Welcome to Party Politics, where we prepare.

For your next political conversation.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghaus.

We're a political science professors here at the University of Houston.

Go, Coogs.

We're in March madness.

We are dancing friends and hopefully a long run.

Now, of course, we're recording this before we know the outcome of the game.

But I have faith.

Right?

And the governor's.

Bracket predicted that UAH is.

Going to the final and then win it all.

You know what?

Okay.

Let's go.

This is good.

And for someone who is a UT grad, this, must have hurt him a little bit to have to make that choice.

But let's make it happen, my friend.

It's going to happen.

Well, it is.

Also March Madness in terms of politics.

We have got so much going on, we're going to get right into it.

The first is that there are basically all leads, all lines, all approaches emerging right here in the Lone Star State.

JD Vance has come here.

CPAC is here Ken Paxton is featured.

There's discussion about the RNC having a special kind of midterm convention here.

You've got a bunch of Democrats coming here to campaign.

Let's talk about what all this means first, starting with JD Vance.

He's coming here for money obviously, and somewhat for barbecue.

What does this mean to the White House?

Why?

Texas?

Money, money money money on the first of.

All right.

I mean.

The not the barbecue, not the Ranch waters.

No.

For the JD Vance, event.

You have to pledge at least 50,000 bucks.

Or if you want to be a. Co host, you have.

To pony up $250,000.

So you're just going to do the pledge, right?

Yes.

Yeah.

Little too much for you.

Yeah.

Indeed.

I want to.

Spend all the money.

All the money and no.

But I think.

Second is.

Because Texas and also Florida are very, very, very important states in.

The midterm elections.

And if they don't win.

Both states.

Then it's going to be.

Problems.

In the.

Horizon.

You make a great point.

Basically, if Texas falls for Republicans, then the entire electoral map gets re shaken and that means that it's going to be harder for them to be able to compete nationwide in the future.

So for sure they want to hold the line, but they also need money to get there.

So yes, a lot of this.

Is about money, but what's not as much about money is CPAC, right, which is a conservative political action committee.

This is sort of Bonnaroo for Republican political nerds, right?

You've got Ken Paxton really featured this week.

And I think this is his home ground who is not featured, though, is John Cornyn.

So he decided to skip it because he's in D.C.

doing his job.

He says, what do you make of this in terms of the kind of upside for Ken Paxton and maybe downside for Cornyn?

Well, I mean, I don't.

Think there's.

Going to be either an upside or downside.

I think that, the.

Preferences in terms at.

Least of.

Primary.

Voters are very, very well.

Defined.

Already fixed.

Yes.

So that's one.

Yeah.

That's but preaching to the converted is good because you need big turnout.

We'll talk about this more later in the show.

But like Paxton needs to have Republicans show up in big numbers.

And it's hard to get people to turnout in a primary runoff.

Exactly right.

So that's going to be the important implication.

If you can get turnout.

Out there for these runoff.

Then all.

Good.

But also, on the other hand, you have to think about that.

Not all primary voters, right.

Are going to be as motivated as the other side.

So maybe that's canceling out.

And you never know.

Yeah I think John Cornyn doesn't want to get booed again.

It's not a good look in the middle of a very contentious race that happened last time.

He did CPAC.

Obviously he is not their preferred candidate.

Ken Paxton is.

But this means money means exposure.

It means mobilization.

That's a huge factor for him in a period where he needs that momentum to carry through, especially if he doesn't get the Trump endorsement, which is still forthcoming.

Right.

Theory.

But we haven't seen it.

Yeah, we haven't.

Seen the much promised it.

But you know, that's something we I think we'll talk about too.

The only thing I can said is that the Republican National Committee is considering a midterm conference, a midterm convention, which they don't ever do.

Right.

And they're considering Dallas for that.

Obviously, like we've said, Texas is very central to much of this.

And so we're seeing a lot of the same kind of theme here, pushed to this idea that Texas is really the epicenter of a lot of Republican Party politics, despite the fact that it's so red, or maybe because it's so red, it's kind of fertile ground.

