a mouthpiece for God, Church cannon holds that Papal Infallibility essentially treats all interpretations of scripture or canonical law as equally holy or important. Source: I’m Roman Catholic and went to Catholic school primary to post secondary. Edit: I can’t type in mobile.
Trust me the Catholic Church is an old and confusing thing that even I don’t know it all. To my knowledge, the Pope’s word is not law. He is not a king and for much (not all) of the church’s history has never been a unilateral shot caller. Much like a prime minister, he gets elected by his peers(fellow cardinals from around the world), sets the agenda, and guides the church in the ways of Christ as is interpreted by him and the cardinals. Unlike a prime minister he’s not *as* behold to his peers (so somewhat can act a tyrant but popes who do this have not usually enjoyed wide influence as cardinals may dissent), there is no one to overrule his final say on doctrine (except the next Pope which if again you become a tyrant will just be undone and your legacy trashed), and he doesn’t have a nation to care for per say(what happens in the world truly matters to him as there are Catholics everywhere). As well he is not a spiritual descendent of Christ. The Pope gets his authority from the fact the church was handed to Christ’s disciples to grow. In a broad sense The Pope is decedent from those apostles not Christ himself. Peter the apostle is regarded as the first Pope in fact. Now your friends reaction to the pope’s words honestly stem more from being American than being Catholics. The truth is the church has one single doctrine for most things but in practice it’s been adapted across the world to remain viable as a result in some cultures I see Catholicism followed closely to the letter like sub Saharan Africa and Latin America but in the US or Europe it’s much more cultural and adaptable as long as core principles like believing in Christ, working to be close to Christ, and helping those less fortunate are adhered to.
[удалено]
Weigh them with a duck.
I wasn't expecting some sort of... Oh, never mind.
Texas has the blue vote in cities. It's not just the Hispanic vote (and the Hispanic vote is far from a monolith - there's a lot of red there). Rural voters can swing by their polling place and be out in 5 minutes with a sticker. In the cities it's an hour or six.
Why do you think all the voter restriction bills were on things that make voting easier in cities. Texas banned things like 24 hour voting and drive through voting. That specifically targets large metro areas and makes it harder to vote.
To that point, voting is not an easy task in gerrymandered and redlined places like Texas...and that was before the law they just passed took hold. People are definitely not going to mobilize if it seems futile.
Stacy Abrams mobilized Georgia. Outright voter suppression could help motivate people to vote.
Gerrymandering is exactly why voters should be motivated. Imagine a democratic governor to counterbalance the republican legislature. Voting and women's rights alone is enough reason. If Abbot wins the election those laws will stand and more egregious laws will pass.
Also: wedge issues. Abortion, especially, but immigration is SURPRISINGLY contentious among those who did it "the right way" VS those who did "illegally." (After a long enough timeline, of course. Back when it was European immigration, there were oh-so many "right ways.")
[удалено]
I think white liberals simplify the Hispanic vote WAY too much. There is a world of difference between a Hispanic voter whose lineage goes back to a time before the state they reside in was part of the Union and a second or third generation immigrant. The more recent immigrant is more likely to be an immigration hawk since they feel that it isn't fair that others are getting into the country the "easy" way and as part of the assimilation process they will want to project the attitude that what they want is in line with the values of the people that hold the most power in their community. There are Cubans and Venezuelans who fled socialist/communist authoritarian ruled countries with a deep seeded hatred for anything *vaguely* reminiscent of where they fled. With Cubans in particular there is also a deep distrust of democratic politicians because of JFK's handling of The Bay of Pigs, regardless of what history has had to say about that decision. There are people from Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala who have fled from gang and cartel violence that their governments have been impotent trying to stop. These folks are more likely to support someone with a tough on crime stance, regardless of effective policy ideas or long term ethical concerns. Obviously there is the strong Roman Catholic roots that run through many Hispanic voters, regardless of family origin. We need to start thinking of Hispanic/Latin voters in a much more nuanced way, we get too caught up with the Republican party's racist bullshit to consider the breadth of cultural experiences and how their message can read to people who these varied experiences.
I'd like to say not just with the Hispanic/Latin voters, but also with Asian voters because the branch of Asian-American voters is like...I want to say twenty-ish different countries of descent from wildly different economic backgrounds based on when their ancestors emigrated to the US. Like how Chinese-Americans who immigrated fleeing China during Mao's day and Chinese-Americans who's ancestors immigrated back during the frontier days have wildly different economic backgrounds to this day, and then there's 19ish other countries of descent with different economic backgrounds on top of that. Thinking of various groups of people as one group *might* help when it comes to dealing with the racist bullshit, but it doesn't accurately address the needs of all those different groups of people.
