To Lead Blue Backlash, Texas Dems Turn to Austin

posted in: All news | 0

I mean the headline of this article in three ways. 

On Tuesday night, Lone Star State Democrats selected two liberal Austin state representatives, James Talarico and Gina Hinojosa, for the top-ballot slots in this likely blue-wave year. And for lieutenant governor, a third liberal Austin state representative, Vikki Goodwin, came in comfortably first but is headed to a May 26 runoff, meaning three of the top four ballot spots could all be held by Austin state reps come the November election. (Yet another liberal Austin state legislator, Sarah Eckhardt, also won the nomination for state comptroller). 

For attorney general, Dallas state Senator Nathan Johnson nearly won outright but will also head to a runoff, in turn meaning that all four of the top nominees might be sitting state legislators—folks who carry out their part-time jobs in the capital city.

And, in the race that most of the nation cared about last night, Talarico relied heavily on his home base to secure his win over Dallas Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett. It’s true that, like Bernie Sanders in the 2020 primary, Talarico appears to have been favored by Latino primary voters—he won Bexar County (San Antonio) and the major border counties handily—and it’s likely true that Dems as a whole are strategic to nominate the candidate seemingly preferred by the state’s Hispanic plurality. It’s also fair to say that, outside of Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, and Greater East Texas, Talarico carried the state map.

But Austin is what really locked down Talarico’s outright, roughly 7 point win Tuesday. As I write this Wednesday morning, more than 90 percent of votes are in and Talarico is up by about 150,000 votes. He carried Travis County (Austin) and neighboring Williamson and Hays counties by a combined margin of about 150,000 votes.

By election night, Talarico’s win felt like the predictable outcome. After favoring Crockett for months, the final polls broke for the Austin state rep, and his fundraising and spending had lapped her. The congresswoman also had unforced errors, recently including Atlantic-gate (which, along with The Colin Allred Incident, I shall leave undefined here for the blissful ignorance of future readers). 

Talarico had also received, starting quite early on and for reasons that still feel somewhat opaque, a glowing rising-star treatment from D.C. and New York media. As early as September—two months after Allred launched his later-abandoned Senate bid and three months before Crockett joined the race, which is to say with the field firmly in flux—the aforementioned Atlantic wondered if he was “Texas’s Pete [Buttigieg].” Soon, a New York Times columnist asked: “Is He the Savior Democrats Have Been Waiting For?” And not too much later, the Times’ star podcaster Ezra Klein taped a 1.5-hour delicately delivered softball with the state rep in which Klein mentioned Crockett’s existence one time at the top.

Much of the middle-brow journalistic fluffing centered on Talarico’s religiosity, which was always something both new and not new. As a Presbyterian seminarian, Talarico deploys liberal Christianity with greater regularity and fluency than most Democratic politicians, but there’s nothing really so unusual about being both a Dem politician and a follower of Jesus. Crockett herself came up in Black Baptist churches and is a pastor’s daughter. And as was brought up somewhere amid The Colin Allred Incident, the media treatment of Talarico sometimes seemed to imply that an actual U.S. senator and actual pastor in Raphael Warnock was comparatively less relevant to a conversation about religion in liberalism.

How much the national press’ active intervention or any of the tawdry social media affairs mattered is unclear. Overall, rank-and-file Democratic voters seemed to continue liking both candidates; in the end, Talarico managed to overcome Crockett’s name recognition advantage, assembling a slightly larger and broader coalition.

Although the primary never centered on matters of substantive policy, it found its way into a sort of bizarro left-vs-moderate groove based on vibes and stated intent, with Talarico as the “moderate.” Essentially, he was more even-keeled, and he said he planned to win the sort of voters who will back Governor Greg Abbott in November but may balk at the GOP’s Senate nominee. He also hopes—as much of the press attention hinged on—to persuade Christians to his side (though this was oddly undermined in his longform New Yorker treatment, where he shrugged off the idea that he could persuade Evangelicals, the largest American Christian grouping).

The racially fraught key word here, of course, is “electable.” Talarico was largely granted the label this primary and now gets the chance to test the case. For the record, though, it should be noted that at least until primary night this was almost entirely a vibes-based theory. Talarico likes to tout that he flipped a red Williamson County state House seat in 2018—but in that blue-wave year Talarico’s margin of victory was 9 points fewer than that of Democratic Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke in the same district. Talarico also underperformed Joe Biden there in 2020. Come 2022—in the Travis County seat Talarico switched into after redistricting—he once again underperformed O’Rourke. 

