RSS Feed Menu
Rick Perry has, perhaps due to the more-localized nature of state politics, not caught fire in the media as a tea party icon. But his eyebrow-raising gaffes certainly place him in league with Sharron Angle or Rand Paul — and his slash-and-burn style is keeping the numbers in his quest for a third term far too close for comfort.
Perry generated some national controversy in the middle of 2009 when he infamously raised the specter of secession as a way of combating big government: “Texas is a unique place. When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that…if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what may come of that?” This statement outraged Keith Olbermann, though, so conservatives didn’t seem to care that Perry was being blatantly unpatriotic.
Earlier this year, of course, Perry trounced Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison in the gubernatorial primary after being out-weirded by a tea party activist named Debra Medina. Both were challenging Perry largely on the rationale that his choice to run for a third term exemplified the arrogance of power. However, coming from Hutchison, a consummate insider, the argument just seemed too hypocritical (and Medina just seemed too batty), and Perry won a majority of the vote, making even a runoff unnecessary. Still, it’s never a good sign when an incumbent governor can only cobble together half of the vote in his own primary.
Perry’s mouth got him in trouble again when, a few days ago, weirdly linking same-sex marriage to threats to job creation, he blasted: “We’re creating more jobs than any other state in the nation…Would you rather live in a state like this, or in a state where guys can marry guys?”
In a ruby-red state like Texas — and in a year like this — it is astonishing that Perry is leading his opponent, former Houston mayor Bill White, by only eight points among likely voters. In contrast, South Carolina’s Nikki Haley leads by sixteen points. It is only in light of his aggressive, overtly ideological style that it makes sense that Perry’s numbers look more like those of New Mexico’s Susana Martinez, who is running in a blue state to replace a Democratic governor. Perry’s claim about jobs is wrong, by the way: his state’s unemployment rate (8.5%) is more than twice that of the state that’s really creating the most jobs per-capita — North Dakota, with its rate of 4.1%. That state’s governor, the center-right John Hoeven, is going to replace retiring Democrat Byron Dorgan in the Senate, probably by an earth-shattering margin of about fifty points.
In the end, the odds that Perry will lose are negligible. Bill White is simply too soft-spoken and the year is amounting to a tidal wave for Republicans that looks more like 1994 than 2006. But Perry’s performance has not proven him to be a reliable winner. If he truly has national ambitions, he ought to check them at the governor’s mansion’s door when he returns next year for his third term.
AAFL – an added American Football League | Buy a Airsoft Gun // Sep 5, 2010 at 11:32 am
[...] Perry’s Gaffes Keep Texas Gov Race Close | FrumForum [...]
This ignores the fact that Perry has historically polled lower then his Election Day showings. He is undefeated in over 26 years of politics, and is facing his most liberal challenger yet in White. Perry will win, again, easily and will be in the 2012 discussion for much of the next year.
My take on this: any time one party (let alone a single individual) holds power for too long, its a problem. I hold to this even in the case of politicians I like, such as John Engler in Michigan, who I think was governor one term too many. With the GOP in charge in Texas since 1994, this is definitely in problem territory.
Perry hates big government until he puts his hand out for the bailout to the states.
@MaxTwain:
Lets assume that he does win.
How can he be a candidate for President? I’d think his threats to secede from the Union have poisoned him as a Federal figure nationally. That may score points in Texas, but IMO it would be a PR disaster at the debates.
“I never said I WOULD secede . . . I just pointed out that Texas COULD secede, and mentioned that if we got any more angry at the Federal government that something would happen. I never said that something was secession. It was totally unrelated.
Vote Perry for President!”
Perry may have been touching upon the fact that his opponant is identified with same-sex marriage and the general attitude of California. http://www.dallasvoice.com/bill-white-clarifies-his-position-on-gay-marriage-1020189.html Texans do not want to be Californians in either economics or mores. This statement is a twofor.
Also, Perry did not couch his statement in per capita terms but absolute terms and there he is correct.
“How can he be a candidate for President?”
3 reasons:
1) Fundraising
2) Texas economy > US economy
3) Experience
He’s the longest serving governor in the country, and of one of the biggest states. The Texas economy is a utopia compared to big liberal states like California, New York, and Michigan. The same big Texas money that propelled Bush to frontrunner status can be rallied behind Perry.