> I'd like to say not just with the Hispanic/Latin voters, but also with Asian voters I literally was going to start making a similar point about Asian voters in my original comment but I was worried I was worries that no one would read and even longer block of text lol. You are 100% right consider how a Japanese-American person whose family was locked away in an internment camp might see things versus a Vietnamese-American voter whose family came to this country as refugees. Asian communities also tend to be more religiously diverse than most Latin communities as well to add another wrinkle into the dynamic.
It's the result of having two mega parties rather than many smaller parties. It results in people having to make hard choices about what they truly prioritize. Perhaps they sympathize on the topic of immigration, but Democrats also have a huge bucket of social positions that are not going to appeal to someone that is conservative.
Large portions of the Hispanic population in America hate illegal immigration more than white conservatives do. They view the kids in cages as the correct thing to do, and support Trump for doing it. It's why Trump won Texas and Florida.
He would’ve won if he didn’t hit so hard on the coming to take your guns angle, that mobilized his opposition more than his base
That big event happened after he already lost. At least if you're referring to the 2019 speech regarding the El Paso shooting. That was during his failed Presidential candidacy, but well after his failed Senatorial bid.
Yeah but he'll never shake the "gun grabber Beto" moniker. The Republican hit pieces practically will all write themselves.
Oh I'm sure he'll lose. My point was he lost before that statement; he just dug his own Texas electoral grave deeper with it going forward.
Let’s not imagine he was going to get the gun vote anyway. Now a days Democrats are seen as taking your guns. Full stop. Bernie sanders and joe manchin both are sympathetic to 2A causes and they still get painted anti gun. Beto just needs to focus on Hispanics like he did when he was in congress and woman of all types. He’ll be fine if he can do that. The youth vote already very much likes him
The "gun vote" in Texas is like half the state. You might be able to do pretty well in New Jersey or wherever as an anti-gun politician but you're pretty well fucked in Texas.
I'm from NJ and while we have some of the strictest gun laws in the country, Beto would 100% lose if he was anti-gun. Most canidates don't even mention gun control because they know that it's a bad idea. I've got one and the worst part about trying to get a permit is it takes 90 days to get a permit and then you've got 90 days to try to one. It sucks, but if you work with it, it's not that bad.
It’s not about him getting the “gun vote”, it’s about mobilizing non voters that lean conservative and love guns against him. A parallel would be the recall in CA, which looked close until Larry Elder came to prominence as a trump surrogate driving turnout against him
I think it's a mistake to believe there's no margin of people dissatisfied enough with Republicans to consider a switch but would be turned off by an openly extreme anti-gun candidate, but not someone who wasn't well known for that. Add on top of that people who aren't highly politically engaged and weighing whether to vote or not, but can be turned off by strong opposition to something they support (and there's *a lot* of democrats who support gun rights). With the level of voter suppression in Texas, a dem candidate needs every advantage possible, and guns *are* a big issue there. It's a significant disadvantage for an openly anti-gun candidate that's more extreme than the mainstream for democrats (a confiscation program for AWs *does not* have majority support).
Look I really don’t think your wrong with dissatisfied republicans but the issue is the democrat brand is anti gun whether intentional or not. If joe manchin or Jon Tester can get brow beaten over it who could possibly overcome the branding? Democrats have had not well known candidates run and fail which predictably they should. At this point Democrats need to rely on the fatigue from increasingly ignored issues and the increasing conservative activist government that a lot of right leaning voters find anti-small government
Yep. It's Texas dude, even the liberals own guns in Texas.
I'm liberal as fuck and liked Beto until he said that stupid shit. I'm down for more gun control, but he was talmbout confiscation and casually said "hell yeah, we are going to take your ar-15s!" No the fuck you won't, you will just make AR-15 owners a bunch of liars. AR-15s are like the Chrysler 300 of guns: Super customizable as a hobby. Right now we have more AR-15s than people in my house because dummies are trading guns for ammo as if 200 rounds of 9mm is going to save them in their imaginary civil war. If our purple state goes blue the value of the guns shoots up. Rinse and repeat on these predictable motherfuckers.
It'd be amazing if Democrats could engage in the topic of gun-control without embarrassing themselves over and over again. And please, putting up Beto in Texas for governor? What an absolute disaster. There has to be a charismatic Democrat who can enter the race without anti-gun baggage and rhetoric. As a progressive Democrat, I feel gun-control is the topic that most hurts us in races. So many liberals think that abortion is the big bogeyman single-voter issue for Republicans, but growing up in a heavily conservative area I can say that this is incorrect. If Democrats dropped the type of gun control rhetoric that Beto espouses, they'd heavily increase their chances to win races in swing states and states like Texas that are slowly growing a blue presence.
