Texas Republicans today are standing at a fork in the road. I’ve seen that contrast up close.

Around 2012–2013, when I was President of the Coppell Republican Club, I invited George P. Bush to speak in Coppell during his statewide campaign. We hit it off immediately. As an Indian American, I joked with him that we shared almost the same skin tone—his father, Jeb Bush, is Caucasian, and his mother, Columba, is Hispanic. We agreed, half-seriously and half-strategically, that our “right skin tone” fit the emerging reality of Texas: a state where non‑white Texans were becoming the majority and where a successful Republican future would have to speak to that diverse electorate, not against it.

George P. Bush went on to win statewide office. Bo French, the current Republican nominee for Texas Railroad Commissioner, represents a very different kind of politics—one that treats that same diversity as a threat.

George P. Bush: Conservative, but consciously inclusive

Background and identity

George P. Bush is a fourth‑generation member of the Bush political family, born in Houston in 1976. He is the son of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Columba Bush, who immigrated from Mexico, and the grandson and nephew of two U.S. presidents. His mixed heritage is not incidental; it has shaped both his public image and his political strategy in a state where Latino and Asian populations have grown rapidly.

Public service and policy focus

Bush served as Texas Land Commissioner from 2015 to 2023, overseeing public lands, mineral rights, coastal protection, and key veterans’ programs. In that role he:

• Emphasized veterans’ issues, hosting dozens of roundtables and events to highlight challenges facing Texas veterans.
• Managed disaster recovery, including housing‑related efforts after Hurricane Harvey.
• Defended property rights, joining litigation against federal overreach on Red River land disputes.
• Promoted energy development, managing state lands that generate billions for public education through oil and gas revenues.

These are mainstream conservative priorities: energy, property rights, veterans, and fiscal stewardship. But Bush consistently framed them in a way that could speak to a broad Texas audience, including communities of color.

Tone toward diversity and immigration

George P. Bush has never run as a “woke” candidate, but he has clearly understood that Texas is diverse and becoming more so. His own biography—Latino heritage, military service, legal and business career—allowed him to campaign comfortably in Latino communities and urban/suburban districts without treating non‑white Texans as outsiders.

When I met him in Coppell, the conversation about our shared skin tone was lighthearted, but it reflected something serious: Bush saw diversity as part of the Republican coalition’s future, not as a demographic enemy to be “managed” or “deported.” That posture matters in a state where Asian Americans, including Indian Americans, are among the fastest‑growing groups.

Bo French: Nativism, racialized grievance, and a shrinking tent

Political profile

Bo French, a former Tarrant County GOP chair, is now the Republican nominee for Texas Railroad Commissioner—the statewide office that regulates oil and gas. Instead of using that platform to talk primarily about energy policy, he has repeatedly chosen to center his politics on race, immigration, and culture war rhetoric.

Rhetoric on immigration and “foreigners”

French has made national news for statements that go far beyond traditional conservative critiques of illegal immigration:

• At CPAC, he called for the deportation of 100 million people, a number that would necessarily include millions of U.S. citizens, and framed immigration from many parts of the world as fundamentally incompatible with “American” culture.
• He has urged Republicans to “more openly embrace Islamophobia,” explicitly naming Islam—not just extremism—as “the problem.”
• He has referred to immigrants and asylum seekers as “third world savages” and even called for deporting Native Americans in a social media post, later attempting to narrow his claim to the individuals in a photograph but not retracting the underlying sentiment.

These are not policy disagreements over border security; they are sweeping attacks on entire groups of people, including communities that have lived in Texas for generations.

Targeting Asian and Indian Texans

French’s most recent controversy illustrates how directly his rhetoric targets non‑white Texans, especially South Asians:

• He posted a photo of University of Texas students—largely of South Asian descent—celebrating a football victory and described them as “foreigners” displacing Americans, calling the scene a “problem” worse than anyone imagined.
• Students in the photo later confirmed they are U.S. citizens and Texas residents, underscoring that French’s judgment was based solely on skin color and ethnicity, not legal status.
• In other posts, he has attacked H‑1B visa holders, particularly Indian professionals, as “low IQ” and “non‑assimilating third worlders,” framing Indian Texans as economic and cultural threats rather than contributors to the state’s growth.