And, of course, Texas Democrats haven’t won statewide in three decades. For all we know, the prototypical winning Dem here might be the first living soul you can manage to find along a road somewhere in Loving County.

All that, plus the fact that Democrats’ rising hopes this year seem to depend in part on scandal-plagued Attorney General Ken Paxton winning the Senate nod on the GOP side of the ledger. On Tuesday, Big and Probably-Not-As-Bad-As-Paxton John Cornyn held his ground better than expected, and the two now head for a May runoff that could go either way—with each surely jockeying desperately for Trump’s still-withheld imprimatur.

And so, Godspeed to us all. Or, as Talarico circa 2021 might put it, “holy mystery”-speed to us all. Or, as I imagine we may soon hear him saying on the campaign trail with Bobby Pulido, in decent gringo Spanish, Dios nos cuide y nos proteja. For November cometh.

In downballot Democratic news, a Houston Congressional fight over age and cryptocurrency is headed for a runoff, as Christian Menefee and Al Green each failed to crack 50 percent Tuesday. (Amanda Edwards pulled about 8 percentage points despite having dropped out.) 

Allred, in The Incident’s wake, came in first in a four-way primary for a deep-blue Dallas congressional seat but will need to prevail in a runoff with Congresswoman Julie Johnson, a messy situation created by the GOP’s mid-decade redistricting and Allred’s aborted Senate bid.

U.S. Representative Sylvia Garcia, of Houston, easily fended off a challenge from former state House representative Jarvis Johnson, while Pulido—the Tejano singer-turned politician—doubled up his opponent and won the chance to try to unseat Rio Grande Valley-based GOP Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz.

It was a mixed night for union-affiliated new candidates, who entered the evening as something of a wave with Texas AFL-CIO backing following the recent state Senate victory of labor candidate Taylor Rehmet. Marcos Vélez, a Gulf Coast union leader, came in a distant second for lieutenant governor but did make a runoff with Goodwin. 

Jose Loya, a United Steelworkers organizer from the Panhandle, lost his bid for the land commissioner nomination to Bay City Council member Benjamin Flores. LiUNA laborers union leader Jeremy Hendricks came in a very distant second in the race to fill Talarico’s state House seat, but former Texas AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Montserrat Garibay did lead the pack in the contest to represent Hinojosa’s Austin House district and now heads to a runoff.

The post To Lead Blue Backlash, Texas Dems Turn to Austin appeared first on The Texas Observer.

Ethics panel is investigating Texas Rep. Tony Gonzales over affair allegations

posted in: All news | 0

By KEVIN FREKING

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Ethics Committee said Wednesday that it has opened an investigation of Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, over allegations that include having an affair with an aide.

Related Articles


Hegseth says US ‘can’t stop everything’ that Iran fires even as he asserts air dominance


Change in primary voting rules leads to confusion in 2 Texas counties as voters are turned away


Republicans brace for an ugly fight in the Texas Senate runoff between Cornyn and Paxton


Texan James Talarico becomes a fresh face of Democrats’ midterm hopes after Senate primary win


Congress taking first votes on Iran war as debate rages about US goals

The top Republican and Democratic members on the committee said in a joint statement that an investigative panel would look into whether Gonzales engaged in sexual misconduct toward an employee in his office and whether he discriminated unfairly by dispensing special favors or privileges.

Gonzales’ office did not immediately reply to a request for comment from The Associated Press.

The congressman, now in his third term, has said he would not step down in response to the allegations, telling reporters at the Capitol recently that there will be opportunities for all the details and facts to come out.

“What you’ve seen is not all the facts,” Gonzales said.

Gonzales, a father of six, first won his seat in 2020 after retiring from a 20-year career in the Navy that included time in Iraq and Afghanistan. On Tuesday, he was forced into a May runoff against Brandon Herrera, a gun manufacturer and YouTube gun-rights influencer who narrowly lost to Gonzales in the 2024 primary.

The San Antonio Express-News reported that it had obtained text messages in which the former Gonzales staffer, Regina Ann Santos-Aviles, wrote to a colleague that she had an affair with the congressman.

