Ken Paxton campaign imploding as voters learn more about him

It looks like voters are finally taking a good look at Attorney General candidate Ken Paxton and aren’t liking what they see. As I said earlier:

Paxton presents himself as some sort of Boy Scout Sunday School teacher. And thus far, the press has let him get away with that persona. I hope more journalists get interested in Paxton’s business dealings and bills he filed as a state representative. Perhaps then the voters will see Paxton for what he is instead of the fairy tale they think they know.

In case you missed it, the Allen Police Association rescinded their endorsement of Paxton:

The Allen Police Association on Tuesday withdrew its endorsement for attorney general candidate Ken Paxton, citing last week’s reprimand and $1,000 fine for a state securities law violation and Paxton’s failure to publicly address the issue.

“We were troubled when we learned last week that the Texas State Securities Board determined that Ken Paxton had violated state securities law and, in response, issued a formal reprimand for his professional misconduct,” an announcement signed by association President Matthew Johnson said. “As law enforcement officers, we can no longer support Ken Paxton.”

(click here to read the original story by Chuck Lindell in the Austin American Statesman)

And yesterday Paxton’s hometown police association rescinded their endorsement:

This is a criminal offense which could possibly be tried by the presiding district attorney or even possibly the Office of the US Attorney General,” McKinney Police Association stated in a release signed by president Jose Quiles and the political action committee chairman Farrel Ritchie.

“Given that the attorney general is the chief law enforcement officer in the state of Texas, the McKinney Police Association feels it is necessary to protect the integrity of the AG office and can no longer support Ken Paxton for attorney general,” they said in a statement.

(click here to read the original story by Christy Hoppe in the Dallas Morning News)

I’m somewhat surprised that the media has ignored the Texas Watchdog’s 2009 report on Paxton’s conflict of interest concerning Watchguard.

But it’s the company contract with the state of Texas that seem to ensnare Cook and Paxton in an unlawful conflict of interest. The provision that would apply here is Article III, section 18, which prohibits “members of the Legislature from being interested, either directly or indirectly, in any contract with the State, or any county thereof, authorized by any law passed during the term for which he shall have been elected.”

(click here to read a reprint of Matt Pulle’s original article as published on Texas Watchdog.)

As you can see by reading that article, ethics problems are nothing new for Ken Paxton. It’s interesting that people “in the know” talk about how Dan Patrick will bring down the R ticket in November if he is the nominee for Lt. Gov. even though polls do not show that happening. The same people ignore the damage that having an ethically challenged, unqualified nominee for Attorney General will do to the ticket. The Democrats in Texas have taken notice, as demonstrated in this tweet by Philip Martin, Deputy Director for @ProgressTX:

phillip martin tweet about ken paxton

It would be a shame if down ballot candidates on the Republican ticket in urban areas lost their races because of a bad candidate at the top of the statewide ticket. Tea party groups need to take a second look at Ken Paxton because the more you know, the more you run away. Just like those two groups of police officers.

Comments

  1. says

    Senator Goeb Patrick has far more character problems than Senator Paxton. Paxton’s are negligence, more than anything. Goeb Patrick’s are more intentional. I mean, the guy has publicly said over the last coupla weeks how much he admires Harry Reid’s methods. Yikes.

  2. says

    This is sad to see a hit piece against a true conservative like Paxton. Paxton made a mistake, admitted it, and fixed it. This was not a major problem like this article claims, he simply forgot to mention a one time piece of charity work that he did. Meanwhile, Dan Branch’s liberal votes are criminal!

    • says

      Neither Paxton nor Branch, neither Goeb-Patrick nor Dewhurst, are liberals. Don’t succumb to the rhetoric. All four guys are conservatives. When they’re competing against each other for the votes of the 5% most passionately conservative voters in Texas, sure, they’re going to call each other RINOS, liberals, leftists, moderates, etc. Don’t take the bait.

      Pick the guy you think will be the most effective. Because an effective conservative always benefits you (and Texas) more than an ineffective conservative. And deep character flaws will eventually harm, if not ultimately gut, a politician’s effectiveness in the political process.

  3. Tom Zakes says

    If you believe the commercials, Paxton has been sanctioned by the SEC every day this week! The more I see of a candidate complaining about his opponent instead of saying what they are going to do, the more I think they don’t have any ideas and are going to do nothing if elected!

    I’m Tom Zakes and I approve this message.

    • Steve S says

      Agreed. I had 4 phone calls yesterday from the same phone number, field testing variousshirt balls against Paxton to see if any of the mud would stick. I come away from this primary cycle with the impression that the Dewhurst-Strauss combo will go to any lengths to keep their power. That alone should be enough to vote against them.
      PS I voted for Branch in the first round. I won’t make that mistake again.

Trackbacks

  1. Watcher’s Council Results

    Here are this week’s full results: Council Winners*First place with 3 votes! – Liberty’s Spirit – Freedom and the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God Second place *t* with 2 votes –Bookworm Room – Higher education: desperately selling a grossly overpriced,…