ustxtxb_obs_1970_05_29_50_00022-00000_000.pdf

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM 1.ISN’T IT A RULE OR RUIN POLICY TO VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS EVERY TIME A LIBERAL LOSES IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY? NOT AT ALL. The objective is not rule or ruin or vengeance. Our objective is to restructure the political environment of Texas by replacing the stagnant one-party system with a competitive two-party system so that liberals can win in the Democratic Primary, as they do in most two-party states. The only way to induce conservatives who do not yet consider themselves Republicans, even though they always vote for Republican Presidential candidates, to move into the Republican primaries is to elect Republicans to office over Conservative Democrats like Smith and Bentsen. The average conservative voter in one-party Texas continues to vote in Democratic primaries because Democrats win most of the elections in one-party states. Transfer any average Texas conservative voter to California, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania or any other two-party state and he will vote in the Republican primary because Republicans win elections in those states, as do liberal Democrats, and liberals nearly always win in the Democratic Primaries. The real contest in two-party states is in the November general election. If conservatives must win elections, let them be Republicans so that conservative Texans will have inducement to vote in the Texas Republican Primary. This, not rule or ruin, is our goal. 2.IF WE DO SUCCEED IN BUILDING A GENUINE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM WON’T THE REPUBLICANS THEN WIN ALL OF THE ELECTIONS? NOT BY ANY MEANS! As it now stands, Liberal Democrats are rarely victorious in the Democratic primaries in Texas or any other Southern one-party state. Senator Yarborough was just defeated in the May 2nd Democratic primary because an overwhelming number of conservatives still regard themselves as Democrats and not as Republicans. REMEMBER, SENATOR YARBOROUGH HAS NEVER BEEN DEFEATED IN A NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION. In any two-party state Senator Yarborough would have been renominated in the Democratic Primary. Liberal Democrats do not win all of the general elections in two-party states, but liberals do win nearly all of the Democratic primary races, and in most two-party states liberals control the Democratic Party. Republicans often elect U.S. Senators –and Governors in two-party states, AS DO LIBERAL DEMOCRATS. In the two-party states the Democratic Party is the liberal Party. There are hardly any conservative Democrats occupying Senate or Congressional seats or Governor’s offices in two-party states. The Conservative Democrat exists almost entirely in states with a one-party system. 3.WHY SHOULD LIBERALS “REWARD” REPUBLICANS BY VOTING FOR EGGERS AND BUSH WHEN IT WAS REPUBLICAN CROSSOVERS WHO CAME INTO THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY AND SUPPLIED THE VOTES THAT BENTSEN NEEDED TO DEFEAT SENATOR YARBOROUGH? This question reflects misunderstanding about the nature of the one-party system, and confusion about the typical Shivers-Connally-Bensten voter. The nature of the one-party system is such that Senator Yarborough’s defeat cannot be attributed to Republicans who voted in the Democratic primary, but to CONSERVATIVES WHO WOULD BE REPUBLICANS IN ANY TWO-PARTY STATE BUT WHO REGARD THEMSELVES AS CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS OR AS CONSERVATIVE INDEPENDENTS AND WHO ALWAYS VOTE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY AND THUS PERPETUATE CONSERVATIVE DOMINATION OF THE TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY. The partisan Republicans of Texas, 106,000 strong, voted in the Republican Primary, as they were urged to by Eggers, Bush and their other statewide leaders. THE LARGEST REPUBLICAN PRIMARY IN TEXAS HISTORY WAS IN 1964 WHEN 144,000 PEOPLE VOTED IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY. EVEN IF THE BROAD ASSUMPTION IS MADE THAT EVERY ONE OF THE 38,000 PEOPLE WHO VOTED IN THE 1964 REPUBLICAN PRIMARY AND DID NOT THIS YEAR, VOTED FOR BENTSEN, THIS CAN ONLY ACCOUNT FOR 40% OF BENTSEN’S 92,000 VOTE MARGIN OVER SENATOR YARBOROUGH. A vote for Eggers and Bush is not an attempt to “reward” Republicans any more than it is an attempt to inflict vengeance on Conservative Democrats. The objective is simple, but vital to democracy. It is to rebuild the political structure of Texas to provide for a competitive two-party system. 4.WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE THAT THE CREATION OF A TWO-PARTY SYSTEM WILL BENEFIT TEXAS LIBERAL DEMOCRATS? QUITE A BIT! In Novembr of 1969, Virginia elected its first Republican Governor in history over an Establishment Democrat. Six months later, U.S. Senator Harry Byrd, Jr., a Virginia version of Allan Shivers, announced he was leaving the Democratic Party. Why? Because with the election of a Republican Governor, the conservative voters of Virginia now identify with that State’s Republican Party and liberals will be in the majority in the next Democratic primary. Byrd knows that there will not be enough conservative voters remaining in the Virginia Democratic primary to assure his renomination over a liberal. Texas has some first hand experience with the development of a two-party system even without the election of a Republican governor. In 1958, only 17,000 votes were cast in the Texas Republican primary election in the entire state, but it was still the largest total vote ever cast in a Texas Republican primary election up to that time In 1960 Texas didn’t even have a Republican primary election. But in 1961 Republican John Tower was elected to the U.S. Senate in a special election. The following year, the Republican primary election vote jumped to 114,000. This exodus of conservative voters out of the 1962 Democratic primary and into the Republican primary was the main reason for Connally’s unexpectedly narrow win of only 26,000 votes over Don Yarborough. The nearly ten-fold increase in participation in the Republican primary, from 17,000 in 1958 to 114,000 in 1962, was caused solely by Tower’s election to the U.S. Senate in 1961, the first statewide office held by a Texas Republican since the 1870’s.