historian said:

---

303Bear said:

---

historian said:

---

Only if you believe the skewed polls that routinely get it wrong. Facts are based on reality, not media propaganda.

---

Ah yes, the ol' "everything I disagree with is propaganda" approach, a true classic.

---

No. The media outlets are propaganda outlets because they have been lying to us for decades and have been repeatedly caught in those lies. Some of us remember the Russia hoax, the climate hoax, Hunter's laptop lies, lies about Obamacare, covid origins lies, lies about masks, lies about the jab, lies about Biden's mental health, lies about the 2020 election (& every election since), and on and on and on. The Left has quite literally lied about everything.

Your side has a long track record of lies and zero credibility.

My conclusion to explain Talarico's action was only an opinion. I thought it was obvious. But my conclusion about his electoral chances are based on reality: I have lived in Texas most of my life and I've been voting here since the 1980s. I know that the majority of Texans of all backgrounds have no interest in the freak show that is James Talarico. That conclusion is plain common sense.

---

Piling on with a paragraph of hyperbole (and ignoring that multiple of the things you list, primarily Covid related, started under or were continued under Trump 1) then trying to state that your prior conclusion as an opinion, only to double down on restating your same prior conclusions is wild work. You clearly know every Texan and how they feel about everything.

RE: the bolded, what "side" do you think I am on? Its lazy and unsound reasoning to simply dismiss based on a (made up) generalization. I am on the side of people. We shouldn't live in a police state (why are there more Flock cameras in Texas than any other state?), our taxes should be lower or at least be used to help americans, not be shipped overseas or used to blow up people in the middle east.

I am voting for neither of these candidates, so I have 0 dog in this fight.

Oldbear83 said:

---

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Polling is subjective by definition, or did you not know that?

---

In what way is that relevant to the discussion of Historian's declarative statement for which he has no actual support?

Of course polling is subjective, that's why it's an indicator and has a margin of error. The only poll that matters is in just under 4 weeks.

---

Look at your post. You claimed polling showed his claim was "factually untrue", but that is not a valid claim, because polls are not facts but subjective measures of emotions.

---

Reading comprehension, you should try it.

Historian made a factual statement that Talarico "knows he cannot win" and is throwing in the towel.

Polling results, subjective or not, show that Talarico is clearing in a position where he COULD win. That is the factually untrue part. If he were down 15 points in those same polls (again, subjective or not), that would be support for the stated position. Even if, as GrowelTowel claims, he is down 3 in internal polling, that is still within the margin of error of even very well structured polls.

President Trump just said Ken Paxton should debate.

I agree.

Ball’s in your court @KenPaxtonTX. https://t.co/AxF0a0caRb

— James Talarico (@jamestalarico) October 8, 2026

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Polling is subjective by definition, or did you not know that?

---

In what way is that relevant to the discussion of Historian's declarative statement for which he has no actual support?

Of course polling is subjective, that's why it's an indicator and has a margin of error. The only poll that matters is in just under 4 weeks.

---

Look at your post. You claimed polling showed his claim was "factually untrue", but that is not a valid claim, because polls are not facts but subjective measures of emotions.

---

Reading comprehension, you should try it.

Historian made a factual statement that Talarico "knows he cannot win" and is throwing in the towel.

Polling results, subjective or not, show that Talarico is clearing in a position where he COULD win. That is the factually untrue part. If he were down 15 points in those same polls (again, subjective or not), that would be support for the stated position. Even if, as GrowelTowel claims, he is down 3 in internal polling, that is still within the margin of error of even very well structured polls.

---

You, sir, are in need of a dictionary.

"Factual" does not mean something you wish to be true, but means an objectively established point.

It is factual, for example, to say that Talarico and Paxton are the candidates from the two major political parties for the US Senate seat. Statements such as 'Talarico knows he cannot win' or 'Paxton is desperate' are by definition subjective statements.

