Welcome to Party Politics, where we prepare you for your next political conversation.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina, a political science professor at the University of Houston.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghause, also a political science professor here at the University of Houston.

Thanks for hanging out with us and talking politics, where we're going to try to get you prepped for your weekend, and it's going to be a big weekend of talking politics, because there's a lot going on.

Obviously, the president is, like zigzagging all around foreign policy.

Tylenol is now a complicated subject for medical use.

And, we've got some developments in the Senate race.

Yeah, let's start there.

Actually, the compendium of news organizations is attempting to sue to open up the records of divorce for Ken Paxton and Angela Paxton, who obviously are elected officials.

Ken Paxton, the attorney general, is running for U.S.

Senate.

Angela Paxton is in the state Senate.

The kind of thesis here is that this is something that's a public record, and it's a public value because they're both public officials.

I keep saying public like, making that point very clear.

That's what the news organizations are saying.

How is this going to come about, and will it have any effect on the way that the Senate race, at least in the primary, is seen?

Well, it might and I think it can go both ways.

Yeah.

If they do not make publicly these records under the argument that, you know, these are public elected officials using the public interest to know what it is, it's, the integrity of public office transparency, etc., etc.. Right, right.

Can go that way or can go the other ways, like know when they're going to open if they don't open them.

Yeah.

Is going to be what are they hiding.

Right.

And it's going to give a lot of speculation that might hurt.

Ken Paxton.

That's a great point.

At the end.

Maybe opening it.

It's better.

There's a lot of kind of academic theorizing about whether it's better to kind of, you know, in a middle of a scandal, kind of have it be more public or have it kind of right.

Be I think we have a paper.

Yeah, something like that.

Yeah.

Actually, I do remember that.

Yeah.

No way back.

So yeah, I think that it definitely has implications to the Senate race.

Ken Paxton has obviously got this ethical baggage, which is problematic.

I mean, you can look at the list securities fraud issue.

They eventually settled that whistleblower retaliation issues.

The impeachment implied he was taking bribes.

Yeah.

He was found kind of acquitted of that.

Other ethics violations with respect to the 2020 election filing.

He stole someone's pen at the Collin County courthouse.

Like there's a lot that John Cornyn is using right against him.

And seen this in play out, even kind of as we speak, digital ads are running.

So I think the most kind of obvious winner here, if it went, would be the newsrooms who want to get this information to the people.

correct.

But the other winner is John Cornyn, who was looking at this like just salivating, saying, I'd love to have more details about this, and it's working.

I think, I mean, polling as we came out and said that basically Ken Paxton has got maybe like a 4 to 5 point lead on John Cornyn, which is kind of a rare thing.

And eventually, you know, from way back it was, you know, 20 points or more.

So he's closed the gap.

And the reason is because of the ethics here.

All right.

Is this the kind of thing that is going to be the determining factor in this primary?

Will it matter?

Oh, absolutely.

I mean, and I think, maybe not the determining factor.

I think the Trump factor plays a role.

Yeah, eventually we don't know yet.

Always, always.

But the type of constituency that they're targeting during the primary election is very particular in terms of how they see, these public behavior.

Great points.

And, there has been some, people from, you know, the right that said, like, well, this is not correct.

We need to see what's going on.

I cannot support this candidates.

Or these other candidates.

I think eventually, yeah.

It might not be very good for Ken Paxton, but I think that heading out like at the get go, I'm just saying boom boom boom.

Owning it.

Maybe.

I don't know.

That strategy actually makes some sense to me.

But they're hiding at least in terms of like trying to keep it private.

I get it.

It's their private life.

You know, this is sort of obviously too kind of in the public interest.

I'm not convinced that this is going to make a huge difference.

In fact, Ken Paxton in the article you referenced said that there's best second, best fundraising day was the day that Angela Paxton on Twitter said that she was going to file for divorce.

So I'm not sure that this matters that much.

There's this fan, you know, kind of group for Paxton that won't ever change.

And if you look at the details of the polling, it's interesting to see that the Republican Party is very divided and also very undecided.

Yeah.

So one of the things that Cornyn is good at rallying are traditional Republicans, younger voters and more educated voters.

Paxton's more favored among Trump voters, Hispanics and among people who are 65 plus.

So the Trump factor is huge here.

Cornyn is playing up the traditional Republican role he got this week, 15 endorsements from former Republican members of Congress, solidifying that he's like the establishment choice, correct.

In a primary, though, like this.

It might not be the thing, right.

It actually might hurt you.

So, I mean, he's definitely trying to rally those troops and that's the goal.

