Politics

Dems aren’t sure whether to actually spend big to flip Texas

Published

8 months ago

March 6, 2026

It didn’t take long for Democrats’ hopes of flipping Texas to dim.

Enthusiasm remains high for the party’s Senate nominee, James Talarico, but national Democrats aren’t sure how far they should go to support him — particularly if Sen. John Cornyn emerges from the GOP runoff in May. Interviews with nearly a dozen high-dollar donor advisers and strategists poured cold water on the likelihood that the party would fully commit to the staggering price tag it’d take to finally flip Texas.

“No one’s taking Texas seriously,” said a Democratic bundler who, like most others, was granted anonymity to speak candidly about intra-party dynamics.

Among their concerns is that Cornyn did better than expected in the GOP primary against Attorney General Ken Paxton, and with President Donald Trump’s potential endorsement would be able to ease his runoff victory. Democrats planning for Talarico to compete against Paxton, a scandal-ridden MAGA darling, are instead facing the prospect of trying to oust a 24-year moderate incumbent in a state that hasn’t voted for a Senate Democrat in nearly four decades.

There are also competing priorities for national spending — just Wednesday evening, Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) dropped his re-election bid in a state Senate Democrats held as recently as 2018 — potentially elevating it as a target for spending.

Underlying it all, Democrats said, is the reality that contesting Texas would require a massive injection of cash — while there are other, cheaper options on the Senate landscape.

“We have to be practical about how we use our resources,” said Alex Hoffman, a Democratic donor adviser. “You need a perfect storm to kill a white whale, and if it’s going to be Cornyn [in the general election], then it’s not a perfect storm.”

Democrats have long dreamed of turning Texas blue. But the idea of flipping the state — much less retaking the Senate overall — appeared laughable last year, when the party hit new lows in its public polling and sustained sweeping losses in 2024. But a string of overperformances in off-year and special election races, combined with Trump’s own stubbornly low approval rating, have Democrats increasingly bullish about their chances.

“If I’m being super honest, Texas would not be within the reach of our boat here, as fishermen of the white whale, but for the wave moment we’re in,” said Tory Gavito, a Democratic donor who leads the progressive donor network Way To Win.

Tuesday’s results gave them another boost when Talarico, a social media star and prolific grassroots fundraiser, easily dispatched Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). He now has a head start on Republicans, who after already dropping $70 million to lift Cornyn, must continue battling it out for another two and a half months through a runoff — which some are predicting could cost upwards of $100 million.

Texas Democrats see this as the moment to strike. Gavito said Democrats have built to this moment, cycle after cycle. Back in 2014, when President Barack Obama won with a young, multi-racial coalition, Democrats believed it was just a matter of time before they’d eventually flip Texas, a youthful, diverse state.

But Trump, both in 2016 and 2024, whittled down Democrats’ advantages with young, diverse voters, suggesting Texas was further out of reach than they thought. Then-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), boosted by more than $80 million, came the closest in 2018, losing to Sen. Ted Cruz by 2.6 percentage points. When former-Rep. Colin Allred tried to oust Cruz in 2024, he lost by 8.5 points.

Gavito said it would be “important” for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Majority PAC, Democrats’ top Senate super PAC, to invest in Texas to actually flip it because even though “Talarico has proven he can raise a bunch of non-corporate money … leadership, like Schumer, should see that their job is to be bullish.”

She also argued against Democrats having to pick between investing in Texas or other states — “you can do both things,” she said.

That’s a tall ask in a cycle when Democrats are already struggling mightily in the money race.

House and Senate Republicans entered 2026 with more than double the cash equivalent of their Democratic counterparts. The Republican National Committee has a more than $100 million cash advantage over the Democratic National Committee. Should the Supreme Court lift coordination limits, a looming decision cited by several donor advisers, then they believe Republicans will have an even more lopsided advantage.

“If the goal is to win the House and Senate, then there are other, cheaper, more competitive places,” said a Democratic consultant who works on Senate races. “Do you want to try to get another $150 million for Texas or another $50 million to put Iowa or Montana or Nebraska in play? That’s the Schumer calculation.”

Before Tuesday’s primary, Schumer hadn’t placed Texas in the DSCC’s top tier of battleground races. Instead, North Carolina, Maine, Ohio and Alaska ranked highest in his list of offensive targets. That could change, however, should Paxton ultimately emerge from the runoff.

