BBill Hemmer just drew a giant smiley face over Texas on the map.
BThat's one way to ask who's making Texas smile.
BFox News posted the clip on X, Hemmer says, "Who's choosin' Texas?" as the Paxton-Talarico race comes down to the count.
BSo no call yet, but that map face is doing a lot of work.
BThis one has been ugly expensive. More than half a billion dollars in ads.
BThat's the most ever for a non-presidential race.
BRepublicans spent around 274 million on ads for Paxton. Democrats dropped about 133 million for Talarico.
BAnd Talarico still led the late October polling average. That's why Democrats think they can break the streak.
BTexas hasn't elected a Democrat statewide in thirty years. This is their clearest shot in decades.
BA former state rep with a populist, faith-heavy message against an attorney general with real baggage.
BBaggage is doing a lot of euphemism work.
BVoters know Paxton's scandals. They've known for years. He's still standing.
BHe's standing because outside groups poured in more than 200 million, much of it, according to reporting, from Elon Musk-funded operations.
BAnd Talarico raised 146 million himself. So don't act like he's building this on bake sales.
BThat's exactly my point! When both sides spend nine figures, the actual choice gets buried.
BNo, the choice is still pretty clear. One side says stay the course, the other says flip the state.
BA Paxton ad got fact-checked for taking Talarico's tax comments out of context. That's what voters see.
BOh, come on. Both campaigns twisted each other. That's not new.
BBut if Talarico wins, it's because a hundred million dollars made Paxton's record easier to ignore.
BOr because suburban Texans are finally sick of the drama and want somebody new.
BYou really believe money's not the story here?
BI believe it's money plus a message. That's how you win a race this big.
BFine. If Paxton holds it, the money men get the credit.
BIf Talarico wins, his campaign gets the credit.
BEither way, Texas is the whole ballgame this hour.
BAnd right now we're watching a smiley face instead of a count.
BNo official call yet. We'll update the moment it changes.
BDifferent battleground entirely: the Senate Commerce Committee just set a hearing for Trump's FCC pick.
BReuters says it's set for November tenth, and ABC TV station licenses are in focus.
BThe nominee is Danielle Thumann Severs.
BI actually think this hearing is overdue. The FCC should be asking hard questions about broadcast licenses.
BAsking hard questions is one thing. Putting ABC licenses under a political microscope is another.
BWhy? Broadcast licenses carry public interest obligations. Congress can ask how the FCC handles them.
BBecause it looks like pressure on a network over its coverage. That's not a good look.
BIt's not just about coverage. There are real rules for station owners.
BThen let career staff handle it. A public hearing with the nominee this early? That's politics.
BBella, every FCC nomination is political. That's how Washington works.
BDoesn't mean we should pretend it's normal to single out one network.
BABC can handle a hearing. They're owned by Disney.
BThat somehow doesn't make me feel better.
BI'll take the hearing. At least it's on the record.
BFine. But I'll be watching whether it's about licenses or punishment.
BQuick result while the Texas count crawls: Politico reports Republican Sydney Gruters beat Democrat Kelly Kirschner for an open seat.
BThat's a hold, not a flip.
BRight. But at this hour every seat matters.
BIt does. But the big one is still Texas.
BMeanwhile over on Bluesky, someone named gabbs posted, "real electoral politics are finally beginning."
BThat's one way to describe the next few hours.
BTexas is still counting, so the night isn't over.
BAnd we'll be watching the map.