Would he win? Who knows. But the credentials and the money would give him as strong a base as anyone running.
Isn’t Texas a welfare state taking more from the Federal government than is taken in taxes?
1) Fundraising
Without a doubt, that helps.
2) Texas economy > US Economy
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I’ve seen economists say just about whatever they like in regards to ecconomic data. I’ve also heard that California is the largest State economy in the United States, for example. However, there is no question that the Texas economy is really, really big.
So what? I don’t mean that in a snotty way — why should I (a resident of TN now) give him my vote because Texas has a big economy? I can look at graphs and stats like these:
http://www.texasahead.org/economy/tracking/
until I’m cross-eyed — in some stats Texas is doing better than the US, in some stats its doing worse. Sure, Perry can claim credit for any ecconomic growth in Texas under his leadership and blame any weakness in the Texas economy on FederalPolicy/Subversives/ActsOfGod/AnythingButHim, but how does that distinguish him from any other candidate?
3) Experience
Well, yes . . . but unless the GOP decides to make an ass out of itself and run Palin isn’t that going to apply to any candidate?
Those three reasons show why he is a potential candidate — that is, why he is presumably at least minimally qualified for the position, and I don’t disagree with that. But that ignores his major flaws:
1) Texas
2) Secession
3) State vs. Federal vs. Texas
1) Texas
Wasn’t the last administration from Texas? Well, truth be told he was from Connecticut, but damn if he didn’t make sure I saw him in his cowboy hat clearing brush for the cameras so often its burned on my retinas. I don’t see how Perry runs without the spectre of W infecting him (even more than any other GOPer) . . . and I don’t think that’s good. Obama and the Dems winning by such a substantial margin wasn’t because he was so uber-cool . . . it was because the Era of W was something people wanted to run from. I’ve said it before: people would have voted for a chair against the GOP ticket in 08. Now that they’ve finally started to put the ghost of W/Cheney to rest, if they put Perry out front they’re going to drag up some really strong reactions, reactions I don’t think help them any.
2) Secession
The man threatened to break apart the Union. To alot of voters, that’s a negative as to why he should be running the Union. Sure, the Tea Partiers love that stuff . . . but suprisingly there are alot of Americans that aren’t interested in the destruction of the Country (“but we’ll seceede to SAVE America!”) or in armed revolution (“but we’ll revolt to SAVE the government!”). For the GOP to win they either need moderate votes, or they need everybody other than the fringe to stay home election day. a Secessionist isn’t going to attract moderates (by definition, people that tend to shy away from extreme rhetoric or action), and “I’ll break up America!” may well galvanize the middle and left to get off their asses and vote. Much like Palin, the votes he generates with this type of talk would (IMO) be outnumbered by the opposition votes it motivates . . . and that’s not a winning strategy.
Perry’s going to have to face the issue because you can be damn sure its going to come up, and he either doubles down as a hard-core fight-the-government fringe persona or he backpedals. If he goes hard, he loses everybody but the fringe. If he backpedals (which would be damn tricky) then he risks alienating the fringe (“sellout!”) while the middle-and-left still have their doubts. Much like Jan Brewer, you don’t accidentally talk about immigrant decapitation attacks and you don’t accidentally talk about seceding from the Union. Repeatedly. On video.
3) State/Fed/Texas
This is tied to the first issue. Texas publicly prodes itself on doing things its own way. F**k America . . . this is Texas. The Lone Star State.
How does that translate to governing the Nation? Does he switch to a Federal vantage point (and thereby lose the benefit of that experience) or does he try to turn the Federal Government into Texas (ain’t gonna work)? His biggest plus can easily be turned against him.
W dodged this by going on vacation and letting Cheney and the rest of the Washington Insiders do whatever the hell they wanted. Perry would have to take the mantle on himself entirely . . . and what plays in Dalls don’t play in Paduca. Can he become more than a Trus Son Of Texas? If he can’t, he’s facing some hesitancy from the other 49 States.
I just don’t see how he gets around his negatives. I’ve been wrong before, so maybe you’re right . . . but I just don’t see it. Next to Palin and (IMO) tied with Gingrich, he’s the most likely candidate with the worst dislike rating. Would it benefit the GOP to run someone that doesn’t get the fringe so passionate but also doesn’t have alot of Americans hating them? Maybe, maybe not. But I think ignoring the serious problems in him as a candidate is a mistake.
