Could David Barton Win The Texas GOP Senate Race? (UPDATED)

There is a lot of chatter these days among tea partiers in Texas about who should run against John Cornyn in the 2014 Senate primary. Despite a conservative voting record, Cornyn is being targeted by the tea party set because he is perceived to be soft on Obamacare, immigration, taxes and the national debt. As I reported on Monday, David Barton has been asked by some tea party folks to consider a challenge to Cornyn. The spin is that Barton has party experience, broad name recognition, and, probably with Glenn Beck’s help, could access adequate funds for a Senate campaign.

Without Barton in the mix, Cornyn seems safe. Cornyn’s current challengers probably could not mount a significant campaign to unseat Cornyn. Thus far, those challengers include attorney Linda VegaErick Wyatt and Dwayne Stovall. Vega got into the race last week and is known as an immigration activist. Her main themes appear to be immigration reform and outreach to the Latino community. Except perhaps on immigration, she sounds all the right tea party notes.

Wyatt is a veteran of the Iraq War and sounds familiar tea party themes of small government and overturning Obamacare but is newcomer to politics. Also a novice, Stovall also appeals to tea partiers with a twist — he spoke at the 2013 annual meeting of the Texas League of the South. The TX League website described his speech as follows:

The second speaker was Dwayne Stovall, who shared his experiences from the recent election where he ran for office. He also elaborated on trends he is seeing in other groups as well, noting that all major groups in Texas have positions on the secession issue, with the major difference being the time tables they are considering.

He also elaborated on the recent legislative session in the Texas Legislature noting the bills and concerns of interest to achieving local sovereignty. A matter which he brought up worth noting is the amount of debt owed by Texas along with the source of that debt, which consists mainly of school districts and municipal bonds.

Stovall is VP of the Houston chapter of the Refounding Father Society. The society seems to have much in common with the League of the South, especially a preoccupation with nullification and interposition. The society’s website refers visitors to Mike Church’s Founder’s Library. Church is a radio talk show host who shares at least some common ground with the League (e.g., dislike of Lincoln, promotion of secession and nullification). Stovall might appeal to the far, far right but could be too extreme for the GOP, even in TX.

If these three are the only challengers, the Senate seat seems safe for Cornyn. However, I suspect the situation would change if Barton gets into the race.

Barton’s name recognition would swamp the other three challengers and soon involve the national media. A Barton v. Cornyn confrontation would place additional focus on the current GOP Civil War. Barton’s supporters would invoke memories of Ted Cruz’s improbable victory over an establishment candidate in Texas with Barton cast as Cruz’s ally. Given Barton’s early support for Cruz, I suspect Cruz would endorse Barton. Cornyn would have a boatload of opposition research to use but Barton’s followers seem immune to such things. All of this is probably enough to cause major heartburn among the GOP establishment in Texas.

UPDATE: National Review Online is on the case and confirms that Barton is considering a run against Cornyn. Barton’s partner at Wallbuilders, Rick Green told NRO:

More than 1,000 (zero exaggeration, that is an actual number) tea party and republican party leaders have asked David Barton to run. Polling says Sen. Cornyn is vulnerable and that’s why he is running ads right now. Like America’s Founding Fathers, David Barton will not “seek” this office, but if the people of Texas speak loud enough in the next few days, he could most certainly be drafted in by the voters.

A look at the membership of the Facebook group dedicated to drafting Barton reveals that many of Barton’s family are also a part of the effort. Barton himself is a member of the group and Green’s wife is actively adding members to the group.  Julie McCarty, tea party leader mentioned in the NRO article, has mounted a vigorous defense of Barton on her Facebook page.

The blog Opposing Views has also covered the possibility of a Barton Senate run.

Related Posts:

David Barton For Senate?

Rick Green: 5,000 Likes On Facebook Could Trigger A Senate Run For David Barton

Janet Mefferd: David Barton Has Too Much Baggage On Historian Credentials To Run For Senate

David Barton For Senate: Status Report With More From Politico, Glenn Beck, First Things

  • Bernie Keefe

    Perish the thought!

