Sanchez (Retired Army Lt. Gen.) to Enter Senate Race in Texas

[jefferson_dem]

Sanchez to Enter Senate Race in Texas
By Shira Toeplitz
Roll Call Staff

May 11, 2011, 5 a.m.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez (D) will announce Wednesday morning that he is filing to run for the open Senate seat in Texas, according to a Democratic source close to the campaign.

Sanchez, a three-star general who oversaw military operations in Iraq from 2003 to 2004, will declare his intentions on his Facebook page. National Democrats have touted Sanchez as a top candidate, frequently citing his military record and Hispanic background as draws for Texas voters.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (Wash.) has identified the Texas race as one of six GOP-held Senate seats that her party is targeting in 2012. The others are in Nevada, Maine, Indiana, Arizona and Massachusetts.

A campaign for any Democratic candidate in Texas is an uphill climb. It’s a particularly expensive state for campaigns, and no Democrat has won a top statewide election in Texas since 1990.

<SNIP>

http://www.rollcall.com/news/ricardo_sanchez_enter_senate_race_texas-205509-1.html

[druidity33]

1. Ugh. Two words... Abu Ghraib. nt.

[tekisui]

2. We should be ashamed that he purports to be a Dem.

In case anyone forgets this was the man in charge in Iraq when we were torturing in Abu Graib,

[LiberalFighter]

3. I'm not sure about anyone with a military career serving in Congress.

Maybe Texas will elect him. But it will have to do it without any financial support from me. I think the party will be wasting its resources in Texas when there are better opportunities. If Texas was about 1/5 its size I might consider it.

The other five targeted states have better odds with Massachusetts being the best chance imo.

[Ter]

4. Come on people, this is Texas

Do you want another Republican? The only way to get a Democrat elected to the Senate in TX is with one like Lt. Gen Sanchez. A guy like Al Franken or Anthony Weiner would lose big time here. This guy has a great chance, especially in a year (2012) when there's a possibility we may lose the Senate.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

5. Has Sanchez made any admissions of guilt/regret over Abu Gharib?

I'm not from Texas so obviously wouldn't be voting for him but I'd want to make sure that our party is not advocating for the election of a torture apologist.

[TrollBuster9090]

6. Not a torture apologist, per se...

As far as I know he claimed (in retrospect) not to have known what was going on at Abu Ghraib, and blamed the whole thing on Colonel Janis Karpinski, who was in charge of the prison. He did sign a memo saying it was okay to interrogate prisoners with "enhanced" techniques like light and sleep deprivation, unpleasant smells etc. He was later due for a promotion to full General, but he wasn't nominated, and retired a three star (Lt.) General instead. Many considered that to be his punishment for Abu Ghraib.

It's an interesting nomination, though. Texas is a pretty tough nut to crack for Democrats, but Sanchez could win it. And, ironically, all those things we'd consider negatives would be positives there. The fact that he authorized "enhanced" interrogation techniques for Iraqi prisoners would probably be a positive in Texas. The fact that he was a general is an obvious plus in Texas, and the fact that he's hispanic is potentially a huge wedge issue in Texas that would split strongly in the Democrats' favor, given that hispanics will soon be the majority in Texas. I'm sure Democrats would love to see the nomination of Sanchez drive all the high profile racists and xenophobes into the Republican camp for all to see, and would love to see the Republican attack machine go into contortions trying to find code words for attacking him without directly attacking his ethnicity. (Or, how about watching the Republican attack machine trying to attack him OVER enhanced interrogation techniques, given that it was they who came up with them, and are still defending them.)

Yeah, the Abu Ghraib thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but in spite of that I still think he's a great choice.

The Dems should also think about running Wesley Clark for the Senate in Arkansas,for the same reasons. Although Clark has a lot fewer negatives than Sanchez.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. Thanks for the information

Yeah, I guess he'd be an o.k. choice for the Senate (in Texas). I'd love to see Wes Clark in some higher office (in WH or Congress). It's too bad he's not being nominated to replace Gates at DOD. He'd be perfect for the job. Heck, I think he might've made a good POTUS as well.

[TrollBuster9090]

8. I agree!

I've seen the Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory so many times over the last 40 years, and waste one opportunity after another so often that it's hard for them to surprise me anymore. But I've NEVER seen such a waste as what they did with Wesley Clark. And it's not as if they guy didn't practically BEG to be included! He went on TV spots, and speaking engagements, and helped other Democrats campaign time after time after time. Went on TV to campaign for Obama even though he was a sworn Clinton ally. And after all that he gets absolutely nothing. Not even a piffling little cabinet position like Secretary of the Army. I've never seen anybody get stiffed so badly by the Democratic party. It was really depressing to watch. Now the same thing is happening with the unions. The beltway Democrats really don't have any desire to take care of their own. They could learn a thing or two from the Republicans in that respect. They always take care of their own, even if it costs them a little embarrassment.

And while we're on the subject, it should be obvious to anybody that if Kerry had picked Clark instead of Edwards as his running mate in 2004, we'd be half way through the second term of the Kerry Administration by now.

[uponit7771]

10. Yeap, he will also pull votes away from conservatives

[Keith Bee]

11. I agree, Ter

Pragmatism trumps ideological purity in this case.

[uponit7771]

9. They will smear him to no end

[Thrill]

12. Texas is a lost cause

Didn't Dems try to run a Military man in 08?

[TrollBuster9090]

13. I wouldn't say Texas is a lost cause, it has a lot of potential...

From a strictly partisan political standpoint Texas isn't a lost cause. Democratic strategists think it has huge potential to flip Democratic based on the large percentage of hispanics and the large percentage of youth, and it's all going to be up for grabs as soon as all of those young voters turn 18 in a couple of years. The youth vote is overwhelmingly Democratic now, thanks to Obama, and the hispanic vote is leaning Democratic thanks to the Republican tea party types.

(The back room Republican strategists are mighty steamed about that one, too! They've often claimed that, because hispanics are usually conservative on social issues (being Catholic) the culture wars split should put them permanently in the Republican camp. They even had George W. Bush, who (believe it or not) speaks spanish, making spanish election commercials and videos in 2000, and they captured a lot of the hispanic vote. But, thanks to the xenophobic nativist movement in the tea party, that villifies anybody with brown skin, they're now leaning Democratic.)

Anyway, I think there are two traditional, big-electoral vote states that traditionally lean Republican, that can be flipped to Democratic with a little massaging. Florida is the easiest one, and Texas will be hard, but it can be done. Mississippi, Kentucky etc., I would consider more of a lost cause than Texas. And the wedge issue for those states is the Confederate flag. Every Governor, Senator, and Congressman from the old Dixie states should be asked what their opinion is on flying the Confederate flag at their state capitol. They should be asked that as often as possible, in front of as many TV cameras as possible. They should be hammered as hard on the Confederate flag, and the place of the Confederacy in history as the Democrats are on flag burning and gay marriage.