But but this is a fight which obviously has, you know, implications for what happens in the Senate more broadly.

But the primary itself is still in flux.

So like I said, a lot of people are undecided.

This poll had 26% of primary voters undecided.

Is there an opportunity here for Wesley Hunt to jump into it?

He is releasing internal polling.

It says he's like second to Paxton.

And in head to head matchups he's a point ahead of of Paxton.

So there is still this kind of moment where you might see, Wesley Hunt jump in the race.

He would prior to this, met with some Trump officials with potentially the goal of resolving this before it got too messy, which it's already pretty messy.

So do you think that has any kind of traction?

Is that possible in this sort of ever changing political world?

I think that it's possible 100% possible.

And I think that if Hunt sees an opportunity, he's going to jump in whether the polls, you know, internal polls sometimes have a little bit of bias, in terms of, how they're conducted, not conducted, but in terms of.

How the questions are asked.

Exactly.

So, so there's a couple of issues, methodologically speaking, that you could say, well, maybe it's not that close or so on and so forth, but he's using that information, right?

I mean, he's going to use that information to make a decision.

Yeah.

And if he believes that information and believes, margin of error or something like that is like, yeah, why not?

Yeah.

Like you wouldn't release a poll that said you were doing badly.

Right.

And I do think that there is an opportunity here.

I mean, every poll is indicating that the Republicans are not convinced that either of these two choices is the best.

And so there's definitely this sort of moment where you could find a third party, a third candidate, not a third party.

Jump into this.

So we'll see how it plays.

But like certainly the time is running short, right?

We're ready in October.

And the primary is obviously in March.

Probably unless it's the case the courts kick this off because of redistricting.

So like I don't want to complicate things any more than it is.

But think about this.

If the courts do kick it off, you have Wesley Hunt.

They're in a much better position to be in.

Absolutely.

Fundraising.

Yeah.

And so yeah, raise more money, increase visibility.

And we've talked about before how you know his I think traction Republicans are really good.

But he's still going to have to be a statewide presence.

Yeah not right now.

So maybe that extra time would help.

So lots of kind of moving pieces here on the old chessboard.

But I think you're right.

It's really a Donald Trump kind of to win or lose scenario.

He's the one who comes in and flips the chessboard over and is like games over.

I'm picking you, so we'll.

See how that comes.

But obviously the Democratic side of things is important too.

Colin Allred this week released a kind of policy paper that he calls a more affordable Texas.

He argues that there are ways to cut costs and improve people's lives.

Repealing Trump's tariffs, abdicating for small businesses, Price Gouging Prevention Act, which would target groceries and consumer products.

Long standing kind of populist goals.

This is Colin Allred 2.0.

Is it going to work?

I mean, I was thinking about this when you confront, the most, serious contender for the primary, right.

Representative Talarico.

Yes.

And Talarico's talking about the billionaires, right?

The one percenters.

So I think they're going to different segments of the, Democratic potential voters.

The one percenters is the billionaires they're ruling America is not the division between this and that, and Republicans and Democrats or party polarization and so on.

And so forth is this big group of billionaires, right?

Yeah, that I think polls very well with very young voters.

Yeah.

The problem with young voters is that they don't vote at the rate of.

Voters is like in quotes.

Right, that you need them to vote.

So that's a little bit complicated unless you can really, make and go out and vote.

That's one thing.

And I think the, the Allred policy platform, is kind of common sense ish and try to bridge between Democrats and Republicans in such a way.

I'm going to try to get the Republican establishment, the Democrats, going with issues that are very clear.

Right.

And I think is just the things that, he's not complicating things, like you said, you know, lowering utility bills.

End of story.

Right.

Boom.

There you go.

In people's pocketbooks.

At their kitchen tables.

Exactly.

He's making a case.

Basically, Democrats should focus more on that.

So in that way I think kind of Allred 2.0 is going to be an improvement.

But he's got a separate kind of agenda.

That's not exactly what Democrats are asking for.

But there's a lot of overlap, right, there.

Obviously, you know, they're of the same party.

But yeah, I think you're right.

I mean, one of the things that Allred's been saying is kind of take a page out of Talarico playbook that, you know, the kind of Republicans in office right now or, you know, kind of siding with the kind of big, right, you know, big money.

And that's become a problem for people who are trying to just kind of live their lives.

So, you know, he has been, I think, pretty active on those issues.

But less active on things like abortion or gun safety or immigration or green energy, the stuff that he ran on in 2024.

Yeah.

Don't mention it.

Don't mention it.

Yeah.

And that change I think is really important.