As usual, Knepper is clueless. Perry is polling up +8 over White, which is consistent with Perry’s +9 margin of victory in the 2006 election, so Perry is right where one would expect him to be.
Straight comparisons with SC are meaningless and stupid. Haley leads by 16%, which is well below Sanford’s margin of victory in 2006. Put simply, SC is a deeper red state than Texas. It always has been.
>> Perry’s claim about jobs is wrong, by the way: his state’s unemployment rate (8.5%) is more than twice that of the state that’s really creating the most jobs per-capita — North Dakota, with its rate of 4.1%.
No, Perry’s claim is correct. Yours is wrong. Perry did not claim that Texas had the lowest unemployment rate, or that Texas created the most jobs on a per-capita basis. Texas has, in fact, had the highest job creation counts in the country.
Texas also has been ranked the #1 state in which to do business by CEOs for four straight years.
http://www.chiefexecutive.net/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=D8BB1C4F12AE46EF9B7647E09E3253A6&AudID=F242408EE36A4B18AABCEB1289960A07
Barring some earth-shattering event, Perry will win by a comfortable 8-10% margin.
>> But Perry’s performance has not proven him to be a reliable winner.
Is this a joke? Perry has held an elected office in Texas since 1984 and has never lost an election. 25 years of consistent electoral success is pretty reliable in my book.
Re: Texas has, in fact, had the highest job creation counts in the country.
Meaningless until you correct for population size.
I’m sorry, CO Independent, so you’re asserting that Perry can’t make a better showing than in a year like 2006? By all means, he should be steamrolling to victory this year. He’s not. One would “expect him to be” doubling his margin, since this is a Republican year. If you can point to another Republican politician struggling to match their 2006 showing, I’ll shave my legs.
And no, his jobs claim is not correct. As JonF mentioned and as I addressed in the piece, it’s stupid to talk about job-creation without looking at it per-capita.
he ought to check them at the governor’s mansion’s door when he returns next year for his third term.
Yeah, but he doesn’t live in the Governor’s mansion, he is renting at taxpayer expense a luxurious iirc 10,000 a month mansion in a gated community, all this while the mansion is being very, very, very slowly renovated.
Texas also has a pretty weak Governor, he only works about 15 hours a week, which is one way he is being hurt. Also I am sure there has to be some Perry fatigue. If he wins, this has to be his last term in office, and as Texas is becoming more and more hispanic it will eventually reach the tipping point where old line people like Perry will be pushed aside.
Personally, I don’t remotely care who wins in Texas, but it will be interesting to see how the white Republicans come to terms with being a clear minority very soon.
@ Alex:
Perry’s claim was that Texas had the highest job creation in absolute numbers. His claim is correct. He made no claim about jobs on a per-capita basis. You didn’t take any courses in statistics, did you?
Michelle Bachmann: 2006 MoV: +8; 2010 Polling +9 with a margin of error of 4.5%. She is struggling to match her 2006 showing.
Please post before, during, and after pictures so I can confirm that you did, in fact, shave your legs.
@CO Independent –
His claim was intended to deceive; to make people think that Texas was leading the pack in job creation for its citizens — within its proper context: per capita. It’s akin to the United States bragging about having more good singers in its borders than Lithuania does. Totally ridiculous, totally out-of-context. Are you paid by Rick Perry or something?
Bachmann! Talk about the exception that proves the rule. She’s become a national lightning-rod for controversy since her election.
In other words: Texas is one of the largest states in the country. Of course it’s going to be creating more jobs than any other state in the union, considering that California and New York are basket cases. Congratulations, Rick Perry, Texas is creating more jobs than Delaware. Here’s a golf clap for you.
>> Are you paid by Rick Perry or something?
I wish. I just have a solid background in statistics. You obviously do not.
You: ” If you can point to another Republican politician struggling to match their 2006 showing, I’ll shave my legs.”
Me: “Michelle Bachmann: 2006 MoV: +8; 2010 Polling +9 with a margin of error of 4.5%. She is struggling to match her 2006 showing.
You: “Bachmann! Talk about the exception that proves the rule. She’s become a national lightning-rod for controversy since her election.”
I don’t care whether she is a lightning rod for controversy or a dead-dull stick in the mud. You said you would shave your legs. I found your struggling Republican. Now pony up. Shave ‘em.