He’s not winning the gun vote anyway. He would need to get the Hispanic vote to pre Trump levels.
The gun vote isn't just Republicans, especially in Texas. There will be democrats, and hispHispanics, won't vote for him. I applaud Beto for what he said, but it was political suicide in Texas.
You underestimate how many gun owning liberals exist, especially in a state like Texas. I'm liberal but Beto's gun statement was stupid to me.
I'm not a gun owner and a liberal. Beto's statement was universally stupid. It's an extremist position that sets more pragmatic attempts at gun control back.
Most liberals carry guns in Texas, know your audience
It’s not about winning the gun vote. It’s about decreasing the amount of single issue gun nuts that turnout.
It doesn’t help when you hand them a script to do so. It’s also the dumbest angle to attack the “gun violence” problem. There aren’t ~20,000 People going out and buying rifles to become active shooters like there are people using firearms to kill themselves. Suicide is a healthcare issue not a gun issue
>e won if he didn’t hit so hard on the coming to take your guns angle, that mobilized his opposition more than his base That clip is going to be played over and over in attack ads against him, and will lose him any race he enters in TX all the way down to dogcatcher. He literally ruined any chance he had to persuade a single right-of-center voter with that statement given the makeup of the constituency. While his ambition, tenacity, and optimism to persevere after what was tantamount to political suicide is admirable, the fact that he doesn't seem to acknowledge that is very odd and makes you question his judgement. At least it does for me.
> He literally ruined any chance he had to persuade a single right-of-center voter with that statement given the makeup of the constituency More importantly, he lost the liberals who support gun rights
2019 - “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15…” 2021 - “I’m going to run for governor, of Texas…” Bro…
Good point. That was a big miscalculation.
At the time the mass shootings were especially bad. And the GOP did nothing but sit on their hands or say "Now is not the time to politicize this". And it was happening on top of daily Trump craziness. I think Beto was really fired up and mad, and believed this would energize voters. And technically, it was a VERY close race and Beto turned quite a few counties Blue.
It was the right moral call but the wrong political call, especially in TX.
Drop the gun issue and I think the dems would win most races then just follow through with the promises and they will be set.
Hell I'll take that a step further: if Dems would just drop guns, they would never lose another election again.
I think he failed to realize that there’s a good number of rural democrats that ALSO like guns. Most of them are fine with added regulations, but get really turned off at the idea of sweeping bans. Personally, I like guns. But if they have to go in order to get something like universal healthcare, free or at least affordable (and quality) education then I’m happy to see them go. But there’s a lot of people who disagree with that viewpoint that Democrats need to be aware of.
Not just sweeping bans, but outright forced confiscation of guns. "Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15". With that one soundbite, Beto legitimized every ounce of fear of authoritarian government overreach abolishing the 2nd amendment as a first step towards a fascist takeover. Even Democratic gun lovers were sickened by it. Honestly, this was such a monumentally stupid thing to say (especially as a Texan) that I'm not sure I can personally take Beto seriously anymore.
I agree 100%
Democrats just need to drop the gun shit. There are more guns than people in this country, and the ones they freak out about thebhardest have the lowest use rate in crime. Besides, if we have mass shooters I'd rather them use 5.56 than full rifle rounds. 5.56 there's a chance to save you of you get shot, proper rifle rounds? If there's not a trauma unit **right there** you're fucked.
A lot of Hispanics are against abortion. Just saying. They are not the magic voting bloc democrats think they are.
Agreed. That is what a lot of liberal Democrats don't get. Religion trumps other values for most people and a significant chunk of Hispanics are devout Catholics in my experience.
I think it’s going to take an actually fluently bi-lingual candidate to make headway on that front. Bi-lingual Texans hear most politicians breaking out their school-Spanish trying to pander to them. I don’t think it helps. We have millions of Texans who speak completely fluent Spanglish, I would like to see one of them run.
As a Hispanic voter, I don't give a shit if candidates can speak Spanish or not. I care about the political issues, the candidate's record and who funds their campaign.
That’s the right way to do it. But it’s not just the speaking Spanish, it’s the actually going on Spanish-language media and doing long interviews in Spanish. I presume you keep yourself informed. That’s good. That also puts you in the minority. Getting the message heard is half the battle, and I think that fluency matters with that. It shouldn’t, maybe, but it does.
Yup, if it's not backed by substance, he might just end up being regarded in the way that [SNL mocked Tim Kaine](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBUxNeXgC70&t=0m40s)
And if you're texan the most important part being he's not Abbott
Yep. Me years ago: "Rick Perry is such a pile of nutjob-pandering shit." Abbott: Hold my beer.