  • DavidHart

    It is Texas. For years a dentist on the school board held us all hostage to young earth theory in science classes. Just about anything is possible in Texas. The last truly sane governor of Texas was Ann Richards. How long did batguano crazy Ron Paul hold his congressional seat? (23 years total over three different terms).

  • ken

    I think the national GOP establishment would probably back Cornyn and do everything it could to prevent Barton from becoming a candidate. If Barton where to win the senate primary, that would only solidify the notion that the GOP is a bunch of arrogant, ignorant, intransient extremists.

    • Zoe_Brain

      If Barton where to win the senate primary, that would only solidify the
      notion that the GOP is a bunch of arrogant, ignorant, intransigent

      In Texas though, isn’t that obviously the case? I don’t mean Republican voters – most of those are just ordinary people. But the leadership, and those active in the party – I think that’s a fair characterisation of them.

      • ken

        “In Texas though, isn’t that obviously the case?”

        However the repercussions will extend far beyond Texas. If Barton wins a primary fight against Cornyn, who will be perceived as a moderate, that will be national news. And I doubt nationally people will think “that’s just Texas”, I believe they will see it as the GOP still hasn’t learned and is still under the control of the extremists.

  • Zoe_Brain

    Stovall might appeal to the far, far right but could be too extreme for the GOP, even in TX.

    Warren… don’t bet on that, OK? For many God-Fearing Christians, he would be seen as far too liberal.

  • yogi29073

    So, instead of having just one moron from Texas in the Senate, we will now have two, if Barton is elected. Stupid is as Stupid does I always say.

  • Richard_Iowa

    Where is my checkbook, and what is Barton’s address?

    • $1420579

      Google “debunking David Barton” before you send him a dime…

  • John Beckett

    Thankfully, Texas has open primaries. As much as it would pain my center-left heart to vote for Cornyn, if Barton runs I’ll cross over and vote for Cornyn in the primary, then cast my meaningless vote for a Democrat or Libertarian or Green in the general election.

  • $1420579

    Amazing. Barton is a Dominionist who makes a living selling revisionist history to Christians to support a Christian Nationalist agenda. His last book was pulled AFTER PRINTING (very unusual) by the conservative publisher because 5 major conservative, Christian historians raised a huge ruckus and force the book to be pulled. It was called Jefferson Lies and it tried to revise the history of Jefferson to paint him as some kind of evangelical Christian who was very glad to have God and Christianity intermingled with govt. He tells many other lies about history regularly, even still repeating the same ones that he admitted were false over 10 years ago but the dupes he sells his garbage to don’t know any better.

    • Tom Van Dyke

      Glennd1, Dominionist: I do not think it means what you think it means. Warren, you should set this straight.

      Barton: I’ve been called that for years and we’ve had to deal with that. Reconstructionist. Dominionist. And it’s a pejorative …

      Green: I hear it all the time, I hear it all over the place but I’d never heard of it before.

      Barton: Well, it’s supposed to be radioactive and chase people off from you. It’s like saying “oh, you’re a Nazi, oh, you’re an anti-Semite, you’re a bigot, you’re a racist, you’re a Dominionist” and it’s a term that’s thrown out to really scare people and chase them off from you. Oh, you don’t want to listen to Rick Green, he’s a Dominionist … and nobody’s ever got around to defining it. And even the people who use it … Dominionist, that means he wants to stone rebellious children and to kill homosexuals … really? Have you ever said that?

      Green: No.

      Barton: But you’re a Dominionist.

      Green: And I’ve never heard you say it either, so something’s up …

      Barton: Exactly right. It’s just a term they throw out to try and scare people and they define it and they define it wrong nearly every time. What a Dominionist means, quite frankly, we as Christians believe we should be salt and light.

      - See more at:

      • $1420579

        Giggling. Barton is a proved fraud and liar. Just Google “debunking David Barton” and read what you find. You can’t believe a thing he says. Period.

