After all of the Sturm und Drang as a result of the electoral failure of HER Ordinance, Houstonians can be forgiven for having a not insignificant amount of political fatigue. The problem is that we're not done, and even though some might think the big issues are over and the ground has been thoroughly salted, but the truth is many of the same campaign issues are still going to be present in the Mayoral run-off.
The election, which is either going to be held on December 5th, or 12th depending on who you listen to, will pit two polar opposite candidates against one another. In light of this, the Chronicle has published an early look at the dynamics of the run-off which, in my opinion, is mostly incorrect.
Turner, King set for showdown in December. Rebecca Elliot and Mike Tolson, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
I'm not going to quote any of this, but I am going to highlight a couple of key points that the Chronicle transcribes from Democratic political consultants:
1. King is behind the eight-ball because he is a Republican.
2. Turner is the front-runner because he's largely viewed as the front-runner.
I disagree with both of these main points. And I disagree strongly with UH Political Scientist Brandon Rottinghaus' contention that King has to go negative early and often. To better explain why, let's take a look at the two candidates in question first, and then at some of the issues the article raises.
Sylvester Turner: This is Turner's third run for Houston Mayor. In prior runs he came up short because he was unable to expand his support beyond his base. In the run-off this challenge does not go away. Turner ran a very focused campaign that was predicated on driving sufficient turnout in what basically was his district as a Texas Legislator. He has high name-ID in this area and a fairly reliable base.
To succeed he's going to need to expand that base, most notably he'll need to pick up Hispanic voters and some independent moderates.
Bill King: This is King's first run for Houston Mayor, so we don't have the electoral history that we do with Turner. What we do know, right now, is that King did a good job, as did Turner, running a focused campaign that drove sufficient turnout in Kingwood and parts of the Clear Lake area that are within the City of Houston.
To succeed he's going to need to expand that base, most notably he'll need to pick up Hispanic voters and some independent moderates.
In short, both candidates are facing the same challenge, but Turner has a track record of being unable to do so. In my mind this makes King a slight favorite to pull off what some will consider an upset, but he is going to have to campaign hard and keep interest relatively high.
HER Ordinance: The conventional wisdom is that King enjoyed support from voters who were motivated primarily by opposition to HER Ordinance. I do not believe this to be true. For one, the under vote for the Mayor's race was lower than the under vote for Prop 1. This suggests that, while Prop 1 was certainly a driver, there were those who cast votes independent of that issue.
Second, the idea that King was "helped" by anti-HER Ordinance fervor doesn't pass the smell test. In the run-up to the election King actually took some heat form his opponents for initially not taking a stand on the issue. It was only late that he came out against it for technical reasons. I think that the only candidate who received meaningful support from those opposed to HER Ordinance was Ben Hall. Without taking such an aggressive stance against Prop 1 I doubt he would have cracked 5%, with that support in his pocket he was able to get close to 10%. (Still not a good showing due, in part, because he lost a lot of credibility with Houston voters in his last run for Mayor)
One thing not mentioned is that HER Ordinance furor is likely to run both ways. IF you accept that King received support from the anti-Prop 1 group then you have to concede that Turner received a portion of his support from the Pro-Prop 1 group. Because of this I think both candidates are going to find that this motivated group of voters is not going to go to the polls for the run-off in the numbers that they did during the general election. Whether than being a negative for King I believe this is a non-factor as the two sides losing momentum will cancel each other out.
Motivation: The key to winning any run-off is the motivation of your base. I think that each candidate is going to see a drop-off in motivation by their supporters and the key to winning will be which campaign does a better job in limiting the damage.
Endorsements: Typically, I don't think these matter much (because people don't pay attention to them) but there might be a couple of factors at play here that could slightly affect things.
Annise Parker: I've written earlier that I think the political reputation of Ms. Parker has taken a beating during this entire process. She has angered the Black Pastor's Association and many independent voters not only through her spiteful campaign, but in her churlish response to losing. The expectation, based on her public statements to date, is that she will now endorse Turner in the run-off, as she has been very derogatory toward King. Were I the Turner campaign I would consider asking her to not endorse, and not tie me to the political mushroom-cloud that is HER Ordinance.
What Turner does not want to see happen is he being viewed as the savior of HER Ordinance and his campaign get bogged down in promising to ensure its passage after he is elected. Should that happen, then all of the talk of the anti-Prop 1 forces tuning out could be wrong and King could find himself with a motivated support group who will stay engaged to ensure that Parker's folly doesn't come back from the grave after she leaves office under a Turner administration who is facing rumors that he is a member of the GLBT community himself.
Adrian Garcia: Again, I'm not quite sure either candidate is going to be all that interested in receiving Garcia's imprimatur. The collapse of the Garcia campaign, and the fact that he angered many Democratic activists, could potentially move as many votes away from a candidate as they do toward.
I think this dynamic is potentially more damaging for Turner than King. Turner needs the Democratic activists that supported Garcia while King does not. King could use the support of the Hispanic community but I think he has a good shot at receiving most of it whether Garcia endorses or no.
Ben Hall, Chris Bell, Stephen Costello: Honestly I think their endorsements are irrelevant. Hall's voters were primarily anti-Prop 1 types who will either vote for King or not at all. Neither Chris Bell or Costello received enough of the vote to matter anyway.
Intangibles: There are always these.
We don't know what Mayor Parker is going to do now that she is stung and angry by her electoral defeat. We don't know what surprises lie in the weeds about which we don't know.
There are rumors, circling about both candidates, that could be potentially damaging in the minds of voters, but will either candidate want to be the one to pull the trigger and potentially open themselves up to a counter-attack?
Is there a potential that Bill Frazar and Bill King team up? IMO this could provide an additional boon to both campaigns if they're seen as a strong team that could shake things up in the city.
How is the media going to cover this race? If it's the same bad coverage that we received in the run-up to the general election will it have any effect here? (Even though it appears not to have on Tuesday)
One last unknown, how hard are the municipal employees unions and John Whitmire going to attack King on behalf of Turner? There are strong arguments to be made why they would/wouldn't and it might depend on whether or not King is seen as jumping ahead early.
So many questions, and just over a month to find out what the answers are.
