TexasCHLforum.com

I also voted for Cruz as well, mainly because he supports 2nd Amendment.

I will also go ahead and say that it left a bad taste in my mouth for other reasons that I care about, but that aren't deal breakers. Namely, my only true liberal (actually, uber liberal) stance on DOMA....

Other than that, I think he is by far the best choice.

AP is calling the race for Cruz!

snatchel wrote:
I will also go ahead and say that it left a bad taste in my mouth for other reasons that I care about, but that aren't deal breakers. Namely, my only true liberal (actually, uber liberal) stance on DOMA....

Libertarian perhaps?

I'd LOVE a true, popular libertarian candidate but I'll take what I can get I guess.

Hahaha. "Take what I can get," works for me too. I'm so familiar with that nasty taste in my mouth that I hardly even notice it anymore.

snatchel wrote:I also voted for Cruz as well, mainly because he supports 2nd Amendment.

I will also go ahead and say that it left a bad taste in my mouth for other reasons that I care about, but that aren't deal breakers. Namely, my only true liberal (actually, uber liberal) stance on DOMA....

Other than that, I think he is by far the best choice.

Right there with you!

The Kool Aid isn't so bad once you get used to it...

The negative ads bugged me enough that I stood in line for 90 minutes to vote yesterday after work. NW Harris County, Champions area.

Either one of them could get the award for the smelliest negative campaign. The television stations must have loved this campaign, and likely will show some serious black ink during the quarter.

Now, just how many moderate republicans will switch parties in November and vote for Sadler because they just can't image Cruz?

gdanaher wrote:
Now, just how many moderate republicans will switch parties in November and vote for Sadler because they just can't image Cruz?

It won't be a number significant enough for me to worry about.

slowpoke wrote:Cruz

I'm tired of compromise. How do you compromise something, when it's right?

Yep. For a little hyperbole, say that we have opposing positions. Say for the sake of argument I want you dead. You, most likely, do not accept that position. A 'compromise' would be that we cut off both your legs. Anyone think that's a good compromise?

Didn't think so.

There are times to compromise, but there are also times to stand on principle. There has been a dire lack of the latter.

The ONLY positive thing I've heard from Dewhurst that he's talked about on some radio interviews is that he can "get things done". Well, we're in this mess nationally because polly-tic-ians always want to "do something". But they fail to ask, "will this help or hurt the situation?" or "how does this square with the Constitution?" The desire to "do something" got us TARP (for one, among many). Personally, it might be good to send enough folks there to ensure they gum up the works and stop any more of these bad bills from being passed. Or would we rather have Lautenberg passing bills to "get something done"?

gdanaher wrote:
Now, just how many moderate republicans will switch parties in November and vote for Sadler because they just can't image Cruz?

Not enough to matter.

Sadler would either need to increase Democratic turnout by 600,000-700,000 votes or he would need to pick off better than 78% of the Dewhurst voters to be competitive.....somehow I don't think either of those is particularly likely.


Edit: Just saw the numbers on the runoff from my county. Under 700 folks showed up to vote in the Democratic run off. 13,600 voted in the Republican race.

The odd thing about the Texas primary system, compared to other states anyway, is that the primaries are open, and anyone can vote in either primary. I can see republicans voting in the democratic primary to foul things up, and democrats doing the same in the republican primary with the same goal. Perhaps not enough to make a sizable difference, but then if the election is otherwise close, it might.

gdanaher wrote:The odd thing about the Texas primary system, compared to other states anyway, is that the primaries are open, and anyone can vote in either primary. I can see republicans voting in the democratic primary to foul things up, and democrats doing the same in the republican primary with the same goal. Perhaps not enough to make a sizable difference, but then if the election is otherwise close, it might.

If only one party had a run off, I might agree with you that crossover would be a factor. But since both parties had a run off for the exact same position, I doubt there were many "cross over" voters.

Even if there were, if the Libs think that putting Cruz in instead of Dewhurst is somehow going to win them the senate seat they're delusional. If any of them did cross over, I thank them for putting a more conservative, non establishment, Tea Party backed candidate into the US Senate.

74novaman wrote:If only one party had a run off, I might agree with you that crossover would be a factor. But since both parties had a run off for the exact same position, I doubt there were many "cross over" voters.

No, no, you missed my point. People cross over during the primaries. If there happens to be a runoff, they are limited to voting in the same party's runoff as in which they first voted in the initial primary. In Texas, republican candidates who win the state primary normally go on to win in November. It's been awhile since a democrat won anything in a statewide competition. Anyway, the real fight is in the republican primary, not the general election in most years. And yes, I know a LOT of otherwise democrats who vote in the republican primary. Obviously not enough of them voted for Dewhurst!!

GTRich94 wrote:I had planned to vote for Cruz and Stockton. However, when I got to the new consolidate poling place this afternoon around 1PM, the line was out the door and down the side of the building. I went back just before 6 and the line was now out the door, down the side of the building and then looped back to the front door (45+ minute wait). Whoever decided they needed to consolidate all of Clear Lake to a single location is crazy. Between that and the 8 to 9 robo calls I have been receiving a night, I decided a pox on all their houses.

We went to our normal polling place at about 5:30 p.m., at a middle school a couple of blocks from our house. Crickets chirping, nobody there.

So then we called a friend who lives around the corner from us and who we knew had voted before us and asked her where to go vote. She said, try the Grapevine Activities Center. So we drove there and got there around 6:00 p.m. Waited in the line for a while, and at about 6:15, a poll worker asked for all precinct 3385 voters, which included us, to raise our hands. We did. "OH, you're supposed to be at the First Baptist Church in Bedford." No explanation given, but now we've got <45 minutes to get to our polling place and vote. So we drove down there, arriving at about 6:35. Got in the lines, voted, left right at 7:00 p.m., just as the polls were fixing to close.

Thing is, we never received any notice that our polling place had changed. It's where we've voted in all elections since we moved here. It's where we voted in this past primary.

I suspect democrats.