The AP has not independently obtained copies of the messages. A lawyer for Adrian Aviles, Santos-Aviles’ husband, has said the husband found out about the affair before his wife’s death.

Santos-Aviles, 35, died in September 2025. The Bexar County Medical Examiner’s Office later ruled her death a suicide.

Cracks appear in Trump’s MAGA base as leading figures criticize the Iran war

posted in: All news | 0

By DAVID BAUDER, MEG KINNARD and ALI SWENSON

NEW YORK (AP) — For President Donald Trump, some of the sharpest criticism he’s faced in the early days of the Iran war has come from once-loyal media figures far more accustomed to singing his praises.

Related Articles


Hegseth says US ‘can’t stop everything’ that Iran fires even as he asserts air dominance


Change in primary voting rules leads to confusion in 2 Texas counties as voters are turned away


Republicans brace for an ugly fight in the Texas Senate runoff between Cornyn and Paxton


Texan James Talarico becomes a fresh face of Democrats’ midterm hopes after Senate primary win


Congress taking first votes on Iran war as debate rages about US goals

Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Matt Walsh are among those to express discontent. It’s been noticed in the White House, which has been playing defense on social media and in interviews.

To be sure, these critics are the minority of the media MAGAsphere, where Fox News’ biggest stars remain cheerleaders. But their words illustrate conservative media’s influence and how valuable it is to Trump when all runs as a well-oiled machine — and, by contrast, how much of a problem it can be if it fractures.

Much of the criticism has centered on Israel’s influence on Trump’s decision to go to war. Carlson, the former Fox News star who has built his own independent operation, told ABC News over the weekend that the attack was “absolutely disgusting and evil.”

“It’s hard to say this, but the United States didn’t make the decision here. Benjamin Netanyahu did,” Carlson said on his podcast, referring to the Israeli prime minister.

‘No one should have to die for a foreign country’

Kelly, another former Fox anchor gone indie, said about American casualties on her show that “no one should have to die for a foreign country.”

“I don’t think those service members died for the United States,” Kelly said. “I think they died for Iran or Israel.”

FILE – Megyn Kelly speaks at a campaign rally with Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump at PPG Paints Arena, Nov. 4, 2024, in Pittsburgh, Pa. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s remarks prior to a Capitol Hill briefing were a flashpoint. Rubio said that Trump had given the go-ahead for the operation knowing that Israel was prepared to strike and he feared retaliation from Iran against U.S. bases in the region.

“We knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them, before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio said. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said that if the Trump administration had not acted, lawmakers would have wondered why.

Walsh, a Daily Wire host, wrote on X that Rubio was “flat out telling us that we’re in a war with Iran because Israel forced our hand. This is basically the worst possible thing he could have said.”

The Republican president told journalist Rachael Bade in an interview that he did not believe that the opinions of Carlson and Kelly are shared by his base of supporters. “I think that MAGA is Trump,” he said. “MAGA’s not the other two.”

Republican former U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who has fashioned herself as an influencer and media figure since bitterly breaking with Trump, said on Kelly’s podcast that she was furious over the U.S. military action. “Make America Great Again,” Greene says, “was supposed to be America first, not Israel first.”

Will Trump supporters return to the fold?

Trump is probably right to think that most of his supporters will return to the fold if they’re unhappy with the Iran attack, said Jason Zengerle, author of “Hated By All the Right People: Tucker Carlson and the Unraveling of the Conservative Mind.” Given the consistency of his views on the topic, Carlson is probably the most important of Trump’s conservative critics, Zengerle said.

“If the war does go badly, I think it strengthens the hand of someone like Tucker,” he said. “All of this is a debate about what happens after Trump is gone anyway.”

Carlson was at the center of a controversy last fall over antisemitism in conservative media for giving attention to polarizing influencer Nick Fuentes with an interview on Carlson’s podcast. Fuentes has called Adolf Hitler “cool,” suggested there is a genocide against white people and said his young followers are “tired of hearing about slavery and the Holocaust.”

FILE – Tucker Carlson attends a meeting with President Donald Trump and oil executives in the East Room of the White House, Friday, Jan. 9, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

There have been cracks in Trump’s conservative media support prior to Iran, notably with the vast and sprawling narratives around the Jeffrey Epstein report. But this week’s criticism unleashed some startling internal vitriol. Ben Shapiro, of “The Daily Wire,” called Kelly “wildly inconsistent” and a coward. Elisabeth Hasselbeck denounced Kelly for her suggestion that American servicemen died for Israel. “How dare you?” Hasselbeck said Tuesday on “The View.”

