Speaker Phelan formally withdraws from speakers race
Copyright December 06, 2024, Harvey Kronberg, www.quorumreport.com, All rights are reserved Copyright December 06, 2024, Harvey Kronberg, www.quorumreport.com, All rights are reserved

Why not make Dan Patrick Speaker?

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

Good. Unfortunate that Texans didnt get that leftist collaborator out of the House entirely, but this is a good first step.

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

I'm for Speaker Abraham George (hoping you guys won't put me in prison)

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

I'm for Speaker Abraham George (hoping you guys won't put me in prison)

---

You're behind the times a bit. Abe lost his primary challenge against Candy Noble. I served on the SREC with Candy. I respected her ability tremendously. Her voting record is not as conservative as I'd prefer, but then with our structure of moderate speakers beholden to the Democrat caucus, it's very hard for Republican reps to be effective voting their principles or their districts. they always get whipped very hard to the center.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

I'm for Speaker Abraham George (hoping you guys won't put me in prison)

---

You're behind the times a bit. Abe lost his primary challenge against Candy Noble. I served on the SREC with Candy. I respected her ability tremendously. Her voting record is not as conservative as I'd prefer, but then with our structure of moderate speakers beholden to the Democrat caucus, it's very hard for Republican reps to be effective voting their principles or their districts. they always get whipped very hard to the center.

---

Well, then Candy for Speaker. Speaker doesn't have to be a State rep, wouldn't it be cleaner to make RPT chairman Speaker? After all, Dan Patrick is running the show anyway

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

I'm for Speaker Abraham George (hoping you guys won't put me in prison)

---

You're behind the times a bit. Abe lost his primary challenge against Candy Noble. I served on the SREC with Candy. I respected her ability tremendously. Her voting record is not as conservative as I'd prefer, but then with our structure of moderate speakers beholden to the Democrat caucus, it's very hard for Republican reps to be effective voting their principles or their districts. they always get whipped very hard to the center.

---

Well, then Candy for Speaker. Speaker doesn't have to be a State rep, wouldn't it be cleaner to make RPT chairman Speaker? After all, Dan Patrick is running the show anyway

---

Two inaccuracies there:

1) Tx Constitution states that, after inauguration, the House shall "proceed to the election of a Speaker from its own members."
2) Patrick is just one of three heavyweights in the process - Governor, Speaker, LtG/President of Senate.

Don't get so jaded that you go completely off the mapsheet........

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

I'm for Speaker Abraham George (hoping you guys won't put me in prison)

---

You're behind the times a bit. Abe lost his primary challenge against Candy Noble. I served on the SREC with Candy. I respected her ability tremendously. Her voting record is not as conservative as I'd prefer, but then with our structure of moderate speakers beholden to the Democrat caucus, it's very hard for Republican reps to be effective voting their principles or their districts. they always get whipped very hard to the center.

---

Well, then Candy for Speaker. Speaker doesn't have to be a State rep, wouldn't it be cleaner to make RPT chairman Speaker? After all, Dan Patrick is running the show anyway

---

Two inaccuracies there:

1) Tx Constitution states that, after inauguration, the House shall "proceed to the election of a Speaker from its own members."
2) Patrick is just one of three heavyweights in the process - Governor, Speaker, LtG/President of Senate.

Don't get so jaded that you go completely off the mapsheet........

---

Let the record show I wanted Candy. Will that keep me off Kash's list?

Candy supported David Cook for Speaker. Good for her.

Primary voters are sick & tired of Democrats selecting our speaker, which appears to be happening this session once again. Burrows will have an even harder time than Phelan.

whiterock said:

---

Candy supported David Cook for Speaker. Good for her.

Primary voters are sick & tired of Democrats selecting our speaker, which appears to be happening this session once again. Burrows will have an even harder time than Phelan.

---

Oops

Burrows declined to answer questions from reporters but later released a list of 76 supporters with 38 Republicans and 38 Democrats.

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Looks like Cook wants the support of Democrats

Cook also said he was willing to talk to Democrats to earn their support.

LOL this is going to be fun to watch.

Note: Under new Texas GOP rules, anyone censured by the party is banned from appearing on a primary ballot for two years. #txlege https://t.co/Hi7plQ3E16

— Robert Downen (@RobertDownen_) December 7, 2024

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

What law is Trump proclaiming that Liz Cheney broke?

Guy Noir said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

What law is Trump pclaiming that Liz Cheney broke?

