Strayhorn enters governor's race as independent

[Sarnstrom]

Jan. 2, 2006, 3:01PM
Strayhorn enters governor's race as independent


By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau

AUSTIN — Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn ended speculation today by announcing she will run for governor against Gov. Rick Perry as an independent.

"It's time to shake Austin up," Strayhorn, who is now serving as a Republican officeholder, told reporters today, the filing deadline for the 2006 elections.

"Governor Perry may be doing the best he can, but after five years, we have learned he is not the strong leader we need to put Texas above politics," she added.

Satirist Kinky Friedman already has announced as an independent candidate for governor.

The major candidates in the Democratic primary are Chris Bell of Houston, a former congressman, and Bob Gammage, a former Houston congressman and Texas Supreme Court justice who now lives in Llano.

Strayhorn, who was first elected comptroller in 1998 as a Republican, had announced in June that she would challenge Perry for the Republican gubernatorial nomination. But last week she refused to dismiss speculation that she would run as an independent to avoid Perry's strong popularity in the GOP primary.

Typical turnout in the Republican primary in a state election is less than 700,000 voters, and polls have shown about 40 percent of the primary voters are social and religious conservatives. Perry has been working to solidify support with this group with strong stands against abortion and gay marriage.

Perry, who had been lieutenant governor, became governor in 2000 when George W. Bush resigned to become president. Perry won election to a full term as governor in 2002, defeating Democrat Tony Sanchez.

To get on the ballot as an independent, Strayhorn will need to collect the signatures of 45,450 registered voters who cast ballots in neither party primary or runoff. The signatures will have to be collected between March 8 and May 11.

Anticipating Strayhorn's independent candidacy, Perry spokesman Robert Black last week said it would demonstrate "the latest desperate act of a politician who has no core convictions or guiding principles."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3560456.html

[Sam Spade]

Missed posting this by about a few minutes.  There was a very strong rumor in the Austin-American Statesman that she was going to do this last Friday, but I decided not to post this as well.

January 2 is the last day to file to run for 2006 races in Texas, the earliest deadline in the country (other than Illinois, but in Illinois the respective party can put candidates up later than the date).

Should be interesting and will probably lead to a more interesting race, though she has very little chance of winning and has probably killed the rest of her political career with this move (imo).  She was also running extremely weak against Perry in most of the latest Republican primary polls that I saw, which probably explains the decision.

[nini2287]

What exactly does a comptroller do?

[Sam Spade]

What exactly does a comptroller do?

In Texas government, really close to nothing. 

The most accurate description of the position is that it collects various state revenues and distributes them to various state programs.  Then, at the end of the year, the Comptroller files an budget of what came in and what went out. 

Historically, this is the time when the Comptroller usually throws his or her own political punches about future shortfalls, surpluses and what should be done to increase revenues, cut taxes, etc.

It has little to no actual power in how the funds are distributed, however, so this statement is often ignored.

If there's something else important the office does that I'm missing, perhaps jimrtex will remind me.

[Jake]

So, is a second place finish likely?

[Sam Spade]

I should clarify one thing said earlier. 

Today is the last day to file for candidacy in Texas for a major party.  That's the reason the announcement had to come today from Strayhorn one way or another.

Independent candidacies can continue filing until May 11, mainly because they have to collect the signatures of 45,450 registered voters who cast ballots in neither party primary or runoff between March 8 (the day of the primary, not runoff) and May 11.

This is probably the most difficult Independent candidacy requirement to fill in the nation and I'd give about a 15% chance that either Strayhorn or Kinky don't get it done.

[Sam Spade]

So, is a second place finish likely?

Probably third or fourth, providing she gets on the ballot.

Right now, my prediction (with all four candidates) is:

Perry 50%-55%
Bell 30%-35%
Friedman 10%-15%
Strayhorn 10%-15%

Here's the issue:

Bell, Friedman and Strayhorn are all going to running from essentially the same angle politically because Perry has such a stranglehold on social conservatives.

All three will run as social moderates or liberals and try to run as fiscal conservatives (Bell did this also during his Houston mayor run).  Bell can and will be successful among standard liberal to moderate Democrats because he'll mention what he did against Tom DeLay.

Strayhorn will be more successful than Friedman in running to the right of Perry after true fiscal conservatives, because she'll mention her continued tirades in Texas budgeting during the shortfall years of 2001-2003.  The problem with that is that the Texas budget is balanced for the moment right now and true fiscal conservatives are not a large number in the state frankly.