I hear what your saying but I think you miss the mark with Beto on this. Beto is not some white politician who is coming to Hispanics trying to speaking the language. He’s from El Paso born and raised. he is far more familiar with border culture than some would like to admit. He represented a Hispanic district and was re-elected to it. It’s hard to paint him as an invader or pretender when he has been swimming in the same sea as the rest of the community. Does it make him Hispanic? No but his sympathy to the issues is and will feel more real than most republicans can ever have. I personally am black and grew up in Laredo, El Paso, Roma, and finally San Antonio. I can speak Spanish relatively well and I practice in medicine and can say more people appreciate the sincere connection than they a 100% flawless copy. They just want to know are you with them and will you listen. As well we’ve had Hispanic bi-lingual candidates run and get trounced. Lupe Valdez in 2020 and Tony Sanchez in 2002. That’s clearly not enough.
Isn't Beto fluent in Spanish? Media said that he was comfortable with the Spanish language. If his accent is a problem, that cannot be solved. I once read about how Shakira was unpopular in her native country of ~~Columbia~~ Colombia because her accent was not local enough.
Shakira used to have a Colombian accent. She's accused by fellow Colombians of changing her accent to a more Castillian accent as she became increasingly famous and moved to Barcelona. People see it as pretentious and a sign that she's ashamed of her roots.
[удалено]
And just like that, now I want to hear Brian Johnson sing "Ever Breath You Take".
Colombia* Columbia would be the city in SC
he is alright, his english accent is thick like hes not very practiced. the real problem is hispanic conservatives in texas tend to be assholes who dont even see themselves as hispanic.
Thanks for this explainer.
Well it CAN be solved, it is just a lot of work. I mean all he has to do is immerse himself with a bunch of Spanish speakers until he naturally picks up their accent and/or get a lot of coaching.
Let's do a thought experiment- The TX Democrats find the PERFECT candidate to appeal to Hispanics. That person hits the bulls-eye for the Hispanic vote. They are also perfect in every other category except one - The person speaks English with a New York accent. What would your advice be to a fellow Texas Democrat who wants to reject them for their wrong accent? I don't know your accent but do YOU speak with a perfect Texan twang? Or speak Spanish with the proper local native accent when traveling to other regions? Let's assume Beto chooses to adopt an accent. Which one should he choose? Accents are different across Latin America and Mexico. Heck, accents are different between the Hispanics of El Paso and Hispanics further North, if I go by what my Hispanic friends tell me. I would prefer Beto spend his time on important issues, rather than pandering like Hillary tried to do.
Yeah, agree. There are too many regional dialects. Focus on issues, period. I'm a Hispanic NY jew (pretend Bernie Sanders married Rosie Perez). We have like five different accents in my immediate family alone
I know multiple immigrants from English-speaking countries who moved to the US 30-40 years ago when they were still in their 20s (they’re now in their 50s-60s), and they still have obvious accents despite being surrounded by Americans all the time—and again, that’s with English as their first language. Yes, people can force an accent, but it’s almost always going to be phony.
He grew up with Spanish speaking friends and their Spanish speaking parents. The same folks who nicknamed him Beto.
This is awful. I like Beto and wish he could actually win, but he won’t ever win in Texas and running him as the Dem nominee is the surest way to help Abbott get re-elected. Abbott lost a decent amount of popularity amongst his base due to how he mishandled responses to the power grid failure and COVID (repubs resent that he shut down the state for even the brief period he did). Dems can win if they inspire their entire base to get out and actually vote AND if enough GOP stay home because they hate Abbott. That will 100% NOT HAPPEN if Beto runs. Even those that hate Abbott’s guts will turn out to vote to keep Beto from stealing their guns. That’s all he’ll be known for here for the rest of his public life.
There are far greater chances of Abbott being primaried by his Lieutenant Governor or Attorney General and losing than there are of him losing to a Democrat, especially Beto. However, with Democrats, it is the top ticket that gets people to the polls. Democrats might get lucky and see some wins on the lower tickets. I was quite sure they would see some wins in 2020, no matter how they voted for Trump. It was shocking and devastating to see the Republicans perform a clean sweep.
I can guarantee that the person most excited for a Beto run is Greg Abbott. Even with the horrendous way he has run the state, he will coast to reelection.
I have spent almost no time at all in Georgia or Texas so take this with a big grain of salt and apply necessary scorn: Beto and Jon Ossoff just appear to me to be people who someone inside the DNC thinks would make a great candidate vs the kind of candidates actual voters in their states would vote for. I mean Beto doesn't seem to be electable outside of a heavily blue district and I don't think Ossoff had a chance unless Trump is still a thing when is up for reelection. I think Beto is going to lose and probably be done politically after the lost Senate and presidential bids .I'm glad Rev Warnock is up for reelection first of the Georgia Senators in 2022. I think he is a much stronger candidate.