Oh yeah.

Because it does give us a sense of the kind of strategy shift here.

He's also talking about the national scene, which we'll talk about here in a few minutes, in terms of the kind of government shutdown potential that, you know, pressing Democrats to, you know, know your worth, right.

Like, basically make sure that you're ordering the guac.

Yeah, you're worth it.

Right.

His argument is like push for the Obamacare, you know, kind of, sort of reductions are the rollback of those, those changes.

So I think that, you know, he's probably in a better position than he was, but there's still a lot of room to go, a lot of money to raise.

So I think this race is even less.

Well defined than the Republican side of things, which, to be honest, is all really kind of about Ken Paxton right now.

So we'll see how this goes.

But we have other races to talk about.

Oh yeah, including a race in South Texas for Congressional District 15.

None other than Bobby Pulido is running.

He's famous.

Oh, yeah.

I mean, being famous is good.

He's a kind.

Of a McEntee contigo.

But.

I mean, from way back in the 90s, right?

He.

Oh, yeah.

Like revolutionized.

Like Tejano music.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

I mean, you and I both remember listening to him way back in, you know, high school.

And so there's just this I think momentum for him.

But he's running in a very, very Republican district.

He's running against Monica de la Cruz, who is the incumbent Republican in a new district.

This is a district that Trump, in theory, would win by about 15 points.

So, yeah, his kind of theory of the case is that, you know, this is sort of a homegrown thing.

He's of this place.

He is talking about immigration issues by saying that, you know, neither Biden nor Trump have it here.

There's a better solution to it.

He's focusing on listening to people, talking to them about the things they care about.

Is it going to work?

I guess I think I've watched, some of his, campaign ads.

And I think that they're very interesting in the way that he's presenting himself to the voter.

Everyone knows Bobby Pulido.

You know, Ruben in that area.

Yeah, 100%.

Right.

So the issue of name recognition or anything like that, it's beyond the point.

Yeah.

But the issue here, I think, is that he's making sense to a community that has its own political culture.

And in order to understand how RGB votes, you know, to understand that, you have to understand the culture.

You have to understand, the handle culture.

You have to understand the proximity with the border, the issue that you have familial ties on both side of the border, a different culture, a different ecosystem.

And he's talking about, home.

He's talking about bringing people together in such a way that I think that that message is going to resonate regardless of, party affiliation.

Yeah.

So we'll see how, La Cruz representitive De La Cruz fights back because this is not, a good idea.

And also, okay, Bobby Pulido has to win the primary.

Yes, of course, of course.

Yeah.

No, I think that's definitely the first place.

But I see him doing this pretty easily.

So far, he's the most prominent contender.

And this is an ever changing district.

And so being able to have name recognition like you say is really good.

That means fundraising makes it easier.

Yeah.

And then you can be able to generate kind of more effort and interest.

So that's a good start.

It's a very different district than it was.

Like I said, it's a Trump district now and way even more than it was before.

But you know, only about 40% of the current district is going to be the old district.

So Monica de la Cruz also has an effort here to try to reconnect to voters in that area.

37%.

are Vicente Gonzalez's voters from 34 and 21% are Michael MacLeod's, MacLeod's from 27.

So it's like a pretty brand new district.

Still, Republican, but a lot of new voters who, like you say, are going to potentially be persuaded by this.

The interview he gave to the, Rolling Stone was really interesting.

He admitted he didn't have health insurance.

I feel like those are the kind of things that people relate to, right, who are out there just struggling to get by.

And those kinds of things really do, I think, resonate.

So it will be a race that is distinctive.

And I think that it will be one of those marquee races.

So absolutely.

And if they can't win with Bobby Pulido, like the question is like how we win, right?

I just don't see any way that it's going to work.

Right.

Even especially in a way they're.

Especially when you have redistricting in such a way.

But yeah.

Yeah.

Let's talk lawsuits.

Okay.

All right.

The ACLU and a coalition of religious freedom organizations are suing Texas, basically 14 districts, to block the implementation of the Ten Commandments law.

Just as a review of the Ten Commandments law went into effect, requiring public school classrooms to have the Ten Commandments prominently displayed.

Obviously, there's a First Amendment issue here, and the ACLU and these groups are hoping to be able to kind of take this.

And, stop it.

The federal judge in, August, basically temporarily, put took the, you know, limited law from taking effect, but only in these districts.

I think there's lots of implications here.

Obviously, the politics of this are really prominent.

This is the continuation of these culture war fights that have been happening for the last ten years or so.

Republicans have been pushing these very conservative social issues to their great success, especially in primaries.

