Mediaboss Marketing

As the 2024 presidential race draws closer to primaries and caucuses getting underway, former President Donald Trump holds a commanding lead over his competitors, while former United States Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley moves to second place, tied with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll of registered voters released today.

Among Republican and Republican leaning voters, 67 percent support Trump, 11 percent support DeSantis, 11 percent support Haley, 4 percent support entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, and 3 percent support former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

This is both Trump's and Haley's highest levels of support since the Quinnipiac University Poll started national surveys on the 2024 GOP presidential primary race in February 2023 and this is DeSantis' lowest score of the year. In February, he received 36 percent support.

Among Republican and Republican leaning voters who support a candidate in the 2024 Republican presidential primary, 50 percent say they might change their candidate choice depending on what happens leading up to the Republican primary, while 48 percent say they are firmly set on their choice for the Republican nomination no matter what happens leading up to the Republican primary.

President Biden receives 75 percent support among Democratic and Democratic leaning voters, author Marianne Williamson receives 13 percent support, and U.S. Representative from Minnesota Dean Phillips receives 5 percent support.

Among Democratic and Democratic leaning voters who support a candidate in the 2024 Democratic presidential primary, a majority (57 percent) say they might change their candidate choice depending on what happens leading up to the Democratic primary, while 40 percent say they are firmly set on their choice for the Democratic nomination no matter what happens leading up to the Democratic primary.

In a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup, President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are in a virtual dead heat, with 47 percent supporting Biden and 46 percent supporting Trump.

Democrats (94 - 5 percent) support Biden, while Republicans (93 - 4 percent) support Trump. Among independents, 46 percent support Biden and 40 percent support Trump.

In a three-person hypothetical 2024 general election matchup adding independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Biden receives 38 percent support, Trump receives 36 percent support, and Kennedy receives 22 percent support.

In a five-person hypothetical 2024 general election matchup adding independent candidate Cornel West and Green Party candidate Jill Stein, Trump receives 38 percent support, Biden receives 36 percent support, Kennedy receives 16 percent support, and West and Stein each receive 3 percent support.

Voters give President Biden a negative 38 - 58 percent job approval rating, largely unchanged from a November 15 Quinnipiac University poll when he received a negative 37 - 59 percent job approval rating.

Voters were asked about Biden's handling of...

Voters are divided on the House of Representatives beginning a formal impeachment inquiry to determine whether or not to bring impeachment charges against President Biden, as 46 percent approve and 49 percent disapprove.

Democrats (85 - 10 percent) disapprove, while Republicans (80 - 17 percent) approve. Independents are split, with 48 percent approving and 47 percent disapproving.

Seven in 10 voters (70 percent) say they are following news about the Justice Department's investigations into President Biden's son Hunter Biden either very closely (28 percent) or somewhat closely (42 percent), while 29 percent say they are following it not too closely.

More than 4 in 10 voters (44 percent) say the Justice Department's treatment of Hunter Biden has been not tough enough, while 28 percent say it has been fair, and 15 percent say it has been too tough.

A majority of voters (53 percent) say they are concerned by a recent comment former President Donald Trump made saying he wants to be a dictator for one day if he wins the 2024 presidential election, while 44 percent say they are not concerned.

Democrats (90 - 9 percent) and independents (57 - 40 percent) say they are concerned, while Republicans (84 - 13 percent) say they are not concerned.

More than two months after the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, voters are split on whether the United States should send more military aid to Israel for their efforts in the war with Hamas, with 45 percent supporting it and 46 percent opposing it.

This is a drop from majority support (54 - 39 percent) for the United States sending more military aid to Israel in Quinnipiac University's November 16 poll.

In today's poll, there are wide gaps by political party, age, and race.

Republicans (65 - 28 percent) support the United States sending more military aid to Israel, while Democrats (58 - 36 percent) oppose it. Among independents, 41 percent support it and 48 percent oppose it.

Voters 65 years of age and over (63 - 28 percent) and voters ages 50 - 64 years old (55 - 36 percent) support the United States sending more military aid to Israel, while voters 18 - 34 years old (72 - 21 percent) and voters 35 - 49 years old (53 - 38 percent) oppose it.

