TexasCHLforum.com

I don't see Straus being beat at the polls. He is in til he decides to retire or move on to bigger better things.

His family has too many powerful connections for him to lose unless he makes a monumental mistake. Get ready to see him push hard to legalize gambling in Texas. His dad's (family's) investment in Retama park goes a long way in driving Speaker Joe's agenda and motives. They partnered with Vegas money folks to bail out Retama and they are all banking on gambling being legalized.

I'm not promoting for or against gambling. I am just trying to help shed some light on what drives Joe. As usual it is personal interests, greed and power. Not the noble leadership he brings to the table as discussed by his nominators and seconders.

Mr. Cotton -- respectfully -- most voters don't know or care who is elected speaker. We care, but a niche group like us -- CHL holders, do'n't have nearly the numbers of general voters. We probably have more voters than the "Constitutional Carry" crowd does. Seriously, I view the status quo as a step backward. Our Reps don't fear us, (or fear of being replaced) so they stuck with the same thing because they fear the Speaker more.

My opinion here folks, don't look for any big steps this session, as far as gun legislation goes. Oh we might win an incremental step here or there, but Campus carry, adding the number of places where CHL holders can carry, and no way will any sort of "open" carry legislation be passed. Licensed or not.

mojo84 wrote:Joe will remember it. I feel sorry for the 19 walking dead members now. I respect them no less though.

I hope that, it being a record vote, they'll actually be less dead than otherwise. It will be painfully obvious even to non-members if Strauss punishes them, and he'll likely be called to account and get exactly the same reaction as Boehner got when he tried to punish House republicans who voted against his speakership. He had to walk back some of his initial responses, in no small part because there was so much publicity surrounding his opposition.

Scott Turner did not mount his campaign from a position of obscurity, and so Strauss cannot retaliate against him or his supporters from the safe haven of obscurity. He'll have to do it out in the open, and if he tries, he'll get called out on it. Not only will he get called out on it by other members, but he might well not be reelected Speaker in 2016 if he runs.

Here is the 19 who voted for Turner:
Rep. Rodney Anderson, District 105
Rep. Dustin Burrows, District 83
Rep. Pat Fallon, District 106
Rep. Bryan Hughes, District 5
Rep. Mark Keough, District 15
Rep. Stephanie Klick, District 91
Rep. Matt Krause, District 93
Rep. Jeff Leach, District 67
Rep. Matt Rinaldi, District 115
Rep. Scott Sanford, District 70
Rep. Matt Schaefer, District 6
Rep. Matt Shaheen, District 66
Rep. David Simpson, District 7
Rep. Stuart Spitzer, District 4
Rep. Jonathan Strickland, District 92
Rep. Tony Tinderholt, District 94
Rep. Scott Turner, District 33
Rep. Molly White, District 55
Rep. Bill Zedler, District 96

Straus says, "A small number sought to divide us, but you cannot lead this House by dividing it."

That does not portend well for the future.

I am angered that my own representative, Capriglione, who ran (an won) on a ticket of bringing change to Austin with Tea Party support, voted for Strauss. I'd sure as hades like to know why.

baldeagle wrote:Straus says, "A small number sought to divide us, but you cannot lead this House by dividing it."

That does not portend well for the future.

Let me see......

Principled opposition = dividing us

Political strong-arming = uniting us.

Right.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Joe will remember it. I feel sorry for the 19 walking dead members now. I respect them no less though.

I hope that, it being a record vote, they'll actually be less dead than otherwise. It will be painfully obvious even to non-members if Strauss punishes them, and he'll likely be called to account and get exactly the same reaction as Boehner got when he tried to punish House republicans who voted against his speakership. He had to walk back some of his initial responses, in no small part because there was so much publicity surrounding his opposition.

Scott Turner did not mount his campaign from a position of obscurity, and so Strauss cannot retaliate against him or his supporters from the safe haven of obscurity. He'll have to do it out in the open, and if he tries, he'll get called out on it. Not only will he get called out on it by other members, but he might well not be reelected Speaker in 2016 if he runs.

I hope you are right, but I don't think members that weren't brave enough to vote against Strauss are going to be brave enough to call him out on it, especially if it is more subtle than just booting them off of committees. Thinks like their bills never moving past a certain stage, funds going to opponents in primaries, etc.

I suspect there were more than 19 people opposed to Strauss, but not yet enough that the undercurrent of opposition had developed enough buzz for them to be fairly certain of winning if they voted against him. If Strauss ever gets voted down, it will be a cascade effect; one moment he will look strong, on paper at least, and then suddenly the vote will seemingly massively turn. That point comes when enough people in the opposition become aware of enough other people in the opposition that are willing to act.

ELB wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Joe will remember it. I feel sorry for the 19 walking dead members now. I respect them no less though.

I hope that, it being a record vote, they'll actually be less dead than otherwise. It will be painfully obvious even to non-members if Strauss punishes them, and he'll likely be called to account and get exactly the same reaction as Boehner got when he tried to punish House republicans who voted against his speakership. He had to walk back some of his initial responses, in no small part because there was so much publicity surrounding his opposition.

Scott Turner did not mount his campaign from a position of obscurity, and so Strauss cannot retaliate against him or his supporters from the safe haven of obscurity. He'll have to do it out in the open, and if he tries, he'll get called out on it. Not only will he get called out on it by other members, but he might well not be reelected Speaker in 2016 if he runs.

I hope you are right, but I don't think members that weren't brave enough to vote against Strauss are going to be brave enough to call him out on it, especially if it is more subtle than just booting them off of committees. Thinks like their bills never moving past a certain stage, funds going to opponents in primaries, etc.

I suspect there were more than 19 people opposed to Strauss, but not yet enough that the undercurrent of opposition had developed enough buzz for them to be fairly certain of winning if they voted against him. If Strauss ever gets voted down, it will be a cascade effect; one moment he will look strong, on paper at least, and then suddenly the vote will seemingly massively turn. That point comes when enough people in the opposition become aware of enough other people in the opposition that are willing to act.

Just the kind of people we do NOT want serving in our legislature.

baldeagle wrote:Straus says, "A small number sought to divide us, but you cannot lead this House by dividing it."

That does not portend well for the future.

This comment right her from Straus is a clue how he views those that don't fall in line. The 19 need some encouragement and a pat on the back for standing on principle.

Kudos to Rep. Matt Krause, District 93 for going against the status quo, he has my vote in two years time. Also Rep Tinderholt, another newly elected state Rep, nice going guys.

baldeagle wrote:Here is the 19 who voted for Turner:

Rep. Molly White, District 55

Good for her.

Disappointed in the results, but no less eager to help push pro gun bills this year. We can spend the next year and a half moping about the set backs, but it's time to warm up the phones and emails to support good bills.

While I am not a Strauss fan, I am really hate the blanket 'throw the bum out and get anyone different' philosophy.

As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation. At least with Strauss we have history and know how to work through legislation with him. Sometimes knowing your enemy and being able to out maneuver them is better then dealing with one that may take you by surprise.

In the case of politicians, it's more like out 'manure' them.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I am angered that my own representative, Capriglione, who ran (an won) on a ticket of bringing change to Austin with Tea Party support, voted for Strauss. I'd sure as hades like to know why.

Not a direct quote, but when I spoke with him a few weeks ago he basically said it wasn't a fight that was winnable, Turner being too new to succeed.

Keith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.

Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrV