Pundits have long suggested the Latinx vote in Texas was a powder keg in Texas politics; strike the right political spark and it ignites an explosion. Yet, to date, the so-called sleeping giant has only slowly risen from its slumber.
As Lupe Valdez and Andrew White take to the debate stage, heated past Democratic gubernatorial primaries from 1972 and 1990 highlight how the nastiest battles are often fought within a political family. Vicious runoffs resulted in political divides that didn’t heal for decades.
Endorsements from groups like these serve as signals to voters about the relative alliances and issues a candidate may embrace and potentially come with access to campaign funds. But what are these endorsements worth? Statistical estimation can help us identify how valuable these endorsements are in terms of actual votes.
Many political themes we'll see over the coming months are as historic as the Capitol's pink dome: disputes between the chambers, intra-party squabbles, the waft of corruption and the race against the ever forward-marching legislative calendar.
Stop me if you've heard this one: A gaffe-prone multimillionaire runs a vitriolic, divisive campaign against a veteran female politician. Trump for president in 2016? Try Claytie for Texas governor in 1990.
Neither candidate underperformed in last week's primary debates, but neither stood out. To stay afloat as the race grinds on, they'll have to do more than that.
