Texas Senate Democratic Primary 2026

There's a closely-watched Senate race coming up. Jasmine Crockett and James Talarico are vying for a US Senate seat.

Turnout for democratic primaries in Texas are abysmal. One factor is that voters must register 1 month before the primaries, or they cannot cast a vote.

But some are saying that whoever wins the primary has a better-than-usual chance at winning against a republican. Democrats haven't won a state-wide election in Texas in 30+ years, but pundits are thinking this is the best chance they have.

In this article, I'll break down section-by-section what I think about the two main strikes (Crockett and Talarico). I'm not a pundit, ChatGPT thinks my analysis is way too vibes-based, but I have made much more money than I have lost predicting elections on Kalshi.

Before you start reading, please consider subscribing to this newsletter. I promise I'll do my best to send you thought-out, high quality writing.

Fundraising

A theory of mine is that when people spend money or volunteer for campaigns, they add some amount of value to the candidate in the form of work done beyond the work actually done.

When someone contributes cash, it can create value for the campaign by being spent on commercials or google workspace subscriptions, and someone contributing time to canvas can lead to conversations with people to convince them to vote for your guy.

But beyond that value is building a kind of 'soft relational organizing energy' in that person. Someone that donates to a campaign reinforces their identity as a 'voter for that candidate.'

This energy can be passed along to their family and friends. Each phone bank call or door knocked in canvassing reinforces this identity, and naturally those people will want to talk about it to people they know. In a low-turnout race, I think this matters more.

This is definitely an untested vibe theory. But the implication of my line of thinking here is that Texas donations are worth more than California donations. Voters who live in Texas and donate to Talarico disperse the identity as a Talarico Supporter into their local connections, which are more likely to vote in the primary.

Besides that, and simply – Talarico has more cash, and he's spending it more aggressively. I will look closer at some of the campaign spending later.

Winner: Talarico. Getting the most money, and the majority comes from Texas.

Progressive/Democratic Establishment

I don't have any sources or definitive sources, but I truly believe that the Democratic and Progressive Establishment wants Talarico to win.

By this I mean the people that make up the machinery of those who support progressive politicians, and those that volunteer.

This may be in the form of advice about who to hire for digital advertising, backroom strategy discussions, and getting in touch with donors, maybe things more concrete. I'm far away from this. But he's been getting tons of individual donations and acting very, very professional.

The largest spend by his campaign according to FEC data is "Aisle 518 Strategies" which has a ton of successful campaigns and big money under their belt:

...versus Jasmine Crockett who is spending the top line of her budget on Blue Chip Strategies (which doesn't even have a website!)

You can look at their FEC spending data to see how much each is spending this cycle; above is just previous cycle data. But it doesn't look like Crockett is working with winners.

It could be an underdog story, where Jasmine rocks the vote against the odds even with a strategy group that doesn't have a great track record, but I just don't see enough excitement or grassroots support for her to overcome this.

Another factor is that Talarico seems more cozy with Austin. He works there, and has spent a lot of his life in the political heart of Texas. I think this means something for a Texas state race and getting party buy-in for his campaign.

Finally, endorsements are starting to ramp up too, with New Mexico Democratic Senator Heinrich giving an endorsement (2/11) per an article in Semafore. More telling, the reporter says "I haven’t talked to a Republican yet who thinks Crockett can win the state, and plenty who think Talarico can prevail."

Winner: Talarico. He's working with people who supported progressive winners, and the dem establishment seems to be supporting him more and more.

Demographics: Signaling and Aesthetics

Ok, time to talk about culture and demographics, or Race, and how it's being signaled by both candidates.

The following feels like it's tokenizing and flattening things to racial/cultural factors, but I think this is a well-thought-out point and matters in the context of how voters perceive candidates from their cultural contexts.

Jasmine Crockett is doing a very Black campaign. I'm not saying this because she is a Black woman, but am objectively looking at how she presents herself, what she talks about, who is in her advertisements, and her context.

She is in a divine-nine sorority. She's wearing "fur" at rallies. Double-C gold Chanel earrings in interviews and diamond earrings in campaign ads. She stands in front of photos of black leaders on her calls. Most of her campaign spending is spent paying Blue Chip Strategies, a Georgia company which had the majority of their FEC-visible spending in the 2022 cycle from two black candidates. Her candid tiktoks are mostly featuring black people too, and the majority of the interviews I'm finding of her are one-on-one with another black person.

This isn't even just "presenting black", but "presenting urban black." I'm not seeing any folksy ads of her around horses or cowboys or wooden barrels, for example.

I think this is because the races she has won, in TX House Districts 100 and 30, all have 2-4x the amount of black voters as white, and in those races nearly all candidates she was running against were also black.

There's nothing inherently wrong with dressing how she does, or being authentically herself. And I'm tired of typing the word "black" and don't know when to capitalize it.

But what does wearing fur and diamond earrings signal to triple-prime dem primary voters in Austin or Laredo? Or would Talarico's more 'folksy milquetoast schoolteacher' aesthetic go over better with primary voters?

