James Talarico won the Democratic nomination for a US Senate seat in Texas on Tuesday, capping a remarkable rise from state lawmaker and seminary student to the party’s standard-bearer in one of the key races of the 2026 midterm cycle.
With his blend of faith-based populism, bipartisan appeal and generational energy, Talarico defeated Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, a firebrand beloved by the party’s base but who struggled to dispel concerns that she could defeat a Republican in a state that has not elected a Democrat statewide in more than 30 years.
A jubilant Talarico told supporters in Austin before the race was called: “We are not just trying to win an election. We are trying to fundamentally change our politics. And it’s working.”
I hope that I am wrong about this, but I am not optimistic about Talarico.
He said all the right things to position himself as not just a progressive candidate, but as a christian candidate. White, male, middle aged, handsome, well spoken, seemingly levelheaded, and gives off strong Mr. Rogers vibes. Those things make him comparatively more palatable than most other democratic candidates, especially in Texas.
However, the democrats have had more than a handful of bad actors and turncoats in recent years. Candidates that talk the blue talk and walk the blue walk, but once they take office they quickly turn face. Sinema, Fetterman, Gillibrand, Robin Webb; not an exhaustive list of democrats that turned their backs to the rhetoric and policies that got them elected, but their the ones that spring to my mind first. Schumer, Jeffries, Pelosi, and a host of others could be rightly accused of actively aiding the republican-led undermining of the rule of law (and civil rights) while in office.
The Streisand effect has a long history of backfiring on public officials, so much so that it’s not too far of a stretch to wonder if the administration banked on the FCC debacle to elevate Talarico. To be clear, I’m not entirely pessimistic about Talarico; I want to believe that there are still good people who want to get into public service for the right reasons. I’m just not optimistic because he’s almost too good. Running a sleeper candidate against one of the stronger progressive voices in congress (who frequently and loudly called out the GOP’s bullshit) is exactly the kind of thing that the far-right think tanks would do.
Appearances can be deceiving. From what I’ve read, Talarico seems the more progressive of the two. If he wins, we’ll find out–the system is entrenched and hard to buck for anyone, until enough more progressive members are there to form a coalition with some power.
But I have no doubt that no matter what, he’ll be vastly better than if the R wins. I’m much more worried about Platner turning out to be a Fetterman/Sinema than I am about Talarico.
