Can Democrats Actually Win in Texas? | The David Frum Show

James Talarico won the Democratic Senate primary on March 3rd, defeating Jasmine Crockett in a race that showcased two «generational talents» and energized the party base. Meanwhile, Republicans John Cornyn and Ken Paxton remain locked in what has become the most expensive Senate primary in world history — more than $90 million spent tearing each other apart, with two more months of bloodletting before their May 26th runoff. Talarico now has time to consolidate support, court Crockett's base, and build momentum.

The structural advantages are historic. For the first time since 1974, Democrats are running candidates in all 150 state house seats, all 16 open state senate seats, and all 38 congressional districts. Even in deep-red counties, these candidates will drive turnout that flows to the top of the ticket. Add Trump's deep unpopularity in his midterm — with tariffs devastating Texas farmers, ICE raids breaking up families, and Medicaid cuts hitting the least-insured state in America — and Democrats see a genuine opening.

But the challenge remains daunting. No Democrat has won statewide in Texas since 1994. No non-incumbent Democrat has won since 1990. The state imposes the nation's most severe voter suppression measures, targeting Black, young, and Latino voters in urban counties like Houston. And despite all the favorable conditions, Colin Allred lost to Ted Cruz by a wider margin in 2024 than O'Rourke did in 2018 — raising questions about whether the theory of the case is sound.

James Talarico represents a strategic gamble by Texas Democrats: nominate a candidate who is progressive on the issues but offers biographical appeal to moderates and conservatives. A former public school teacher and seminarian who speaks fluently about faith and scripture, Talarico hopes his authenticity and ability to connect across divides will offset positions that are well to the left of Colin Allred's 2024 campaign.

Frum compared this to the Tim Walz model in 2024 — progressive policies wrapped in a relatable, non-threatening persona. The theory is that swing voters respond to biography and affect more than issue positions. O'Rourke pushed back, arguing that Talarico's approach is genuinely authentic, not programmed. He pointed to Talarico's success in fighting for public education funding and against school vouchers, working with Republican colleagues in the Texas House to deliver broadly popular wins.

But the question remains: will moderate and swing voters focus on Talarico's substance or his style? O'Rourke himself ran in 2018 with a progressive affect but a moderate voting record — the opposite of Talarico's approach. Allred ran as a centrist in 2024 and lost by a wider margin than O'Rourke did in 2018, suggesting that moderation alone is not a winning formula in Texas. The 2026 race will test whether authenticity and local focus can overcome ideological misalignment.

In a bonus segment, Frum spoke with Adam Smith scholar Samuel Fleischacker about the 250th anniversary of «The Wealth of Nations». Fleischacker dismantled the libertarian myth of Smith as an apostle of pure individualism. Smith believed individuals should make their own economic decisions, but his moral philosophy insisted that human identity is socially constructed — we see ourselves only through the eyes of others. He supported public education for the poor, welfare through the English Poor Law, and believed friendship, not commerce, was the highest good.

Smith's central economic principle was that governments must not pick winners and losers. He despised tariffs, believing they always harm the home economy more than they help — even when imposed for defense. His concept of the «invisible hand» was not divine intervention but a recognition that individual self-interest naturally serves the collective when embedded in a well-functioning society. Fleischacker concluded that Trump's America — with tariffs, crony capitalism, no-bid contracts, and officials auctioning government favoritism — represents the most un-Smithian economy imaginable. Smith, he said, would be appalled.