Houston 2009 Mayoral Election

[Sam Spade]

I don't even know who's running actually.  Let me check.

I've rarely seen any polling done there and since it's non-partisan, historically the voters have decided along racial lines.

[Sam Spade]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_mayoral_election,_2009

[Sam Spade]

*bump

who will make the runoff?!

I'm guessing Brown, because he's spent more money than anyone else *by far*, including going into the black community (which has worked for white politicians in Houston in the past).  

Then Parker because she's spent second-most and is kind of a known name, and will get the white liberals and the unmentionables in Montrose (she is one of them).  

The black candidate, Locke, has not done much advertising, so I don't even know if the blacks know who he is.  He does stand a shot, but I think it's low.

Morales (the Republican/conservative in the non-partisan race) has spent no money either, but you can't necessarily count him out because of his name and because there is always a loud, vocal conservative minority in Houston who may not trust Brown.  That might be enough to get him to a runoff.  I don't think so.

So, in short, Brown and Parker.

Full Disclosure:  Spade's family benefits quite a lot if Brown eventually wins.  He's also as corrupt as the day is long.  Not because my family benefits, of course. 

[Sam Spade]

this unmentionable voted for her! 
but she's also a rice grad.  and i think she's best for the job.  what's to do?

it'll be interesting how the runoff plays out no matter who makes it.

well, not so much if it's brown v. locke.  then i couldn't really care less.

I have a rule that I would never vote for a Rice grad for elected office. 

[Sam Spade]

Parker is the more competent candidate from what I've seen (I don't think either is very competent, even by Houston standards), but...

Coalition of blacks (at least 30% or about 1/3rd of voters usually) + social conservative Republicans (about 1/5 in Houston, maybe as much as 1/4th of voters usually) = majority.  Michael Berry won his at-large seat originally by utilizing these two groups.

Remains to be seen whether Locke can form this coalition, of course.  Parker should win otherwise.

EDIT:  Social conservative Republicans should be social conservatives.

[Sam Spade]

KBH isn't resigning unless she wins the primary and I'm sure then she would make sure the election occurs in November.

If she wins the primary, Bill White is a dead duck.  He can beat Perry, however (even though the environment probably won't be favorable).

I think that covers it all.  I'm not really giving the Dems a chance of picking up the Senate seat in a November election, though it could happen, I guess.

[Sam Spade]

So Zogby did a poll for the Houston Crapsicle, and it said -

Parker 41.9%
Locke 36.4%
Lots of undecideds.

FWIW. (maybe two cents)

Btw, Spade's father, after voting for Parker in the general (he did that, even though Brown obviously benefited him and would have voted for him in the runoff - go figure), will be voting for Locke in the runoff.  He met Locke personally and thinks he's better for business (though he probably is leery of the gays - I can understand).

Spade's mother is still undecided (and voted for Parker in the first round as well).  I suspect she votes for Parker in the end, because, well, she's a liberal and I can predict how she votes.

[Sam Spade]

Right now, we're merely in guess mode.  And this is way too close to call.

My gut questions whether this is good for Parker because I suspect Locke's voters will lean towards being same day (especially blacks), but this analysis could be completely wrong.

The question is whether "hate-a-gay" or "hate-a-black" triumphs, honestly.

[Sam Spade]

Decent link and specifics - with breakdown...

http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/

The Fort Bend county part of Houston is very black (and Hispanic), though clearly much more black than Hispanic.  Henceforth, Locke getting 90% there in absentees.

[Sam Spade]

Decent link and specifics - with breakdown...

http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/

The Fort Bend county part of Houston is very black (and Hispanic), though clearly much more black than Hispanic.  Henceforth, Locke getting 90% there in absentees.

btw, that means the actual total is:

Parker 50.4%
Locke 49.6%

Not the 50.99% to 49.01% result posted above

about a five hundred vote difference.

[Sam Spade]

Here's a good consolidated page of the numbers:

http://www.chron.com/apps/ElectionPub/local.mpl?action=results&nextview=localmatrix&election_id=1047

I will arbitrarily root for Locke. Just because.

"hate-a-gay"? 

