Texas Math

I’m not a Texan. This week’s Republican senatorial primary wasn’t my rodeo, circus, or fashion show… Ken Paxton, John Cornyn, and James Talarico are not my ponies, monkeys, or models, respectively.

But if you follow the news, you've been forced to consider the ramifications of the race. Even the math of the race.

I heard time and time again (often from Jim Geraghty on The Three Martini Lunch) that if Paxton were the nominee, the RNC would have to spend tons of money for Paxton to defeat Talarico. Many conservative commentators are very concerned about the money that will need to go to Texas rather than to other tight Senate races. But I also heard that $100 million was spent on Cornyn’s unsuccessful campaign to be the nominee. What if that money had been saved for the November race?

Another math problem comes courtesy of John Cornyn. In the recent race, he asked voters to look at what he’d done in the previous six months. He’s been in the Senate for 24 years. What percentage of 24 years is six months? I believe it’s a small percentage.

There’s another math problem we can’t work out because we don’t have the figures. What percentage of senators actually support the SAVE Act? We don’t know, because it hasn’t been brought to a vote. Senator Cornyn assures us he supports it. Paxton was willing to drop out of the race if it was passed. But even if John Thune “doesn’t have the votes,” why can’t he do a vote so we’ll know what percentage of senators oppose the will of 80% of the American people?

There is one math problem I can do. Jimmy Talarico says there are six genders. What percentage of those genders are imaginary? The answer is two-thirds of Talarico’s genders aren’t real.

So a math problem for y’all. What are the odds of James Talarico being the next senator from Texas?