---

See post above . Felony disobedience to DJT

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

They did abuse their office to run a Reichstsg Fire Hoax to infringe the rights of speech and assembly of their political opponents. That was by orders of magnitude worse than anything g that happened on J6. They ignored any evidence counter to narrative (I.e. most of it), then destroyed all their work (government records, mind you) when their efforts failed.

Trump is right. They should be investigated, and either censured or prosecuted just as earnestly as they did their work, only strictly following the law.

Curiously, this topic has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, so I'm guessing you perceive a weakness or three in your argument.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

They did abuse their office to run a Reichstsg Fire Hoax to infringe the rights of speech and assembly of their political opponents. That was by orders of magnitude worse than anything g that happened on J6. They ignored any evidence counter to narrative (I.e. most of it), then destroyed all their work (government records, mind you) when their efforts failed.

Trump is right. They should be investigated, and either censured or prosecuted just as earnestly as they did their work, only strictly following the law.

Curiously, this topic has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, so I'm guessing you perceive a weakness or three in your argument.

---

Remember, I was all in for Donald

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

They did abuse their office to run a Reichstsg Fire Hoax to infringe the rights of speech and assembly of their political opponents. That was by orders of magnitude worse than anything g that happened on J6. They ignored any evidence counter to narrative (I.e. most of it), then destroyed all their work (government records, mind you) when their efforts failed.

Trump is right. They should be investigated, and either censured or prosecuted just as earnestly as they did their work, only strictly following the law.

Curiously, this topic has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, so I'm guessing you perceive a weakness or three in your argument.

---

Remember, I was all in for Donald

---

"Cheney did something that's inexcusable, along with Thompson and the people on the un-select committee of political thugs and, you know, creeps," he said, referring to Representative Bennie G. Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the committee's chairman. "They deleted and destroyed all evidence."

He went on: "And Cheney was behind it. And so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee. For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail."

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

Osodecentx said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

you guys sure did spend a lot of money and effort to save a back-bencher in the Tx House.

---

Look, I was really for Trump the whole time. Please don't throw me in prison

And he said members of Congress who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 attack should be thrown behind bars.

"For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail," Mr. Trump said of Ms. Cheney, a Republican who represented Wyoming, and the rest of the bipartisan House committee that looked into the attack.

---

They did abuse their office to run a Reichstsg Fire Hoax to infringe the rights of speech and assembly of their political opponents. That was by orders of magnitude worse than anything g that happened on J6. They ignored any evidence counter to narrative (I.e. most of it), then destroyed all their work (government records, mind you) when their efforts failed.

Trump is right. They should be investigated, and either censured or prosecuted just as earnestly as they did their work, only strictly following the law.

Curiously, this topic has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, so I'm guessing you perceive a weakness or three in your argument.

---

Remember, I was all in for Donald

---

"Cheney did something that's inexcusable, along with Thompson and the people on the un-select committee of political thugs and, you know, creeps," he said, referring to Representative Bennie G. Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the committee's chairman. "They deleted and destroyed all evidence."

He went on: "And Cheney was behind it. And so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee. For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail."

---

If you did what they did (unauthorized destruction of thousands of govt documents), you'd be hiring a lawyer. Why shouldn't they?

Answer, please.....

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

---

Let's see......anonymous sources. How has that worked out for you recently?

Let's see how it plays out. I don't care if Democrats vote for him. I care about ending the practice of giving out committee chairmanships to Democrats, about letting Democrats have veto over our agenda.

I want the platform voted on. What's your problem with the democratic process?

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

---

Let's see......anonymous sources. How has that worked out for you recently?

Let's see how it plays out. I don't care if Democrats vote for him. I care about ending the practice of giving out committee chairmanships to Democrats, about letting Democrats have veto over our agenda.

I want the platform voted on. What's your problem with the democratic process?

---

Having a cabal of Republicans (board of directors of Texas Republican Party) dictating how my state rep should vote isn't democracy it's an oligarchy

GrowlTowel said:

---

Shouldn't matter. Do as the Dems do. Investigate until something is found or change the laws to resurrect a crime from the past or elect a District Attorney whose sole purpose is to get her or send the FBI to fondle around her support garments.


Use the tools from the previous administration.

---

This is not the way.





The tools that the previous administration used to unleash their four years of tyranny cannot be used to defeat tyranny. They must be completely destroyed.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

---

Let's see......anonymous sources. How has that worked out for you recently?