Alex,
Although I generally disagree with CO Independent (who seems remarkably similar to your garden-variety partisan Republican), I think he’s got you on this one.
Solid background in statistics? Rubbish. There is also no refutation, it is simple assertion.
This from Gallup.
The results for Gallup’s Job Creation Index reflect aggregated data from approximately 100,000 Gallup Daily tracking interviews conducted throughout 2009 with employed adults in all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. Gallup asks those who are employed whether their companies are hiring workers and expanding the size of their labor forces, not changing the size of their workforces, or laying off workers and reducing the number of employees they have. The Job Creation Index reports the net difference between the percentage reporting an expansion and the percentage reporting a reduction in their workforces.
Energy-producing states such as North Dakota, Louisiana, West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Texas were home to some of the top job markets in the U.S. in 2009, as they were in 2008. They were joined by Alaska and New Mexico, two other energy states; Nebraska, a farm state benefiting from ethanol and a strong commodities market; and Maryland and Virginia, two states benefiting from the presence of federal government employees.
Despite the recent improvement in manufacturing and banking, economically long-depressed Michigan and financial-crisis states in the Northeast, including Rhode Island, Delaware, New Jersey, and Connecticut continued to be some of the worst state job markets in 2009. The housing-crash states of Nevada and California also remained near the bottom of the list, joined by Arizona, another state with housing problems, and two other Western states — Oregon and Idaho. New Hampshire, another financial state, was on the list of worst job market states, as was Minnesota.
Texas does not lead in job creation, it comes in tied for 8 with Virginia and New Mexico. The top state is North Dakota, followed by Nebraska, West Virginia, Lousiana, Maryland, Oklahoma, and Alaska.
Texas is a leading energy state, oil prices are sufficiently high enough at $72, so that helps it be more recession proof. But Alex is absolutely right. Of course it is per capita. When they talk about birth rates per state they talk about it on the per capita basis, not how many total children are born in the state. Birth rates are live births per 1,000 estimated population in each area. Even though California had 552,000 live births, its birth rate of 71 is far below that of Utah, which had only 56,000 live births, yet had a birth rate of 93.
As to Bachmann, how convenient you forgot to list 2008. In 2008 Bachmann won, 46.41% to 43.43% with the rest going to an independent, so if she is higher than that now, when she couldn’t even get 50%, then how can you say she is struggling. Some brilliant statistician you are.
This from Reuters:
NEW YORK, July 26 (Reuters) – North Dakota and Alaska have added the most jobs, while Nevada, California and Florida have lost the most, in the last five years, according to research released on Monday.
The study of U.S. employment trends found 40 states had fewer jobs in May 2010 than they did five years earlier, according to Portfolio.com, a business news site that published the research of private-sector employment conducted by American City Business Journals.
In first place, North Dakota added 21,300 jobs, and Alaska followed by adding 10,100 jobs from 2005 to 2010, it said. North Dakota saw an increase of 3,200 jobs in the last year alone, it said.
North Dakota and other states that added jobs did not undergo the economic volatility of recent years as much as other states, said G. Scott Thomas, a Portfolio.com demographer.
“There was no real estate boom or bubble and, as a result, they kept plodding along,” Thomas said. “Now those numbers look fantastic.”
Nevada ranked at the bottom of the list, having lost 113,000 jobs in the last five years, followed by California and Florida, it said.
That marked a dramatic change in fortunes for Nevada and Florida, which finished first and second in jobs in a similar 2005 study, it said.
The change illustrates how little can be divined from such data, Thomas said.
“Five years ago, we said Nevada was No. 1, and now it’s dead last,” he said. “It does make you leery of economic forecasts.”
Together, Nevada, California and Florida have lost 1.69 million jobs since 2005, the study said.
Overall, the United States lost 4.51 million private-sector jobs from mid-2005 to mid-2010, it said. The study used U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data from the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Other states at the bottom of the list were Michigan, Rhode Island, Georgia, Ohio and Arizona. The declines were a combination of real-estate problems, slowed construction and tourism and a drop in manufacturing, it said.
Yeah, I am sure Reuters is out to shill for Alaska and North Dakota, yeesh.
Nice volley!
Everything busboy said, plus
4) Hair.
Seriously – look at the guy. President? You’re havin’ a laugh….