And that is definitely something that win or lose on this issue they can use to their aid.

The other thing I think that is sort of the under the hood effect here is about what's happening at the local level.

School board fights in particular, have been much more partizan than before.

This is a great tool for Republicans to be able to have other Republicans in name, right?

Because mostly these are nonpartisan elections fighting about this issue locally and riling up Republican voters, which has been successful in some cases.

So to me, this is a fight that's obviously a statewide fight, and it's a legal question.

right.

And but it's also about what's happening locally, because if you can control school boards, you can control a lot of what happens in public school classrooms.

Beyond that, too Republicans are using this to build a bench, which then gives them the ability to draw from that, to be able to have people run for other higher offices.

But.

Absolutely.

And here also, the point in more substantive terms is, very important constitutional issues.

Right?

Separation of church and state is extremely important in terms of, of nowadays, because people have the right to, worship any religion, any God or whatnot, but also not to, right.

So this brings a very complicated conversation in terms of what is the role of public education.

Right.

And remember, we have this argument, that is made in terms of, should schools focus on certain topics or not on certain topics.

Right.

Why, for example, advancing these, these agenda is different than, you know, other type of agenda that wants to push whatever it is that they want to push on the progressive side.

Right?

So it's a false, I would say benchmark when you're thinking about, you know, what are our constitutional rights in terms of, First Amendment and what are the constitutional, important issues in terms of separation of state and church?

It's fascinating to see the First Amendment so prominent.

Right?

I mean, the fight about, you know.

Oh, yeah.

Well, who's back on the air kind of connect to this.

Obviously, that's the right speech part.

This is the religion part.

So there's a lot of great case law on this that helps to illuminate this.

But honestly, this is probably going to be a case that Texas loses.

The case law is pretty clear on this.

They very struck down laws that are very similar to it.

So I don't think this is going to be a winnable fight.

But Republicans are kicking to a bigger net, right?

They're hoping that they can get these changes in the judiciary, which are going to be able to kind of affect the outcomes.

And good news for them.

But we'll obviously watch to see how this plays out and the degree to which this makes a difference politically.

Let's talk about more, good news, I guess, probably bad news.

And that's that there's going to potentially be a government shutdown.

You know, as of this recording, there is no communication between John Thune, the Senate majority leader, and the Senate minority leader.

Chuck Schumer.

The president had canceled a meeting with, Jeffords, the speaker, the majority leader for the House and with Chuck Schumer.

So things aren't going very well.

What do you think is going to happen here?

Give me your best prediction in like a couple of days before this goes down.

Well, I don't know, because, I don't know.

I mean, if history serves as a guide, that sometimes it doesn't.

Right?

I think that Schumer is not going to play ball anymore.

Right?

Potentially.

Yeah.

The incentives are there for Democrats to say, you know what?

We already had this fight.

We caved.

We need something to run on.

Yeah.

And so they're pressuring him to hold the line.

Even candidates for Senate like we've talked about before are telling Chuck Schumer, we need you in the fight.

Like stop, you know, giving into Republicans on this.

But Donald Trump says the demands are outrageous and would never go in particular, what he's asking for, what Democrats are asking for is, basically Obama era cuts to the Affordable Care Act are going to expire.

And so what the Democrats are asking for is to have those held up.

That's a winnable issue for them, I think.

Right.

That is, the polling suggests that this is something that people favor and even Republicans favor it.

So think about it that way.

There's a lot of pressure on Chuck Schumer to kind of hold the line here, even if it means shutting down the government, which is a pretty serious effect.

I mean, I think that if, they don't do that right, they're going to lose a lot of credibility.

And once again, the fact that, they're not willing to hold the line in terms of these partizan polarization, yes, is going to be complicated, is going to be very messy.

But so far they have not done anything significantly to stop, the Trump administration, whatever policies they want to pursue.

It's a good point.

So this is their, I guess, last opportunity that they have.

Yeah.

And if they don't take advantage of it, it's going to be complicated.

It's a line in the sand.

And Democrats are demanding this happen.

And I think that frankly, as a party, they need to do something to show that they're fighting back.

And Republicans are saying, yeah, you're making outrageous demands.

We just need a clean resolution here, right, to say, like, let's continue to negotiate.

And Democrats are said like, we're done negotiating and or, you know, you haven't even started.

So, like, what's the difference?

But they need Democratic votes.

So that's going to be, I think, the real catch all.

So the last time there was a shutdown, it was 35 days, which is a fairly long time.

Yeah.

More than a month.

What will happen this time like we don't know I don't know.

It's really hard to predict these things.

