Beto O'Rourke Doesn't Want to Be Democrats' Next National Cause

[DonViejo]

The Texas congressman is hoping to unseat Ted Cruz—without becoming another Jon Ossoff.

By EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE March 20, 2018

Beto O’Rourke wants to be a little more Conor Lamb, a little less Jon Ossoff.

O’Rourke, the Texas congressman who is running for U.S. Senate against Ted Cruz, is looking to live out a Democratic fantasy of turning Texas blue by taking down the only Republican who gets Democrats nearly as riled up as President Donald Trump, in a race no one thinks he can win. But he insists he doesn’t want to become the next national Democratic cause along the way—that kind of attention can create a backlash, and with the background of first winning his House seat despite Bill Clinton and Barack Obama campaigning against him, O’Rourke doesn’t see the value of outside help.

“It may hurt,” O’Rourke told me in an interview for POLITICO’s Off Message podcast. “My takeaway is I don’t know that it ever helps.”

-snip-

O’Rourke wants to be seen as a renegade, running against all the conventional wisdom and usual politicking. He claimed victory on primary night in a webcam off-kilter Facebook Live chat from the dining room table of the row house he shares with a few colleagues on Capitol Hill; he’s planning to drive around all 254 counties in Texas (he’s hit 226 so far); he’s refusing to spend money on focus groups or pollsters; he casually curses in interviews—and makes sure he’s doing interviews all the time. He points out that he voted against Nancy Pelosi for House minority leader and insists that he got in the race against Cruz without any commitment of help from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

more + podcast
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/03/20/beto-orourke-doesnt-want-to-be-democrats-next-national-cause-217659

[vi5]

1. Wait, why did Obama and Clinton campaign against him?

I admittedly don't know much about him other than that he's running against Cruz.

Nevermind, I found an article about it. The incumbent protection racket was apparently in full effect.

And no, the "They know who would have a better chance at winning the seat!!!" thing obviously does not play in this case since O'Rourke won.

Reinforces my opinion that elected Democrats with bully pulpits at their disposals should stay out of primary fights.

[left-of-center2012]

2. Good question

"... with the background of first winning his House seat despite Bill Clinton and Barack Obama
campaigning against him, O’Rourke doesn’t see the value of outside help."

This (from Wikipedia) may be the reason:

His opponent in the Democratic primary was Silvestre Reyes, who had been the Southwest Co-Chairman for Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.

[Hortensis]

3. Neither are doing anything of the sort in this election.

Beto once ran Hillary's campaign operation in his area, and of course he formally endorsed her. And, needless to say, Beto's a big Obama supporter.

Presidents Obama and Clinton are not involving themselves in Democratic primaries. People of their stature will become involved and support whoever wins in the general.

[vi5]

7. You're right, it doesn't seem like that this time around...

...but it seems clear that in 2012 they became involved in the primaries. And Beto's house run is far from the only example of that. The most egregious being supporting Lieberman in his primary.

[NCTraveler]

8. Not in this election.

Good job following up.

[vi5]

9. Well in this case it is a general election...

..I would assume it would be a no brainer that they would support O'Rourke over Cruz. But I was curious why they would campaign against him in a primary, even in 2012.

[NCTraveler]

10. +1

2012 and Clinton is what’s important. I agree.

[Hortensis]

4. "a little more Conor Lamb, a little less Jon Ossoff."

Last edited Tue Mar 20, 2018, 09:37 AM - Edit history (1)

A little more Doug Jones also.

Both these Democrats who won in red districts/states did it by talking to their voters about local/state issues and avoiding letting outsiders damage the image he's trying to project.

[NCTraveler]

6. That isn't why Jones won.

Look at the final vote count numbers, compared to state wide elections in years past, and his opponent.

Jones ran a solid campaign. He would have lost to Jeff Sessions by twenty-five or more.

No larger parallel can be drawn from his campaign. It was simply too muddy. Vote numbers show he didn't win because of Democratic enthusiasm. Moores vote total was down almost fifty percent from Republicans in statewide elections in years past.

[Hortensis]

11. Jones won by speaking to decency and good sense

in government, but basically decency, in an introverted Alabama race. He didn't want outsiders coming in and further stirring up negative passions, certainly not figures or issues whose very names would be like blowing oxygen into smoldering coals.

That's how he drew from the right and also how he avoided inciting higher turnout against him on the right, and that's what we're talking about here -- how to get disaffected conservatives to vote for Democrats in predominantly conservative districts.

[NCTraveler]

12. Jones isn't why almost fifty percent of Republicans stayed home.

The vote also didn't come out for Jones in any major way.

"how to elect Democrats in predominantly conservative districts."

Let me know when Alabama's favorite son comes home to take Jones seat. It's not going to be pretty.

Democrat numbers weren't up all that much in Jones election. Republicans numbers were down almost fifty percent.

Conor Lamb would be a good example of the point.

No knock on Jones as he was excellent. It's just not a race you can make the assumptions your are making. The numbers don't equate to what you are saying. I would like to see people like Jones run in many districts in my own state of Florida.

[EL34x4]

13. Jones won because 650,000 Trump voters stayed home.

That's how loathsome a candidate Roy Moore was. Jones is a great guy, don't get me wrong, but he mostly has Republican primary voters to thank for putting Roy Moore on the ticket. I strongly doubt Jones would have beaten Luther Strange or even Mo Brooks.

[Hortensis]

14. This is part of what I said about how Jones won.

A winning strategy, and smart Democrats in red areas seem to be taking note. Ergo, Beto.

[NCTraveler]

5. Sounds like a solid Texas Democrat.

"Based on an analysis of bill sponsorship by GovTrack, O'Rourke was a "moderate Democratic follower" as of July 2014. In June 2013, O'Rourke was rated as a "centrist Democrat."[146]"

In 2014 "O'Rourke voted with the Democratic Party 93.8 percent of the time, which ranked 77th among the 204 House Democratic members as of July 2014.[150]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beto_O%27Rourke

"I am supporting Hillary Clinton because she represents the best opportunity for experienced leadership in the world's most important job," O'Rourke told the El Paso Times on Friday. "I know that in a Clinton administration, El Paso will have a strong friend to help us pass comprehensive immigration reform, improve our relationship with Mexico, transform the VA and support our service members at Fort Bliss and around the world."

https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/10/rep-beto-orourke-endorses-hillary-clinton/85709174/

[Hortensis]

15. :) Yes, meaning in normal times he wouldn't stand a chance.

But these aren't even slightly abnormal times.

Cruz has done his best to cover up his crazy, creepy side with his own decent-moderate posturing lately, but now his involvement with Cambridge Analytica may be coming home to roost. Including reminders of dirty tricks like this.



And there are a lot more nasty, questionable actions in his background.

[MagickMuffin]

16. It's laughable to think the DSCC would spend any $$$$$ in Texas

The DSCC has never helped to contribute to Texas candidates in the past, why would they start now???

GO BETO!!!