Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Why do you think that Hunt is less terrible than Paxton?

Well, I mean....he doesn't yet have the well-known multi-year track record of crimes and corruption like Ken, but I'm sure he can catch up.  What I'm really saying is that Paxton trounces him in a primary too.  Paxton is unstoppable.  Because Texas Republican voters are not turned OFF by a shameless lying crook....voting for a shameless lying crook gives them a fucking boner that the Viagra folks would study for years.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh my god, you're ADORABLE.  

Paxton's venality, criminality, dishonesty, and corruption are POSITIVES to the Texas voter pool.  When are you going to accept the truth that Texan voters are really awful people who actually like really awful things?

If only Bugs could saw off Texas like he did Florida.  But he would need one big ass jigsaw to make all the necessary cuts.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
41 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, I mean....he doesn't yet have the well-known multi-year track record of crimes and corruption like Ken, but I'm sure he can catch up.  What I'm really saying is that Paxton trounces him in a primary too.  Paxton is unstoppable.  Because Texas Republican voters are not turned OFF by a shameless lying crook....voting for a shameless lying crook gives them a fucking boner that the Viagra folks would study for years.

No, they aren’t turned off by it. But Hunt gives them everything they want without the baggage and a slam dunk. Plus, the normies will come back for Hunt.

GOP primary voters in Texas are very focused on winning and are realistic about liabilities. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

But Hunt gives them everything they want without the baggage and a slam dunk. Plus, the normies will come back for Hunt.

Dude.  You missed a really huge problem Hunt has:

VukFDv.gif

The motivated nutbars are the entire GQP demo in the primary in Texas.  There are no fucking "normies" GTFO with that shit.  Anybody who started out as a normie and still votes GQP has drunk ALL the fucking kool-aid, and is now a fucking nutbar.

Paxton wins whatever office in Texas he wants.  Easily.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

If only Bugs could saw off Texas like he did Florida.  But he would need one big ass jigsaw to make all the necessary cuts.

The suck from Oklahoma would keep us attached

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
On 8/4/2025 at 8:37 PM, berlinerbaer said:

Most blue states have independent commissions. Most red states and many purple states do not. If the commissions went away, the Dems would net a bunch of seats.

Everyone is talking about California, but I think eliminating the commission in CA requires a ballot measure because it was enacted by ballot measure and a change in the state constitution. It's not a given that the voters will repeal it, since it's the kind of thing only partisan Dems would vote for.

The few Dem states that do gerrymander (NY, IL, MD) will need to go hard to the paint, as will the few more that have commissions set up by laws that can be repealed by the legislature. I don't think CA is the way.

Looks like I'm wrong and CA voters would pass a mid-decade gerrymander according to a poll done by a TV station in Sacramento.

screenshot-2025-08-03-at-8-44-34-pm-6891

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, they aren’t turned off by it. But Hunt gives them everything they want without the baggage and a slam dunk. Plus, the normies will come back for Hunt.

GOP primary voters in Texas are very focused on winning and are realistic about liabilities. 

GOP voters know that statewide voting is a fuckin lock in Tx. If they cared about quality of candidate they wouldn’t have allowed Abbott to steam roll the voucher challengers in house primaries. 

Edited by bluto
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
8 hours ago, bluto said:

GOP voters know that statewide voting is a fuckin lock in Tx.

No. They don’t. That’s what separates them from Democrats. Texas GOP voters care more about winning races than anything else. That’s why they were able to break the Democrats hold on the state. GOP voters in Texas haven’t gotten lazy yet. 

They know Paxton is the favorite and can win. They aren’t sure he will and they know if will be expensive to get him there.
Hunt, on the other hand, assures them of taking the natural statewide 56-44 break, making the race much cheaper to win, and presents an opportunity to take some black voters from Democrats as well, which then means the GOP could be competitive in local races in urban districts where they otherwise would not be. 
 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

They know Paxton is the favorite and can win. They aren’t sure he will and they know if will be expensive to get him there.
Hunt, on the other hand, assures them of taking the natural statewide 56-44 break, making the race much cheaper to win, and presents an opportunity to take some black voters from Democrats as well, which then means the GOP could be competitive in local races in urban districts where they otherwise would not be. 

Yep.  Paxton and Cruz are the only statewide Rs who underperform the statewide judicial races that are as good a proxy as you can get for generic R vs generic D.

Add in the natural midterm blowback and the environment is the same as the one that let Beto keep it close against Cruz in 2018.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Paxton just won a statewide midterm race by 10 pts. And that was during the tornado of shit flying around him regarding whistleblower suits and securities fraud. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, bluto said:

Paxton just won a statewide midterm race by 10 pts. And that was during the tornado of shit flying around him regarding whistleblower suits and securities fraud. 

I blame the regular program in Texas public schools. I took a few non-honors classes for shit I really wasn't good at and you don't learn anything. It's like busywork babysitting. 

Posted
2 hours ago, bluto said:

Paxton just won a statewide midterm race by 10 pts. And that was during the tornado of shit flying around him regarding whistleblower suits and securities fraud. 

