I went to the forum last night, if it was any indication of the rest of the district. Roberts doesn't have a chance, and you could see it on his face when Crenshaw was receiving applause continuously.

During the questions, they both essentially said the same things and stand for the same things.

willie wonka said:

---

We got a long handwritten note from a friend of ours who is a local elected official asking us to vote for Kevin Roberts and gave us Roberts' cell phone number in case we had any questions or concerns.

When we got that, my wife and I looked at each other and said, "Wow. Roberts must be in trouble in this race."

---

We've gotten those postcards as well. Also a phone call from the campaign in which they offered up his cell phone number again. I replied "no thanks, I already have it."

redag06 said:

---

I went to the forum last night, if it was any indication of the rest of the district. Roberts doesn't have a chance, and you could see it on his face when Crenshaw was receiving applause continuously.

During the questions, they both essentially said the same things and stand for the same things.

---

I live in Kingwood and there are Crenshaw signs everywhere. It's like he flew over the area and dumped thousands of signs out of the back.

If Crenshaw wants to become a multi-term Congressperson, I don't see him going up to DC and giving the finger to his constituents by voting with the Democrats. I can see him becoming a Brady or Culberson, talking a conservative game and voting the correct way on votes that don't matter. But, siding with big government and the cheap labor express when it comes to crunch time.

Other than what Roberts has said about Crenshaw, I haven't heard or seen where Crenshaw is going to vote with the democrats.

Calling Trump an idiot doesn't make someone a liberal. Last night Roberts was pushing the Trump stuff hard.

Did you happen to get it from the wife of a Justice of the Peace?

All I can think of when I see Dan Crenshaw's signs is that he is the Governor from The Walking Dead.

My problem with Crenshaw is he reached the end of his tour of duty couple of years ago (in his own words) and decided he could either make a career out of the military or career out of politics, and decided he didn't want to go the military route. I appreciate his candor, but I want someone representing me in Congress who (1) is motivated by ideology not a career choice (so you know how they will vote and can count on them to resist caving in) and (2) didn't just discover an interest in politics "yesterday" (so they know the issues and have a track record for you to rely upon). Crenshaw may very well turn out to be the consistent conservative congressman I hope for, and if he is, I will enthusiastically support him. But I have significant reservations.

Roberts pimping Trump hard is a huge turn off. Trump isn't conservative, and doesn't need Roberts to "defend his honor" against an old Crenshaw facebook post. If Roberts hadn't voted for Trump in the primary (by his own admission), I might assume his Trumpism was just a tactic to split the base away from Crenshaw in the primary.

Considering the groundswell of grassroots support, early and consistent mailers, ubiquitous yard signs, Michael Berry promotion, all wrapped up with smart if not vapid marketing plan...this is going to be a cake walk for Crenshaw.

Quote:

---

I want someone representing me in Congress who (1) is motivated by ideology not a career choice

---

Those aren't mutually exclusive. Like it or not, running for and serving in Congress is a seriously full-time commitment and does require a career choice. It's not like the state legislature where they can keep their insurance office or law practice back home.

ChiliBeans said:

---

Quote:

---

I want someone representing me in Congress who (1) is motivated by ideology not a career choice

---

Those aren't mutually exclusive. Like it or not, running for and serving in Congress is a seriously full-time commitment and does require a career choice. It's not like the state legislature where they can keep their insurance office or law practice back home.

---

I never said being a congressman wasn't a career choice. I said I don't want the career choice to be the motivation for someone to run for congress.

Sounds like you just want them to lie about their motivations.

Diggity said:

---

Sounds like you just want them to lie about their motivations.

---

There are plenty of folks who run for elected office - from precinct chair, to local school board, to part-time state legislature, US Senate - who do so because they strongly believe that their ideas are better, and not because of job title/publicity/salary/etc. That's the type I want to represent me in Congress.

aTm2004 said:

---

So, you can stay in the military and make it a career...a career that has already taken your eye and has most likely taken close friends from you.

Or, you can go a different direction in politics and help change policy so those you protected can live a better life and possibly get to a position where you can help influence the military action.

---

That's fine. But I want a congressman running on issues and not simply on his military service. It's a plus for sure, but at the end of the day, his service record has little bearing on whether or not he supports legislation I want and works to block legislation I don't. See John McCain for example.

aTm2004 said:

---

redag06 said:

---

I went to the forum last night, if it was any indication of the rest of the district. Roberts doesn't have a chance, and you could see it on his face when Crenshaw was receiving applause continuously.

During the questions, they both essentially said the same things and stand for the same things.

---

I live in Kingwood and there are Crenshaw signs everywhere. It's like he flew over the area and dumped thousands of signs out of the back.

---

I voted for Roberts at KUMC. I thought it was interesting that the illegal Crenshaw sign sat there in the median for several days and nobody removed it. Purely anecdotal, but seemed to tell me that Roberts' ground game is weak. Crenshaw definitely has the grass roots support, as evidenced by overtaking Wall. Even though Roberts has the NRA endorsement, Crenshaw has a lot of appeal from former Wall supporters who are looking for their next "patriot." Of course, he's not a blue collar or a redneck like them at all, but I'm sure he doesn't care as long as he gets their votes.

Also remember that these things are generally low turnout, and Roberts is going to get some big amounts of block voting over in Champions/Cypress.