And another thing to look at is Unemployment:
1 NORTH DAKOTA 3.6
2 SOUTH DAKOTA 4.4
3 NEBRASKA 4.7
4 NEW HAMPSHIRE 5.8
5 VERMONT 6.0
6 HAWAII 6.3
7 KANSAS 6.5
8 WYOMING 6.7
9 IOWA 6.8
9 MINNESOTA 6.8
11 OKLAHOMA 6.9
12 VIRGINIA 7.0
13 MARYLAND 7.1
14 LOUISIANA 7.2
14 UTAH 7.2
16 MONTANA 7.3
17 ARKANSAS 7.4
18 ALASKA 7.7
19 WISCONSIN 7.8
20 COLORADO 8.0
21 MAINE 8.1
22 NEW MEXICO 8.2
22 NEW YORK 8.2
22 TEXAS 8.2
25 DELAWARE 8.4
26 WEST VIRGINIA 8.6
27 IDAHO 8.8
28 CONNECTICUT 8.9
28 WASHINGTON 8.9
30 MASSACHUSETTS 9.0
31 MISSOURI 9.2
32 PENNSYLVANIA 9.3
33 ARIZONA 9.6
34 ALABAMA 9.7
34 NEW JERSEY 9.7
36 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 9.8
36 NORTH CAROLINA 9.8
36 TENNESSEE 9.8
39 GEORGIA 9.9
39 KENTUCKY 9.9
41 INDIANA 10.2
42 ILLINOIS 10.3
42 OHIO 10.3
44 OREGON 10.6
45 MISSISSIPPI 10.8
45 SOUTH CAROLINA 10.8
47 FLORIDA 11.5
48 RHODE ISLAND 11.9
49 CALIFORNIA 12.3
50 MICHIGAN 13.1
51 NEVADA 14.3
Yes, Texas is at 22, tied with New York. And the jobs in New York pay much higher and have much better benefits. If Perry is supposed to be so great, and he has been Governor for 10 years, why is his state all the way down at 22.
Let us also not forget that Texas leads the nation in uninsured, at 26.5% of the population. Mass. is at 4.6%. NY is at 13% (bad, but not Texas insane)
Easton, you should stick to languages.
1. Perry’s claim: “We’re creating more jobs than any other state in the nation…”
2. The Facts: “Texas ranked third on the list, with a 5.9 percent growth rate in employment over the five-year period, adding 474,400 jobs — the highest mark by far and only one of 11 states to post an increase in private-sector jobs between 2005 and 2010.”
http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stories/2010/08/02/story10.html
3. Perry’s claim is correct.
There are more states in the article, but I suspect they would overwhelm you.
This is so, so embarrassing. Per-capita job growth is all that matters. Perry’s claim was meant to manipulate.
Again: it’s akin to the U.S. bragging about producing more good singers than Lithuania. True, but not exactly relevant, given the comparative population sizes!
Easton: Thanks for posting the states’ rankings on unemployment. I’m relieved my home state — Michigan — is no longer No. 1.
CO Independent: Compare numbers to the previous election. With Rep. Michele Bachmann,
(R-Minnesota #06), it was 2008 not 2006 in which she was last elected. (Bachmann, who put her seat in jeopardy after controversial anti-American/Obama remarks on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” won her last race by 3%). In Texas gubernatorial, Republican Gov. Rick Perry’s 2006 margin was 9.2% over Democratic challenger Chris Bell. As Alex Knepper notes: Perry is now polling 8 points ahead of opponent, ex-Houston Mayor Bill White. Unless White is so hugely popular — despite Republican wave — Perry should be outperforming 2006 (say, mid-10s%); not seeing any Democratic shift. He may end up doing this, once results are official. But, for the time being, it’s noteworthy. Especially with Mr. Perry bragging about his state’s successes — under his “leadership.”
“Perry’s claim about jobs is wrong, by the way: his state’s unemployment rate (8.5%) is more than twice that of the state that’s really creating the most jobs per-capita — North Dakota, with its rate of 4.1%.”
The answer for that is simple—the unemployed (probably from CA, AZ, FL and NV) are flooding into Texas, looking for work…since July ’09, the size of the labor force is Texas has grown by about 182,000. Not many people are moving into North Dakota; since July ’09, the labor force in ND has grown by about 4,600. And we need to take a look at what kind of jobs are being created in North Dakota vs. Texas. High tech private sector jobs? Or construction jobs for shovel ready projects, paid for by the ‘stimulus’ program? Or maybe a couple of thousand census workers? I think that merits some space in your article, because you’re using those very statistics to attack Perry.