White voters (51 - 40 percent) support the United States sending more military aid to Israel, while Hispanic voters (60 - 36 percent) and Black voters (56 - 35 percent) oppose it.

A majority of voters (69 percent) think supporting Israel is in the national interest of the United States, while 23 percent think it is not in the national interest of the United States.

When it comes to the relationship between the United States and Israel, 29 percent of voters think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, while 17 percent think the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel, and 45 percent think the U.S. support of Israel is about right.

Voters are split on the way Israel is responding to the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack, with 43 percent approving and 42 percent disapproving. This compares to a November 16 poll when 46 percent approved and 40 percent disapproved of Israel's response.

Voters were asked whether their sympathies lie more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians based on what they know about the situation in the Middle East. Forty-nine percent of voters say the Israelis, while 24 percent say the Palestinians. This compares to mid-November when 54 percent said the Israelis and 24 percent said the Palestinians.

Republicans (77 - 6 percent) and independents (48 - 24 percent) say their sympathies lie more with the Israelis, while Democrats (40 - 30 percent) say their sympathies lie more with the Palestinians.

Voters (55 - 38 percent) support the United States sending more military aid to Ukraine for their efforts in the war with Russia, largely unchanged from a mid-November survey.

There is a big gap by party identification.

Democrats (77 - 17 percent) and independents (51 - 42 percent) support the United States sending more military aid to Ukraine, while Republicans (51 - 42 percent) oppose it.

A majority of voters (69 percent) think supporting Ukraine is in the national interest of the United States, while 25 percent think it is not in the national interest of the United States.

Nearly one-third of voters (32 percent) think the United States is doing too much to help Ukraine, 25 percent think the U.S. is doing too little, and 35 percent think the U.S. is doing about the right amount to help Ukraine.

Just under half of voters (48 percent) say they plan to spend about the same amount on gifts this holiday season compared to last year, 39 percent say they plan to spend less, and 12 percent say they plan to spend more.

As for next year, a plurality of voters (48 percent) think the nation's economy will be better, while 39 percent think it will be worse.

More than 6 in 10 voters (62 percent) think 2024 will be better than 2023 for them personally, while 20 percent think it will be worse than 2023 for them personally.

1,647 self-identified registered voters nationwide were surveyed from December 14th - 18th with a margin of error of +/- 2.4 percentage points. The survey included 702 Republican and Republican leaning voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.7 percentage points. The survey included 683 Democratic and Democratic leaning voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.8 percentage points.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Doug Schwartz, Ph.D. since 1994, conducts independent, non-partisan national and state polls on politics and issues. Surveys adhere to industry best practices and are based on random samples of adults using random digit dialing with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones.

Visit poll.qu.edu or http://www.facebook.com/quinnipiacpoll

Email poll@qu.edu, or follow us on Twitter @QuinnipiacPoll.

Read this article:
12/20/23 - Haley Ties DeSantis For First Time In GOP Primary, While Trump Still Dominates, With Biggest Lead To Date ... - Quinnipiac University Poll

The Colorado GOP is threatening to try to withdraw from Colorados Republican presidential primary in March or ignore the results if Donald Trump isnt on the ballot, heaping uncertainty onto the fast-approaching contest and setting up a possible legal showdown with state elections officials.

The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Trump cant appear on the ballot because he engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and therefore is disqualified from holding office again. The decision will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but theres little time for a resolution before the Jan. 5 state deadline to set the ballot. Ballots start being mailed to military and overseas voters on Jan. 20. Election Day is March 5.

Colorado GOP Chairman Dave Williams told The Colorado Sun on Tuesday night that if Trump isnt on the ballot, the party would ask the state to cancel the Republican presidential primary. Instead, Republican voters would caucus to select delegates to the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee next year.

There are 37 delegates up for grabs from the state.

Im not going to let these sons of bitches dictate who were going to nominate, Williams said in an X Spaces event Tuesday night on the site formerly known as Twitter.

