Teslag said:

---

The System said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

txwxman said:

---

Need to clean house of the RINOs. Abbott, Patrick, Paxton would be a good start.

---

Ummm...sure.

We get it. Your folks got their man in Burrows.

---

Here we go. The age old F16 argument of which conservative is a real conservative. Never gets old. You better toe the tea party line, or you get labeled RINO, leftist, Kamala voter.

I'll save you a few keystrokes….yes the username checks out.

---

The poster he was responding to is literally a liberal.

---

Well it's pretty hard to know who's who around here as much as you throw out that word. It's like the race card.

Finally got a hold of someone in Cecil Bell Jr.'s Austin office to answer my call.

The answer he gave me was that there were 2 factors that influenced his decision to side with the Dems and vote Burrows. It was tough to actually follow along with what the poor office clerk was trying to explain.

1) dark money influence & out of state meddling. Something about in West TX 2 big money (billionaires) were trying to influence the election and spread misinformation.

2) Burrows won't allow Dems to be head of committees/chairmans but Cooks would have.

Neither of the reasons given made any sense. The office worker also tried to spin that Cooks was also making overtures to Dems to win the Speaker role. When I pointed out that Cooks would have to because Republicans like Cecil not following party rules would require him to.

The office worker also tried to make the claim that Burrows is more conservative and that Cooks sided with the impeach Paxton crowd.

Whenever I mess up and don't have a good explanation I always throw out the "dark money" excuse.

rgag12 said:

---

Whenever I mess up and don't have a good explanation I always throw out the "dark money" excuse.

---

Stan Gerdes can EAD

TJaggie14 said:

---

Finally got a hold of someone in Cecil Bell Jr.'s Austin office to answer my call.

The answer he gave me was that there were 2 factors that influenced his decision to side with the Dems and vote Burrows. It was tough to actually follow along with what the poor office clerk was trying to explain.

1) dark money influence & out of state meddling. Something about in West TX 2 big money (billionaires) were trying to influence the election and spread misinformation.

2) Burrows won't allow Dems to be head of committees/chairmans but Cooks would have.

Neither of the reasons given made any sense. The office worker also tried to spin that Cooks was also making overtures to Dems to win the Speaker role. When I pointed out that Cooks would have to because Republicans like Cecil not following party rules would require him to.

The office worker also tried to make the claim that Burrows is more conservative and that Cooks sided with the impeach Paxton crowd.

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

TJaggie14 said:

---

Finally got a hold of someone in Cecil Bell Jr.'s Austin office to answer my call.

The answer he gave me was that there were 2 factors that influenced his decision to side with the Dems and vote Burrows. It was tough to actually follow along with what the poor office clerk was trying to explain.

1) dark money influence & out of state meddling. Something about in West TX 2 big money (billionaires) were trying to influence the election and spread misinformation.

2) Burrows won't allow Dems to be head of committees/chairmans but Cooks would have.

Neither of the reasons given made any sense. The office worker also tried to spin that Cooks was also making overtures to Dems to win the Speaker role. When I pointed out that Cooks would have to because Republicans like Cecil not following party rules would require him to.

The office worker also tried to make the claim that Burrows is more conservative and that Cooks sided with the impeach Paxton crowd.

---

They think you're stupid.

---

Well I was barely a business student, so maybe they have a point.

Yeah it all sounded like garbage and a bunch of political buzz words to try and justify his actions without really saying anything. I felt bad for the office worker having to face the music instead of his boss.

HTownAg98 said:

---

You can expel them, censure, do whatever you want to them, but there's no way to stop them from filing in a Republican primary and running again.

---

Yes, they can run, but the County Committee can also endorse their primary opponent and direct all funding to their opponent.

Time for County Committees to step up and take a stand.

HTownAg98 said:

---

And that's also illegal. If they meet the requirements as outlined in the state election code, the party chair shall include them on a primary ballot. Period. It's up to the voters to decide if that candidate best represents the ideals of the party. If someone challenges this, it will be overturned.

---

Yup. I don't think that there's anything in the code that keeps any yahoo that can garner a couple of hundred signatures from getting on the ballot.

Which also poses a problem with you have someone with a common name - like for instance, Robert Morrow - who gets on a ballot and actually wins with zero effort going towards their candidacy.

