Thoughts on Beto?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He made a statement about going after Texans guns. No way he could recover from that in Texas. Which is a real shame since Abbott is one of the worst governor's in history.

OP here... yes, I get the "going after their guns" concern, but I've heard him talk about really reasonable gun control as a 4th gen Texan. With Uvalde, El Paso, etc., I would think Texas would be more open to him. I also. just read a story that the county where Uvalde is went 60% for Abbott, so what do I know???

There’s *nothing* reasonable about telling Texans “hell YES we’re gonna take your AR15!” . And that’s what he’s going to be forever known for. There’s no walking that back. Do you know how many millions of Texans own an AR15? It’s THE most common rifle in Texas. Had Eugene Stoner been a Texas resident when he invented it in 1956, the state legislature would’ve made it the official firearm of the state of Texas.

Not defending this logic but it is the reality there. This is why he lost.

Eh, I'm not convinced of that.

I was born in El Paso and spent several years back there in my 20's. What other posters are describing here is true - Beto probably got his nickname from his nanny or housekeeper, and then he's the rich kid that left. So he has El Paso roots, but amongst a very small proportion of the population of even his hometown. We used to say El Paso was the biggest small town you would ever live in - and that was mainly due to socio-economic status. It's also a unique and isolated part of Texas that doesn't really fit into the other cities. I'm trying to remember the last time we had a prominent Democrat from Dallas or Houston try to mount any kind of statewide challenge. Because if you had roots and a career in those cities you might be able to reach across party lines.

I don't have the same visceral reaction to Beto that others do, but the fact that so many people feel the same way is an indication.

In some way, I think it's probably a good thing he was not elected governor. He would have been a failure simply because he would not have been able to accomplish anything with the Legislature and appointments only do so much. I also think he would have been in physical danger.

All that said, he got 48% of the vote against Cruz's 50% and 43% against Abbott's 54%. Those aren't exactly blowout numbers for the Republicans, but Beto wasn't the guy. If Democrats want to win a statewide election in Texas I think they will have to invest long and hard and the candidate must come from Dallas or Houston.

I agree with all your points about Beto. I live in Dallas and El Paso’s never part of the conversation about Texas the way other major cities are… it’s so remote from the cluster of other big Texas cities, on mountain instead of central time, not in ERCOT, etc. so yes, I’m sure there’s something there in terms of being considered truly “Texan.”

At the same time, look at the down-ballot votes. For attorney general: Garza is a good candidate, native Texan, Houston law school grad, endorsed by every newspaper in the state because she is running against a North Dakotan literal criminal indicted on felony charges that he has been misusing his political power to evade for SEVEN years. Still 53-44. Same with Land Commissioner: Jay Kleberg, 6th generation cattle ranching Texan who made a feature film about Texas parks and has a great resume of conservation, against… I dunno, an Austin eye doctor with no discernible experience in land management? 56-42. I don’t know what mythical unicorn the democrats could run that can actually convince a substantial number of people, especially after the latest round of gerrymandering that very much limits the number and locations of local political offices where Ds could build a political resume.

Sorry, maybe that is too doom and gloom but I am pretty frustrated with how things went this week in Texas. Much more encouraged by results in other states.

These are excellent points. It's really inconceivable to me how Paxton keeps getting re-elected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Beto is a repeated failed candidate. So tired of hearing about him and watching him suck all the oxygen out of the air in terms of media coverage that could be spent on other better candidates who can actually WIN.

What does he even do? Honestly it seems he has been doing nothing but running for one election or another for the past 10 years and doing nothing but losing.

Look, nothing personal but clearly he's not a good politician and it's time to step aside and give other people a chance.

Well said. What has he even done when he's actually been voted INTO office? There's nothing to show for his time int he House. He's a grandstander, an empty suit, who does nothing other than campaign. There are so many other candidates that could have been successful against Abbott.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Beto and Kamala are kind of similar. They have a lot of confidence, but not a lot of substance. I like both of them as people. But, as political leaders, they seem to be lightweights. Mostly show, not substance.

All hat, no cattle...