Democrats say that Republicans are coming here and defending their turf because they're scared they're going to lose it.

What do you think?

I think it's a little.

Bit of both.

Yeah.

And especially once again, is we have to think about the context.

And the context of this election is high.

Gas.

Prices.

Yeah.

They have gone.

Up about.

One buck per gallon.

That it's a lot.

It's a lot.

Yeah.

You have and.

You got a big tank.

In your truck.

Yeah.

It's not I was suffering.

Yes.

I was like, oh, my God, this is just.

I don't look at the end just credit card and.

Walk away, like.

Blinders.

Blinders like a horse and then that's it.

But you should get a horse that would be cheaper.

That would be.

Well, I know, because with gas prices also feed has gone on.

Yeah.

Right.

Yeah.

Exactly.

Fertilizer is more.

Serious.

And as the farmers.

If they're happy with how prices about feed.

And.

Fertilizer.

And everything has gone.

Up.

So what are you saying?

Walk a walk or your bicycle is, is.

But the real.

Problem here is that context, right?

So when you put everything together and Republicans, Have to.

A certain extent.

Save face.

And trying to explain the.

Narrative of why this.

Thing is not working.

It has to be supposed to be working.

Yeah.

And even.

Very strong supporters of.

President Trump and the MAGA movement, like.

Tucker Carlson, are really.

Questioning.

Especially the conflict with you.

Ryan.

Yeah, I need I don't understand how those these benefit.

Yeah.

The American.

First, Movement's good.

So having that.

Exposure.

I think that it will.

Help Republicans.

Trying to bridge.

That gap, or at least have a, On the ground conversation.

With the.

Ones that they need for.

The.

Midterm election.

Yeah.

And in the primaries, one thing, but the generals the other, there's real concern.

And the polling reflects this, that there's a pretty tight race.

Talarico has got a bit of an edge over both Cornyn and Paxton.

The Democrats are saying that it doesn't really matter which they're both vulnerable.

I think that's probably true.

And the fact that the Republicans are converging on Texas means that's likely what's going on.

And even if it's not the case that there's a real fight here, although I think that it is, it is certainly the case that they want to make sure they defend that territory.

So they want to be here to do that.

But Democrats are thinking about the same thing, but in a slightly different position.

You've had a lot of Democrats come here who are nationally ambitious.

Ruben Gallego was just here, Senator, from, from, from.

Arizona.

From Arizona.

You've got Gavin Newsom, who is here for South by Southwest, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Kentucky Governor Beshear is here like, every other week.

So they're looking at Texas as a potential fertile ground for the future, right?

They know that Texas is a central moment for politics now.

Right.

We've got competitive Senate races.

You've got Democratic turnout increasing.

So they're all looking for momentum builders here.

Texas is not just a red state anymore.

It's a future battleground.

It's a testing ground.

Yeah.

And it's potentially, of course, available for for fun.

So everyone is looking to kind of plant their flag here.

And I think that really, again, is a democratic issue as well as a Republican issue.

But these Democrats are looking for an opportunity to build long term success.

They want to build an infrastructure.

They want to have voters that are connected.

They want to test their messages.

Right?

Yeah.

We've got a huge population here.

You've got a Latino vote, which is a huge swing, right?

We've talked about you've got urban, you've got rural.

You've got you kind of range of different policy issues.

So there's a lot of things that are going on that Democrats want to test in terms of how that message might land.

And if you can win in Texas in a big growing Sunbelt state, then you can do really well in a place like Arizona.

Oh, yeah, place like Nevada Even a place like Florida.

Eventually swing states like Georgia and to some degree, Colorado.

These are all places where Democrats, if they're successful, will change the balance of the map nationally.

Yeah, yeah, for sure.

But I guess it's.

All going to depend on.

What the.

Government.

Does with our.

Current problems and.

Those partial shutdowns.

What problems are you speaking of the like 3 to 5 hour lines.

To get on a flight?

Yes, sir.

People are getting frustrated that a. Lot of frustration.