Let's see how it plays out. I don't care if Democrats vote for him. I care about ending the practice of giving out committee chairmanships to Democrats, about letting Democrats have veto over our agenda.

I want the platform voted on. What's your problem with the democratic process?

---

Having a cabal of Republicans (board of directors of Texas Republican Party) dictating how my state rep should vote isn't democracy it's an oligarchy

---

It's hardly a cabal. It's a statutory entity which operates primary elections in accordance with state law, which reflecting the will of millions of voters. Party officials are elected in those primaries. Then, they electe delegates to state conventions, where Texas GOP board of directors are elected. And where national GOP board members are elected. And where electors are elected....by representatives of MILLIONS of voters.

It's the same structure as our republic. You know, millions of voters elect representatives to sort stuff out for them. 181 representatives, to be precise....which is not quite 2% of the numbers of representatives elected at State Conventions (approx 9000 delegates). Hell, Oso, the RPT state board is TWICE the size of the Texas Senate.

You musta skipped a few civics elections.
If you don't like what the GOP is doing, get involved.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

---

Let's see......anonymous sources. How has that worked out for you recently?

Let's see how it plays out. I don't care if Democrats vote for him. I care about ending the practice of giving out committee chairmanships to Democrats, about letting Democrats have veto over our agenda.

I want the platform voted on. What's your problem with the democratic process?

---

Having a cabal of Republicans (board of directors of Texas Republican Party) dictating how my state rep should vote isn't democracy it's an oligarchy

---

It's hardly a cabal. It's a statutory entity which operates primary elections in accordance with state law, which reflecting the will of millions of voters. Party officials are elected in those primaries. Then, they electe delegates to state conventions, where Texas GOP board of directors are elected. And where national GOP board members are elected. And where electors are elected....by representatives of MILLIONS of voters.

It's the same structure as our republic. You know, millions of voters elect representatives to sort stuff out for them. 181 representatives, to be precise....which is not quite 2% of the numbers of representatives elected at State Conventions (approx 9000 delegates). Hell, Oso, the RPT state board is TWICE the size of the Texas Senate.

You musta skipped a few civics elections.
If you don't like what the GOP is doing, get involved.

---

How many are on BOD?
Were they on the ballot for the primary voters? Did everyone get to vote for them, or just Republicans?

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yep, he lost two rounds of voting in caucus. Then he & 20 supporters left the caucus to go tell the Dems how many votes they needed. A list of Dem names were provided. And here we are - the 2nd place finisher in caucus cut a deal with Dems to get enough votes.

Democrats selected our speaker.
Because moderate Republicans would rather compromise with Democrats than Republicans.

Expect to lose more moderate Republicans in the next primary cycle.

---

Cook solicits Democrat support
ecember 8, 2024 4:47 PM

Multiple House Democrats say Rep. Cook was soliciting their advice and support in his speaker bid prior to the GOP Caucus vote
At least three Democratic House members, including one who went on record Sunday, said Rep. Cook has been reaching out to collaborate for weeks if not months

At least three Texas House Democrats now report that Rep. David Cook has, for weeks if not months, been reaching out for advice and support as he figures out his path to holding the gavel in the 2025 session.

---

Let's see......anonymous sources. How has that worked out for you recently?

Let's see how it plays out. I don't care if Democrats vote for him. I care about ending the practice of giving out committee chairmanships to Democrats, about letting Democrats have veto over our agenda.

I want the platform voted on. What's your problem with the democratic process?

---

Having a cabal of Republicans (board of directors of Texas Republican Party) dictating how my state rep should vote isn't democracy it's an oligarchy

---

It's hardly a cabal. It's a statutory entity which operates primary elections in accordance with state law, which reflecting the will of millions of voters. Party officials are elected in those primaries. Then, they electe delegates to state conventions, where Texas GOP board of directors are elected. And where national GOP board members are elected. And where electors are elected....by representatives of MILLIONS of voters.

It's the same structure as our republic. You know, millions of voters elect representatives to sort stuff out for them. 181 representatives, to be precise....which is not quite 2% of the numbers of representatives elected at State Conventions (approx 9000 delegates). Hell, Oso, the RPT state board is TWICE the size of the Texas Senate.

You musta skipped a few civics elections.
If you don't like what the GOP is doing, get involved.

---

How many are on BOD?
Were they on the ballot for the primary voters? Did everyone get to vote for them, or just Republicans?

