Did Beto O’Rourke manage to change Texas governor race in debate with Greg Abbott?
Democrat Beto O’Rourke needed a breakthrough moment Friday night in his only debate with Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.
Barring that, he needed Abbott to make a blunder that would cause large numbers of voters to rethink the race.
He probably didn’t get either.
The debate in Edinburg in the Rio Grande Valley was hampered by a choppy format, but it largely reflected where the race for governor stands with just more than three weeks until voting starts on Oct. 24: Broad differences on the issues. An incumbent displaying a mostly serene demeanor, who calmly landed the punches he wanted to land.
And most of all, two candidates who do not like each other, largely trying to energize their dedicated voters by activating their antipathy for the other guy.
Voters looking for new information or deeper explanations of the candidates’ positions walked away disappointed. On immigration and the border, abortion and property taxes, neither candidate said much new. The closest thing to news was O’Rourke’s seeming pledge to eliminate STAAR testing in schools and Abbott’s promise to make school safety an emergency item for the Legislature. That authorizes lawmakers to move more quickly on the issue than they otherwise could.
O’Rourke frequently put the governor on the defensive. Abbott often began answers by responding to an O’Rourke charge, on immigration, guns and efforts to bolster the power grid.
But Abbott surely hit every item on his to-do list. Right out of the gate, he got in a shot at President Joe Biden over the border, reflecting a fundamental problem for O’Rourke — it’s an uphill year for Democrats nationwide, especially on that issue.
Each walked away with points they’ll gladly emphasize in campaign ads and fundraising appeals. For Abbott, it was the Democrat’s failure to disavow his pledge to confiscate AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles. O’Rourke twice declined to do so, saying he would want to focus on gun provisions that might actually be achievable in Texas.
Give him points for refusing to flip-flop. But if the Uvalde shooting made that line of attack against him harder for Abbott’s campaign to pursue, Friday’s non-answer revived it.
O’Rourke’s campaign will no doubt emphasize Abbott’s clumsy response to a question he should have seen coming on abortion rights for rape victims. The governor said recently that Plan B, the emergency contraception, was the answer. In the debate, he put the state on the hook for making sure it’s available to sexual assault victims.
O’Rourke will put any hiccups in that availability at the governor’s feet. His campaign wants to drive new voters, especially younger people and moderate women, on the abortion issue. Abbott’s stumbles will be at the center of the effort.
Also noticeable was a lack of much personality or sense of humor from either candidate. They came to fight, and it was clear even in how they addressed each other. O’Rourke started out calling Abbott “the governor,” but soon resorted to “this guy,” more than once. Abbott called his opponent only “Beto,” reflecting Republicans’ contempt for O’Rourke’s accomplishments and the ubiquity of his childhood nickname.
If Abbott is on his way to winning a third term, as it appears, it’s because of a fundamental math problem for Texas Democrats. It’s one that even O’Rourke, who’s come closer to winning a major statewide race than any Democrat in decades, probably cannot solve.
The electorate here, as in the rest of the country, is largely polarized. New polls in the race have shown almost no crossover vote; a Quinnipiac University survey released Wednesday had 96% of Republicans voting for Abbott and the same share of Democrats supporting O’Rourke.
Republicans still outnumber Democrats. Independents lean GOP: In the poll, they went 53%-46% for Abbott. And all but 4% of people in the poll said their mind was firmly made up, so there’s not much room to make up ground.
That’s why O’Rourke needed a game changer in the debate. The fact that he didn’t get it leaves him mostly with long odds and little time left.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREHey, who writes these editorials?
Editorials are the positions of the Editorial Board, which serves as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s institutional voice. The members of the board are: Cynthia M. Allen, columnist; Steve Coffman, editor and president; Bud Kennedy, columnist; Ryan J. Rusak, opinion editor; and Nicole Russell, editorial writer and columnist. Most editorials are written by Rusak or Russell. Editorials are unsigned because they represent the board’s consensus positions, not the views of individual writers.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
How are topics and positions chosen?
The Editorial Board meets regularly to discuss issues in the news and what points should be made in editorials. We strive to build a consensus to produce the strongest editorials possible, but when we differ, we put matters to a vote.
The board aims to be consistent with stances it has taken in the past but usually engages in a fresh discussion based on new developments and different perspectives.
We focus on local and state news, though we will also weigh in on national issues with an eye toward their impact on Texas or the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
How are these different from news articles or signed columns?
News reporters strive to keep their opinions out of what they write. They have no input on the Editorial Board’s stances. The board consults their reporting and expertise but does its own research for editorials.
Signed columns by writers such as Allen, Kennedy and Rusak contain the writer’s personal opinions.
How can I respond to an editorial, suggest a topic or ask a question?
We invite readers to write letters to be considered for publication. The preferred method is an email to letters@star-telegram.com. To suggest a topic or ask a question, please email Rusak directly at rrusak@star-telegram.com.
This story was originally published October 1, 2022 at 5:04 AM.