Fox News’ Sean Hannity said that Carlson was “not the person I knew when he was at Fox.” Kelly denounced Hannity as a supplicant who “would never say anything other than to puff Donald Trump up.”

It’s worth remembering that most of what readers and viewers are seeing in conservative media supports Trump. Howard Polskin, publisher of The Righting newsletter, estimated Tuesday that about 95% of what he’s monitored on websites is behind the president. “Trump Stands Tall on Iran,” headlined The American Spectator.

The most popular personalities on Fox News — still the top dog among conservatives — continue to be supportive. Hannity, Brian Kilmeade and Mark Levin were among the most vociferous leading up to the attack and after. “The president has shown more courage, and this Pentagon, Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon, has executed brilliantly once again,” said Kilmeade, the “Fox & Friends” co-host.

“I think that MAGA gives him the benefit of the doubt, no question about it,” Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary during the early part of Trump’s first term, said on his podcast Tuesday. “I think he’s built up a ton of credibility with the base. … Look, you’ve got PTSD from a lot of our former leaders between Iraq and Afghanistan in particular, who only know forever wars, and so I get it. But this president has proven now twice that he knows what he’s doing.”

Criticism of war rollout draws specific White House rebuke

The podcast influencers who helped to drive many young men into Trump’s camp during the 2024 campaign have been largely quiet.

Some of Walsh’s criticism this week appeared to sting so much that it drew a specific rebuke from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is reflected in a video camera lens as she speaks during a briefing in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Nathan Howard)

“So far we’ve heard that although we killed the whole Iranian regime, this was not a regime change war,” Walsh wrote on Monday. “And although we obliterated their nuclear program, we had to do this because of their nuclear program. And although Iran was not planning any attacks on the U.S., they also might have been, depending on who you ask. And although we are not fighting this war to free the Iranian people, they are now free, or might be, depending on who seizes power, and we have no idea who that will be. The messaging on this thing is, to put it mildly, confused.”

President Donald Trump, accompanied by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, speaks to reporters before departing on Marine One from the South Lawn of the White House, Friday, Feb. 27, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Leavitt posted a lengthy response on X explaining Trump’s rationale. “Simply put,” she wrote, “the terrorist Iranian regime would not say yes to peace.”

Kinnard reported from Washington.

Supply chain disruptions from the Iran war could raise prices for drugs, electronics and more

posted in: All news | 0

By MAE ANDERSON, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — The Iran war has effectively halted oil tanker movement in the key Strait of Hormuz. But it’s also disrupting the wider global supply chain beyond oil, affecting everything from pharmaceuticals from India, semiconductors from Asia and oil-derived products like fertilizers that come from the Middle East.

Cargo ships are stuck in the Gulf or making a much longer detour around the southern tip of Africa. Planes carrying air cargo out of the Middle East are grounded. And the longer the war drags on, the more likely that there will be shortages and price increases on a wide range of goods.

“This is really causing some major impacts within the global supply chain,” said Patrick Penfield, professor of supply chain practice at Syracuse University. “As this conflict keeps progressing, you’ll start to see some shortages, you’ll see some major price increases.”

Stalled at sea

Clarksons Research, which tracks shipping data, estimates that about 3,200 ships, or about 4% of global ship tonnage, are idle inside the Persian Gulf, but that includes about 1,231 that likely only operate within the Gulf. About 500 ships, or 1% of global tonnage, are currently “waiting” outside the Gulf in ports off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and Oman, according to the firm.

While those may seem like small percentages, they have a domino effect that will lead to congestion elsewhere, said Michael Goldman, general manager North America of CARU Containers.

“The supply chain is kind of like a long train with many cars and each car represents, let’s say, a port in the world. Well, if one car gets derailed, it can very often have a domino effect to many other cars behind it or in front of it,” he said. “So although we only have a small number of ports affected by this military action, it can really have a big effect on the total supply chain.”

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump pitched a plan aimed at getting oil and trade moving again through the Strait.