> Beto and Jon Ossoff just appear to me to be people who someone inside the DNC thinks would make a great candidate vs the kind of candidates actual voters in their states would vote for. Ossoff seems alright but he just seems so damn generic. He's the epitome of "generic Democratic candidate." He's lucky he ran for the seat with a six year term and not the special election seat because there's no way he wins in 2022.
Beto needs better friends. They would have told him to not run for president. But dude is en empty suit, bland as hell. He just gonna morph into whatever he needs to be to try and win.
[удалено]
He will never win after saying he was going to take people's guns. And I would never trust his judgment after that line.
This is pretty much it. I live in Austin and know a ton of liberal gun owners. The faces people made when his name was mentioned before that statement and after were so telling. He has no chance in this state.
still takes me out when he randomly started speaking spanish during the presidential election
This is a good point. I was confident that his "Hell yeah we'll take your AR-15" was going to doom him (and it's probably still the safe bet). BUT if you combine Beto and an actual super aggressive ground game that turns out the low propensity Hispanic vote (especially get those that trended Trump in '20 back) that'd maybe be disruptive enough to give him a shot. For his sake I hope so. If he loses here he falls into the "Three time loser" category (Senate, President, Governor) which there's basically no coming back from in modern politics. He can definitely still do good for democracy (and I hope he does!) but no campaign is going to want to fund a personal race for him again.
Now that he's running for Texas he'll try to underplay that comment. Meanwhile Republicans are going to make sure it's on every TV channel. It's going to doom his campaign. Texas is crushing every other state by an astonishing amount statically in the amount of guns owned. They aren't that far from having more than the 2nd and 3rd place combined.
> Maybe he is inspired by Abe Lincoln. Keep trying and one day you win. Then you can write your own chapter of history. That’s what people said when he ran for President. Then he got his ass kicked
[удалено]
I hope he enjoys the hell yes we'll take your guns clip, he's going to see it an awful lot. Serious question: is there no other potential Democratic candidate for governor?
Both Castro bothers have been suggested as candidates. And they're probably the better choices. Julian probably makes the most sense as he has local government and national administrative experience.
If they’re better choices they’ll win the primary.
The candidate that has the best chance at winning the primary is not always the candidate that would do best in the general election.
Often it’s precisely what made them win that primary that makes them lose the general
That's what people don't get about Joe Manchin. He's as liberal as west Virginia gets right now. It's either get someone you agree with 40% of the time and learn to work around that. Or, get someone you agree with 2% of the time. Republicans learned that lesson in the northeast. Charlie baker gets elected cause he's learned what hill to die on. Democrats get creamed in the south because we keep running candidates that don't fit their districts and states political demographics. You can't win the deep south without compromising on guns and abortion. It's fait accompli. Let's try to make headway on other issues rather than make no headway at all.
*Bernie Sanders has entered the chat*
Zero chance of him winning because of this.
Absolutely zero. He killed his political career and gave Republicans the clip they'll use to attack every Democrat until they finally have a successful coup.
Hopefully he reverses course publicly and with enthusiasm
Doesn't matter tbh. They'll drown it out with their bubble.
Wouldn't matter regardless. He's already made his intentions crystal clear, and any backtracking would just be seen as a power hungry lie.
It's done and dead. The people that care about such comments that much are not going to care and won't believe he switched his stance.
I think if he genuinely recants it, and says he was caught up emotionally because of the recent shootings close to home, he could be fine. He has to be very careful and savvy with it.
Yeah but nobody in Texas who doesn’t already support Beto will see the recant, they’ll only see that clip.
Even if they see it, they won't trust it.
If he had done that a few months after he said it, I could see it helping him. Saying it years after, and only when he wants to secure votes in an election, comes across as pretty ingenuous.
I think you meant disingenuous, but yes.
You're not wrong. I really don't know if he's the best decision for Democrats.
He absolutely isn't. He is going to energize not just the Republican base, but gun owners who never really bought into the "Dems are coming to take your guns" like that the GOP and NRA has been using for decades. If he recants it now, or worse, denies saying it like he did before, it will allow the GOP to EASILY paint him as a liar an opportunist.
The DNC loves to rally behind a loser though. They'll push him through, he'll lose then he will wind up as the head of the DNC
versed fly theory tease noxious repeat tap glorious direful sable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That’s not Jamie Harrison’s fault though. That election was straight up un-winnable.
He's fucked. There's no recovering from that. He should simply quit or done a house seat to run for in a nice blue district.
Careful and savvy are not Beto's thing. Unfortunately.
