Nobel economist lays out Trump’s weaknesses in key red state

In Texas' 2026 Democratic U.S. Senate primary, voters had a choice between a centrist — State Rep. James Talarico, a Presbyterian seminarian — and a liberal/progressive firebrand: Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who is quite popular on the left wing of her party. Lone Star Democrats went with Talarico, who will go up against either incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) or far-right Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton after Republicans choose their candidate.

Conservatives are taking Talarico seriously. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) believes that the state lawmaker is capable of winning in November if Cornyn isn't the GOP nominee. A Talarico victory in the general election would be a political bombshell, as Texas hasn't had a Democratic U.S. senator since 1993. MS NOW's Chris Jansing is reporting that President Donald Trump plans to endorse Cornyn, not Paxton.

In a Substack column published on March 5, liberal economist Paul Krugman emphasizes that if Democrats are going to start winning statewide races in Texas again, they will need a thorough understanding of the state's economic complexities. And he believes that the MAGA movement is vulnerable in the Lone Star State.

"Talarico, a virtual political nobody six months ago, appears to have a good chance of winning that contest," Krugman explains. "But why has Texas been such a Democratic disappointment for all these years? And what do those disappointments portend for Talarico? Let's begin by understanding that a state's politics often follow economics…. Texas' economic growth is a major reason Democrats perennially hope that they will someday turn the state blue. For in modern America, rich states tend to vote Democratic, while poor states vote Republican: Think Massachusetts versus Mississippi."

Krugman adds, "So as Texas grows richer and more sophisticated, won't it eventually free itself of rabid, backward-looking Republicanism?"

The economist's answer to that question is: not necessarily.

"My initial thought was that economic success might indeed cause Texas to flip politically," Krugman writes. "But the more I look at it, the less convincing I find that case. Why? Because Texas' economic story isn't what many people — including Republicans who boast about it — think it is. And that's an important point even aside from politics. Why has the economy of Texas grown more rapidly than the US economy as a whole? Conservatives like to attribute growth to low taxes. But the claim that low taxes lead to rapid economic growth has been more thoroughly tested in practice than any other proposition in economics, and has failed every time."

Krugman continues, "What Texas does do right, however, is let businesses build stuff, especially housing, in stark contrast with the regulations and multiple veto points that strangle construction in many blue states…. The same openness to building that has held the cost of Texas housing down has also helped the state become by far the nation's largest producer of wind energy. Don't tell Trump."

Krugman is skeptical about Texas becoming a full-fledged blue state anytime soon, but he believes it could evolve into a swing state if Democrats understand its economy and play their cards right.

"So the point here is that while Texas could be shifting towards the blue zone, it won't come easily," the former New York Times columnist argues. "It won’t be a simple matter of a state becoming more progressive as a result of economic progress. In other words, Texas is not about to become New Jersey, or even Colorado. But with the right Democratic candidates, who can straddle the divide between urban Democrats and non-urban Republicans, it could become Georgia. And maybe, just maybe, Texas could blaze the trail for Democrats in other deep red states."