Stolen from: http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=514 via Andrew Sullivan With 193 pledged delegates at stake, Texas is the biggest prize to come in its upcoming March 4 “primary.” Except it’s not mainly a primary. 126 of those delegates will be chosen at the district level, but differently than in other states where they’ve been allocated based on Congressional district: they’ll be chosen based on totals in 31 state senate districts by caucuses in more than 18,000 precincts. The remaining 67 pledged delegates will be chosen by statewide primary vote. So the Texas primary gives only a delegate catch of 67 delegates, less than, say, Minnesota. On the same date, in the evening, precinct caucuses will be held across the state and to participate one has to have voted in the primary earlier in the day. That is where the big prize of 126 delegates will be chosen. That scenario favors a campaign that spends the resources and has the volunteers to wage a ground game on 18,000 fronts. Here’s another fact: The Texas Democratic Party is not as institutionally strong as those that remember LBJ might presume. There will be no falling back upon a pre-existing machine to deliver in most of the state. Years of Republican legislatures and governors have redistricted Congressional seats to their advantage: 19 of its 32 members of Congress are Republicans. Of the 13 Democratic seats, three elected African-American members of Congress and six elected Hispanic Americans. The state’s population is 35 percent Hispanic-American (they constituted 20 percent of the general election vote in 2004, and half of those voted for George W. Bush), and 13 percent African-American. Regarding those senate districts through which the delegates will be chosen, 20 are represented at the State House by the GOP: there are only 11 Democratic state senators. On the plus side for the party, Democrats are only five seats away from taking back the state House of Representatives. By and large, there’s a situation in more than half of the state in which there aren’t powerful Democratic power brokers - similar to what we saw in Northern Nevada. There’s an opening there for a truly grassroots campaign, prioritizing rural voters, to take enough delegates to win the state on March 4. So March 4 is going to offer an assumption-shattering Texas-sized spectacle of the likes we have not yet seen in this nomination fight.
Interesting read, Mulder. I didn't realize it was that convoluted. No place else but Texas, hey? My favorite part was this line... On the plus side for the party, Democrats are only five seats away from taking back the state House of Representatives. I believe we picked up 6 seats in the last election. With the way voters have been trending Democratic in the primaries to date, even out-polling the GOP in some traditionally Republican strongholds, we just might grab those 5 seats. That would really make me smile and put a roadblock to some of Perry's corruption, not to mention that S.O.B., Craddick. Example of GOP idiocy? Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, the idiot, is still trying to give away the Christmas Mountains, a gift 17 years ago to the State of Texas. Check this out: Feb. 5, 2008, 10:33PM Land board chief still wants hunting on Christmas land Other members holding out hope National Park Service can buy it By GARY SCHARRER Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau AUSTIN — The state of Texas will keep the Christmas Mountains, at least for the time being, while Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson looks for options that allow hunting on the 9,270-acre parcel in West Texas. Chances of the rugged West Texas tract ending up as part of Big Bend National Park improved slightly Tuesday when the School Land Board voted unanimously to reject two private bids for it. But Patterson said that hunting and the right to carry firearms on the land remain priorities for him and that it could take a year or longer to decide what to do with the property, which borders the national park. He wants to open the Christmas Mountains for dove and blue quail hunting, starting in the fall, if possible. In the short term, Patterson said he would make public access to the land easier and ask Congress to find money for any federal agency to buy the land so long as hunting is allowed. "Federal ownership and hunting in the Christmas Mountains are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to do both," he said. "We will explore all options at the federal level." Some environmental leaders cheered the board's rejection of private party bids but called Patterson stubborn for insisting on hunting there. Other agencies interested? The National Park Service last week expressed interest in acquiring the property, but suggested a hunting access requirement would be problematic in addition to requiring special congressional action. Federal agencies that don't prohibit hunting, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the U.S. Forest Service, might be candidates for the property, Patterson said. "He continues to be stubborn and putting up new barriers," said Luke Metzger, director of Environment Texas. The tract shares a one-mile border with Big Bend National Park, but its other 18 perimeter miles hug private property without public access. Environmentalists and others have criticized the plan to sell the property, which the Conservation Fund donated to the state of Texas 17 years ago. The board rejected bids of $750,000 from Dallas lawyer Michael Craddock and his wife, Ramona, and $704,489 from Southwestern Holdings CEO John Poindexter. Patterson has been pushing for the sale of the land, which is difficult to manage because of an easement on the property that prohibits utility and road construction. The Conservation Fund owns the easement, which limits development to a single caretaker's cabin. School Land Board member David Herrmann of San Antonio said he was not comfortable with the private-sector bids after the National Park Service signaled interest in buying the land. 'Fair deal' sought Board member Todd Barth of Houston did not hear Patterson's comments and declined to respond to Patterson's insistence that hunting be allowed on the property. "I am interested in working to find a way to make a fair deal with the National Park Service," Barth said. Although the rugged land was donated to Texas, the state may not be able to give it to the National Park Service, School Land Board lawyer Bill Warnick said. The land now is part of the Public School Land inventory, and the board, he said, "should be very careful about its fiduciary responsibility to the schoolchildren of Texas." http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5516869.html Patterson (did I mention that he's an idiot?) is still trying to "sell" (give away... $700,000??) over 9,000 acres of pristine land in the Big Bend area, land that was a gift to the state. One would think we would just keep it for future generations of Texans who want to see what this area looks like undeveloped. No, that's too logical. Way past time to end the corrupt and incompetent Republican state government. Impeach Bush.
