This Texas Tribune article says the Texas Republican Party passed a rule last year that authorizes keeping candidates off the Republican primary ballot for ideological reasons. Now, the state party seems to be starting to compile a list of “sins” that would implement the rule, especially for state legislative candidates.
The party claims that state elections laws do not apply to them. IIUC, they only apply filing fees by choice not as a matter of law.
One more tyrant regime ???
sin – A-N-Y vote against tyrant monarch gang boss order-
in tx – the guv tyrant monarch gang boss
Any relatives of 1836 tx heroes still around for a Tx Rev/ind War II ???
Good. We’ve had it with the rhinoes.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2025/08/11/governor-gretchen-whitmer-lawsuit-special-election-35th-district/85610805007/
WHITMER – SCHEMING COMMIE TRYING FOR A COMMIE MONARCHY ???
CANDIDATE/INCUMBENT REPLACEMENT LISTS
I like getting edged by Republicans.
LGBT: #metoo!
I like it better when they get me all the way.
One “RINO” who would have been kept off the ballot in Texas was Ron Paul. Aside from his support for Ronald Reagan,.
he never supported another Republican nominee for President. He often went against the policies of The Bush regimes.
If this pushes people into running as Independents it might be ok after all.
I bet Gene Berkman supported communist retard freak Chase Oliver.
@GB,
Probably not in the case of Ron Paul.
Paul first ran in 1974 against Bob Casey a long serving Democrat (9 terms) from Harris County in a district that had recently been extended to include Brazoria County where Paul lived. Paul received 28% of the vote. The Republican Party would not have done rigorous screening when there were only three other Republican representatives from Texas (of 24).
Casey took a federal appointment triggering a special election, which Paul won. He would not have defeated a 9-term Democrat, nor won in a general election. Paul was narrowly defeated in the 1976 general election likely due to residual effect of Watergate and Nixon’s resignation. Paul narrowly won the seat back in 1978, an off-year election in which Bill Clements became the first Republican governor in over a century. Paul again narrowly won in 1978, and 1980.
The 1980s redistricting pushed the district out into the growing suburbs. Paul had no Democratic opponent in 1982. Paul gave up his House seat to run for the US Senate in 1984, losing the GOP primary to Phil Gramm who had recently switched parties. Paul ran for President in 1988.
Paul ran for the House again in 1996 in an entirely different district. It was nominally a Democratic district, as the Democratic gerrymander had been intended to protect their incumbents which meant very thin majorities. The national party had convinced the incumbent who had been elected as Democrat in 1994 to switch and run as a Republican in 1996. This is relative easy to do in Texas since there is not partisan registration for candidates or voters. A voter can choose their party on primary election day. It is unlikely that local Republican parties would have censured Paul based on his record of 14 years earlier in a different district, when they were trying to flip the district. Had the incumbent run again as a Democrat he likely would have won. To rank and file Republicans someone who was running as a Republican 20 years ago, is less suspect of being a RINO than someone who had literally been a Democrat a day earlier, and had changed his “name” to run in the Republican primary. Paul won the Republican primary and went on to be elected narrowly in the general election. Over successive elections, Paul won by increasing margins. From 2004 onward the district was radically altered and Paul ran without a Democratic opponent in 2004.
Ron Paul is not a rhino. He bucked the Republican establishment that dominated the party in between Reagan and Trump, and in many ways even during the Reagan years and Trump’s first term. People like Ford, the Bushes, Doles, McCains, Romney’s and their supporters – it is those people we call rhinoes nowadays.
I’ve supported Ron Paul in all his campaigns, starting with that 1974 run, financially in the case of his congressional runs, and with my vote as well whenever he ran for President, regardless of party. Likewise, I’ve supported George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Ronald Reagan, Virgil Goode, Pat Buchanan, and Bob Barr, regardless of office sought or party if any.
Before Reagan, and in between Reagan and Trump, I never supported a Republican in the general election for President (other than Goldwater, well before I could vote). There were, however, Republicans I supported in Presidential primaries – Reagan when he ran unsuccessfully as well as when he ran successfully, Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan, Gary Bauer, Ron Paul – even when I didn’t support their nominee in the general election. The last time I supported anyone seeking the Democrats presidential nomination was George Wallace in 1972.
Meanwhile, today’s rhinoes are those who spent all those years disparaging the candidates I supported, and the organisation’s I belong to such as the John Birch Society, Council of Conservative Citizens, League of the South, Sons of Confederate Veterans, National Association for the Advancement of White People, etc, as “extremists,” “racists,” and other such ridiculous slurs.
Thank God for President Trump and the Make America Great Again movement!
Whose party is it? Eu v San Francisco says that political parties are private associations.
We need to require proof of loyalty to Trump.
@WZ,
Who is the party?
The party is in your esophagus.
@JR:
The party is whomever the party decides to accept as members.
@WZ,
Isn’t that a circular definition?
Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee concerned the organization of the governing bodies of the political parties and whether those governing bodies may make endorsements in primary elections. It did not concern the organization of nominations by voters.