Analysis shows GOP groups’ endorsement success rates
A new analysis offers a glimpse at one measure of influence in the universe of Republican groups hoping to sway what are typically Texas’ most consequential elections: how often the candidates they endorse actually win. Brandon Rottinghaus, a political scientist at the University Houston, recently to determine the endorsement success rates of GOP organizations in this cycle’s statewide and regional primaries and runoffs.
The Houston-based Tea Party 911 had a perfect record in the primaries, backing 13 candidates who all went on to win, and one of the highest success rates in the runoffs at 67 percent. However, the group endorsed fewer candidates than most other organizations in Rottinghaus’ analysis, lowering its risk of betting on the wrong horse. For example,Update- FBI member, Gulfport detective will be pre, the size of its primary slate was well below that of the anti-abortion group Texas Right to Life, which picked 111 candidates, 100 of whom were victorious.
Empower Texans, the Austin-based group headed by limited government activist Michael Quinn Sullivan, is the arguable winner in Rottinghaus’ analysis. The organization threw its support behind nearly four times as many primary candidates as Tea Party 911 did and only one candidate lost, resulting in a success rate of 98 percent. In the runoffs, Empower Texans also was near the top of Rottinghaus’ list,Nationals’ Anthony Rendon- ‘I don’t watch baseball — it’s too long and boring’, backing 13 candidates, seven of whom went on to win. (The group made an endorsement in Texas Senate District 10, but the special election to replace its former officeholder — Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis — has not yet been held.)
The comparisons are not perfect, given a variety of factors such as the groups’ different agendas. For instance,Richard Linklater's Life Advice, some organizations probably are more interested in backing candidates who support a specific cause than those who have the best chance of winning.
Still, Rottinghaus saw a general trend: Groups that “tend to be more broadly conservative and tend to have a bigger picture of the success of the Texas Republican Party” were more likely to pick winning candidates, he told the Chronicle.
Endorsements were more important than usual in this cycle’s primaries and runoffs, Rottinghaus said, noting the impending end of Rick Perry’s 14 years as governor “has allowed for a backlog of Republican candidates to emerge.” The groups’ slates help voters sift through occasionally crowded fields that otherwise may have discouraged them from showing up at the polls.
Overall, the groups’ hand-picked candidates fared well in the primaries thanks to few surprises at the top of the ballot. Most of them backed Dan Patrick for lieutenant governor and Ken Paxton for attorney general, two candidates who faced serious opponents but were increasingly favored to win as their contests drew closer.
The groups’ records were more mixed in the runoffs, with Rottinghaus noting the one “consistent miss” was in the race for railroad commissioner. Many organizations passed on engineer Ryan Sitton for former state Rep. Wayne Christian, an early front-runner who by nearly 15 points.
The Texas Eagle Forum, a Dallas-based group for conservative women, landed near the bottom of Rottinghaus’ list with a 58 percent success rate in the primaries and 50 percent in the runoffs.
Of course, successful endorsements are not the only way to gauge a group’s clout. Its fundraising muscle and membership size, to name just a few factors, contribute to how much it can move the needle in a competitive race. Nonetheless, endorsements send the clearest message to a group’s ranks who could be expected to most advocate for their interests if elected, whether those interests are as broad as conservative values or as focused as home schooling.
Read Rottinghaus’ analysis, including more information about his methodology:
Please enable JavaScript to view the