Williams told The Sun that if Trump isnt on the ballot and the Colorado Secretary of States Office wont cancel the Republican presidential primary, we will ignore the primary results.

The Colorado Secretary of States Office said the Colorado GOP couldnt withdraw from the presidential primary and that it has doubts about whether the party can ignore the primary results.

Colorado law does not allow a presidential primary election to be canceled at the request of a political party, the office said in a written statement Wednesday. If the Colorado Republican Party attempts to withdraw from the presidential primary or ignore the results of the election, this would likely be a matter for the courts.

State law says each political party shall use the results of the (presidential primary) election to allocate national delegate votes in accordance with the partys state and national rules.

The legal and political uncertainty highlights how the Colorado Supreme Courts ruling marks the first time that the insurrection clause has been used to block a presidential candidate from appearing on the ballot.

The Colorado Supreme Courts ruling is stayed until Jan. 4. The court ordered that the stay remain in place, and that the Colorado Secretary of States Office must place Trumps name on the ballot, if its decision is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Since an appeal is imminent, the U.S. Supreme Court would have to block Trump from Colorados primary ballot in the next three weeks for Williams threat to be relevant.

Before it could even try to use a caucus process to pick delegates to the national convention, the Colorado GOP would have to get a waiver from the Republican National Committee. The Colorado GOP filed an alternative delegate apportionment plan with the RNC as an insurance policy against the Colorado case challenging Trumps spot on the ballot.

The waiver appears likely to be granted.

RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel said on X on Tuesday night that the Colorado Supreme Courts decision was election interference.

The Republican nominee will be decided by Republican voters, not a partisan state court, she said.

A similar situation is playing out in Nevada, where both a Republican presidential primary and caucuses will be held in February. That states GOP said it will only honor the results of the caucus.

The Nevada GOP has barred any candidate who participates in the primary from also participating in the caucus.

The caucus system has a long history in Colorado and its still used to place candidates on the ballot in lower-tier races.

Colorados presidential primary this year will be just the fifth-ever in the state. Voters overwhelmingly approved ditching the caucus system in Colorado for a presidential primary in 2016.

Previously, Colorado has had presidential primaries only in 1992,1996, 2000 and 2020.

Still, quickly organizing a last-minute caucus process would likely be immensely difficult and costly. The Colorado GOP would have to find and reserve spaces throughout the state for Republicans to gather. The party would also have to draft and agree upon rules for how the system would work.

The Colorado GOP could try to combine the presidential primary caucus with its already scheduled caucuses in March that are set to select which candidates are on the states June primary ballot for lower-tier races, like congressional and state legislative contests.

If the Colorado GOP were to somehow withdraw from the primary or ignore the results, doing so would invalidate the opinion of unaffiliated voters, who make up the largest share of the states electorate and are allowed to cast ballots in partisan primaries.

Colorados 37 delegates to the Republican National Convention are electorally unimportant. Polls show Trump has plenty of support to secure the GOP nomination without backing from the state.

Additionally, the former president is unlikely to win in Colorado in the general election. President Joe Biden beat Trump by 13 percentage points in 2020.

But Williams said exiting the primary is a matter of principle. Were not going to take this lying down, he said on CNN.

In addition to Trump, several other candidates have filed to appear on Colorados Republican presidential primary ballot. They include Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

Ramaswamy late Tuesday posted a video on X promising to withdraw from the Colorado GOP ballot unless Trump is part of the primary and demanding that DeSantis, Christie and Haley do the same.

The Colorado Supreme Courts 4-3 decision to block Trump from the ballot stems from the so-called insurrection clause in the U.S. Constitution.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment bars officers of the United States who took an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and then engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof from holding federal or state office again.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a liberal political nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., sued Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold in September on behalf of a group of Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters, arguing that the former president shouldnt be allowed on the states presidential primary ballot because of his role in the Jan. 6 riot.

The four Colorado Supreme Court justices who voted to block Trump from the ballot wrote in their opinion that Trump clearly engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6.

The record amply established that the events of Jan. 6 constituted a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish the peaceful transfer of power in this country, the courts majority wrote. Under any viable definition, this constituted an insurrection.