“If Paxton wins the runoff, the race is on the battleground list,” a person familiar with the DSCC’s thinking said, granted anonymity to describe private conversations. “If Cornyn makes it out, I wouldn’t count it out [either].”

When asked about Texas on Wednesday, Schumer said “Tuesday’s results in Texas are a step forward in our quest to win the Senate,” and called Talarico “a great candidate, and we can win.”

SMP spokesperson Lauren French reiterated that “the majority runs through Ohio, Maine, Iowa, Alaska, and North Carolina … but it can also run through Texas.”

Republicans, for their part, continue to scoff at the idea Texas is competitive. In a statement, NRSC Regional Press Secretary Samantha Cantrell said: “James Talarico thinks ‘God is nonbinary,’ wants to lay a welcome mat on our southern border, and would prioritize the rights of our ‘trans community’, all things Texans will never vote for in November.”

Even if Democrats can’t ultimately flip Texas in November, they believe Talarico’s campaign — and a potentially weakened Cornyn — will force the GOP to spend cash to defend it, turning it into “a money sinkhole for Republicans,” said Cooper Teboe, a Democratic donor adviser and strategist.

“Do we win Ohio by one [percentage point] because of this?” Teboe added.

Some Republican strategists are warning of the possibility.

“In every race, from this point until November, there’s going to be the Texas undertones: You spent $70 million there to protect an incumbent,” a GOP strategist said, granted anonymity to discuss the issue candidly. “I think there is some frustration amongst the consulting class of like, all right, can we focus on Georgia and Michigan, some of these other places a little bit more?”

Erin Doherty contributed to this report.

Politics

Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens endorses Republican Mike Rogers for Michigan Senate

Published

2 hours ago

November 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens endorsed Republican Mike Rogers in the Michigan Senate race on Sunday — a stunning break with her party that derails Democrats’ attempts to create a united front for Abdul El-Sayed.

Her endorsement comes just a few days after she said she was going to vote for El-Sayed.

The two former primary rivals have been locked in a public, escalating feud over El-Sayed’s and his allies’ criticism of Israel.

“Abdul said that I was no longer welcome in his campaign and that I should stay away. And he’s right,” Stevens said in a video posted to social media on Sunday after she appeared at a Detroit church alongside Rogers.

“And that’s why I am endorsing Mike Rogers for the United States Senate today,” she said. “I don’t belong in Abdul’s campaign.”

Politics

November 2026

Published

5 hours ago

November 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Political cartoons from the desk of Matt Wuerker

Politics

Progressives and moderate Dems are already jockeying to claim credit for Tuesday

Published

5 hours ago

November 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

For Democrats, the size of their victory matters.

Progressives and moderates have been sparring all cycle over who will get to claim credit if they win on Tuesday. A new POLITICO Poll shows that the bigger the win, the more Democrats appear inclined to see it as a mandate to run more progressive candidates.

A smaller-than-expected victory next week would leave the party — and voters — torn over which direction to go.

The results reveal that the midterm election will have major implications over the next stage of the Democratic Party war over their identity — and could give progressives fresh ammunition ahead of a critical 2028 presidential race. Party insiders are closely watching contests where that infighting has been on display: From Abdul El-Sayed’s battle for Michigan Senate and Troy Jackson’s for Maine Senate, to Randy Villegas’ House race in California and Manny Rutinel’s in Colorado.

More than a dozen Democratic Party operatives and strategists said in interviews that both factions are already preparing to see a blue wave as validation of its own approach. Top super PACs and campaign firms are finishing strategy memos and finalizing lineups for a slate of post-election conferences where they intend to claim their way is the party’s future.

“You know what they say: Victory has a thousand mothers, right?” said Oliver Libby, the Democratic author behind the book “Strong Floor, No Ceiling,” which became a rallying cry for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries this cycle.

The survey, conducted by PF Global, found Democrats are nearly evenly split over what a smaller-than-expected victory next week would mean for future elections: 37% said it would signal a need to run more progressive candidates in the next election, while 35% said it would show the party should run more moderates. Another 28% said they didn’t know.