---

64. They are elected at state convention by Tx Senate Caucus, 2 per district. 1 man and 1 woman.

For state convention, the delegates are elected in their counties at a county convention. There are designated delegates (elected in the primary as precinct or county chair), and there open delegates (even alternate delegates) selected at county convention. At State Convention, county delegates and alternates meet first in general assembly (everybody). Then, they meet by state senate caucus, where they elect BOD members, the state party Chairman, and the state party Deputy Chairman. Following that, country delegates caucus by US Congressional district, where they elect a National Committeeman and Committeewoman, who will represent the Tx GOP on the Republican National Committee, (along with the state party chair.) So, at RNC level, Tx has three total votes, as does every other state. Congressional caucus also elects, in presidential election years, 1 person to represent the congressional district at the Electoral College (in accordance with the Constitution). Then at the end, there is a General Assembly where all the county votes on state level offices are announced. Possible floor fights, etc...... There are of course general sessions sprinkled out in between caucuses mostly for the purpose of giving all the state & national electeds opportunities to make speeches.

It's a system of direct and indirect elections built upon millions of votes.
Very consistent with the federalist republic our founders crafted.
Quit *****in'. Get involved. It'll change some of your assessments.

So 64 people can remove someone from the ballot based on their opinion of party purity

It's an oligarchy and usurpation of the democratic process. The 2 people are selected in a DEI process (can't have 2 men or 2 women, must be 1 of each. The 2 people probably won't live in the district of my state rep (senate districts are approximately 5 times larger than state rep districts. Several 100 people (maybe less) will decide who millions of people can vote for in the primary.
It's a cabal, and you are in the inner circle.

oligarchy, government by the few, especially despotic power exercised by a small and privileged group for corrupt or selfish purposes.

Your group gives Paxton an unqualified vote of support

Speaking of swamps & Elites

Osodecentx said:

---

So 64 people can remove someone from the ballot based on their opinion of party purity.
They can make someone go to court to challenge them. To the extent that makes candidates honor their promises to voters, is that a bad thing? (GOP candidates are notorious for promising in the primary to vote the platform, then failing to do so in Austin.)

It's an oligarchy and usurpation of the democratic process. The 2 people are selected in a DEI process (can't have 2 men or 2 women, must be 1 of each.)
It's been that way for decades, so this is a patently silly objection. It's a nod to the a great truth - Republican women are the backbone of the party, when it comes to volunteers. THAT is what drove the structure.

The 2 people probably won't live in the district of my state rep (senate districts are approximately 5 times larger than state rep districts. Several 100 people (maybe less) will decide who millions of people can vote for in the primary.
Your numbers are a bit inflated, given that Tx senate districts are apportioned for 750k people.

It's a cabal, and you are in the inner circle.
LOL it's a political party. It has a purpose And what you're seeing is a logical response by the party to call to heel the REAL cabal, which is the swamp in Austin.

oligarchy, government by the few, especially despotic power exercised by a small and privileged group for corrupt or selfish purposes.
your definition would apply to the US House and US Senate, too, who like the SREC are elected to represent large numbers of people.

Your group gives Paxton an unqualified vote of support.
Because he pursues the platform agenda, which is exactly what he was elected by millions of people to do.

---

Nothing is more ironic than your critique of Paxton. I told you impeaching him was a dumb idea. Turns out, it was an exceedingly dumb idea. You tossed a proverbial grenade into the toilet you were sitting on. And now it's my fault that you're scratched, stained, and smelly?

Some very idealistic people are misguided enough to think politics should be above politics, and get pretty jaded when politics actually happen. Unless, of course, it's THEIR politics. You were perfectly fine when a cabal of swamp creatures tried to impeach a guy who had only 90 days prior had won a statewide election in which the issues of the impeachment were on the ballot. Talk about inner circles!

Why are you so upset when ordinary citizens exercising their First Amendment rights of speech and assembly join processes and structures established by state statute to seek redress of grievances against elected officials who have manifestly broken promises made during an election? On what planet is that a "cabal," but an ad hoc committee conducting secret investigations without affording the accused any opportunity for defense against an effort seeking to overturn the results of an election within weeks of the outcome NOT a cabal?

You are suffering from a profound case of recto-cranial inversion.

Shelley is correct. As the nation watched Congress two years ago - each of us had to stand up and offer a name for all to see. We had to defend our vote - in that case, 15 times. https://t.co/7U5LU7zau5

— Chip Roy (@chiproytx) December 14, 2024

Thought this was a Kamala Brown thread.