For Indian Texans like me, this is not abstract. French’s rhetoric explicitly paints people who look like us—and often are citizens, taxpayers, and professionals—as outsiders to be removed or marginalized.

Backlash from both parties

French’s comments have drawn condemnation not only from Democrats but from prominent Republicans:

• U.S. Senator John Cornyn called his posts “intolerance and racism” and warned that such rhetoric is how “great political parties self‑destruct.”
• Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows and other Republican officials have publicly stated that French’s posts “crossed the line,” emphasizing that one can oppose immigration policy without demeaning people based on race or ethnicity.

The fact that French remains the party’s nominee despite this backlash shows the tension inside the Texas GOP: a struggle between those who want a big‑tent, multi‑ethnic conservatism and those who are comfortable with overtly nativist, racially charged politics.

Comparing George P. Bush and Bo French: Two paths for Texas Republicans

1. How they see non‑white Texans

• George P. Bush: His own family story and campaign style treat non‑white Texans—Latinos, Asians, immigrants—as part of the Republican audience. He has campaigned in diverse communities and used his heritage as a bridge, not a wedge.
• Bo French: He repeatedly describes non‑white Texans, especially South Asians and Muslims, as “foreigners,” “savages,” or threats to “our culture,” even when they are citizens and long‑time residents. His language suggests that whiteness is the default for being “American” in Texas.

For someone like me, who once stood next to George P. Bush at a campaign event and joked about our shared skin tone as a political asset, the contrast is stark. Bush saw our complexion as something that could help Republicans connect with a changing Texas. French sees that same complexion in a UT student section and calls it a “problem.”

2. Policy focus vs. culture war

• Bush: As Land Commissioner, he focused on veterans’ benefits, coastal protection, disaster recovery, and energy development—issues that matter to all Texans regardless of race.
• French: Even in a race for an energy‑regulatory office, he has chosen to center his campaign on mass deportation, Islamophobia, and racialized grievance, arguing that young white males are the most discriminated‑against group and that Texas must “rid” itself of “third world foreigners.”

One approach tries to build a coalition around shared interests; the other tries to mobilize resentment against neighbors and classmates.

3. Strategic implications for the GOP

Texas is not the Texas of 1980. Asian Americans are the fastest‑growing ethnic group in the state, and Indians are the largest subgroup among them. Suburbs like those around Dallas–Fort Worth, including Coppell, have seen dramatic demographic change.

• A George P. Bush‑style Republican Party can compete in that environment by offering conservative policies while respecting and engaging non‑white communities.
• A Bo French‑style Republican Party risks alienating precisely the voters it needs—educated suburban families, immigrants, and second‑generation professionals—by telling them they don’t belong.

Cornyn’s warning that this is how “great political parties self‑destruct” is not hyperbole; it is a sober assessment of what happens when a party chooses exclusion over persuasion.

Why this comparison matters—for Texas and for Republicans

My personal experience with George P. Bush in Coppell was a small moment, but it captured a larger truth: Republicans can be conservative on policy and still be respectful, inclusive, and forward‑looking about who “counts” as a Texan.

Bo French’s rhetoric represents the opposite instinct. It tells non‑white Texans—especially Indians, Asians, Muslims, and even Native Americans—that they are suspect, expendable, or unwelcome. That is morally wrong, and it is politically shortsighted.

The choice between these two models is not just about one statewide race. It is about what kind of Texas Republican Party will exist in a state where diversity is a fact, not a theory:

• A party that sees people like George P. Bush and me as part of its future, or
• A party that sees people who look like us as “foreigners” to be displaced or deported.

For Texans who care about both conservative governance and basic human dignity, the answer should be clear.

Tags: Bo French, Coppell Republican Club, George P. Bush, Political Commentary, Republican Party, Texas Elections, Texas Politics, Venky Venkatraman