So for the reason stated above, as well as what we've seen with the Burrows bunch refusing to follow Caucus rules THEY helped write, I will be speaking with my rep about the need for amending of the law to provide some safeguards for the Parties to protect their own primaries.

Without said legislation, I fear we will soon see the day where a Soros-style strategy will be implemented to fund common name candidates of their own party being placed on opposing party ballots just to garner the uniformed vote.

Parties need some control of who goes on the ballot of the Party. Anyone should be able to run, but to get on a primary ballot should require at least a minimum of party-related requirements.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

And that's also illegal. If they meet the requirements as outlined in the state election code, the party chair shall include them on a primary ballot. Period. It's up to the voters to decide if that candidate best represents the ideals of the party. If someone challenges this, it will be overturned.

---

It is not illegal and it won't be overturned. You should crack open the US constitution sometime, specifically the 1st amendment.

---

You should look at SCoTx precedent that says otherwise.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11003288982219520028&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

Quote:

---

A request made under the provisions of Article 13.12 for a place as a candidate on a party primary ballot imports a present good faith intention of affiliating with the party. Past or present words or conduct may open that intention to doubt and question. But party officers and Executive Committees may not decide the issue against the candidate and so deciding refuse to place his name on the party primary ballot. This Court so held in Love v. Wilcox, 119 Tex. 256, 28 S.W.2d 515, 525, 70 A.L.R. 1484. We there said that "The power to pass on the sincerity of the candidate's pledge and to indorse or condemn his past party record is to be exercised by the party voters." Further, we quoted with approval from an opinion of the Attorney General as follows: "If proper application is made the committee should place the name of the candidate on the ballot and the members of the party the voters themselves would be the best judges of his fidelity to the party and make that decision at the polls."

---

---

Sadly, this opinion was adequate imo until just recently. Now, with the manipulation that we've seen to get Soros DAs elected, and the other games that have now been put into play utilizing lawfare, misinformation, and exchange of money to achieve political goals, it is an unfortunate truth that "the voters themselves" ARE NOT necessarily the best judges of fidelity to party.

Again, case in point, the Curious Case of Robert Morrow.

They think you're stupid.

The Texas lege wont ban China from owning land in Texas because wait for it…. Its racist. You can't make this crap up

— Kambree (@KamVTV) January 19, 2025

Office of Angela Orr response to my email. What a load of horse *****

Thank you for reaching out and for taking the time to share your thoughts with our office regarding Rep. Orr's decision in the Speaker selection. We appreciate your engagement and value the perspectives of our constituents.
Dustin Burrows was raised in rural Texas and continues to represent a rural district, which closely aligns with the needs and priorities of House District 13. Rural issues and challenges are significantly different from those faced in larger metropolitan areas, such as Mansfield, which Rep. David Cook represents. Given this, it is essential to have leadership that truly understands and advocates for rural communities.
Speaker Burrows has strong conservative credentials, extensive knowledge of House operations, and a proven commitment to passing critical legislative priorities. Now serving his fifth term, he brings a wealth of experience and a record of conservative victories, surpassing that of Rep. Cook, who is in his third term. Additionally, Speaker Burrows has worked alongside Rep. Orr to pass legislation that directly benefits families in House District 13, ensuring that our rural communities have a strong voice in the Texas House.
Furthermore, rural representatives are far fewer in number than in the past, making it even more critical to ensure that rural voices remain strong in the legislature. With fewer rural leaders, the unique challenges our communities face risk being overshadowed by urban interests. This is why Rep. Orr believes it is essential to support leadership that understands the distinct needs of rural Texas and will champion policies that protect and strengthen our way of life.
A representative is elected to serve their district and advocate for the best interests of their constituents, and that remains Rep. Orr's top priority. She is committed to making informed decisions that will have the most positive impact on those she represents.
Rep. Orr also greatly enjoyed her visit with Riesel ISD. She was impressed by the engagement of the students, who asked thoughtful questions that she answered with honesty and transparency. It was a meaningful opportunity to connect with young members of our community.
I'm sorry that you feel disappointed by this decision, but please know that Rep. Orr is dedicated to serving her constituents to the best of her ability and within the framework of her responsibilities.
Thank you and please reach out anytime if we can do anything for you.



Lindsay Kimbrell
District Director
Representative Angelia Orr
House District 13
214 E Elm St.
Hillsboro, Tx 76645
Capitol Office: 512-463-0600
District Office: 254-580-9008