Texas Senate Rundown: Fallout from Trump backing Paxton over Cornyn | Opinion
President Donald Trump’s endorsement of Ken Paxton shook Texas’ Republican U.S. Senate runoff Tuesday, bringing a gusher of speculation about why he acted when he did and what it would mean not just for the race in Texas, but for the overall battle for Senate control. Here’s a survey of some reporting and commentary that followed Trump’s bombshell, along with my analysis of each angle:
Why did Trump endorse Ken Paxton? And why now?
The president floated the idea of an endorsement in March, after John Cornyn narrowly edged Paxton in the initial primary election. He never specified, but reports indicated he was close to backing Cornyn, the four-term incumbent. Months went by, and with so little time remaining until the May 26 election, it seemed likely that Trump would take a pass.
The news site Axios reports that what may have made Trump pull the trigger was mounting frustration with delays and roadblocks to his agenda in the Senate. Citing a “Trump confidante,” Axios said the Senate’s refusal to pass a piece of election legislation called the SAVE Act was the last straw. If he didn’t get that, the argument went, why should he back Cornyn over the true-believer Paxton?
The president was also swayed, Axios relayed from a presidential adviser, by polling that showed Paxton would beat Democrat James Talarico if the election were held today.
My take: As I wrote just after Trump’s announcement, the president values fealty over all else. Republicans who have to work in the Senate after Trump is gone — and possibly under Democratic control — are reluctant to give up the filibuster as a tool to stop or at least slow the progressive agenda. Trump focuses much more on the short term; he wants what he wants when he wants it.
As for the horse race, everyone seems to forget that polling is a snapshot of things right now. And it should alarm, not comfort, Republicans that Talarico is so close to Paxton or, for that matter, Cornyn. In a close race, though, the party is usually better off with a scandal-free candidate who’s good at fundraising. Paxton is neither. But he’s a Trump sycophant, and Trump has trouble distinguishing between what his MAGA base wants and what the larger electorate prefers.
Democrats make clear which candidate they prefer to face in Texas
The likelihood of Paxton winning the runoff has national Democratic groups re-evaluating the race, the Washington-based site NOTUS reports. The political committee aligned with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer is among those signaling they might boost Talarico in the fall.
Or as the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal put it: “Trump makes Chuck Schumer’s day by endorsing Ken Paxton.”
My take: National Democrats are conflicted about our state. They badly want to compete here because in a war of attrition like congressional politics, taking the other side’s solid turf is a huge victory. They also like the idea of the message it would send if Texas elected Talarico, something like: “Trump and MAGA are too extreme even for a 30-year red state.”
They have many fronts on which to fight, though, and a narrow shot to win a Senate majority. Democrats must defend a handful of seats where Republicans will be competitive and then flip at least four GOP-held seats. Is Texas one of their best bets? History would say no. Plus, it’s expensive — precious campaign ad dollars go a lot further in states such as Iowa than in Texas, where we have several of the largest media markets in the country.
Is this John Cornyn’s problem among Texas Republicans?
At the conservative-leaning news site The Dispatch, Kevin D. Williamson, who grew up in Texas, has a solid take comparing Cornyn to Sam Houston — at least in terms of how fellow Texans are receiving him. Cornyn, Williamson writes, may be sent into retirement from politics because he is “not a big enough lunatic for Texas.” Houston, of course, resigned the office of governor rather than sanction secession from the Union. Williamson gives Cornyn no credit for a similar level of standards.
“Sen. Cornyn has a great big bucket where his principles should be, and, thus equipped, he has been a committed and generally effective water carrier for the Republican Party for many years,” he writes. “Sen. Cornyn carried water for so-called establishment Republicans when they opposed Donald Trump in 2016 and then carried — and contentedly carries — water for Trump now that Trump has become the establishment.”
My take: Cornyn’s obsequiousness to Trump in the last few years is fair game. But he is not the first politician to see his party turn away from some of his long-established beliefs and have to find a way to hold on. And he won’t be the last. Political coalitions are rapidly changing, and a lot of people — left, right and middle — will have to decide to swallow distasteful pills to remain effective in parties that still share most of their beliefs.
As Cornyn himself is telling everyone who listens, however: Character counts. He’s referring to Paxton, but the same applies to Trump (or should). When the president values personal subservience over his party’s future and thus even his own future political outcomes, you have to know he’ll turn on you for someone he views as more submissive.
If Cornyn wanted another term, even with the noble goal of keeping a libertine such as Paxton out of higher office, this was the only game he could play. But with Trump as the dealer, the odds were never good.