By the way, the unemployment rate in Texas stands at 8.2% and North Dakota stands at 3.6%:
http://www.bls.gov/lau/
““We’re creating more jobs than any other state in the nation…Would you rather live in a state like this, or in a state where guys can marry guys?”
- Gov. Rick Perry
So let’s see:
The American people are overwhelmingly against gay marriage.
Gay marriage was defeated in a referendum in uber-leftwing California.
The only reason Gay marriage is still an issue is due to the interference of activist, Liberal judges.
But despite all of this, FRUM-FORUM thinks Perry got into “trouble” for stating the obvious??
And Perry’s statement WAS obvious. To all those who need a translation, he basically said:
“If you want to live in state that provides the maximum of both economic and political freedom by virtue of tried-and-true Conservative, American principles, then come to Texas. Or, if you want to live in a loony liberal state that drives down it’s economy, drive away business, and focuses on idiocy like gay marriage…Then don’t come to Texas.”
Here’s hoping Rick Perry has aspirations beyond Austin.
And, instead of devoting an entire article to Rick Perry’s supposedly weak lead in Texas polls, here’s a much more significant statistic (one that really merits an article here on FF):
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html
@ Candy
I’m not sure I understand your point. I used 2006 because Knepper’s specific challenge was that if I could find another Republican struggling to match their 2006 performance he would shave his legs.
IIRC, the margin of error (MoE) for the most recent Perry poll was 4.5%, so the 9.x% margin of victory in 2006 is within the MoE for the polls in 2010. In a statistical sense, Perry is right where he was in 2006.
It’s also worth noting that most of the polls show Perry’s hovering consistently between 6% and 9% over the course of the last 18 months. The alleged “eyebrow raising gaffes” to which Knepper refers appear to have had no impact whatsoever on his polling numbers, indicating that they weren’t really “eyebrow raising gaffes.”
CO, yeah, some minor league bs blog out of San Antonio is really going to be convincing. What next, statistics from Texasisbest.blogspot.com?
Texas is 22nd in unemployment. 22nd. This is middle of the road. And given how it is an energy state with low taxes and low wages, pretty damn pathetic.
You should stick to chasing those ambulances, oh look, there goes one now. Hurry to the ER, so maybe you can afford hamburger helper soon.
Alex, CO is a typical know it all Lawyer who can never, ever admit he is wrong. I am happy to, I got Wahabbists and Salafists mixed up here once and you corrected me. That is fine by me.
“I used 2006 because Knepper’s specific challenge was that if I could find another Republican struggling to match their 2006 performance he would shave his legs.”
Yeah, but he obviously meant Governor. You know, people elected every four years. In case you have not noticed, the House is every 2 years. Why would anyone compare such radically different venues as House and the Governors mansion? Oh, I know, because some people have a fetish at the idea of a man shaving his legs.
As to Texas, it has long had very high population growth.
“Since the early 1900s, Texas has grown faster than the nation. However, during the Texas oil boom, the state’s population growth accelerated. From 1970 to 1980, as oil prices spiraled upward and people flocked to Texas, its population grew by 2.71 percent per year, while the nation’s increased at a 1.14 percent pace. Even during the 1980s, which witnessed an oil and real estate bust, Texas almost doubled the nation’s population growth. During the 1990s, Texas again exceeded expectations and grew by its largest amount yet, adding almost 3.9 million residents and surpassing New York as the second most populous state. Many immigrants and residents from other states were drawn to Texas’ strong economy and rapidly expanding high-tech centers, such as Austin and Dallas’ telecom corridor.”
Might I remind people that Texas had very low unemployment in the 90′s? In fact, up to a few years ago Texas had a very low unemployment rate of 4.3% There has been no flooding into Texas from other states, in fact it is lower than its historical average being at 2.1%
“Slightly more than half of Texas’ population growth in 2010-11 will flow from net migration, with natural increase (births minus deaths of residents) accounting for the remainder. Population growth is expected to step up from its 2008-09 pace (1.8 percent per year), increasing by 1,069,000 in 2010-11, for an average annual increase of 2.1 percent. The state’s total population is expected to average 25,779,000 in fiscal 2011.”
