Counties that haven’t voted for a Democrat in decades turned out for Beto O’Rourke in his unsuccessful bid to unseat U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, and he picked up enough support in ruby red Republican counties to force Cruz into single-digit wins.
There's an interesting bit of political intrigue appearing in Texas right now. As Democrats long chastised the poor and working class for voting Republican against their interests, it seems that many Texas suburbs voted Democratic this election against theirs.
The Democrats, to an official, are an urban party. Since the rise of Al Gore and his investors they've loathed Suburbia. Politicians pass laws against it, comedians make jokes about it, TV shows and movies mock it. Suburbia is the gated last-resort of the White elitist, the last refuge of the conservative scoundrel.
Suburbs are overheating the planet, running mom and pop shops out of business, and generally casting a shadow over the vibrancy of an economy based on home-grown, fair-trade, organic, free range donkey dung crackers sourced locally from a collective farming community.
In Houston, especially, the switch is confusing.
The Harris County Democratic Party currently takes its public policy directly from the mind of David Crossley and his non-productive class band of acolytes. Their solution for Houston?
Empty the suburbs, force everyone to live asshole to elbow inside the Loop and ride the Danger Train everywhere (unless it's raining, then you can ride a bus, IF they go where you want). From so-called "Complete streets" (which are really streets that make it difficult to get anywhere) to speed limits capped at 30, to bemoaning the existence of the single-occupancy vehicle, the Democrats don't like the relatively mundane, relatively sequestered Suburban lifestyle preferring instead the highly segregated, highly controlled, highly taxed urban one.
Not that Democrats won't take their votes, they're not stupid, but to think that a party that's ran primarily on reducing energy consumption and footprint is all of the sudden going to embrace Mrs. Johnston living in a $500K McMansion (their term) and driving around in her Mercedes to a nail salon, or make policy that helps Mr. Johnston load up in his SUV to go golfing and create policy to promote this lifestyle requires the suspension of disbelief.
Yes, there's the problem with modern Republicans, and the short-sighted anti-immigrant stance they are taking. And the Bronzed Ego sitting in the White House doesn't help. But if you turn off the Twitter rage machine, block out the media breathlessly acting like every statement el Bronzo utters is "beyond the pale" you get to a place that has to, even begrudgingly, admit that this administration's actual results have been fairly positive, from a conservative perspective.
And this is the problem with politics today. Too much of it is ran through the Social Media outrage prism before being disseminated to people via what should be a calm, rational media. Not an unbiased media mind you, the media has never been that. If you think differently and are longing for some bygone day that never existed I cannot help you.
The media has always been biased to some degree because it's delivered by people. Reporters, journalists and editorialists (we need fewer of the latter) who are people with ideas, views and positions just like you. To think that some C student can get a bachelor's degree in J-School and suddenly come out as a beacon of neutrality is to ask something of the human condition that is not hard-wired within us.
Am I biased? You bet. I hold moderately Libertarian views that can be summed up thusly: The government is responsible for a few things, they should focus on those few things and leave the rest up to us. Will things be perfect? No, but that's the cost of living in a free society. Things don't always go as you would like.
The difference here is this:
1. I openly admit my bias. Currently the media does not. Because of this the Chron can let publicly slip a pro-light rail manifesto and still claim to be reporting on the issue in a neutral manner. Anderson Cooper can get a "tingle up his leg" when Barack Obama speaks but still claim he can moderate a Presidential debate fairly.
2. I'm not a professional media outlet. This, in case you haven't noticed, is an opinion blog. If you don't LIKE or AGREE with my opinion you can either comment, or start your own, or ignore it. The Chronicle, and other media outlets sell themselves as truth seekers, the last line of defense in the battle for the Republic.
This is a problem because often the reporting that you see doesn't tell the truth. It allows politicians of a certain strip to claim to be for the "working family" despite wanting to raise taxes and fees to levels that will have a real impact on their daily lives. Money taken by the government is NEVER referred to as your money, but as the government's money, as if they have a god-given right to it.
A lot of what people vote on today comes down to plain ignorance. We're mad that the VA Hospital is in shambles, a government program gone awry, yet we're sold that the solution to the problem is.....more government. People get mad at the banks for issuing sub-prime mortgages, forgetting that it was, in some cases, a government diktat that led and allowed them to do so.
Suburbanites in Texas get angry at the government, and vote for a party that's promising more......government.
Many times elections in America are a large temper tantrum. I think this one in Texas can be described as such, the question is how long it will linger, and if the low-information voter can allow the results to hold?
