Battle for the Heart of Texas: Political Change in the Electorate by Mark Owens, Ken Wink, and Kenneth Bryant Jr. (review)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

• Battle for the Heart of Texas: Political Change in the Electorate by Mark Owens, Ken Wink, and Kenneth Bryant Jr.
• Joel Webster

Battle for the Heart of Texas: Political Change in the Electorate. By Mark Owens, Ken Wink, & Kenneth Bryant Jr. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2022. Pp. 210. Illustrations, tables, notes, index.)

It is often hard to go a week without seeing an article or a pundit offering an overreaction to potential political changes in Texas. This is [End Page 369] why three scholars from the University of Texas at Tyler—Mark Owens, Ken Wink, and Kenneth Bryant Jr.—collaborated with the Dallas Morning News to assess the many political implications of changes in the Texas electorate in recent years. In addition to county- and state-level voting data, their discussions focus on 23,750 interview responses taken between 2018 and 2020.

This data allows them to track any changes in voter's mindset across broad political issues that one would expect, like immigration, gun laws, or responses by Republicans to the Covid-19 pandemic. However, their examination of how the complexities of a vast and diverse Texas affect the mindsets of voters is their best work. They show the impact of race/ethnicity, urban vs. rural, and geographical differences that all make the future of Texas politics a complex game of navigating these various and competing voter groups that all possess their distinct needs, problems, and expectations.

There are, however, some concerning occurrences throughout the book. Only five pages in, readers are confronted with historically questionable and incorrect facts surrounding "three key elections" where "Texas split from the Solid South." For the 1872 election they oversimplify the target of Texas's votes—Horace Greeley—who did not run only as a Liberal Republican, as they assert, but also ran as the Democratic candidate. More troublesome is the statement that "in 1928, Texas was the only Southern state to vote for Herbert Hoover (R) over Al Smith (D-NY)." Texas was far from alone among Southern states; Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia also voted for Hoover. Finally, in 1948 Texas did not break with the Solid South (at least in its usual application) and sided with most of the region to support the Democratic nominee, Harry S. Truman, instead of supporting the Dixiecrats.

This is a worrisome way to start a book that centers on Texas politics and political change. Such mishandling of the past might stem from their limited engagement with other scholarly works about Texas politics. The focus is largely on the notion of Texas being only a Southern state without speaking more to the uniqueness of the forces that have shaped it as part of the American West and the Sunbelt.

Finally, there is at least one major instance of neglecting citations. On pages 126-128 there are numerous direct quotes and a reference to a "Mendelberg's theory"—presumably the work of Tali Mendelberg on the many uses of race by politicians during elections—that lack proper citation. Such a combination of errors potentially diminish a very useful study of the present and future of Texas politics. [End Page 370]

Joel Webster Texas Tech University Copyright © 2022 The Texas State Historical Association ...