Those divisions largely fall along ideological lines. Among self-identified progressives, 52% said a smaller-than-expected victory would show that Democrats should run more progressive candidates. Meanwhile, a 45% plurality of self-identified moderates said that the same result would be evidence that the party should nominate more moderates, while just 28% percent said to run more progressives.

But if Democrats sweep key races — presented in the survey as a “large victory” — both progressives and moderates move toward running more progressive candidates in the next election. A majority of self-identified progressives — 61% — said it would show that the party should run more progressive candidates, while 35% of self-identified moderates agreed (compared with the 28% who said this for a smaller margin of victory).

A majority of Democratic midterm voters, including majorities of both self-identified progressives and moderates, also said a large victory would mean the party has a winning strategy for the 2028 presidential election, according to the poll.

“If Democrats had half a brain cell, they would look for the things that those two movements have in common,” said Chuck Rocha, a veteran Democratic strategist who has advised prominent candidates in both camps. “Whoever can combine these two things is who’s going to end up being somebody who is going to be a stalwart in ‘28.”

Progressives are eager for Tuesday’s results to bolster their argument that the party should move further to the left and that their candidates can win in competitive general elections. They’ve spent years feeling like they were being discounted by the party’s establishment wing, which was convinced that only more moderate candidates could cut into Trump’s coalition.

Progressives have cast a slate of battleground House and Senate races where their candidates felled more moderate primary rivals as major proof points — none more so than El-Sayed in purple Michigan’s marquee Senate race. A victory there, they say, could help springboard some of their biggest stars, like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), for presidential bids. Both representatives and a slate of other progressive surrogates up through Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have hit the trail to help.

“Our North Star in 2026 is to prove the concept that bold, shake up the system economic fighters can win anywhere, including purple and red areas, as a prelude to the presidential election in 2028,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “We think we will have plenty to work with after the election. For us, Abdul is Exhibit A.”

PCCC is drafting a memo touting what it predicts as “two common themes in election winners: Outsiders and economic fighters who challenge corporate power,” according to a draft viewed by Blue Light News.

Moderates, meanwhile, are poised to point to results as evidence that building broad coalitions can help Democrats compete in Republican strongholds.

“The interpretation game is already under way,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of the centrist think-tank Third Way, which has been conducting advertising analysis and polling the electorate, with plans to release its findings after Election Day. “[Progressives] are going to cherry pick the couple of races that they win, and they are going to say, therefore … everybody should go to the left.”

A memo from The Bench — a Democratic organization that supports candidates with real-world experience, such as teachers, nurses or veterans — touts recruits like James Talarico in Texas and Adam Hamilton in Kansas as evidence of the strength of its approach working. Public polling shows Talarico and Hamilton in a competitive position in once-solid safe red states.

“While much of the Democratic establishment was busy studying how to talk to working people, our answer was simpler: Run them,” the memo released this week reads.

“I saw Democrats, a lot of people in the 2020 primary, adopt positions that were just electoral poison,” said Democratic strategist Lis Smith, an architect of Pete Buttigieg’s 2020 presidential campaign who is a senior adviser to The Bench and works with The Bench’s sister organization, Majority Democrats. “You had Democrats say decriminalize border crossing, defund the police, and things like that. And we just can’t go back there as a party. We’re not going to be a majority party if we go down that road again.”

A new memo obtained by Blue Light News from Blue Dog PAC, a moderate Democratic group chaired by Rep. Adam Gray (D-Calif.), already makes the case that there was a “Blue Dog overperformance in 2024 and the Trump era.” It points to over a dozen House races the group is involved in that were initially rated as “Solid Republican” or “Likely Republican” by the Cook Political Report, and are finishing the cycle in the “Lean Republican,” “Toss Up” and “Lean Democratic” columns.

But some Democrats say that all this focus on who won the progressive-moderate fight is missing the point entirely.

“Actually doing something if we do win majorities, that’s more important than a bunch of memos saying we’re the reason we won,” said Bill Neidhardt, who worked on Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign and is now advising Will Lawrence, who’s running for Michigan’s 7th District, and working to boost El-Sayed.

“Whether one super PAC says to the other super PAC, ‘We’re the better super PAC’ — I just think if that’s what victory looks like to you in 2026, you’re going to set the Democrats up to lose in 2028,” he added.