 He underperformed his whole ticket in a midterm that was essentially a referendum on a Covid and inflation.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
 He underperformed his whole ticket in a midterm that was essentially a referendum on a Covid and inflation.

But he also has a hard and known floor. “Hey, if we run a psychotic, crooked criminal, how low will it go?” We know that. He wins. No matter what. He could buttfuck a puppy to death on live TV, and not go below that floor. AND…the MAGA base LOVES him…BECAUSE he’s the type of guy who would kill a puppy to own the libs.
Posted

Kinda splitting hairs on underperforming the ticket…

Abbott got 54.7% and won by 10.9%
patrick got 53.7% and won by 10.3%
paxton got 53.4% and won by 9.76%… and that needs context as Paxton actually outgained the other two comparing it to prior election. 

Posted (edited)

This is absolutely crazy to me. Our mortgage is a dick hair over $1000. I can't imagine a car, but in the land of 70k trucks it makes sense.

Screenshot_20250808-121659.png

Edited by pacman
Posted
10 minutes ago, pacman said:

This is absolutely crazy to me. Our mortgage is a dick hair over $1000. I can't imagine a car, but in the land of 70k trucks it makes sense.

Screenshot_20250808-121659.png

My wife said my sister just bought a pickup for like $85,000.  IIRC, they live in a doublewide, so this checks out.

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, pacman said:

This is absolutely crazy to me. Our mortgage is a dick hair over $1000. I can't imagine a car, but in the land of 70k trucks it makes sense.

Screenshot_20250808-121659.png

Derek Thompson had Conor Sen (Bloomberg columnist) on his podcast a couple of weeks back and they think housing unaffordability is pushing crypto investing amongst younger generations--I wonder if this is an example of that, as well ("I can't afford a house, but I can afford this car..")

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, kevwun said:

That's a dumb way to spend money. 

My good sir, "galactic stupidity" is our national ethos now.  Imagine the dumbest things you could think or do.  Then sit down and brace yourself, because everything our society is doing is 10X dumber than the dumbest shit you can imagine.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
5 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 He underperformed his whole ticket in a midterm that was essentially a referendum on a Covid and inflation.

Anecdotal, but in one of my now regular arguments with my parents since reestablishishing contact, my Dad did acknowledge that Paxton and Patrick specifically are clowns that he wouldn't vote for again. 

How does he not see that the average R, especially in Texas, is 99% as bad? Not sure. Small victories, I guess...

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, kevwun said:

That's a dumb way to spend money.  Cars don't go up in value.

Trump announced yesterday that the Administration supports private equity and crypto as investments in 401k plans.  The Great Fleecing is coming.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 4
  • Drool 1
Posted
5 hours ago, pacman said:

This is absolutely crazy to me. Our mortgage is a dick hair over $1000. I can't imagine a car, but in the land of 70k trucks it makes sense.

Screenshot_20250808-121659.png

 

jeep has a $123k Cherokee

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Trump announced yesterday that the Administration supports private equity and crypto as investments in 401k plans.  The Great Fleecing is coming.

Give it time.  A future step is "your 401k loses tax-exempt status if it is NOT invested at least 30% in an approved crypto*."

* Approved crypto will include Trumpcoin, and/or any other crypto that directly enriches the Trump family or indirectly does so (the primary beneficiaries of said coin spend $10 million at MAL every year or some shit).

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

jeep has a $123k Cherokee

 

That's insane.  I mean, when the SCOTUS voids the 13th amendment next year, you'll surely be able to pick up a Cherokee for half that price, just like back in the old days.

cherokke_orig.jpeg

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Give it time.  A future step is "your 401k loses tax-exempt status if it is NOT invested at least 30% in an approved crypto*."

* Approved crypto will include Trumpcoin, and/or any other crypto that directly enriches the Trump family or indirectly does so (the primary beneficiaries of said coin spend $10 million at MAL every year or some shit).

It's funny because it's true. 

Most people at my firm (wealth management and retirement plan consultating are very opposed to this.  But when you look at the articles and responses on LinkedIn, places like State Street are all for it.  The gridt angle is off the charts.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
5 hours ago, pacman said:

This is absolutely crazy to me. Our mortgage is a dick hair over $1000. I can't imagine a car, but in the land of 70k trucks it makes sense.

Screenshot_20250808-121659.png

And people will put almost nothing down, finance it over 84 months, and pay 9% interest.  Because fuck financial literacy, I need my truck.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

Surely those that willingly finance 100k of vehicle debt aren’t the same ones bitching about how expensive things are and they can’t afford to buy a house. 
 

i would be sick to my stomach if I was dumb enough to do that and then a year later realized that I owe 95k on my now 75k car, when I decide I can’t afford it and need to sell it. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

y'all really need to take a drive behind the Pine Curtain. 

mile after mile of mobile homes with a brand new $100K Ford F250 and $110K+ 21' Skeeter parked in front.

priorities, my dudes...  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

y'all really need to take a drive behind the Pine Curtain. 

mile after mile of mobile homes with a brand new $100K Ford F250 and $110K+ 21' Skeeter parked in front.

priorities, my dudes...  

the boat is on a 15 year note probably so even worse

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

y'all really need to take a drive behind the Pine Curtain. 

mile after mile of mobile homes with a brand new $100K Ford F250 and $110K+ 21' Skeeter parked in front.

priorities, my dudes...  

yeah, but that’s same as it ever was-I remember going with my Dad, who was doing some appraisal work to make ends meet after the S&L’s went to shit in the early 80’s, in Crosby and Mont Belvieu and seeing clean Corvette’s parked in front of small houses that looked like goats lived there.  
 