Hmmmmm....everyone I know in that area from work is voting for "the pirate"

Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

---

aTm2004 said:

---

So, you can stay in the military and make it a career...a career that has already taken your eye and has most likely taken close friends from you.

Or, you can go a different direction in politics and help change policy so those you protected can live a better life and possibly get to a position where you can help influence the military action.

---

That's fine. But I want a congressman running on issues and not simply on his military service. It's a plus for sure, but at the end of the day, his service record has little bearing on whether or not he supports legislation I want and works to block legislation I don't. See John McCain for example.

---

I completely agree, but it seemed like you are holding his decision to leave the military and go into politics against him. Whether or not he agrees or supports the policies you do is between you and him, but IMO, you can't fault him for wanting to leave the military and go into politics. Less people shooting at you (words aren't bullets) and more time with family.

Quote:

---

My problem with Crenshaw is he reached the end of his tour of duty couple of years ago (in his own words) and decided he could either make a career out of the military or career out of politics, and decided he didn't want to go the military route.

---

redag06 said:

---

Hmmmmm....everyone I know in that area from work is voting for "the pirate"

---

Champions Forest Baptist Church has 8,000 weekly attendance. Gotta think that will help Roberts. His wife and BIL have a LOT of friends. But if people turn out, it will be to vote for Crenshaw.

FYI, there were 46,000 total votes cast in the first round, with 60% of them going to Roberts or Crenshaw.

Now that you mention the powerful friends at Champion Forest, it finally clicked for me which JP the other posters were talking about. Makes sense.

The other factor is the buy-an-endorsement slates. I don't think they're as important as they once were, but in a low turnout race in that part of the county, those bought & paid for evangelical endorsements could help Roberts.

Runoffs like this favor insurgent candidates. See, e.g. Dewhurst v. Cruz.

Where did I fault him for leaving the military? He can do whatever he wants to career-wise as far as I am concerned. But for the second or third time, I want a candidate motivated by ideology and not a job opportunity as my congressman. Just like I want a brain surgeon motivated by passion for science and healing rather than he was looking for a career change. If Crenshaw had been an adjunct professor of English instead and when asked why he was running, responded that he reached a cross roads where had to decide on a career in higher education or politics and chose the latter, I'd have the same criticism.

Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

---

Where did I fault him for leaving the military? He can do whatever he wants to career-wise as far as I am concerned. But for the second or third time, I want a candidate motivated by ideology and not a job opportunity as my congressman. Just like I want a brain surgeon motivated by passion for science and healing rather than he was looking for a career change. If Crenshaw had been an adjunct professor of English instead and when asked why he was running, responded that he reached a cross roads where had to decide on a career in higher education or politics and chose the latter, I'd have the same criticism.

---

You never faulted him for leaving the military. You faulted him for deciding to leave the military to go into politics (there is a difference). At the end of the day, damn near every politician decided to make a career move/change to go into politics. As another poster above said, the position isn't one where they can keep their daily job and do it on the side. It's 100% all in, so giving up your current career is necessary. Honestly, I appreciate his openness about it. It's much better than the usual "well, I've always felt the calling for public service" crap most bore you with. Also, IMO, those are the ones that we want in politics instead of those who go right into it out of college and spend 25+ years there.

As far as supporting a candidate on policy, I completely agree. I haven't followed either of their policies that close since I don't live in their district (just outside of it and moving into it), so I won't be able to cast a vote for either in the primary and can't say which one I see eye-to-eye with. Once I'm in the district and can vote for the rep, then I'll start paying more attention to their policies.

aTm2004 said:

---

You never faulted him for leaving the military. You faulted him for deciding to leave the military to go into politics (there is a difference).

---

Damn. No, I did not and do not "fault" him for making a career change. I have made my position clear as day: I want a politician motivated by their ideology. I'm out.

I voted for Roberts the first time. When this all started I liked them both and thought I am fine either way. However at this point I find myself wishing for a third choice.

StillNotAnAggie said:

---

All I can think of when I see Dan Crenshaw's signs is that he is the Governor from The Walking Dead.

---

Snake Plissken

My JP friend doesn't go to Champion Forest.

https://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/Attack-ads-in-Houston-race-being-funded-by-12923612.php

"The biggest donor behind negative ads against Republican Dan Crenshaw in a Houston Republican congressional runoff is his opponent's brother-in-law's law firm, new Federal Election Commission reports show.

The Lanier Law Firm sent $450,000 to Conservative Results Matter in April, FEC records filed on Thursday show. That PAC, which supports Kevin Roberts for the 2nd Congressional District over Crenshaw, has been running ads that slam Crenshaw as a "so-called Republican" and compares him to Democrats like former President Barack Obama and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.

The Lanier Law Firm was founded by Mark Lanier in 1990. Kevin Roberts is Lanier's brother-in-law and he works for the firm as its executive director.

Roberts campaign on Thursday said Roberts never asked Lanier to give to the Conservative Results Matter PAC."

The dude literally works down the hall from Lanier and is married to his sister. SMH.

Here is the FEC filing. http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00674739/1232025/sa/11AI

Lanier and Roberts seem like your typical Tech Tards!

I just saw the TV ad where Roberts starts off with Insane, Hateful, Idiot that Crenshaw called trump and calls Crenshaw an anti-Trump liberal and put him between a picture of Obama's and Bernie...

I wish I lived in this district so I could vote against Roberts like I would have against Wall.