But by the time we're back and doing the next episode, it may be already shut down, or it'll be so close to the shutdown that it'll be hard for us to make predictions, but it's looking very much like it's moving in that direction.

So we will talk about that as things go.

But let's get to some more internal gossip.

And that is about Kamala Harris's new book.

She says it's a 107 days.

What stood out to you that was juicy from this?

Well, everything.

Yeah, a lot of dish.

Yeah.

It's like the whole tea that it spilled in the book is just beyond belief.

I mean, and if some issue that we kind of already knew.

Right.

Issues in terms of, for example, what she thought when, Governor Walz was debating vice president, Vance, like, why are you caving like he's tricking You like don't.

etc., etc.

texting him mid debate.

Like like.

You know.

Don't do it.

Don't do it.

Obviously the fact that, Biden continues, you know, the pursuit of, reelection.

Yeah.

Also, yes.

You know, wide open.

Pretty harsh in a way, right?

Yeah.

My favorite was when she texted Governor Gavin Newsom of California and asked for his endorsement after the Biden switch, and he responded by saying, "Hiking.

Will get back to you."

Which is like the most perfect brush off that right, has ever happened and is a pretty good symptom of the problem that they face at that moment, which is kind of the crux of the book, which is like she didn't have the time to kind of develop this relationship with Democrats in order to be successful and of course, she was not.

So that definitely has the sort of element, I guess I have kind of a question beyond that, and that's whether or not, like, any of this is going to matter, right?

I mean, it strikes me that she is not running, given that she has burned a lot of bridges here.

Yeah.

If she does run well, any of this matter to voters, I don't know.

Maybe this is just us talking about the No, I mean, juiciness of it.

Well, it depends on the signal it, right.

So you try to signal to, some Democrats that perhaps blame her is like, Look, here's the evidence.

It was not my fault.

I did my best.

Yeah.

Given what I was dealt with.

Right.

Yeah, that seems fair, but yeah, definitely.

There some complications here.

Oh, yeah.

You're seeing a lot of, Democrats push back on this saying we need unity right now, not you kind of dishing about all the problems that we have, right?

Like, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Keep the family struggles right, inside.

Right, right.

Right, of the tunnel as it were.

The president had an unusual week this week.

He had a kind of very rangy speech at the UN.

His speeches are always worth watching at the UN.

Right.

Like it's always this mix of these stuffy UN elites, and then this kind of brash New Yorker who comes in to tell him what's what.

He told the countries that were assembled, that their countries are going to hell.

Yeah.

And that the US was rising.

He said he ended seven wars and never even got a phone call from the UN.

Except the things he did get were a bad escalator, which stopped right as he was getting to it.

Yeah, yeah.

Also the bad teleprompter, which went south when he started, beyond just the kind of speech itself, the meetings were the most important.

And he did a kind of 180 on the Ukrainian.

Yeah, Russian situation saying that he thinks, in fact, that Ukraine should keep the territory, that it gains and maybe even more.

This is obviously a reflection of the fact that he and Vladimir Putin have had a kind of falling out.

The countries are still trying to figure out how to sort of sanction nations for, you know, sort of having Russian oil.

So that's an odd effect.

The other thing that happened was that the Tylenol kind of debacle, I think, came down.

The president, a very rangy speech, I guess, is the polite way to put it to say, basically, you know, pregnant women shouldn't take Tylenol.

Lots of falsehoods there that got checked.

I guess the question is, politically, does this change the dynamic for the president in either of these dimensions?

No.

Yeah.

I mean, it's no, because this is the president's style.

Yeah.

I mean, there's nothing significantly new when you I mean, in terms of going to the UN, besides saying that people want to kill cows, climate change is a hoax.

It's everything.

Is is is within the brand.

There are too many to even list.

Right.

And so like, exact kind of exaggerations or falsehoods that.

Yeah.

And so that's his M.O.. That's his style.

Right.

So, so that's, you know, falls within the the Trump brand and his administration.

The worrisome thing is about this debate and, in terms of Tylenol is that, the science is not conclusive in that.

And that is important question.

Right.

And he wasn't.

As clear as he could have been about exactly when and how.

I mean, people should follow their doctor's advice obviously, but this was sort of unclear in terms of exactly what has been found and why and what it meant.

And so there's a lot of uncertainty on this when you really want more certainty.

But that has implications, right?

And and obviously these people need to, you know, consult their physicians and ask what is the best way to, to move forward.

So true.

So but that's going to be an issue that we're going to consult with our own physicians.

But for next week.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghause.

The party keeps up next week.