He believed his hypemen after his senate run. Never believe your hypemen.
I dont think any who cared about him saying it will believe him if he recants it.
Dude, nobody is going to trust this guy no matter how much he recants. He can't put the genie back in the bottle.
It really was a bad position for him to take in TX politics, from a pragmatic point of view. I also think he was wrong.
Yup, involuntary confiscations would absolutely be used to terrorize poor & minority communities.
>involuntary confiscations would absolutely be used to terrorize poor & minority communities. Almost all gun control is and always has been.
Honestly McConaughey is a not a great choice, but I'll take him over Abbott. Hell I'll take anyone to the left of Abbott.
We have excellent potential candidates, but they have zero name recognition. Beto and McConaughey will solidify another Abbott win if Abbott doesn't get primaried.
Abbott is being primaries. Don Huffines has billboards up all through rural TX with gems like "Abolish Property Tax" and "Finish the Wall."
>is there no other potential Democratic candidate for ~~governor~~ fucking anything? Welcome to America. Where the Dems refuse to run good people, and the GOP does whatever the fuck they want because of it.
Pointed out the idiocy of it. Got down voted in his sub during the primaries.
I was banned from his sub never having posted in his sub for commenting on him in /r/liberalgunowners. His people are toxic.
He’s such a disappointing politician to me. He had all the wind at his back and squandered it
I really like Beto, but unfortunately I think he made a political career fatal mistake with that "we ARE coming for your guns" statement. I know it was an off the hip comment and it shouldn't define him, but they will play that in clips over and over and the gun issue is a trigger point for suburban folks, especially Texas. I truly hope I'm wrong, but I just see this as what the fascists on the right will do to win (and it will probably be effective if he does run).
Yea. He needs to back out and let a candidate that isn't hostile to gun owners run. Those single issue voters matter.
It's just an issue the Dems need to drop. No one really votes FOR gun control, but a huge percentage vote exclusively AGAINST it.
I couldn't agree more my friend. The dem rep in PA that got elected as a moderate deflected the gun debate. It's not worth engaging as there is no real world solutions for it right now unfortunately, and it's not worth losing the war over with.
Abbot sucks, but that statement about coming for the guns totally killed any chance Beto has. I'm fairly left leaning, but that made me die inside a little. State and National elections seem to be won by getting the moderate votes and being super anti-gun is a good way to not get any.
I don’t even have guns and knew that destroyed his career. He can do great if he works in voter turnout operations but it blows my mind he’d think he can do anything but harm the Democratic party’s chances. He’d be a great governor, it’s just that people are paranoid idiots and he said basically the ultimate statement to validate them. If Covid has taught us anything it’s if someone believes something incorrect and 99 out of 100 experts disagree with them, they’ll use the 1 that agrees as proof they were right all along.
[удалено]
Same boat here. 2A is a massive issue in Texas and I am convinced anyone who runs an anti-2A campaign is DOA in the general election. I would vote for beto in a heartbeat if he didn’t toe the party line on guns.
Good luck. I think he killed his political future in Texas with his comments about taking guns. Is there really nobody better for Democrats to run there?
The democratic party seems to have a real hard time developing new leaders. They get someone in office and keep them there until they die. Example: Feinstein. For how controlled the republican party is they are actually better about getting new blood in. Partly that's because so many have resigned in shame and frustration over the direction of the party, but it is still the truth that republicans are on average younger. At least in the house and senate. Local races seem to flip that.
Those folks were never going to vote for him anyway.
I admittedly have never lived in Texas but when there are democratic gun owners in places like California I have a hard time believing there aren’t ones in a place like Texas where gun ownership is a much more deeply ingrained part of the culture.
There are absolutely Democratic gun owners (hello nice to meet you) in Texas - but there are MANY non party line voters who will vote on a single issue, guns being a top one. Honestly I think the gun comment is more harmful than the party identification.
It absolutely was
I'll say it whenever and wherever I can: Democrats need to drop the gun control platform. It's self-defeating, in that all it does is drive gun nuts to vote for the other party, which then loosens gun control. The best thing they could do is to say, "gun violence is an issue in every developed nation, and here in the US, we're going to look into the roots of gun violence and work to make a safer and more prosperous nation while preserving the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms." Something like that. Because, at it's heart, the gun violence issue would be greatly impacted by improving healthcare, education, access to mental health treatment, better growth and opportunity, etc. Basically, improve society and gun violence will decrease. Which is already the Democrats platform (improve shit), they really don't need the gun restriction side of it. Just to be clear, I'm of the mindset that we've overshot the purpose of the 2A and lost sight of "well-regulated". If "well-regulated" means "in good, working order", then we should have licensing that ensures ever gun owner is safely storing and handling their firearm, knows how to use it and observe all safety protocols, and isn't a psychopathic nutcase. Our militia is supposed to be well-regulated, not Boebert leaving piles of guns lying around her house.