The majority also wrote that Trump did not merely incite the insurrection.

Even when the siege on the Capitol was fully underway, he continued to support it by repeatedly demanding that Vice President (Mike) Pence refuse to perform his constitutional duty and by calling senators to persuade them to stop the counting of electoral votes, the majority wrote. These actions constituted overt, voluntary and direct participation in the insurrection.

Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.

Excerpt from:
Colorado GOP threatens to withdraw from or ignore state's presidential primary if Trump isn't on the ballot - The Colorado Sun

All right, friends. Lets play Jeopardy!

Forgettable Losers for $200, you say? Very well! The answer is: Theodore Pomeroy and Michael Kerr.

Players? Anyone?

Oh, so sorry. The correct question is, Who are the only two House speakers in U.S. history whose tenures were shorter than Kevin McCarthys?

Yes, readers, this is true. Pomeroy, by all accounts a reasonably impressive and quite well-liked politician, was an accidental speaker, serving for only one day in 1869, as a kind of bouquet thrown to the retiring New Yorker by his admiring colleagues. Kerrs speakership ended in 1876 after a mere 258 days, but not because of scandal or weakness. Rather, he up and died in office, at the tender age of 49.

So you can put asterisks next to both of those, if you ask me. Which leaves McCarthy, at 270 days, as the shortest-serving House speaker in American history owing solely to his own incompetence, ineffectiveness, and emptiness.

For what will history remember Kevin McCarthy? A few things. But lets not complicate matters. First and foremost, and by far, he will go down in history for that photograph. You know the one I mean. The Mar-a-Lago one, standing next to Donald Trump. It was a week after Trumps presidency ended in January 2021, and three weeks and a day after McCarthy got into a screaming match with Trump over the phone on January 6, about the rioters Trump had sent Hill-ward to hang Mike Pence. Your insurrectionists, McCarthy said, were trying to fucking kill me. Trump retorted: Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are.

Heres what the photo symbolizes. McCarthy was furious at Trump on January 6. Ive had it with this guy, he said shortly afterward, in a taped call famously obtained by two New York Times reporters. He was steeling himself to call on Trump to resign.

Then something changed. We dont know exactly what. He started talking to his GOP colleagues. They cautioned against confronting Trump. And soon enough, he was on a plane down to Florida. He later complained that he didnt know they were going to take a picture. Well, look at it. It sure looks like he knows a picture is being taken.

Could McCarthy have single-handedly moved the Republican Party into a post-Trump world? Lets not be nave. He could not have. Trump would still be contesting for control of the GOP. But maybe, just maybe, McCarthywho was, after all, the leader of the House Republican conference and the minority leader of the House of Representativescould have started something.

Maybe others would have been emboldened to follow him. Maybe that group would have gained the backing of a few GOP senators. Bill Barr would have joined them, and John Kelly, and a number of other prominent Republicans. And they could have coalesced around a still-conservative but non-MAGA potential candidate, and instead of the coronation we are watching today, wed be watching an actual fightmaybe not a particularly close one, but a fight all the samefor the soul (if they can be said to have such a thing anymore) of the Republican Party.

But no. Shortly after Joe Bidens inauguration, McCarthy had decided: He had to stay leader. He had to be speaker one day. And that meant staying with Trump. And thats what history will remember about him. He was the one maneven more than the superannuated Mitch McConnellwho could have defied Trump. He deified him instead. And if Trump wins next fall and returns to the White House and does all the things he promises hes going to do, and future historians are one day compiling a list of those complicit in the collapse of American democracy, Kevin McCarthys name will be in the top 10 on that list, and maybe the top five.

There are a couple other things hell be remembered for. That joke of a speakership vote. Finally elected on the fifteenth ballot. It was so obvious that his colleagues did not respect him. And so obvious that he was desperate for their approvalso desperate that he handed them the tool, the famous one-person motion to vacate, that sealed his fate from the day he was handed the gavel.