But in the end, the problem is that in Texas social conservatives rule the state right now whenever you split everything else up as much as Bell, Friedman and Strayhorn will and you have no one else campaigning from the social conservative angle.  Add to that the "Republicans who will only vote for Republicans vote" in the state and that makes my prediction above.

[Sam Spade]

One other thing:

Once the candidacy list is finalized (I haven't seen one yet), I'll post some opinions.

Basically, if nothing major has changed, it looks like it's going to be sort of boring year election-wise, except for Governor and a few House races (CD-17, CD-22, and CD-28 primary).  And if the Supreme Court doesn't overturn the Texas redistricting.

Governor's race will be entertaining because Kinky Friedman is Kinky Friedman and because Carole Keeton Strayhorn has "Tom Coburn disease", ie "foot-in-mouth syndrome". 

[Sarnstrom]

I'm hoping that Bob Gammage beats Chris Bell in the primary, as Gammage has credibility and more experience. (State Senator, Congressman, Texas Supreme Court Justice)


www.gammageforgovernor.com/

[Sam Spade]

I'm hoping that Bob Gammage beats Chris Bell in the primary, as Gammage has credibility and more experience. (State Senator, Congressman, Texas Supreme Court Justice)


www.gammageforgovernor.com/

Gammage also has a number of skeletons in his closet concerning the tobacco-kickbacks scandal, which I am sure his opponents will remind the voters.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Where'd you think Strayhorn and Friedman would poll best?

[WalterMitty]

What exactly does a comptroller do?

control the money.

sort of like a treasurer?

[Sam Spade]

Where'd you think Strayhorn and Friedman would poll best?

Strayhorn will probably poll best in the Austin metro area.  She was mayor of Austin as a Democrat in the late 70s/early 80s, after all. (and is another reason why her entry will not be good for Democrats in the long run).

Kinky is harder to figure.  Mainly because it's hard to figure what type of campaign he's running right now.  He should poll best in Austin also, but it depends on the type of race he runs.

One of the key things I notice is an absence of minority/Hispanic candidates.  I wouldn't be surprised if Perry puts a lot of energy towards that area in the race.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Were I a Texan, I would have voted for Strayhorn in the primary.

Maybe there is some skeleton in Perry's closet that she knows about?

[Sam Spade]

Were I a Texan, I would have voted for Strayhorn in the primary.

Maybe there is some skeleton in Perry's closet that she knows about?

The key question is, would you vote for Strayhorn now that she's running as an Independent?

I can take a guess as to the answer.

[Sam Spade]

Where'd you think Strayhorn and Friedman would poll best?

Strayhorn will probably poll best in the Austin metro area.  She was mayor of Austin as a Democrat in the late 70s/early 80s, after all. (and is another reason why her entry will not be good for Democrats in the long run).

Kinky is harder to figure.  Mainly because it's hard to figure what type of campaign he's running right now.  He should poll best in Austin also, but it depends on the type of race he runs.

One of the key things I notice is an absence of minority/Hispanic candidates.  I wouldn't be surprised if Perry puts a lot of energy towards that area in the race.

Re-answering my question, if either Strayhorn or Kinky was smart, they would fashion a campaign to go after old-school East Texas Democrats, who can be fairly independent in voting style (especially after 1994), but I think Al probably already knows that.

Having Kay Bailey Hutchinson up at the top of the ticket will also help Perry in the race (imo)

[Alcon]

Sam,

Do you think that Friedman or Strayhorn could be successful in Culberson or Reeves Counties (especially the latter)?  They are heavily white, sparsely populated, and were close in 2004.  I doubt they could carry them, but is that the sort of area you mean by east Texas Democrats?

[Sam Spade]

Sam,

Do you think that Friedman or Strayhorn could be successful in Culberson or Reeves Counties (especially the latter)?  They are heavily white, sparsely populated, and were close in 2004.  I doubt they could carry them, but is that the sort of area you mean by east Texas Democrats?

Well, if you really wanted to go after those areas, I guess so.  But they really don't count much towards the bottom line.  There's a lot of Texas counties that fit that bill also.

Anyway, East Texas Democrats are East Texas Democrats.  There's no real county association there and Presidential Elections of the last 10 years or so don't acknowledge where they really stand.  The more populous counties are along the coast: Galveston, Jefferson, etc, but they exist up to the Northeast part of state also, in towns like Tyler, Longview and Texarkana. 