All of these quoted parts and statistics come directly from the State government of Texas, from the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.
Oh, wait, I am sorry, actually using facts instead of simple assertion “I say it, therefore it must be so”
and here are some stats from CNN: Its population also grew by the greatest number of people (478,000) during the 12 months ended July 1. California was second with 381,000 followed by North Carolina with 134,000.
Wyoming boasted the fastest growth rate for the 12-month period: 2.12% to a total of 544,270. The Cowboy State was followed by Utah (2.1%), Texas (1.97%) and Colorado (1.81%).
So, no it is a lie to state that people are flooding in now more so than in the past. By the way, Nevada saw a 1% increase in population from last year, in spite of its record unemployment.
>> Yeah, but he obviously meant Governor. You know, people elected every four years. In case you have not noticed, the House is every 2 years. Why would anyone compare such radically different venues as House and the Governors mansion?
There are no other incumbent, elected Republican Governors running for reelection in 2010. Brewer is the only other sitting Republican running for Governor.
Thirty seconds on realclearpolitics.com would have told you this. This is why I don’t bother to read your posts anymore–you don’t do your homework.
>> Oh, I know, because some people have a fetish at the idea of a man shaving his legs.
Meh. I’m a cyclist and triathlete. Half my male friends shave their legs.
Incumbent Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons was denied renomination by losing the Republican primary held on June 8 to Former Federal Judge Brian Sandoval. So doesn’t Gibbons count? I mean, he sure as hell struggled all the way towards being defeated. Twenty seconds looking for that would have told you that, but no, you had to choose a whackjob Congresswoman, when Gibbons was there for the easy picking.
And if you don’t read me, how do you know what I said? Talk about another failure on your part.
I find you amusing because of your unbridled love affair that you profess for yourself. Oooh, you are a triathlete and a cyclist…how pompous. Dude, when you do some real athletics, get back to me. Ever hear of chi ku tian wei? Of course not, you are way too soft for that. I promise you that I would have you crying like a little girl after an hour of a real workout. Not that I can do it anymore myself (nor could I even do it that great when I was young), it is just that i know the real thing and it is obvious to me that you are utterly weak in mind and body to hope to do it.
But Cyclist, please I don’t even own a car, I ride my bike throughout the region here in temperatures that would turn you into a puddle. You do crack me up, that is for sure. Be honest, you have a big picture of yourself in your living room, don’t you?
“There are no other incumbent, elected Republican Governors running for reelection in 2010″
Massive, massive Fail.
The Governor of Nebraska, Dave Heineman is running for re-election. Heineman defeated Democratic nominee David Hahn in the November 7, 2006, general election, capturing 73.4 percent of the vote—one of the most lopsided victories for a gubernatorial race in Nebraska history.
Governor Butch Otter is seeking a second term in 2010. A former state legislator, lieutenant governor and Congressman, Otter was elected in 2006 with 52 percent of the vote
TKO.
How much does anyone want to bet that CO will not admit he is wrong? He mocks me, then I turn around and buried him because the fool is too stupid to know what is going on in America
“There are no other incumbent, elected Republican Governors running for reelection in 2010. Brewer is the only other sitting Republican running for Governor.
Thirty seconds on realclearpolitics.com would have told you this. This is why I don’t bother to read your posts anymore–you don’t do your homework.”
I am sorry, I know I am gloating but damn, what a complete and utter tool. I don’t do my homework?
I have proven, once and for all, what a complete and utter tool CO Independent is.
Hmm..Two other Republican Governors running for re-election counts as no one in his fantasy mind. Scary. The guy misreads something on RCP, lord knows how bad his reading comprehension is. He got his Law degree from downstairs Law school underneath the sewage pipes on American Somoa.
So CO where is your apology to me, say: “I was wrong, you were right, you did your homework, I didn’t do mine, I was foolish to mock you as not doing your homework.”
OK, I gotta do some real work, it is just so rare that I get to completely and utterly destroy someones credibility in such a short time. And it was sooooo easy.
Ha! You’re right, Easton. I didn’t see Nebraska.
And guess what, Dave Heineman, currently polling at 61%, is struggling to match his 74% performance in the 2006 election, so Knepper still has to shave his legs! Thank you!
Separately, I think you’re losing it.