Also, I think the fact she features very few white or hispanic men in her messaging puts her at a disadvantage in the primary, and especially would put her at a large disadvantage in the general where only about 13% of texas residents are black. This just isn't a culture that the 'middle of the state' voters would necessarily identify with.

Ignoring the white vote is a major issue that dems recognized in the 2024 campaign, and hastily tried to fix up with a very funny "White Dudes for Kamala" push. I don't see her even attempting anything like this.

Politics is tribal, in the United States race-identity is tribal, and people will frequently vote along their racial lines. And with a hypothetically mobilized and expanded texas democratic base, with a majority-white democratic primary voter base (opposed to her wins in very minority white districts), she should be doing messaging that indicates she is broadening her coalition if she wants to win.

This is also where the democratic party is trying to move away from - being seen as ignoring the Joe Rogan swing vote; the juicy independent vote the Dems could pick up in a blue wave. And when there are literally zero white men shown in her campaign ads, why would the dem establishment want to support that?

The University of Houston / YouGov poll estimates that "White likely voters account for 44% of this population of Texas March 2026 Democratic primary likely voters, Latino likely voters for 28%, Black likely voters for 23%, and others for 5%. Women represent 60% of this population and men 40%."

It's not necessarily a conscious decision, maybe a product of what got her to this place and the people available to her. This also indicates she may be having trouble expanding this political labor beyond her existing structures.

And it isn't even "because she's black" – Colin Allred, who is endorsing Crockett after dropping out of the primary, has done some polished commercials with more generic messaging like "keeping the faith," shots of his football career, and actually interacting with people:

My advice to Crockett: At least get a few token white dudes in your commercials, get more clips of you interacting with humans, and get a video of you in a factory. It could only help.

Meanwhile, James Talarico is running a hyper-polished campaign which methodically represents all relevant demographics, in classic establishment ad fashion.

For example in this awkwardly named "JT Interacting" video with 189 views and zero likes, we get 44 minutes and 30 seconds of B-roll where he silently talks to people of all colors and walks of life.

It starts with him talking to a black woman in a kitchen, they cheers their coffee mugs, switch spots for a better angle, then we get black working class dude in factory, then JT with white dude in denim jacket by his truck, then white woman in bookstore, another 'kitchen table' with mugs and an old white man, then latinas in a schoolroom, latino family in backyard, latinos+whites at rally, back to kids at school, ending JT with the kids on ipads together.

This video (that should have been kept private) shows the Talarico campaign is thinking about signaling in these demographics terms. The scenes move through each demographic group in an order (black-black-white-white-white-latina-latin@s), never repeating any age-race pairing (besides the schoolchildren).

And they think about this in these terms because presumably it works, or it's what these agencies do. Whatever professional consulting services that are helping him out here assumably have some tried-and-true strategy for state-wide campaigns with a diverse voter-base.

Winner: Talarico. He's taking the standard campaign approach, and in all his advertising is hitting all demographic groups, and I think Crockett is making a mistake not signaling more to white/hispanic men. And Crockett doesn't have enough grassroots support to take advantage of her authenticity.

Volunteer Labor

I don't have too much to go off of. But I am seeing more photos of people volunteering with Talarico vs Crockett.

From what I'm inferring about Talarico being a 'rising star' in the Texas democratic party, I think that 0.1% of highly engaged democrats is more likely to follow their party vibe and go out to canvas for their rising star.

Jasmine Crockett has a wide net of black community support through the aforementioned divine 9 sororities and black churches; but I'm just not seeing the photos of these volunteer networks yet.

Winner: Talarico. With limited information, I'm seeing more events and seeing proof that people are attending them.

Polling

I don't focus much on polls, personally. This is mostly because it's such a small sample size, there's selection bias towards people who actually do polls, and things can change over months.

That might be why I'm being so pro-Talarico here, since Crockett is doing pretty well in the polls.

It's within a reasonable margin of error, but the University of Houston / YouGov is showing 47%-39%, which means something.

The demographic breakdowns may provide some context. For example this is from the University of Houston / YouGov:

The Emerson cross-tabs are interesting too, showing higher likelihood to vote in the primary and general for Talarico voters, and a statistically significant amount of republicans/independents who would vote for Talarico which supports his 'electability' narrative.

This is also showing a 27-Crockett 63-Talarico for Hispanic voters, which is counterintuitive to me given that Crockett won in majority Hispanic districts.

Winner: Crockett. Objectively she is leading the polls, and has a noticeable lead among the young. But I will be looking forward to future crosstabs.

Social Media / Virality

This is one place that Crockett, in some respects, may have Talarico beat. She even recently got some press coverage over the Epstein/Maxwell situation.

I know people that live very far away from Texas that know who Jasmine Crockett is in the context of what she said about MTG or Trump.

But there is an issue with equating this popularity to votes: if you look at how many views she has, most of the views aren't by people who can vote in a texas primary. So I think this is less important that it seems. But maybe there is more impact than I understand.

It gives her more name recognition for sure. And this name recognition in the context of "viral moments" may give her enough of an advantage.

