Texas Progressives offer primary wrap, more

We'll start this with a primary wrap.

The vouchers wingnuts affected SBOE races as well as Texas House races. That's even when Strangeabbott endorsed incumbents. That said, per links on a Kuff post, whether it's SBOE incumbents or House incumbents losing, I have no sympathy, as you benefited from dark money, lies and half-lies before yourselves.

Rethuglicans outpaced Democraps by a 5-2 margin in Texas primary voting. Maybe having Genocide Joe topping the primary ballot, with ConservaDem Colin Allred No. 2, didn't help, contra the likes of ConservaDem commenter Greg Summerlin.

At the Monthly, Forrest Wilder offers a big-picture overview of the GOP side of the primary. He correctly notes that Phelan has served as more of a "speed bump than a guardrail" against the Abbott-Patrick-Dunn steamroller. But, even that could disappear. And, with that 5-2 primary differential, not be replaced. 

The Texas Signal gave their primary recap. 

The Observer counts the Republican bodies after their grim and bloody Primary Day, with a scathing take on Abbott's lies on his "anti-endorsements" as well as the response lies by some of the rural House Republicans he targeted.

Off the Kuff has some initial thoughts on the 2024 primaries, and evaluated the polls that were done before them.

Beyond his submitted posting, Kuff separately lists SEVENTEEN state House districts he thinks Dems have some odds of swinging. Sure, as soon as Gilberto Hinojosa's demographic wave hits.

==

Kenny Boy Paxton, in his role as Tex-ass AG, not in his personal role, lost again in court last week, this time over a Biden immigration program. The Trumpy federal judge ruled he didn't have standing.

Is anybody shocked that a former cop turned PI whitewashed the Uvalde Police Department? That said, per a commenter on Kuff's post about this? If any of the bitching Uvalde parents pulled the lever for Abbott and other Rethuglicans? Look in the mirror first.

Xcel Energy admits it screwed the pooch in the Smokehouse Fire but claims it's not LEGALLY responsible, as in, it denies it was negligent. Uh, sure, and I can't believe company lawyers even let the initial statement go forward; I would have kept radio silence longer. State law requires utilities be prepared for emergencies. This, from the Trib, is key:

Even without knowing the fire’s exact cause, experts say the Panhandle fire shows utilities need to be ready for more extreme weather. This could be a challenge in a state where discussing climate change is often taboo.

That said, California law is probably more stringent on the climate change issue than it is here in Tex-ass, and that hasn't stopped PG&E from having its lines start all sorts of fires there.

SocraticGadfly offers up a variety of thoughts on the SCOTUS ruling in Trump v Colorado. 

Stace gives his view on President Biden's South Texas support. But after the SOTU, he also gave a few thoughts on Biden's "illegal" flub. I was going to comment on the latter, that Biden's regret wasn't real. I passed, knowing I'm the only real non-duopoly leftist in TPA. But, Stace, in the former, looks at Mando Perez-Serrato only as Latino. Kuff at least looks at his Palestinian support, although he doesn't comment on it. And, Stace talks about the "Abandon Biden" in Michigan, apparently  unaware it was higher yet in Minnesota and higher than that yet in Hawaii.

Neil at the Houston Democracy Project says take Republicans at face value when they say they'll take democracy.

Law Dork digs into the drag ban at West Texas A&M. 

The Austin Chronicle analyzes Travis County DA Jose Garza's primary win.  

Grits for Breakfast tries to make sense of where criminal justice reform is now. 

Nonsequiteuse reminds Harris County that it gets to (and has to) vote twice in May. 

Josh Cohen, known as Ettingermentum on Twitter, offers a wrap on why Trump is doing ... er not too badly? (And he's right; Trump is winning the election, per polls, except the weird Quinnipiac.)

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is buying up private data about you and me left and right.

==

We will wrap with observations on a trio of pieces from the most recent "Weekend Link Dump" from Charles Kuffner, since I sometimes crib from there for my own version of the weekly Roundup.

First, the just weird. Kuff posts stuff without comment, and I'm taking silence as assent. He's some sort of "population growther." (The piece is wrong by not looking at climate change, which we can't "growth" out of, for starters. Interestingly, per the tagline at end, philosopher friend Massimo Pigliucci's sometime co-author Maarten Boudry, but for different reasons, is also a growther. And, I've got a breakout for a separate blog post.)

Second, the half-wrong. Kuff posts a piece from a Kos staffer (not just a momma's basement contributor) claiming there is no constitutional requirement for a State of the Union response.

I had to do two comments, because I misread, and because I'm naturally suspicious of the duopoly-based Kos, and I thought the guy was first talking about SOTU itself.

Yes, there's no constitutional requirement for a response. But, SOTU itself has become ever more politicized, especially since the start of live broadcasting it on teevee. Let future presidents go back to the Jefferson-Taft idea of submitting a written report, and then call out anybody in media who gives a live video response time. Besides that, no REAL opposition — Greens, Libertarians, PSL, etc. — ever is given a live response time at all, so fuck off Kos.

Third, Kuff pays to read a subscribers-only newsletter from Zionist Josh Marshall, founder of Talking Points Memo? Nuff ced.