There’s another, more urban contingent who can’t make a $3k house payment but they can do $1k on a SUV, and delayed gratification is for pussies.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

That's insane.  I mean, when the SCOTUS voids the 13th amendment next year, you'll surely be able to pick up a Cherokee for half that price, just like back in the old days.

cherokke_orig.jpeg

 

You really wrote that? WTF?!

Posted
22 hours ago, Pasken said:

I blame the regular program in Texas public schools. I took a few non-honors classes for shit I really wasn't good at and you don't learn anything. It's like busywork babysitting. 

image.jpeg.2873261f686d1dd98f912e65bd7a823a.jpeg

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 8/8/2025 at 8:03 AM, Bozo_Casanova said:

No. They don’t. That’s what separates them from Democrats. Texas GOP voters care more about winning races than anything else. That’s why they were able to break the Democrats hold on the state. GOP voters in Texas haven’t gotten lazy yet. 

They know Paxton is the favorite and can win. They aren’t sure he will and they know if will be expensive to get him there.
Hunt, on the other hand, assures them of taking the natural statewide 56-44 break, making the race much cheaper to win, and presents an opportunity to take some black voters from Democrats as well, which then means the GOP could be competitive in local races in urban districts where they otherwise would not be. 
 

 

 

 

 

To be fair I would put the state of the GOP in Texas clearly in the hands of well orchestrated moves by Rove and others. I recommend reading this -https://www.texasobserver.org/john-cornyn-profile-mitch-mcconnell-trump-2020/ which talks about the moves made during the 80s and 90s that put us squarely where we are today.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
On 7/31/2025 at 10:10 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Wait. You’ve consistently supported a consideration of party support in creating congressional districts.
My opinion is and has always been that partisan gerrymandering is bad, period, at all times and in all places and that party outcomes should *never* be considered in the districting process.

Have you changed your mind? California and Illinois just do what you’ve always advocated for. 
The difference is that you and I don’t live in those places. And for the record. I really don’t care about them. I do care that northern Hays county, where I served in an official capacity for about a decade, will be deprived of congressional representation by sharing a rep with places that it has nothing in common with.

My consideration of party support had to do with how a state voted.

CA voted Harris 58.47% Trump 38.33%.  Their legislature should be close to representing that ratio.

However, it's currently 83%-17%

A state that votes 55-65%-45-35% for X party should have a state legislature and US House representation somewhere around those values.

Unfortunately, you will NEVER be able to do a NON gerrymandered map.  Look at every single state - the rural areas are bright red.  WHY?  Because they have "conservative values" (however you want to define those)...

But, then you get to the urban areas and that's why you have the "salamanders" crawling all over them.  And you want, I forgot what you called it, but I think "communities of interest" or something like that to be linked.  I don't think I ever argued against that.  People in urban or even suburban areas don't live where they live to fit some type of good "district map"...

My whole point has been that the legislature makeup should match the voting makeup.

How do you propose that districts be drawn up that ONLY reflect "communities of interest" and yet allow the majority in the state to have their voting "power" be reflected in a way that actually works?

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
On 8/1/2025 at 12:39 AM, Eskimohorn said:


Dems will gladly accept nonpartisan redistricting commissions across the country.

They have one...

 

And their "nonpartisan" redistricting commission gerrymandered the state to 83%-17% when the state votes 59%-39%...

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
On 7/31/2025 at 10:22 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Btw, @Ag with kids, are you OK?
Is that the best you can do? After defending such an unconcionable position for so many years it’s pretty sad that “the Dems in California do it too!!1!1!!” is where you landed, like I give a fuck about what Democrats do, or California. Whom are you even addressing?
It makes me think your media diet must be pretty low calorie. 

How about this:  if you can’t defend this gerrymander, at least you know your party is going to get to the bottom of this Epstein scandal, amirite.

I don't like how many states have apportioned their voting structure.

 

HOWEVER, I also don't think that the right should acquiesce to the fact that the left has "gerrymandered" or "partisan apportioned" their legislatures to be more partisan than the right.  And are now demanding "fairness"...

The right should return the favor and get on an even field and THEN negotiate to change things.  Otherwise, they're doing every election with AT LEAST one hand tied behind their back

 

Hell, blue states are apportioned at 79% Democrat.  Red states are at 76% Republican.  IF Texas gets 5 more seats, the red states STILL won't be at 79%.

 

Tell YOUR side to change first since you don't like the way the districts are set up...

 

BTW, to answer your original question...Yes, I'm OK.  Thanks for asking.

  • Fuck You 5


×
×
  • Create New...