And finally there is the utter lack of achievement in behalf of the American people that he oversaw. The week before McCarthy was ousted as speaker, one study found that the current Congress had enacted into law only 12 billsa full 40 fewer than your average Congress going back to 1973. The House had passed 224 bills, which sounds respectable, but that was actually the second-lowest number in the last 50 years. That ignominious record was held by the 113th Congress, also a Republican House, obsessed with tying Barack Obama in knots and making sure that he could not, for example, raise the minimum wage.

McCarthys pulverizing failure as a legislative leader stems from two truths: One, he cared little about policy; two, his word was no good. Hed say anything to anyone. If youve read enough political biographies, you know that he was always as good as his word is a common form of high praise that can be delivered across partisan lines. McCarthy was as useless and malleable as his word.

So off he goes, back to Bakersfield as the new year dawns, or more likely off to K Street. Because that too is now expected of people like McCarthyto go cash in on one of those lavish lobbyists salaries. And then, if Trump wins, maybe hell join the administration. Then, with luck, well all get to watch him be indicted and convicted. Something tells me God is not finished with Kevin McCarthy.

Read the original:
The Most Pathetic Republican Leader of 2023 - The New Republic

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribunes daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

The Texas Senates roll-call votes during this years regular legislative session and four special sessions allow us to once again rank the 31 senators from liberal to conservative on that bodys ideological spectrum. (See the methodological note at the end of this article.)

The 19 Republican senators fall into four general groups on the ideological spectrum.

At the most conservative end are three senators: Bryan Hughes of Mineola, Mayes Middleton of Galveston and Bob Hall of Edgewood. Hughes, Middleton and Hall all have Lib-Con Scores that are significantly more conservative than those of the 16 other Republican senators. Within this trio, Hughes and Middleton have Lib-Con Scores that are even more conservative than that of Hall. Lib-Con Scores measure how liberal or conservative lawmakers are.

A second group to the right of the GOP median consists of six senators, ranging from Kelly Hancock of North Richland Hills and Drew Springer of Muenster to Paul Bettencourt of Houston and Phil King of Weatherford. Hancock and Springers respective Lib-Con Scores are each significantly more conservative than those of 11 Republican senators, and each significantly less conservative than those of three. Bettencourts Lib-Con Score is significantly more conservative than those of eight Republican senators and is significantly less conservative than those of three. Kings Lib-Con Score is significantly more conservative than those of six Republican senators and significantly less conservative than those of five.

A third GOP group consists of nine senators, ranging from Tan Parker of Flower Mound and Kevin Sparks of Midland to Brian Birdwell of Granbury and Pete Flores of Pleasanton. Parker and Sparks respective Lib-Con Scores are each significantly less conservative than those of six Republican senators, and each significantly more conservative than those of five. Flores Lib-Con Score is significantly less conservative than those of 13 Republican senators while Birdwells is significantly less conservative than those of 11.

At the least conservative end of the GOP ideological spectrum is a single senator, Robert Nichols of Jacksonville. Nichols has a Lib-Con Score that is significantly less conservative than those of all 18 of his Republican colleagues. Nichols Lib-Con Score is still however significantly more conservative than that of the most conservative Democrat.

The 12 Democratic senators fall into three general groups in regard to their location on the ideological spectrum.

At the most liberal end of the Democratic ideological continuum are two senators, Sarah Eckhardt of Austin and Roland Gutierrez of San Antonio (who is running in the Democratic primary next year for the U.S. Senate seat occupied by Ted Cruz). Both have Lib-Con Scores that are significantly more liberal than those of all of the 10 other Democrats.

At the least liberal end of the Democratic ideological continuum is a single senator, Juan Chuy Hinojosa of McAllen. His Lib-Con Score is significantly less liberal than those of every one of his 11 fellow Democrats. Hinojosas Lib-Con Score is still however significantly more liberal than that of the least conservative Republican.

The largest group of Democrats is located between these two poles. This group of nine senators ranges from Borris Miles of Houston, Jos Menndez of San Antonio and Carol Alvarado of Houston at the more liberal end to Csar Blanco of El Paso, Morgan LaMantia of South Padre Island and Judith Zaffirini of Laredo at the less liberal end.

