(03-07-2018 05:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 04:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 04:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 04:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 03:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  Culberson is more likely to get back up to 60% than he is to lose. He got 56% with the Trump albatross in 2016 in a solid, but moderate Republican district. Republicans can take district 7, the district of George HW Bush (67-71) and Bill Archer (71-01) and Culberson since to the bank.

LOL. The 23% percent who voted against him in the GOP Primary were Democrats voting in the GOP primary for Sarah Davis and voted against Culbertson while they were doing so.

To the bank? That's a bold statement. LOL. He got 56% against James Cargas in 2016. I know James. He's nice, but he's not a serious candidate. Basically he got 56% running against a random name on the ballot. He had no money either (btw, half the Dems running against Culbertson are raising money faster than he is). There are lots of Republicans living in that district that don't like Culbertson AND his district is gaining thousands of new voters each month (and they don't appear to be Trumpers either). He's no moderate, but a doctrinaire right winger that has the added detraction of not being particularly liked by the Trumpers either.

We shall see in November, but I'm feeling really good about the Dems chances in that district. Heck, the GOP primary (which featured a really, really, really nasty race for State Rep in it - that drew in LOTS of voters - and a LOT of voters that have no intention of voting for Culbertson in November) only outdrew the Dem primary in the district by 2 percent. And in District 7, which has historically been VERY Conservative, that's an amazing development.

60%? No way. 56%? No way. 50.1%? Unlikely, but possible.

He got 60% in 2014 and 64% in 2012. I lived in 7 for many years. He's to the right of a lot of the district (including me), and he's no George HW Bush or Bill Archer, but he's "right" on the right issues. The district is not going to vote for a Democrat and you've really got nothing but wishful thinking and lots of solid Republicans who didn't vote for Trump but who have and will continue to vote for Culberson.

Yes, against a hapless candidate (handing out scrawled business cards as his campaign literature) with no money, he got 64% in 2012, 60% in 2014, 56% in 2016. He'll be facing a well funded, much more polished and serious candidate this time. We shall see. I strongly suspect it will be you who will be surprised in November. BTW, watch out for the increasing African American vote in the NW part of the district too. Its not just the West Montrose/Galleria/Afton Oaks/Greensway/Bellaire areas that are problems for the GOP. That South of 1-10 corridor in the district is still VERY right wing, but that area really isn't gaining population. Second Baptist might be in that district, but it really no longer represents that district. Neither does Hotze.

By the way, Culbertson hasn't faced a well funded challenger since 2006. That year, also a big Democratic year, and in a district FAR more conservative than his is now.....he got 52%. Most of the people in Afton Oaks now weren't there for the 'no rail on Richmond' movement in 2006 and could care less if rail gets built anyway. That's what saved him last time. There's no local issue like that to exploit this time.

And Culbertson has fundraising problems too. In all those years, he never managed to bank a stash for a tough race. Rumor is that he's a lazy campaigner too. Now he's in a real fight, and I suspect the big shots aren't going to want to invest in a district that is going to be VERY expensive to play in. Furthermore, the fact that the neighboring district TX-2 isn't in play is going to deter the big money outsiders from getting too involved in this race. Too much expense for just one seat when there are far cheaper ways to spend that money. BTW, the Dems, who are largely raising the money from within the district, WILL make it rain for Fletcher or Moser. How did he spend half a million in the primary? WTF did he buy with that money? Certainly not much that I could see. Maybe he blew it all on ads on KSEV and tablecloth inserts at Taste of Texas and buying endorsements on the million different 'pay to play' endorsement cards of dubious value in the GOP Primary (and of even less value in a General election). And 23% of the voters still voted for someone else in his primary. My guess it went to overpriced consultants. His GOTV sucked too. Fletchers GOTV most definitely did not suck.

Basically, Culbertson was running against a random name out of the phone book the last 3 cycles and is down to 56%. Culbertson could win, but 56% is pretty damn near impossible barring some sort of scandal.

Spending 1.2 billion still didn't convince enough people to vote for Hillary. No amount of spending is going to convince someone like me- a moderately conservative professional (which a lot of the voters in that district are) to vote for a Liberal Democrat. Even though Culberson is very right, he isn't offensively so (like Tom Delay could be). It would take a MASSIVE difference in turnout. And as fired up as the Democrats are, their extremism is firing up a lot on the right. And off years are generally better for Republican turnout.

You are correct, off years are USUALLY better for Republican turnout. But the Dems came within 4,000 votes of outdrawing the GOP in the primary (where its even more of an advantage for the GOP) in CD7 and that's before you factor in the impact of all of those Democrats voting in the GOP Primary to help Sarah Davis fend off Dopukil. Texas' Democratic primary results were mildly disappointing in some parts of the state (although they certainly showed a dramatic increase in participation by Dems). Those results were definitely not disappointing in CD7. Or really in Harris County in general. Sometimes the percentage voting against a GOP incumbent are usually from right wingers who want to send a message to the candidate and who will certainly vote for that candidate against a Democrat. Yesterday, in CD7, that wasn't the case. That 23 percent voting against Culbertson represented a lot of Davis voters, who will crawl over broken glass to vote for Fletcher or Moser.


Look at it this way. In 2016, the Democratic and Republican primary voter turnout in District 7 was as follows. Democratic voters....~36,000 Republican voters ~78,000. So the GOP beat the Dems in primary turnout by a 69-31 margin (by the way, there was a contested and contentious Dem primary that year for President). Culbertson, running against a very weak candidate converted that into a 56-44 win. This year, the primary voting totals in the district were as follows: Democrats 34,107 and Republicans 38,044. So roughly a 53-47% split. And we most certainly know that the GOP primary number, unlike the Democratic one, included a significant number of crossover voters with no intention of voting for Culbertson in the general (some Davis voters). Combine that MASSIVE drop in primary margin, Culbertson's money woes, plus a much better candidate for the Dems, and the Trump environment - which is not very popular in CD7....And I don't see that as encouraging for Culbertson. If anything, he probably had the worst night of any GOP Congressional incumbent in Texas.

Yea, I'd rate CD7 as 'lean Dem' and possibly 'likely Dem'. It would take a LOT to get Culbertson to 56%.

---

By the way, the Texas GOP did have a good night in another Houston area CD, CD-2 (I'm disappointed we won't see Kath-a-leen waste another 50 million of her husbands money on ads extolling Trump, firing a shotgun at the camera, and basically acting like she's the next idiot in the Star Wars Cantina - and still then probably losing to a Democrat because a third of the district is offended by her ads, a third is laughing at the ads, and everyone wants her to just shut the hell up). But in CD-7....It was a very bad result for them.