Definitely driving the news of the week and compromise seems to be in pretty short supply.

The current moment, the parties are dug in, Democrats want to get concessions in terms of ICE.

They want to make sure things like body cameras are used.

They want to make sure people in ICE don't wear a mask.

The correct reforms to the, kind of, sort of investigations.

So there are things that they want that they're not willing to budge on.

And I think the American people are largely with them now.

But the more this drags out, the harder it is.

The blame, I think, to some degree falls to the Republicans, too, because they're the ones who are in charge of government.

And now you've got this added wrinkle where the Republican leadership in the Senate has gone to the president and said, hey, here's what we like to do.

We've got the split between ICE and DHS.

We can fund DHS so people can get through the TSA lines and under, you know, five hours.

But we're going to fight about ICE later on.

That is a compromise that the president was not willing to take.

He said, we're going to pass the SAVE act.

As a result, the SAVE act, if you haven't paying attention, is basically a kind of voting act where you've got, you know, requirements for citizenship to prove that you're eligible to vote and some restrictions on mail in ballots.

This is something which the.

President voted.

And, yeah, I said would limit the president on voting.

He'd have to.

Fly back tomorrow.

Lago, which I'm sure he'd love, play some golf, vote and then come back to do so.

But he use, Mail-In ballots.

But anyways.

Yeah.

And so that's where things are now.

So I think the more that this gets pressed into Trump's court, the harder it is for Republicans to say that they're really working with Democrats on this or they're fighting Democrats who are just being unreasonable on this, that they're moving the goalposts.

Right.

And it's.

It's it's impossible.

Because the implications of.

These shutdown, first of all, is.

1,000%.

Unfair for TSA, workers yet.

Again, they're caught in the crossfire.

Like working without a paycheck is like, wait, what is.

Number one?

Number two.

The the number of TSA.

Agents.

That officers that have quit are about 400, officers.

Right.

And that has.

Implications then for recruitment.

And you cannot.

Have complications for recruitment.

For such.

An important industry.

This is not a. bar where you have someone like, oh yeah, you.

Can come in and.

Right, you.

Done.

Whatever.

Cut the.

Like.

No no no no these.

Guys will teach you how to make a Manhattan and then you're set to go.

You know, there's a lot of training involved, a lot of commitment.

A lot of.

Important security and.

Safety.

Implications.

So this is.

Certainly not good.

Some of the.

Airlines have.

Taken away congressional.

Privilege.

So, yes, You cannot keep the line anymore.

I'm in favor of this.

Oh, this is like an impromptu town hall.

Like you've got the senators and members of Congress, like, basically standing in line with everyone else, and they're going to hear it, I'm sure, from their.

Constituents directly, like a four hour wait.

It's like, sorry, buddy.

Like you're going to stick with us.

Yeah, I think it's a great idea, actually.

No, no, no.

And it's only fair, honestly, because the suffrage thing is basically.

Yeah.

And people who work there, but also on the American people who've got to, you know, kind of wait through all of this chaos and dysfunction.

Once again, the Republicans are pushing a potential solution called reconciliation, which is a kind of fancy budget term, basically, that lets them pass a simple kind of budget resolution with a simple majority.

That means they can avoid the filibuster.

They still have to get the House and the president to agree, which, like I said, probably is not exactly happening.

But they're going to fold in some of the elements of the SAVE act with the hope that that'll entice Trump and kind of a Trump kind of a down payment on the save.

It's not clear that's going to work either.

And this is very fast moving.

And as of the time we're recording this, you know, this is sort of still up in the air, but there's potential for that to move forward.

But again, it's really clunky.

It's a Hail Mary and it's not the best solution.

Now this outcome, which is happening again and again and again, speaking of intractable issues, let's talk about Iran.

Yeah, this has become a kind of real, problem for the White House.

The war is going okay militarily, right?

Obviously, the U.S.

and Israel are much better prepared for this, but the efforts haven't materialized in terms of any significant changes on the ground for Iran.

The hope is that there would be this uprising of opposition hasn't happened.