From Rasmussen
“Incumbent Republican C.L. “Butch” Otter still leads the race for Idaho’s next governor.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Idaho finds that Otter holds a sizable 52% to 36% advantage over his Democratic challenger, Keith Allred. Just seven percent (7%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are not sure.
Numbers have hardly changed since July, when Otter held a 53% to 36% lead. The Republican held a 32-point advantage over his Democratic challenger – 60% to 32% – in the first Rasmussen Reports survey of the race in late March.
While Otter’s lead has fallen since then, he is still running above the 50% safe line for incumbents. Also, any Democratic candidate faces long odds in Idaho. The state hasn’t elected a Democratic governor in 20 years.
This race remains Solid GOP in the Rasmussen Reports 2010 Gubernatorial Scorecard.
And as to Nebraska, good lord, 74% is an outlier almost impossible to repeat especially for an incumbent. And Otter is doing better than he was 4 years ago.”
As to my losing it, there has been a solid month of rain in Oaxaca, the water was out in town all weekend, as was electricity, I have campus housing and we have our own plant and water but I was stuck at home all weekend. You stay home with 3 small children and you not lose it. I can yell at my kids or I can vent and be an a-hole here. As I love my kids I choose to vent here. Is that so hard to understand?
My wife an kids have the TV’s so I am stuck with the internet. And let us say I have no choice but to waste my time here, at least until the weather clears up so that beach going because viable. The rip tides now are murder.
But anyway, kudos to at least owning up to being wrong.
>> I can vent and be an a-hole here
You will get no argument from me on that one. You’re definitely an asshole.
Knepper: It’s unmanly to run away from your commitments. You’ve tucked tail and run away from this thread. I want pictures, dammit! I’ll hound you from here to eternity until I see those silky smooth legs shimmering in the afterglow of a fresh shave!
CO Independent writes:
“@ Candy
“I’m not sure I understand your point. I used 2006 because Knepper’s specific challenge was that if I could find another Republican struggling to match their 2006 performance he would shave his legs.”
I was making the point that Gov. Rick Perry (R-Texas) should be outperforming his 2006 margin because a wave election — favoring Perry’s party — would send the margins higher in nearly all seats (gubernatorial, Senate, House) that would represent Republican holds.
I was getting at shifts. And you when you focus on that, always compare to the previous election.
This is why I thought Alex Knepper had a valid point about incumbent Rick Perry getting challenged by Bill White (D-Houston), for the Texas gubernatorial.
“IIRC, the margin of error (MoE) for the most recent Perry poll was 4.5%, so the 9.x% margin of victory in 2006 is within the MoE for the polls in 2010. In a statistical sense, Perry is right where he was in 2006.
“It’s also worth noting that most of the polls show Perry’s hovering consistently between 6% and 9% over the course of the last 18 months. The alleged “eyebrow raising gaffes” to which Knepper refers appear to have had no impact whatsoever on his polling numbers, indicating that they weren’t really “eyebrow raising gaffes.”
No real argument from me. I was just adding to the discussion. But it may indeed turn out that Perry wins re-election with, as I’d expect, a better 2010 margin (than 2006) over Bill White (even if by one or two more points). All politics are local, yes, but this year’s are also national. A whole lot of states (routinely voting for the opposition White House party’s candidate) will end up flipping out of the Democratic and into the Republican column.
These states (with no more than one occurrence of deviating from the script) are as follows: Pennsylvania (since 1938, except 1982); Wyoming (1958, sans 1978); Michigan (1978, minus 1982); Tennessee (1986); Kansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma (1990). Each one is on the list for likely flips. (New York has been on the pattern since 1982, except 2002, but it’ll likely stay blue and give a promotion — after the Sept. 14 primaries — to N.Y. Atty. Gen. Andrew Cuomo.)
Original: “Michigan (1978, minus 1982)”
Correction: Michigan (1978, minus 1990)
I’m not endorsing being an undisciplined, gaffe-prone clown (and I’m not saying Perry is being that either), but I dislike it when a clear front-runner is cautious and inoffensive to run up the score. It’s lazy and ultimately self-defeating after you win, because you don’t have a mandate.
If you’re cruising to re-election, you have a cushion available enabling you to consciously push the envelope, stir up a little controversy, push the Overton Window to the right, deliberately drive your re-elect numbers down in order to give yourself a mandate once you’ve won.