Unfortunately, I'm not going to be around to find out the results this evening.

[Sam Spade]

Got back in time.  Parker's in good position, but without knowing where the votes are coming from, I can't make a call as to whether it's "hate-a-gay" or "hate-a-black".

[Sam Spade]

From looking at the Chronicle's homepage, Council District A has only 46% reporting while Council District F has 89%. Anyone know what either of these places are like?

With Houston, it's hard to give an exact call (no zoning), but...

District A is pretty white and should be one of the most Republican areas of town (decent money too).  I suspect Hispanics have moved in, but how much = no clue.

District F has a pretty big Asian population.  Lots of Arabs too, I seem to recall.  This used to be pretty white, but has browned over the years.  Still one of the more whiter areas of town (but I'm just guessing).

Unless the remaining areas are pretty strong Locke, Parker should win.

When I speak of whites in the area, you have to remember there are all of these little incorporated cities within Houston where all the whites with families moved (along with the unincorporated Harris County suburbs).

[Sam Spade]

Yep, it's over.

The gays should thank Lee Brown many, many times over. 

[Sam Spade]

Looks like Republicans are going to pick up the at-large council seat #1.

Houston council races are non-partisan, so I really don't know what you're talking about... 

[Sam Spade]

Looks like Republicans are going to pick up the at-large council seat #1.

Houston council races are non-partisan, so I really don't know what you're talking about... 

Oh yes of course, "non-partisan". Is there any office nowadays that is truly non-partisan?

If Houston races were partisan, Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in the city-wide races (meaning the at-large seats, not the others, which they've never had a shot in).

[Sam Spade]

Yay! This is the largest U.S. city that's elected a gay mayor, yes?

But I thought New York in the '8... ah yes. Sorry. Openly.

roftlmao

Of course, there's another connection in there.  Like I said, the gays should be thanking Lee Brown (much as Giuliani/Bloomberg should be thanking David Dinkins).

[Sam Spade]

Yay! This is the largest U.S. city that's elected a gay mayor, yes?

But I thought New York in the '8... ah yes. Sorry. Openly.

Who?

"vote for Cuomo, not the homo..."

[Sam Spade]

What's next for the gays now that they've got Houston?  Chicago??? LOS ANGELES??? NEW YORK?

President.

Already have that too.

[Sam Spade]

Update:

Although I'm still working (hard) on the precinct-by-precinct stuff for Houston/Harris County in this election (and many others), my preliminary analysis would pretty much classify the results as white vs. black. (i.e. 80-20 in white precincts, regardless of Republican/liberal, 90-10 in black ones)

The Hispanics either split evenly or in general didn't show up (which shows in those Hispanic precincts where I know that a certain amount of older whites still reside - Hispanic/black precincts are surprisingly not very common in Houston).

There might be some class distinctions, but I'm not finding them as of yet.

(caveat - only through about 1/4th of precincts at present)

[Sam Spade]

No link to (white) partisan preference is at least a little bit surprising.

It may show up eventually (remember I've only been through 1/4 of the precincts), but it really hasn't in what I found so far.  I think my preliminary analysis may be a little too simplified as to partisanship - I'm spotting a lot of 85-90% showings in white liberal areas (where Obama got 60-70%), as opposed to 70-75% showings in the Republican white suburbs (where McCain got 60-70%), but that would still clearly mean that partisanship was not the key factor or even really that important of one.

I have a theory as to why this may be the case - Parker ran, basically, as the fiscal conservative in the race, and was fiscally conservative even by usual Houston mayoral candidate standards.  The usual white Republican suburbs in the Houston area tend to be wealthy (as opposed to those in Harris County - which tend to be less wealthy), and were therefore more sympathetic to this message, especially when it was opposed by a black man (which would bring up memories of Lee Brown).

Anyway, more on this later, I promise when I've run through all the numbers.

[Sam Spade]

So white conservatives voted for the gay over the black?

Parker could have never won the election, by my estimates, without at minimum getting 65% (maybe 70%) of the white vote.  Therefore, given the way Houston tends to work, she had to get a decent amount of Republicans (and probably conservatives too).  I don't know the exact number there she got or needed, but I could probably make a guess.