It's growing more dangerous, more deadly, more costly by the day, not just in terms of blood and treasure, but also in terms of the political capital the president has to spend on this.

So we're in basically a week, two and a half.

What's the status and what do you think's going to happen?

Who knows.

And the problem.

With this is.

That the administration wanted to.

Apply.

The Venezuela.

Switcheroo type model.

Yeah.

But oops, it didn't work.

And I think that's great.

And a good point because like this is the modern war, right.

And it's unclear kind of what victory looks like in a modern war.

Right.

We don't have.

And he said we don't want troops on the ground.

That's a different level of political investment and obviously investment in terms of U.S.

personnel.

But it obviously is a new generation of how wars are fought.

And it's not so clear.

There's like an endgame here where you can claim victory even if the president does so Yeah, but the victory.

I mean, for example, in the case of Venezuela.

Was very clear, right?

Yeah.

It was.

We take Maduro out.

Yeah.

Then we.

Have, The next.

Year of the.

Kingdom or.

Whatever of the.

System or whatnot.

And that.

Person in this.

Case that's Delcy Rodriguez is is collaborating with.

Washington.

End of story.

That's what they want right?

That's a victory.

Very clear victory.

Yeah.

In the case of Iran was.

Like, okay.

We're going to get the ayatollah.

And then hopefully.

We.

Were going to get someone that he's going to be a moderate that would sit down and talk.

To us.

And that did not happen at all.

It went the other side.

The current things that we have been hearing from the administration is.

That talks are going very well with Iran, very positive, etc., etc.. And then you're answering like.

No, we're not talking.

I'm like, that's not happening.

I don't know who.

You're talking.

To.

But yeah.

It's like an catfish.

Situation, right?

Yeah.

It's like probably you talking with someone but not with.

The ones that.

You should be.

It's Iran, not Iraq.

Right?

Or, you know, you're you're in the right space.

And and obviously this also.

Has very important implications for what's going on also in Lebanon.

Right.

Taking up.

A lot of the territory, at least the.

Israelis want to do.

That.

And they're the US.

Government, or U.S.

military forces doesn't have to do anything, About that.

And also, the international.

Pressure that has been reported that, the, prince, Saudi.

Prince.

Crown prince.

Of Saudi Arabia.

Has been also.

Pressuring.

The Trump administration to continue the.

War.

And saying that these would.

Be.

Very important for the region to.

Reshape it.

So, yeah, I don't know.

It's a lot of a lot of challenges that the White House faces.

Right.

And it's costly.

Right.

The first six days cost $11 billion.

It's great.

White House plans to go back to Congress to ask for another $200 billion.

In a moment where people are struggling to buy bacon.

This is not a good look for the White House.

And I think the complication here is that they got themselves into something, like you said.

I think they thought they could finish quickly, partly because Iran kind of spurred them on.

It's not uncommon for the two countries to kind of operate in concert, but the reality is now very different than it was when it started.

And there is a divergence in terms of interest and in terms of desire.

So that could definitely be a kind of problem going forward for the White House.

So we'll keep monitoring how things go.

It changes a lot by the day, by.

The hour minute.

That's right.

So unclear exactly what it'll look like.

You know even at the end of our recording of the show.

But for sure, it's something that's going to be a topic of discussion in the midterms.

We're already seeing.

Like we said, Ruben Gallego came here to Texas to talk about this issue, right.

And to try to rally Democrats and sort of leaning independents about this.

So this has got some traction.

We'll keep watching.

In addition to that, we've got blockbuster news that in implies that Cesar Chavez sexually abused women and minors.

That led to this national backlash, rapid reassessment of his legacy.

And as a foundational figure in the civil rights movement.

It is destabilizing, I think, for a lot of people.

You saw states canceling celebrations.

Texas has moved in the direction of trying to scrub him from the curriculum and from obviously not celebrating a lot of the moments that are kind of preset to have his memory celebrated.

What do you make of this outcome?

I'm shocked.

I mean, I think everybody was shocked.

And it's.

Also very.

Disturbing.

Yeah.

And it's just.

