Is Texas the Newest Swing State?

In the blog from HuffPost, Roque Planas writes an article titled “A Beto O’Rourke Presidential Campaign Could Flip Texas.” Throughout the piece, Planas speculates the possibility of Texas flipping, and how this may happen in the next presidential election. Speculators say that the historically known red state might be changing to blue with this new candidate.

Planas uses the results from the Midterm elections from last year to back up his argument as well as the results from internet poll conducted by UT Texas that states that only 39% of the population in the area would vote for Trump again. Beto, a Democrat candidate, won a substantial amount of votes against his opposition, Ted Cruz, last year during the Midterm elections and surprised many people. His campaign is focused on low-turnout cities (even if they were mostly blue), strong red counties in the north, and large cities such as Austin and Houston. He encourages opposing parties, such as Republicans and Independents, to come together and join him.

The author is optimistic about this change and brings valid and interesting points into the discussion. Texas being only 45 percent white but with a low-turnout rate of Latinos seems contradictory to his argument, but he reminds us that this demographic along with millennial voters has been increasing. I think he is clear and realistic when he claims these are just predictions and that historically this has not happened. Just as the writer does, I believe that if it were to happen now is more likely than it has ever been. More liberal leaning people have been migrating to Texas, and the Democratic voters have been growing as more people turn 18 and are incentivized to vote. People were very hopeful during the midterms, yet Ted Cruz still won despite Beto’s intense campaigning in the state. We also have to remember that it is not only Texas that will determine this election and there are many white Republican states out there that are less likely to flip. In the end, it will depend on what the rest of the country is leaning towards and how many people are still convinced in voting for Trump.  

The truth about social mobility.

Paul Krugman, a columnist for the New York Times recently wrote about a statement made by Ivanka Trump commenting on social mobility in America, claiming Americans don’t want to be guaranteed the minimum, instead the people want to work for what they receive and create their own chances of moving up economically. Krugman criticizes Ivanka Trump saying that she lacks self-awareness and how she got to where she is now is not the reality for most Americans. He claims that social mobility in this country is the worst compared to other developed countries, such as Canada and Scandinavia. These countries implement a larger government and provide basic help, such as affordable healthcare and enough funds going into schools, so that the chances of social mobility increase.

The author's intended audience is the american people. He tries to create awareness concerning the current state of the country regarding this “easily attainable social mobility” that many Americans believe in, when in reality it is much harder than people make it to be and often times leads to shaming people for not working hard enough and not giving the necessary attention to policies that may help these cases. The author is credible as he uses several studies and provides links defending his arguments he is also a Professor at a university and has won the Nobel Memorial Prize in  Economic Sciences in 2008.

I agree with Paul Krugman, this topic is important to discuss as it seems to be quite unknown by the general population. Criticizing the wealthy’s delusion that many get there by hard work is also important, people with everyday jobs work long and hard and most of the time don’t come close to what these people make, it is irresponsible to claim that people do not want to be “given things by the government” as these “things” aren’t given, they are deserved by any citizen. I also liked how the author touched on the subject of how Republicans call these policies that Democrats are defending Socialism, and how it is inaccurate to do so. The outcome the the two parties defend, a good economy and increasing social mobility would be a direct consequence from aiding low-income populations.