Which brings us to polling. Polling used to be noted as 'opinion polling', which is a fairly accurate label for the process. Without getting too deep into the weeds, I'm sure you recall that polls in the past have sometimes been on the mark, sometimes way off the mark in actual election results. Remember the woman in Iowa, who assured us Trump would lose Iowa? She had a long and respected history as a pollster, yet she was very wrong. Some folks wanted to claim she rigged her poll to help the Democrats, but that makes no sense, as in that scenario she would have known the fake would be exposed by the election results. It's far more likely that she simply ran a poll in Iowa which depended on invalid premises. My point is that polls by definition are subjective, and get published in media on the basis of whether the publisher likes what they say.

I would also note that 'margin of error' is commonly misunderstood by a lot of people. But that discussion may be for another time.

Oldbear83 said:

---

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Polling is subjective by definition, or did you not know that?

---

In what way is that relevant to the discussion of Historian's declarative statement for which he has no actual support?

Of course polling is subjective, that's why it's an indicator and has a margin of error. The only poll that matters is in just under 4 weeks.

---

Look at your post. You claimed polling showed his claim was "factually untrue", but that is not a valid claim, because polls are not facts but subjective measures of emotions.

---

Reading comprehension, you should try it.

Historian made a factual statement that Talarico "knows he cannot win" and is throwing in the towel.

Polling results, subjective or not, show that Talarico is clearing in a position where he COULD win. That is the factually untrue part. If he were down 15 points in those same polls (again, subjective or not), that would be support for the stated position. Even if, as GrowelTowel claims, he is down 3 in internal polling, that is still within the margin of error of even very well structured polls.

---

You, sir, are in need of a dictionary.

"Factual" does not mean something you wish to be true, but means an objectively established point.

It is factual, for example, to say that Talarico and Paxton are the candidates from the two major political parties for the US Senate seat. Statements such as 'Talarico knows he cannot win' or 'Paxton is desperate' are by definition subjective statements.

Which brings us to polling. Polling used to be noted as 'opinion polling', which is a fairly accurate label for the process. Without getting too deep into the weeds, I'm sure you recall that polls in the past have sometimes been on the mark, sometimes way off the mark in actual election results. Remember the woman in Iowa, who assured us Trump would lose Iowa? She had a long and respected history as a pollster, yet she was very wrong. Some folks wanted to claim she rigged her poll to help the Democrats, but that makes no sense, as in that scenario she would have known the fake would be exposed by the election results. It's far more likely that she simply ran a poll in Iowa which depended on invalid premises. My point is that polls by definition are subjective, and get published in media on the basis of whether the publisher likes what they say.

I would also note that 'margin of error' is commonly misunderstood by a lot of people. But that discussion may be for another time.

---

So many words to miss the point.

Congratulations, you remain undefeated against the strawmen of your own creation. Get a cup of coffee, pat yourself on the back for winning an argument with no one and have a good day.

You are very angry in reaction to such a vanilla post from me.

Have you considered decaf?

I was addressing the topic, despite your claims. You asserted that polling is factual, which I simply corrected.

If you calm down, take a deep breath and read my posts here like an adult, you might notice I agreed that Talarico could win. It's simply that pretending we have conclusive evidence on the outcome is really just wishful thinking on either end right now.

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was addressing the topic, despite your claims. You asserted that polling is factual, which I simply corrected.

If you calm down, take a deep breath and read my posts here like an adult, you might notice I agreed that Talarico could win. It's simply that pretending we have conclusive evidence on the outcome is really just wishful thinking on either end right now.

---

There you did it again. I never said polling is factual (whatever that actually means), that's the strawman you made up to win your argument with yourself.

I said Historian's assertion that Talarico is throwing in the towel and "knows he can't win" is, in part based in polling, is factually unsupported and incorrect. A massive difference, you knew that and continue to lie about what I said anyway.