Utter shock that he.

Raped and abused women.

Back.

Then in, in, in the 60s and also late 70s.

Is just.

Yeah, it's just crazy.

And the problem is that it.

Discredit, you know.

United Farm workers movement.

Ri Which is.

Completely independent from.

A political figure.

Yeah.

So it's just.

Yeah.

No.

And the ramifications have been pretty severe, including the kind of educational component to this.

Oh, yeah.

Right.

Where, there's this broader question, especially in Texas, about how curriculum should be shaped.

Right.

And so rapid curriculum changes that are tied to these breaking news moments certainly raises a question about what constitutes like a legitimate sort of source of, of of documentation or what about intimate source of, kind of influence.

So the question is sort of should these figures be removed, or contextualized in that?

And that's one question that is most prominent.

We've seen this play out in other ways to the other is like whether political figures should remove these folks or whether it should be an educational based question.

So this is a fight that the state has had in multiple different domains.

Correct.

This is the kind of most latest, TSA said, yeah, like I said that, TEA have said that they're going to take away kind of his, discussion from.

But it obviously means that there's just this continuing political battle over, you know, what he means.

And of course, reciprocation will happen too, right?

We saw this happen with Charlie Kirk, too, the kind of revisionist storyline.

Right.

And sort of each side wants to present how they see this.

So there's a lot of just, you know, kind of, kind of ugliness when it comes to how we think about this things.

And it's all politically driven instead of being kind of educationally driven.

So creates this difficulty to kind of really understand kind of how things are playing out.

But let's talk about the White House and Republicans in Texas in slightly different way.

And that's that many members of the delegation of the U.S.

House and Senate, from Texas, went to the white House to talk to several of the cabinet secretaries RFK, Howard Lutnick, Nick Scott Turner, and Kelly, Kelly Loeffler.

There is obviously a strong alignment between Republicans at the national level and Republicans in Texas.

We talked about this earlier.

What do you make of this meeting?

I don't know, because the objectives are, or the.

Outcomes.

Were just like, yeah, we have a lot of.

Synergy.

We agree.

On a. Lot of.

Points.

But yeah, we don't know yet.

Right.

How those are going to be transformed eventually into.

Legislation or policies or whatnot.

But I think it.

It signals I think once again.

Is that question, is a had the White House worried about what's.

Happening potentially happening in.

Texas or it's just like.

Inviting, you know.

Your.

Friends after doing.

A great job.

So it's it's like.

Which one is it?

Yeah.

Like this like Oklahoma City Thunder get to come to celebrate their championship.

You know all that great.

You know midterms you're you know kind of welcome to come and have some.

Yeah.

Exactly.

Oh eat some eat some McDonald's here.

Yeah I mean I think that's part of it.

But it also I think has policy implications.

So questions about sure.

Health care questions about housing supply, questions about kind of business intent symptoms.

These are all kind of connected to the way that, you know, the white House wants Texas to operate and wants Republican states to operate in Texas, like we said earlier, is a kind of epicenter of all of this.

Obviously, Trump's leverage over the Republican Party in Texas remains very strong.

Right.

And you just us waiting on tenterhooks to have the, you know, work recommendation for the Senate race is a big factor, too.

So, I think that is partially like what's going on here, but we're very likely to see, I think the outcome of this kind of spillover into next legislative session.

So we'll keep watching that.

One way that that happens is that you've got committee assignments from Dan Patrick.

Yes.

This is sort of inside baseball to a degree.

But those of us who are watching politics closely can see some subtle changes, many of which involve education policy.

The Senate had merged together the public Ed that deals with sort of secondary ed and higher ed, which deal with the universities that merge them together, to one committee.

In this case, they have been disentangled.

So Don Campbell is now ed chair and and Paul Bettencourt here from Houston is higher ed chair.

So they split them out.

Phil King seems to be the big winner here.

He is not only the chair of the select committee on Religious Liberty, but also Select Committee on Border Security.

So it gives a signal of kind of what's to come legislatively in the next election.

But bad news is for Taylor Rhemet.