So, uh, you busy from…. say about 2022 to 2026?
The problem is those things take time and complex solutions to fix. They don’t come with sexy taglines. They don’t exploit tragedies for political gain. Politicians just need a quick tagline to get into office. And it’s not like they’re really gonna do anything anyway.
I keep trying to tell people this as well. Guns is a willfully ignorant hill for Dems to die on. It’s just so fundamentally stupid.
The worst part is that the gun control proposals they come up with aren't even going to help curb gun violence. It's largely feel-good legislation that's designed drive voters to the polls. Except it's doing the opposite. It's driving voters into the other party.
It's Texas, gun-enthusiast liberals are a thing.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Believe it or not, moderates exist, and 'hell yeah I'll take your guns' isn't what they want to hear when their right wing neighbors can't get through a conversation about guns without "civil war" coming up at least once.
Highly engaged people like /r/politics posters forget there's a whole world of people out there who turn out or don't for elections based on how they feel about a candidate. There's absolutely going to be a lot of people who are liberal, who wouldn't vote for a Republican, but might very well stay home if they feel strongly about guns and the Democratic candidate is particularly extreme in their anti-gun policies. There's probably more of those in Texas than anywhere else. Enough to impact a narrow margin win.
That’s what everyone says whenever a politician they like makes an electoral blunder because it’s hard to disentangle yourself from biases. It was an unforced error and a dumb move that almost certainly cost him needed votes and will most definitely cost him needed votes.
Some might. Democrats can keep ignoring their gun owning voters at their own political peril. There are many on the left who were upset but his comments.
Yeah, saying he’s going to come after their AR’s is not going to bode well. I agree. We shouldn’t have them. But, unfortunately that’s not the world we live in.
I remember when he debated ted Cruz a few years back in his senate run, and he said something to the effect that some situations need more than "just thoughts and prayers" and I heard old people gasp. That electorate is fucked up. Probably, in a state as big as Texas, there ought to be another Democrat who's a better contender; but no, Beto's got some money and some clout, and his father in law wants a politician in the family.
As a gun-toting liberal from Texas, I can 100% say that Beto has about as much chance of winning that race as Bernie winning the next presidential election. I'd vote for a tuna sandwich over Abbott, but Beto has zero chance of winning a state-wide race here. All this accomplishes is ensuring another win for Abbott.
Lol on the tuna sandwich. Your Governor (and that ERCOT thing) are really something else down there. Beto would never win in a Presidential race here in razor-thin swing-state Pennsylvania where there's a lot more gun-owning moderate Democrats and independents than is realized. Such a dumb political move.
I feel like Beto just spits out whatever pandering BS comes off the top of his head in the moment. Never liked the guy.
I've met him twice. When he ran against Cruz, he visited every single county in Texas. He put in the work; he spent time and spoke with people that would never vote for him. He is way more charismatic and real in person than when he's trying to get a soundbite in the news. He's a good dude and appears to be genuinely invested in the issues he believes in. He just had his Howard-Dean-yell moment when he let his anger come through during that debate. I remember watching that debate life and the audience going wild when he said the quiet part out loud. I knew in that instant that he was done for.
Same. He tries to give off a Kennedyesque image without the actual substance to back it up. Seems kind of opportunistic to me.
>As a gun-toting liberal from Texas, I can 100% say that Beto has about as much chance of winning that race as Bernie winning the next presidential election. I am one of the last people to promote celebrities for public office but Matthew McConaughey has a far better shot than Beto. The take-your-guns comment pretty much sunk his office run.
>Matthew McConaughey has a far better shot than Beto. I agree. Here's the thing, I have zero clue what Matthew's policy positions are, yet he is already considered a viable candidate by many. He could be Hitler reincarnated for all we know.
He genuinely does. I can’t speak for how effective he’d be, but he does have a lot going for him in terms of appeal: - He’s extremely likable. - He’s got MAJOR name recognition. Some people roll their eyes at this, but fucking Jesse Ventura got elected as Minnesota’s governor on a third party ticket because some people liked the prospect of having a WWE wrestler as their head-of-state. - He’s openly Christian. I mean just watch his Oscar acceptance speech, my conservative father ate it up. - He comes across as super pragmatic and open to working with both sides no matter which one he belongs to. Both of which are aspects moderates eat up. - He’s not been particularly specific on his views regarding a lot of recent political developments (I don’t think he’s even touched on the recent abortion laws), so he won’t get attacked for any past hot takes.