Stop being patronizing with your narcissistic invention of "emotions" so you can dismiss things I it of hand and try engaging with what is actually said.

I'm not arguing your made up position you assign me to control the conversation. Once again have a good day.

Now it seems you have memory issues.

Your posts are right there, as is your spleen venting.

Whatever is causing you to rage, hope it gets better, sincerely.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Now it seems you have memory issues.

Your posts are right there, as is your spleen venting.

Whatever is causing you to rage, hope it gets better, sincerely.

---

It pains you not to have the last word, doesn't it?

This is a forum. No one gets the absolute last word.

Unless everyone agrees to let it die. Even then, some folks come back even years later and start them up again.

You new to the Internet?

Oldbear83 said:

---

This is a forum. No one gets the absolute last word.

Unless everyone agrees to let it die. Even then, some folks come back even years later and start them up again.

You new to the Internet?

---

Pathological.

Oldbear83 said:

---

303Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

This is a forum. No one gets the absolute last word.

Unless everyone agrees to let it die. Even then, some folks come back even years later and start them up again.

You new to the Internet?

---

Pathological.

---

Maybe you are, but I will be polite and suggest you are simply a mix of confused and OCD on this topic.

---

Every accusation and admission.

Hello BUDOS, and thanks again for your post.

I found your last post interesting, considering the topic and recent posts made by people regarding the mood of the room.

I am something of a minority in the Paxton v Talarico debate, in that I can accept that either candidate can win, without being emotionally invested either for or against the other one.

My comments in this thread have mostly been about Cornyn's hypocrisy, which in my opinion was both glaringly obvious as the reason his career ended with the primary loss, and notably a source of some serious hypocrisy from the Left members here.

You may note that I largely ignored the name-calling and vitriol, but I admit to having some fun with 303, who decided to show either ignorance or his own hypocrisy in this series of posts.

Historian, 10/7, 1203 PM: "He's throwing in the towel. He knows he cannot win."

303Bear,10/7, 1212 PM: "Or maybe he just has the flu like his campaign announced... Consistent polling has shown the bolded is factually untrue."

Now it happens that both historian and 303 were making subjective statements of opinion. But having some experience in polling, I chose to respond to 303.

His responses from that point were dishonest and antagonistic, in my opinion, not least his claim that I was somehow off-topic for pointing out that polling is subjective:

Me, 10/7, 121 PM : "Polling is subjective by definition, or did you not know that?"

303Bear, 10/7, 259 PM: "In what way is that relevant to the discussion of Historian's declarative statement for which he has no actual support? Of course polling is subjective, that's why it's an indicator and has a margin of error. The only poll that matters is in just under 4 weeks."

Things of course, devolved from there, in my opinion because 303 was mad and wanted to bully his way to an Internet win.

Having seen that play before, I admit I resorted to snark. I am serious when addressing adults, but see no reason to respect someone who thinks a recurring tantrum is valid and appropriate as forum behavior.

Your mileage may differ.

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and God's word. I hope James repents.

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

With respect, Frank, if the people of Texas genuinely had the chance to choose someone who actually would represent our interests as a State in the US Senate, I believe we would be much more likely to choose someone with a normal job, living in a modest neighborhood, who was not so comfortable with political ads and the fake persona we see so commonly in political candidates all over the TV and internet now.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Hello BUDOS, and thanks again for your post.

I found your last post interesting, considering the topic and recent posts made by people regarding the mood of the room.

I am something of a minority in the Paxton v Talarico debate, in that I can accept that either candidate can win, without being emotionally invested either for or against the other one.

My comments in this thread have mostly been about Cornyn's hypocrisy, which in my opinion was both glaringly obvious as the reason his career ended with the primary loss, and notably a source of some serious hypocrisy from the Left members here.

You may note that I largely ignored the name-calling and vitriol, but I admit to having some fun with 303, who decided to show either ignorance or his own hypocrisy in this series of posts.