Who, yes, although.

Newly elected, did not get a committee assignment, he says it's politics.

Dan Patrick pushes back saying, look, you know, you're an interim member.

You're a special election.

You know, kind of winner.

You don't get a committee assignment.

That's pretty consistent with the way they've handled things.

Yeah.

What do you make of that politics or it's just process.

Let's let's say both.

Yeah.

I'm very diplomatic.

Let's give both.

Of them the benefit.

Of the doubt.

Okay.

And, and and yeah, I mean, I on the one hand.

I see as a pure.

Public administrator.

Background, which I have of course, I would say you.

Keep mentioning that.

Yeah.

Right.

I mean, I mean, it doesn't make sense, right.

If you're going to be here for potentially.

Right, it is like.

Yeah it doesn't make sense.

Yeah.

And they're you know, they're building, coalitions.

They're investigating political questions.

They're understanding policy stuff.

They're starting to frame legislation.

Yeah.

Like they should be like doing this.

Right.

And on the other hand, right.

If you're saying a Taylor Rhemet you say like Yeah.

But I'm still a member.

Of this body.

So I deserve to have access to a committee.

So it's a representation question.

Right.

Like you represent this portion of Texas.

Exactly.

You should have some say in terms of the policy.

Absolutely.

I think that's makes sense.

Traditionally that hasn't been the case.

And so Dan Patrick says, well, you don't really get one.

That's just not the way we do things.

So obviously there's a bit of both in play here.

So we'll obviously see how this unfolds.

And if he wins obviously he'll get one something.

But what he gets is of course in question.

And that's the fun of the inside baseball portion of our of our show.

But let's talk about something that everybody wants to talk about.

And that means the US Senate race.

Things are heating up in the Republican runoff.

The rematch is set for May 26th.

We saw some pretty serious exchanges this week, mostly on digital stuff.

I want to get your take on this because I know you love digital ads.

Cornyn unveiled digital ads featuring an AI generated characters that was a parody of the B-52's Love Shack with jetpacks and driving around and like, going to these illicit locations.

Ken Paxton's PAC slammed the John Cornyn for backing the Biden administration, especially in terms of judges, which he says is blocking Trump's agenda.

Cornyn released an ad that I thought was pretty clever with a magic eight ball that's like a Ken Paxton figure shaking it, asking questions like, should I accept favors from wealthy donors?

I think we all see where this is going.

What do you make of the outcomes here?

Well, I mean, I think is once again the war is on.

Yeah.

And it's fierce.

It is fierce.

And it's, both.

Of them are fighting for.

Their political future.

And they're just.

Having their political careers on the.

Line.

Yeah.

And this is.

It is.

Now.

We're never.

Like, forget about.

They're not thinking about the general election right now.

They're thinking about this may hurt.

You're in a fight for your life.

Yeah.

The same is true for James Talarico.

And he's taking knives and shrapnel from all sides, including Donald Trump, who says in social media that he insults Jesus.

He thinks there are six genders and he is a vegan.

Yes, Vegan-Gate popped up this week.

This was an old ad that the people brought up that James Talarico suggested that the environment is better off if people are vegan.

There's actual documentation that this is true, but it made him look like he was anti barbecue.

What better way to make him look like he's out of touch than that?

My opinion on this is that there's a lot of stuff out there on Talarico, and the Republicans are throwing a bunch of stuff at him.

He can't swing at every pitch in the dirt, but there is a real liability here, potentially to make him look like he doesn't understand Texas.

It's not the biggest issue.

Obviously, people like you said are struggling and don't care about whether you're a vegan or not.

If you're in office and you can make things better, but there is an opportunity here from Republicans to try to paint Hillary as out of touch.

You think it's gonna work?

I mean, yes and no.

Because I. Think the language that.

The like.

Is using in this campaign is very interesting.

Because he's basically.

Talking about the things that.

Are down.

To earth and that.

Voters.

Really understand, you know.

Right here.

In the.

Pocketbooks.

But we're going to continue the conversation next week.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghaus.

Conversation continues next week.