Political scientists have for decades used roll-call votes cast by members of the U.S. Congress to map their places on the Liberal-Conservative scale along which most legislative politics now takes place. This ranking of the Texas Senate does the same, conducted biennially since 2011, by drawing on the 2,161 non-lopsided roll-call votes taken during the 2023 regular session and the four special sessions (during the regular session there were 2,728 votes taken all together, of which 2,055 were non-lopsided, while during the four special sessions there were 115 votes taken all together, of which 106 were non-lopsided). Non-lopsided votes are those where at least two senators are on the losing side.

As with previous rankings conducted earlier in 2023 after the regular session and in 2021 (post-special session), 2021, 2019, 2017 (post-special session), 2017, 2015, 2013 and 2011, this 2023 post-special session analysis uses a Bayesian estimation procedure belonging to the family of methodological approaches that represent political sciences gold standard for roll-call vote analysis.

The senators are ranked from most liberal to most conservative based on their Liberal-Conservative Scores, with the 95% credible interval (CI) for this point estimate also provided. If two senators CIs overlap, their positions on the ideological spectrum might be statistically equivalent, even if their Lib-Con Scores are different.

In no case in 2023 did the CI of a Republican senator overlap with that of a Democratic senator, indicating that every Republican is significantly more conservative than every Democrat, and every Democrat is significantly more liberal than every Republican. This stands in contrast to the situation as recently as 1989, when there were six Republicans who were less conservative than at least one Democrat and two Democrats who were more conservative than at least one Republican. However over the subsequent 35 years, a combination of the nationalization of partisan politics, a growing focus on ideological purity in each party, and the retirement (or party switching) of incumbents whose popularity in their district allowed them to resist these trends has created a widening chasm between Democrats and Republicans in the Texas Legislature.

Mark P. Jones is the Political Science Fellow at Rice Universitys James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.

Go here to see the original:
The 2023 Texas Senate, from right to left: Post-special session - The Texas Tribune

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribunes daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

After nearly a decade of high tensions between Republicans running the state and leaders of the states bluer urban areas, some mayors of major Texas cities are trying a new playbook: play nice with the state.

Republican lawmakers and local officials have little they havent fought about, sparring in recent years over matters like hurricane relief funds, local police budgets, voting access and COVID-19 response measures. After years of trying to undo local progressive policies they disagreed with, GOP legislators this year passed a sweeping law intended to block cities from enacting them in the first place.

To some, the contentiousness between city and state leaders hasnt been productive for either side. In his successful bid for Houston mayor this year, John Whitmire, a longtime Democratic fixture in the Texas Senate, promised to mend the relationship between the states largest city and lawmakers in Austin.

I just want to fix things regardless of who you have to work with, Whitmire said at a November debate.

That echoes the more diplomatic tone struck by Austin Mayor Kirk Watson, another veteran Democratic state legislator who served as mayor in the late 1990s and returned to the seat this year. Austin has often been in the crosshairs of Republican lawmakers and the citys previous mayor openly feuded on social media with Gov. Greg Abbott over pandemic measures like mask mandates and occupancy restrictions.

In his first months as mayor, Watson has also sought collaboration with state officials to solve local problems, including securing $65 million from the states housing agency to combat homelessness.

I'm working very hard to make sure that that relationship is a good one because it benefits my constituents, Watson said during a panel at the Texas Tribune Festival in September.

In an unusual show of amity after Whitmires election, Abbott, who has long warred with cities over adopting policies he sees as hostile to businesses, congratulated the new mayor after his win in a runoff for the seat. Whitmire bested the more progressive U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, by a wide margin, in part by relying on a coalition of Republicans and independents as well as funds from well-known GOP donors.

A couple of factors have guided this shift in tone, political analysts told the Tribune. For one, after years of conflict with the state, local officials are tired of their cities being punching bags for state lawmakers.

Mayors want to take the temperature down, said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston. And they don't want to be political targets.

Voters in Texas cities have also had enough of the feud, analysts said. In big cities that have leaned blue for some time, theyre picking Democratic candidates considered to be more moderate and who have a track record of working with Republican lawmakers in the Texas Capitol.