Historian, 10/7, 1203 PM: "He's throwing in the towel. He knows he cannot win."

303Bear,10/7, 1212 PM: "Or maybe he just has the flu like his campaign announced... Consistent polling has shown the bolded is factually untrue."

Now it happens that both historian and 303 were making subjective statements of opinion. But having some experience in polling, I chose to respond to 303.

His responses from that point were dishonest and antagonistic, in my opinion, not least his claim that I was somehow off-topic for pointing out that polling is subjective:

Me, 10/7, 121 PM : "Polling is subjective by definition, or did you not know that?"

303Bear, 10/7, 259 PM: "In what way is that relevant to the discussion of Historian's declarative statement for which he has no actual support? Of course polling is subjective, that's why it's an indicator and has a margin of error. The only poll that matters is in just under 4 weeks."

Things of course, devolved from there, in my opinion because 303 was mad and wanted to bully his way to an Internet win.

Having seen that play before, I admit I resorted to snark. I am serious when addressing adults, but see no reason to respect someone who thinks a recurring tantrum is valid and appropriate as forum behavior.

Your mileage may differ.

---

Oldbear,
I appreciate the review, as when I went back to review some of the posts, it gets a bit difficult. To be honest, I appreciate a timely snarky comment, especially when it is more in the context of responding to one that is more of a personal attack and obvious name calling. (It's all I can do not to do so on another thread, and I am not sure how much longer I can hold out.) Politics gets into the layers of one's complex belief system and its core values struggling with one's opinions and biases struggling with new information, especially if it appears solid evidence against a core belief. I think this is often where one strikes out, due to the threat it poses to the core beliefs. But I digress and changed the subject. Anyway, we are allowed to "behave" depending upon the topic and even our mood at the time--and the consequences which may ensue. You are quite aware of this.

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

His entire campaign is based on getting Republicans not to vote while at the same time placating his radical base. Hardly representative of Texas.

Further, turnout in this election is going to be under 52% of eligible voters.
There are almost 19 million eligible voters in Texas.
Even if magic happens and Low-T receives 51% of the 52% of the 19 million eligible voters - that is just over 5 million people electing a child genital remover and open boarders nut.
There are 31.7 million Texans.
If Low-T and his California overlords manage to suppress the turnout and buy his senate seat, it will do so with the consent of 16% of Texans.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

With respect, Frank, if the people of Texas genuinely had the chance to choose someone who actually would represent our interests as a State in the US Senate, I believe we would be much more likely to choose someone with a normal job, living in a modest neighborhood, who was not so comfortable with political ads and the fake persona we see so commonly in political candidates all over the TV and internet now.

---

What a strange comment to make, doubly so when it's seemingly intended to be a criticism of Talarico...

He lives in a normal house in north Austin and was a public school teacher, one of the most normal middle class careers imaginable. If that's your criteria, then you're backing the wrong horse.

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

With respect, Frank, if the people of Texas genuinely had the chance to choose someone who actually would represent our interests as a State in the US Senate, I believe we would be much more likely to choose someone with a normal job, living in a modest neighborhood, who was not so comfortable with political ads and the fake persona we see so commonly in political candidates all over the TV and internet now.

---

What a strange comment to make, doubly so when it's seemingly intended to be a criticism of Talarico...

He lives in a normal house in north Austin and was a public school teacher, one of the most normal middle class careers imaginable. If that's your criteria, then you're backing the wrong horse.

---

You also just described John Wayne Gacy, BID.

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

With respect, Frank, if the people of Texas genuinely had the chance to choose someone who actually would represent our interests as a State in the US Senate, I believe we would be much more likely to choose someone with a normal job, living in a modest neighborhood, who was not so comfortable with political ads and the fake persona we see so commonly in political candidates all over the TV and internet now.

---

What a strange comment to make, doubly so when it's seemingly intended to be a criticism of Talarico...

