Texas Democrats Finally Have a Race They Cannot Afford to Lose

James Talarico is ahead in most public polls, and that is precisely why the next few days feel so uneasy for Texas Democrats. A lead is not a victory. In Texas, it has too often been the opening scene of a familiar ending.

Talarico, a Democratic state representative, is running against Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton for a U.S. Senate seat. Most recent surveys show him narrowly ahead. One Texas Southern University poll put him up 49 percent to 47 percent. A CNN/SSRS survey of likely voters had him at 49 percent to Paxton’s 43 percent. The margins differ, but the direction is consistent.

That alone is unusual. Texas has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since Lloyd Bentsen in 1988. For nearly four decades, Democrats have run, hoped, raised money, and then watched Republican candidates prevail. Talarico gives them their best shot in decades.

I want to be careful with that phrase. “Best shot” is not the same as “likely winner.” The race remains close enough that a late shift, a turnout problem, or a few bad days of news could change it. The Cook Political Report calls it a toss-up. That label is not caution for its own sake. It reflects a real uncertainty that no poll can erase.

Why this race matters

A Talarico loss would be devastating for Texas Democrats, and not only because it would leave them without a senator. It would confirm, again, that a promising opening can close before Election Day. It would make it harder for the party to persuade donors, candidates, and voters that Texas is genuinely competitive.

The stakes go beyond one seat. The Senate contest could affect which party controls the chamber during the final two years of President Donald Trump’s term. Republicans are treating the race that way. Vice President JD Vance has campaigned for Paxton, and Trump has made repeated trips to Texas to support him.

For Democrats, the opportunity comes from an uncomfortable political moment for their opponents. Trump’s approval rating in Texas is negative in recent polling, and Paxton carries a long record of ethical and legal controversies. Talarico’s campaign has tried to turn that combination into a argument about corruption, influence, and whether government works for ordinary people.

But a favorable environment is not a plan. It is weather. A campaign still has to bring voters to the polls, hold its coalition together, and survive the final argument.

What Talarico has built

Talarico has raised an extraordinary amount of money. Through October 14, his campaign reported $155 million in cumulative receipts since the beginning of 2025, according to the Texas Tribune’s tracking. Paxton reported $40.6 million over the same period.

Money does not vote. It can, however, pay for the unglamorous work that decides close elections: staff, field offices, voter contact, advertising, and the ability to respond quickly when an attack lands. Talarico has had the resources to run a statewide campaign at a scale Texas Democrats have rarely enjoyed.

His personal profile also matters. He is a former schoolteacher and a seminarian, and he has presented himself as someone trying to speak beyond the usual partisan categories. That appeal may help him with independents and with voters who have supported Republicans before but are dissatisfied now.

The evidence for that appeal is mixed but real. One recent YouGov poll found Talarico leading Paxton by 21 points among independents. That is a striking number, though a single survey should never be treated as a verdict. Other polls show a much narrower race.

Paxton’s counterweight

Paxton is not a generic Republican nominee. He defeated Senator John Cornyn in the party’s May runoff, with Trump’s endorsement behind him. That victory tells us something important: Texas Republicans chose a candidate closely aligned with the president, even after years of controversy.

Paxton’s campaign has tried to make the election about identity, loyalty, and cultural conflict rather than his record. National Republicans have joined that effort. The final week has brought sharp personal attacks, high-profile surrogates, and a scramble to energize the Republican base.

There is a risk in assuming that scandal automatically becomes disqualifying. Voters can dislike a politician’s conduct and still prefer his party, his judges, his tax policy, or his stance on immigration. Texas Democrats have learned that lesson before.

The ordinary stakes

Strip away the campaign finance totals and the national attention, and this race is about practical things. Whether health care feels affordable. Whether wages cover rent and groceries. Whether public schools have the support they need. Whether people believe their vote can change a state that often seems decided before the ballots are printed.

Talarico’s strength is that he has made those concerns central. Paxton’s strength is that he can make the election feel like a referendum on Trump, Texas identity, and resistance to Democrats. Both strategies are aimed at the same voter: someone tired of politics but still paying attention enough to show up.

I keep thinking about what a win would mean beyond the Senate chamber. It would not fix Texas. It would not settle every argument about the state’s future. But it would give Democrats proof that a statewide victory is possible, not theoretical. It would change the kind of candidates who decide to run and the kind of investments parties are willing to make.

A loss would do the opposite. It would leave Democrats with another painful post-election question: if this was the year, with an unpopular president and a damaged opponent, then when?

The answer may still be soon. Texas is changing, and Talarico has built a campaign that reflects that change. But elections do not reward potential. They count votes. In five days, Texas Democrats will learn whether their long wait ends, or whether it continues.

Explore: Politics