Winner: Tie. Crockett has the fire and has some hot moments. But Talarico seems to be getting more views nowadays. Crockett needs more 'viral moments' to stay ahead of Talarico's 'rising star'.

Relatability + Rhetoric

In the past 10 years the dems had a moral emphasis, more about identity politics and social justice. Time has passed and now there's a vibe that voters didn't like to feel scolded. My theory now is that there is going to still be a moral emphasis in the dems, but more rooted in religion and through it, 'kindness.'

You can see this with how the catholic church is pushing back against some of Trump's policies, or talking of "Trump's Hate", for example

This is part of why I think the Dems want Talarico to win this primary. In a state like Texas which stands out as one of the more distinctly religious states (Friday Night Lights halftime prayers, drive-in megachurches, 10 commandments in schools).

Talarico also has a well-rehearsed story of moving to Austin with his single mother, and had an abusive father. He hits the proper nouns like "Larado", "Ford Escort," "East Austin", paints a picture of his mother making her closet into a nursery for him, her standing up for him, and points out that his mother is here with us today, her first time in New York City.

He's well-rehearsed and polished, and talks about others, using words like "We"

Crockett will say in interviews that she is "the type of person that real people can relate to," but she has a really hard time communicating this. She isn't painting a story, she isn't rehearsing a life journey about how she is relatable.

In the equivalent Crockett View appearance, she gestures at it, saying that "people that know my story know I won by 90 votes and was hand picked as a freshman by my predecessor...", sounding more like political jargon and a little bit of bragging. She talks of 'the numbers', 'turnout'. She is on the defensive, talking about how others are talking about her, defending being a black candidate and a woman candidate in this and almost every interview.

She comes across as more authentic than Talarico to me, and will use a kind of beautiful alliterative speech in contexts like when confronting Bondi in the 2/12 Epstein hearing.

As Crockett puts it, "It’s not about who sounds as clean as possible. It is about tapping into the rawness of this moment."

The question then is would Talarico's more tempered rhetoric and well-rehearsed lines outweigh Crockett's alliteration and more confrontational, fighter speech. I think Talarico wins here, mainly because she's not featuring her rhetoric strength in the campaigning and messaging itself. Maybe I'm not seeing what voters are seeing though.

Winner: Talarico. He has a well-rehearsed folksy image, and communicates it better than Crockett. And you can't beat the preacher+teacher combo.

Left-Wing Zeitgeist "Movement"

Jasmine Crockett is a self-described fighter who has stood up to those bullies like MTG and Trump, but I don't think she is close enough to the "leftist movement" that got Zohran elected for example, or was behind Omar Fateh's failed Minneapolis Mayor campaign.

I don't see a compelling reason that primary voters would see her as more likely than Talarico to stand up to ICE. Conceptually, she should be, but Talarico is matching her rhetoric (in a softer way), saying he is "standing up to the billionaires and far right extremists who are hoarding wealth."

However, Crockett has a huge liability here: AIPAC. Israel is toxic to the dem primary voters, and there are soft allegations that she is pro-Israel. Track AIPAC and ajpaction think so, at least, and some smear comments are carrying it.

Talarico had some ties to AIPAC in the past, but has since disavowed it, and I think any perception of him being 'better' in this respect is simply because he isn't voting in the US House.

Winner: None. Neither of them are really close enough with the zeitgeist, Talarico is an 'adequate' DNC-vetted fusion of winning opinions, and Crockett is seen as a little too pro-Israel but is at least a fighter.

Conclusion and Final Thoughts

In short: I think the Dem establishment, made up of major donors and state party members and volunteers, want Talarico to win. Crockett needs enough energy or political labor to combat this, and I don't think she has it.

Jasmine Crockett is more of a 'real left' that is hot in the moment with ICE and her jabs at MTG/Trump, and could give her an advantage with the farther-left primary voters. But I think she is too far from the 'leftist/socialist' farther-left zeitgeist to take advantage of that specific energy more than Talarico.

Jasmine Crockett is also much more well known for her viral moments, and has a higher office than Talarico. These are arguably her biggest advantage.

What is uncertain to me is with such typically low tx dem primary turnout, and requiring 1 month advance registration to vote, if Jasmine Crockett has enough name-brand recognition and networks to get out her vote.

Also, there could be enough highly-mobilized black voter turnout to get her to victory. But I have not run the numbers.

She has also simply won more votes period in elections. But Talarico seems to be scaling better, and it's unclear if that momentum will scale fast enough.

Either way, I put Talarico Y at more than 80% FV. This number is out of thin air and represents my thought that "He will almost certainly win" but I won't look like too much of an idiot if he loses.

We'll see as we get closer to the race. There will be more polls and maybe more alignment behind one candidate or another. But unless I see Crockett capture some kind of energy (which I'm not seeing yet), the winner seems clear.

If you want more of this "free alpha", please consider subscribing:

Thanks to:

• sharpieman20 for reviewing the article and suggesting edits
• bernard for being my counterparty and willing to talk about it on the kalshi discord.
• Kalshi Journeyman / backtovioletroad for fixing an error (Dems haven't won a state-wide election in 32 years, not 40 years)