      • Warren Throckmorton

        TVD – There is nothing to set straight. While Barton might not be a consistent reconstructionist, he certainly fits the bill for dominionism.

        • Tom Van Dyke

          Yes, Warren, if you get your info from left-wing websites. Barton does not want to return to biblical law and stone disobedient children and homosexuals–or at least you will not be able to find any direct quotes to that effect.

          I’m continually amazed at the low threshold for truth for Barton’s opponents. This is a smear, facts be damned.

          Those labeled dominionists rarely use the terms “dominionist” and “dominionism” for self-description, and some people have attacked the use of such words.[1] Journalist Anthony Williams charged that such usage aims “to smear the Republican Party as the party of domestic Theocracy, facts be damned.”[54] Journalist Stanley Kurtz labeled it “conspiratorial nonsense”, “political paranoia”, and “guilt by association”,[55] and decried Hedges’ “vague characterizations” that allow him to “paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless ‘Dominionist’ Christian mass.”[56] Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian Reconstructionism:

          The notion that conservative Christians want to reinstitute slavery and rule by genocide is not just crazy, it’s downright dangerous. The most disturbing part of the Harper’s cover story (the one by Chris Hedges) was the attempt to link Christian conservatives with Hitler and fascism. Once we acknowledge the similarity between conservative Christians and fascists, Hedges appears to suggest, we can confront Christian evil by setting aside ‘the old polite rules of democracy.’ So wild conspiracy theories and visions of genocide are really excuses for the Left to disregard the rules of democracy and defeat conservative Christians — by any means necessary.[55]

          Joe Carter of First Things writes:

          [T]here is no “school of thought” known as “dominionism.” The term was coined in the 1980s by Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.[57]

          • ken

            “Barton does not want to return to biblical law and stone disobedient children and homosexuals–or at least you will not be able to find any direct quotes to that effect.”

            So to you “dominionism’ means stoning disobedient children and homosexuals?

            funny that doesn’t come up in any of the definitions I’ve seen of it. Nor in the article you cited.

          • Tom Van Dyke

            “Dominionist” is a slur made up by the far left against religious conservatives. It has no principled definition or use.

          • ken

            so you say, but then again you also said it meant people who wanted to “stone disobedient children and homosexuals.” I’m not inclined to give much credit to what you say on the matter.

            Warren on the other hand has been fairly consistent in his use of the term, which is someone who believes the bible entreats them to use civil government to enact their interpretation of christian law.

          • Tom Van Dyke

            “Dominionist” is a slur, not a real term. As to the other niggle, apparently you’re unfamiliar with the references to Deuteronomy and Leviticus per your accusation that “the bible entreats them to use civil government to enact their interpretation of christian law.”

          • ken

            “”Dominionist” is a slur, not a real term.”

            You mean like when you use the term “leftist” or “lefty” or “left-wing”?

            also, I’m familiar with the biblical passages to which you refer. However I am unfamiliar with anyone (except you when you were trying to misrepresent the meaning of “dominionist”) using that as a requirement for someone being a dominionist. Do you believe that all christians think disobedient children and homosexuals should be stoned?

          • Tom Van Dyke

            “Dominionist” is a slur. Stop using it, or be called on it.

          • Oswald Carnes

            Tom Van Dyke is a dominionist.

          • Tom Van Dyke

            That’s funny, at least by this blog’s standards.

          • Stogumber

            “someone who believes the bible entreats them to use civil government to enact their interpretation of christian law”
            sounds a lot like Martin Luther King

          • ken

            Really. Can you cite me where King said that christians should take control of the civil government as it says for them to do in the bible? or really anything even close to dominionist philosophy?

          • Warren Throckmorton

            TVD – Right Wing Watch quoted Barton’s endorsement of the 7 Mountains teaching which exhorts followers to take dominion over the 7 spheres of culture. RWW cited Barton’s own broadcast.

          • Tom Van Dyke

            That’s not synonymous with “Dominionist” theocracy, Warren. You and your buddy “Ken” are using the term in completely different senses, as are the countless far-left websites who employ the slur.