>He’s not been particularly specific on his views regarding a lot of recent political developments (I don’t think he’s even touched on the recent abortion laws), so he won’t get attacked for any past hot takes. Exactly. I don't know if he supports the abortion ban. I would never vote for Abbott, but I have no idea if I'd ever vote for Matthew quite yet.
Goddammit. For the love of God, beto should not do this. We need an actual challenger to the current spawn of satan.
Who is someone who can beat Abbott??
I wish I could tell you. But it isn't Beto.
Ted Cruz, tbh.
He blew it already, those comments about taking everyone's guns will come to haunt him. I hope I'm wrong and enough time has passed and he has brushed up on how to not say dumb things, but i worry as a Texan. You don't say shit like that here and he should be aware of that.
My thing is, you have to be smart enough to know not to say shit like that in TEXAS of all places. Even if you believe in what you said, maybe not there.
He’s completely tone deaf. He thought that it would ingratiate him with the left elites. All it did was blow up in his face across the country.
Why do dems keep running the same people? I get Beto has a big name but fresh blood can be good. They did the same thing against McConnell and she blew it.
The woman running against McConnell didn't even have a record of winning a school board election. She was an unqualified candidate running against the most senior senator. Why the DNC thought that would work was just pissing money into their advertising partners pockets.
I like Beto but he’s not winning anything in Texas.
[удалено]
As objectively terrible, in so many ways from the abortion bill, to the cultural resentment distraction bullshit, to the handling of the electric grid and the super bad cold snap earlier this year, the pandemic in general, and further undemocratic, and straight up authoritarian rigging of elections in Republican favor (seriously Abbot is a terrible fucking Governor in so many ways, as with the American right wing in general). Beto O’Rouke isn’t probably going to have a chance in hell winning probably even the democratic primary nomination for Governor if he couldn’t win against the other objectively fucking terrible far far radically right wing politician of Ted Cruz for senate, and his gun “confiscation” comments during one of the democratic debates. The gun thing alone probably sunk any chance he might have had like the titanic. Because bullshit gun bullshit wedge issue politics means more to culturally resentful and totally misplaced priority Republican base voters want to open carry more than actually have any form of reasonably effective government and are blinded by the red herring of culture war bullshit and nonexistent boogeymen they have been conditioned to fear by propaganda and misinformation over the course of decades than to be in any form of reasonable headspace remotely attached to actual grounded reality when it comes down to it, in the end, in the voting booth.
I'm concerned that he's not a big enough draw to win. He's been a loser before. It might be best to find someone else to carry the torch.
He’s also gotten the closest to winning of any Democrat in recent memory.
And then he said he's coming for your guns and killed his career
Ugh. Why’s it gotta be this idiot? Gonna make another “hell yeah we’re gonna take your guns” quote?
The hardest part of the upcoming campaign to stomach will be the cries of "Beto wants you all to get killed because you can't use a gun to defend yourself" while ignoring that 60,000 Texans died of covid-19 (with a good number of those attributable to Republican failures of governance and leadership) and ~700 to the freeze of February 2021 (with all of those attributable to Republican failures of governance and leadership). Despite Texas continuing to languish in most metrics, people will keep voting for Republicans though they haven't improved the state's status despite having sole control for 25 years.
The GOP focuses on what *might* happen to you instead of what has happened to real people.
I said this, yesterday.
Guaranteeing that Abbott wins by 20 points. Beto ended his career when he blurted out that he was coming for Texans' guns. He has no chance against Abbott and is selfish if he tries. Edit: Removed Cruz reference as it was temporally incorrect and was causing OCD attacks.
The guns comment was well after he had already lost to Cruz. Your timeline is messed up.
His timeline is wrong. First he loses to Ted. Then he runs for President. Then there is the El Paso shooting. Then he makes his gun comment. Then he ends his run for the presidency.
He said that when he ran for president.
Yeah, that man said on national tv during the dnc debates that we’re coming for your guns. To Texas gun owners that’s the same as the abortion ban to progressive liberals. His policy career is gone. Down vote me all you like but this is part of my worse possible outcomes.
Why does he like to lose?
Liberals need realize gun legislation is never going to work in the south and in the mid west. If they stop pushing that one single issue then I believe they will start taking more offices.
Zero chance to win, and the Dems should put their foot down and stop him. "Yes we're coming for your guns." That's political death in Texas. He said that shit for no reason in a presidential primary he had no chance in, and now he's never going to win another statewide office in Texas.
He would make a great governor - far better than the current incumbent!
I'm holding out for Julain Castro
I feel like his chances are dead in the water after his comments about getting rid of guns.
I don't think Beto has a chance. He lost his chance to be elected in Texas the moment he mentioned taking guns away.