Trump said on social media he ordered the U.S. International Development Finance Corp. to provide political risk insurance for tankers carrying oil and other goods through the Persian Gulf “at a very reasonable price.”

Political risk insurance is a type of coverage intended to protect firms against financial losses caused by unstable political conditions, government actions, or violence. Marine insurers had been canceling or raising rates for insurance in the region.

He said that, if necessary, the U.S. Navy would escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. The Navy has at least eight destroyers and three, smaller, littoral combat ships in the region. These ships have previously been used to escort merchant shipping in the region and in the Red Sea.

Computer chips, pharmaceuticals and other goods face delays

A wide range of products are shipped through the Mideast region. Along with about 20% of the worlds oil that comes from the region, products made with natural gas such as petrochemical feedstock — used to make plastic and rubber — and nitrogen fertilizer come from the Middle East. Pharmaceuticals exported from India and semiconductors and batteries exported from Asia to the rest of the world are all shipped through the region and could face delays.

Limited routes, higher costs

In addition to constraints on the Strait of Hormuz, the instability has put a damper on transit in the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, which had just begun to see more transit after years of instability due to Houthi attacks on ships in the region. Shipping company Maersk had resumed transit in the Suez Canal and Red Sea but said Sunday it was rerouting that traffic around the Cape of Good Hope in Africa, a move other companies have been making to avoid the volatile region.

That journey adds 10 to 14 days to the trip and about $1 million extra in fuel per ship, Syracuse’ Penfield estimates.

With higher fuel prices, longer routes and higher risk in the region, shippers have begun adding fuel and “war risk” or “emergency conflict” surcharges to what they’re charging clients, leading to higher costs all around, he said.

Air cargo under pressure

Air cargo has also been constrained. Closed airspace and airports in countries including UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, and Iran have stranded tens of thousands of people – and cargo.

Each of the three major Middle Eastern airlines — Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways — operate fleets of cargo aircraft, and the airlines also transport goods in the belly of their passenger planes.

Related Articles


How to save money: 14 easy tips


Wall Street holds steadier as oil prices stop spiking, for now at least


Pentagon dispute bolsters Anthropic reputation but raises questions about AI readiness in military


Justice Department lawyer says concert ticket industry is broken because of Ticketmaster


Iranian strikes on Amazon data centers highlight industry’s vulnerability to physical disasters

The amount of goods that travels through the air typically accounts for less than 1% of all freight moving globally, but the products that do travel by air tend to be perishable or high-value goods like pharmaceuticals, electronics and produce that together account for about 35% of the world trade value, Boeing estimated in its World Air Cargo Forecast.

The longer these airports in the Middle East remain closed the greater the potential disruption to the economy if these sensitive shipments don’t arrive or have to be rerouted around the conflict. Even before the war in Iran began over the weekend, air freight and airlines were already contending with closed airspace over Ukraine and Russia.

Flights through these Middle Eastern airport hubs are a key route for passengers and cargo from India. Henry Harteveldt, an airline industry analyst with Atmosphere Research Group, said it’s going to be hard to get to India now, and passengers may have to switch to different routes that fly west across Asia. Airlines may have to resort to longer flights, and in some case even add fuel stops on some routes.

“Remember, there’s a lot of pharmaceutical products that are made in India and then exported to different countries around the world. If that’s disrupted, that has a huge, huge, huge impact,” Harteveldt said.

Air cargo costs are expected to rise due to reduced capacity, increased demand, and surcharges.

Maersk said in an operational update Tuesday that it expects air freight rates to rise due to capacity constraints.

“Airlines are also introducing or reviewing the possibility of introducing war risk surcharges on shipments routed through or near the impacted regions,” Maersk said in a statement. “There may also be added costs linked to jet fuel which in turn can push up costs.”

An industry that ‘runs on disruption’

Despite the supply chain upheaval, however, Michael Goldman, general manager North America of CARU Containers, said the industry will adjust. Over the past few years it has faced other major disruptions like COVID supply shortages and other recent Mideast conflicts and has become more nimble.

“The specific situation that’s happening is pretty unprecedented, so it’s very unique from that perspective,” he said. “(But) for the last few years the industry just kind of runs on disruption. So in terms of our industry having disruption, that is nothing new. That’s more of the same.”

Josh Funk in Omaha, Nebraska and Fatima Hussein and Konstantin Toropin in Washington contributed to this report.