He lives in a normal house in north Austin with his mother and was a public school teacher for two years, one of the most normal middle class careers imaginable until he took a job selling DEI course materials to those public schools. He is in his late 30s, unmarried, and his most valued friendships are with trans-kids. If that's your criteria, then you're backing the wrong horse you are an equally unrepresentative Texan.

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

historian said:

---

I'm not sure if there are any good reasons for thinking Talarico can win. The polls are often flawed, very subjective, and wrong. It happens every election cycle: the polls over estimate Dem support. Harry Enten on CNN had a segment on this 1-2 weeks ago: if the GOP performs the way they usually do relative to the polls then they will win several key senate races.

My conclusions about Talarico and the Texas race are strictly an opinion based on the obvious realities of Texas and Texas voters. On top of that large numbers of blacks and Hispanics, groups that historically have voted Dem in large numbers, are very unlikely to vote for him. His radical ideas, his transparent lies, and his creepiness will continue to turn them off. Most will either vote for Paxton or stay home.

All the Left has is their propaganda and flawed polls. Both are unreliable.

The only possible way he can win is if large numbers of GOP voters stay home. That seems unlikely too.

---

You are ignoring the only reason we are having this discussion. The GOP candidate is even worse.

---

Talarico is far worse than Paxton in almost every way imaginable. He does not represent Texans and his ideas are crazy and dangerous. He cannot even face reality, a common trait in the Left. Worst of all he is a blasphemer, repeatedly lying about God and Hod's word. I hope James repents.

---

If he doesn't represent Texans, how is he going to get betweeen 47% and 51% of the vote? Don't we have elections to decide who represents us best?

---

With respect, Frank, if the people of Texas genuinely had the chance to choose someone who actually would represent our interests as a State in the US Senate, I believe we would be much more likely to choose someone with a normal job, living in a modest neighborhood, who was not so comfortable with political ads and the fake persona we see so commonly in political candidates all over the TV and internet now.

---

What a strange comment to make, doubly so when it's seemingly intended to be a criticism of Talarico...

He lives in a normal house in north Austin and was a public school teacher, one of the most normal middle class careers imaginable. If that's your criteria, then you're backing the wrong horse.

---

1. It was a comment about our available roster of candidates, not aimed at any one person.

2. Talarico certainly fails the part I put in bold above.

TEXAS SENATE RACE - something odd is going on https://t.co/VlJXpAJ53o pic.twitter.com/TtuZmbrP8e

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) October 8, 2026

Now @KenPaxtonTX is demanding “proof of life” from James Talarico after 12 days out of the public eye.

The campaign is calling for a video of Talarico holding today’s newspaper, his flight information from NYC, and a doctor’s note confirming his reported “flu” diagnosis. https://t.co/1l9E0NIbee pic.twitter.com/rfgQqtrjlr

— Brandon Waltens (@bwaltens) October 8, 2026

🚨 MISSING: James Talarico

Missing posters are popping up across Texas as the search continues.

LAST SEEN: 12 days ago.

Texans everywhere are asking: where is James Talarico? pic.twitter.com/t6SZG92fge

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) October 8, 2026

🤔 https://t.co/6eEiecc8yj pic.twitter.com/hW4zmCBsMk

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 8, 2026

HuMcK said:

---

"former low level staffer in the AG's office who got fired"

That's a bold assumption, and it's news to me. I'm almost impressed at the confidence to make sht up like that and use it as the foundation of your argument, very Trump-like.

---

dude your a pro kid transitioning and castrating ally, you're a sick man.

You making up excuses as to why you're not, but you know that you are. Sicko progressive.

Far too much sickness in both parties.

Governor Abbott, I'll meet you at the Governor's Mansion next Thursday at 10 AM.

If you're not man enough to debate me, you don't deserve to be the governor of Texas. pic.twitter.com/VZOQjaKbXq

— Gina Hinojosa (@GinaHinojosaTX) October 8, 2026