To actually advance the agendas of their cities, [local leaders] are going to need the support of the state, said Steven Pedigo, who heads the University of Texas at Austins LBJ Urban Lab, which focuses on urban policy. Why fight with the state?

Matt Mackowiak, an Austin-based GOP strategist who chairs the Travis County Republican Party, had another explanation.

The hard-left policy experiment in major cities has clearly failed, he said. So when you have candidates who recognize that those policies have failed, who are pledging to be more mainstream, there's a market for that among voters in many of these cities.

Republicans also picked up a mayoral seat this year in the states third largest city. Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson, who served in the Texas House as a Democrat, switched to the Republican Party in September after winning an uncontested reelection bid in May. Though municipal seats are technically nonpartisan, Republicans now lead two of the states biggest cities; Republican Mattie Parker has been mayor of Fort Worth since 2021.

Tensions between state leaders and city officials have been high for many years as GOP lawmakers have sought to limit how cities govern themselves.

In recent years, the GOP-controlled Legislature limited how much cities budgets can grow each year and forbade local leaders from banning fracking or requiring landlords to accept low-income tenants with federal housing vouchers.

State lawmakers also enacted a law that blocks cities from trimming their police budgets without first asking voters a direct response to the Austin City Council trimming its police budget in 2020 in the wake of the George Floyd protests. State officials later used that law to probe whether Harris County had cut public safety spending.

Local officials unsuccessfully turned to the courts to overturn Abbotts pandemic-era directive barring local governments from adopting public health measures like mask mandates. The Texas Supreme Court sided with Abbott in June, but not before legislators forbade local officials from requiring masks, vaccines or business shutdowns in the event of another COVID-19 surge.

The fight between state and local leaders reached a new peak this year. Legislators passed a wide-ranging bill that attempts to significantly curtail city officials abilities to enact progressive policies drawing a legal challenge spearheaded by Houston officials.

As the Houston region emerged as a Democratic stronghold in the last decade, Republican state lawmakers stepped up their scrutiny of local officials, including recently targeting Harris County over voting access issues.

Whitmire sees opportunities to work on relations between Houston and the state. During the campaign, Whitmire said he would seek to repair the citys relationship with the General Land Office. The state agency, under then-Land Commissioner George P. Bush, shut the city out of federal relief funds to help hard-hit areas recover from Hurricane Harvey.

Whitmire cited a particular factor in his favor: his relationship with current Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham, who previously served with Whitmire in the Senate.

I can bring resources to Houston like no one else has ever served as mayor, Whitmire said at a November debate. Working across the aisle gets results.

Local officials this year have looked for more opportunities to partner with the state to solve local problems. Whitmire, who takes office in January, wants to allow 200 Texas Department of Public Safety troopers to patrol Houston as the city deals with an officer shortage an idea backed by nearly two-thirds of Houston voters, according to a recent poll from the Hobby School of Public Affairs at the University of Houston.

Watson already did something similar this year partnering with the state to allow state troopers to patrol the city amid Austins own persistent officer shortage. The idea sprung out of a conversation with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Watson said during the September TribFest panel.

While Watson has credited the DPS deployment with reductions in violent crime and traffic deaths, the enforcement efforts have fallen disproportionately on communities of color. Watson ended the formal partnership in July but Abbott later sent additional troopers to patrol the city.

There was no benefit gained by cutting deals with state leadership, or pretending that being nice to them will give your city any additional leeway to conduct business how it sees fit or any less meddling in the city's affairs, said Chris Harris, Austin Justice Coalition policy director.

To Watson, there will always be some political tension between the city and state given that Austin does see things with a different point of view than the majority of people that are in the state Legislature, he said at the TribFest panel.

We're going to stand up for Austin values, and I'll always do that, Watson said. But one of my rules of politics is, Don't make unnecessary enemies.

Disclosure: University of Texas at Austin and University of Houston have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

View original post here:
After years of losing battles with GOP leaders, some big city Texas mayors strike friendlier tone - The Texas Tribune