Houston: We Finally Have a Mayor's Race

I had lunch today with fellow blogger Nancy Sims (Check out her "MayoralMusings" website).  We agreed this has been one strange mayoral contest.  The three well-funded contenders differ greatly in age, race, and sexual orientation, but not much on policy issues, and not at all in party and ideology (all are progressive Democrats).  The race started slow and lost momentum, characterized by a civility rarely observed in an open race for one of the most powerful mayor positions in the United States.  Voters hardly seemed aware they had to choose a replacement for popular, but term-limited incumbent Bill White, and many have continued to tell pollsters they remain undecided as the race draws to a close.

But over the last week things have perked up.  City Controller Annise Parker, Council Member Peter Brown, and former City Attorney Gene Locke have taken the gloves off and begun to slug it out, as one of the three faces certain elimination by the voters on November 3rd.  All now have decent advertising budgets delivering commercials and mailers, door-knocking and phone banks have kicked in, and the contenders have finally started poking each other with rather sharp sticks.  Good.  Nothing to stir some interest in a hitherto boring race like some good charges and counter-charges.

The way I size the race up as early voting winds down and late-deciders have to fish or cut bait is as follows.

(1)    There remains great uncertainty as to the order of finish among Brown, Parker, and Locke.  Brown has led in recent media-sponsored polls, but his support is “soft” and that can be a very big problem in a low-turnout election such as we seem headed toward.  Parker has the most committed base, but the least money for a closing push.  Locke has the strongest support from cue-givers (the police and fire-fighters union, prominent Republicans and business groups, etc.) but no one knows if these usually conservative sources can deliver many votes on election day to a black man.

 (2)    My personal sense is that Annise Parker remains the advantaged candidate in this race because she started as and remains the best-known candidate in the race, and has a net positive image with voters who know her.  Peter Brown and Gene Locke lag in both respects.   There is some chance she runs third and out of the money, but I make it less than ten percent.

 (3)    If my guess is right about Parker, that means the big question is who gets the remaining runoff spot?  Will it be Peter Brown or Gene Locke?  If the election had been held two weeks ago, it would very likely have been the council member.  But the election is next Tuesday, not back in mid-October, and things have changed since then.  Locke has finally moved ahead of Brown in the black community, and likely will increase that margin over the weekend.  Meantime, many west-side whites still seem up for grabs between the two.  Locke has to improve his standing here as well as in the black community to edge past Brown.

 (4)    This means, for me, the critical fronts in the Brown-Locke struggle as the election wraps up are among black Democrats and white Republicans – the two largest voter groups in the city.   And the two most important things about these groups are relative turnout – what percentage of the total city wide vote does each make up when the polls close at 7PM Tuesday – and what share of the each group’s vote goes to Peter Brown compared to Gene Locke.  Locke needs relatively high turnout in the black community, and must carry that vote by more than two-to-one to make a runoff.  He does not need high turnout among voters who identify themselves as Republicans, but the former City Attorney must run at least even with Council Member Peter Brown among GOP partisans who vote.

OK, that’s enough guessing for now.  Let’s get to the polls and vote.  Our city faces great challenges in coming years, and given the enormous powers Houston’s city charter bestows on the chief executive and chief legislator, we should hope voters choose carefully in selecting the best two finalists for the December runoff.   

Dr. Richard Murray  

Comments

[JJMB]

You say ... "the contenders have finally started poking each other with rather sharp sticks. Good. Nothing to stir some interest in a hitherto boring race like some good charges and counter-charges."

Except that I have looked into the "charges" against both Parker and Locke (by them against each other, and by Brown) and they all appear to me to be patently false. So all 3 are consciously lying to the public. That does not seem "good" to me. And I have to vote for one of them, because Morales doesn't interest me.