You can connect them to being like the Cajuns of Louisiana or Southern Arkansas, except they starting voting for statewide Republican candidates starting with Hutchinson in 1994 and since then they have tended to vote Republican on the Senate and Governor's level, whereas the Louisiana and Arkansas areas haven't.

The problem is that Strayhorn or Friedman would have to run further to the right on social issues to play better here.

I assume that Strayhorn and Friedman will try and play strongly to the Austin suburbs (Williamson County), which tend to be more libertarian and less Republican than the suburbs of Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio.

West and North Texas is really just not populous enough to do real damage to another candidate nowadays.  I also assume they will try to go after Hispanic votes in the Valley, which, with a urban White candidate like Bell, might be open for the taking.  Perry will go after these also.

As I said earlier today, I would predict that this move essentially ends Strayhorn's career.  Strayhorn should have run again for Comptroller, because the polls were showing she couldn't beat Perry.  Susan Combs (R) is essentially running unopposed the Comptroller's race (D or R) and it would have been a good fight between the two.

[nini2287]

January 2 is the last day to file to run for 2006 races in Texas, the earliest deadline in the country (other than Illinois, but in Illinois the respective party can put candidates up later than the date).

In New Jersey, candidates don't have to be chosen until three weeks before the election.

How long before the election was it when the Dems yanked Torcelli in 2002?

[riceowl]

I think Strayhorn is much more comparable to Hutchison than Perry is, IMHO.

I'm voting for her, probably.

[Gustaf]

Sam, unrelated, how is the situation nowadays for the Texas Democratic party on the local level (state legislature)? How dead are they?

[Sam Spade]

Sam, unrelated, how is the situation nowadays for the Texas Democratic party on the local level (state legislature)? How dead are they?

Well, they're behind, but I wouldn't say dead, though life support might be more accurate. 

The Republicans have a 19-12 majority in the State Senate and an 87-63 margin in the State House.

The problem (or maybe it's not a problem) is that 3 of these Senate seats and about 5-10 of the House seats are classic rural blue-dog Democrats that could well go Republican if they retire, whereas there really aren't any large group of GOP seats for the moment that I see going the other way (some always do, mind you) but then again the Texas Senate and House districts have been gerrymandered for a long time so that they favor rural areas anyway.

All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if this type of margin (possibly growing slightly for the GOP, because of the reasons above) continues for a while, with the parties as they presently stand.

[Gustaf]

Sam, unrelated, how is the situation nowadays for the Texas Democratic party on the local level (state legislature)? How dead are they?

Well, they're behind, but I wouldn't say dead, though life support might be more accurate. 

The Republicans have a 19-12 majority in the State Senate and an 87-63 margin in the State House.

The problem (or maybe it's not a problem) is that 3 of these Senate seats and about 5-10 of the House seats are classic rural blue-dog Democrats that could well go Republican if they retire, whereas there really aren't any large group of GOP seats for the moment that I see going the other way (some always do, mind you) but then again the Texas Senate and House districts have been gerrymandered for a long time so that they favor rural areas anyway.

All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if this type of margin (possibly growing slightly for the GOP, because of the reasons above) continues for a while, with the parties as they presently stand.

Not as bad as when it was the other way round then...
I would expect to Dems to be able to improve their situation as the number of Hispanics grow, but maybe that's wishful thinking?

[Sam Spade]

Sam, unrelated, how is the situation nowadays for the Texas Democratic party on the local level (state legislature)? How dead are they?

Well, they're behind, but I wouldn't say dead, though life support might be more accurate. 

The Republicans have a 19-12 majority in the State Senate and an 87-63 margin in the State House.

The problem (or maybe it's not a problem) is that 3 of these Senate seats and about 5-10 of the House seats are classic rural blue-dog Democrats that could well go Republican if they retire, whereas there really aren't any large group of GOP seats for the moment that I see going the other way (some always do, mind you) but then again the Texas Senate and House districts have been gerrymandered for a long time so that they favor rural areas anyway.

All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if this type of margin (possibly growing slightly for the GOP, because of the reasons above) continues for a while, with the parties as they presently stand.

Not as bad as when it was the other way round then...

Very true.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's one of the big ifs here.  There's basically three reasons why the Democrats lost control of Texas.

First, was basically the gigantic growth of extremely Republican suburban areas in Dallas and Houston where the main cities are stagnant.  And for some reason or another, inner-line suburbs in Texas are the slowest to make a Democrat trend that has signified other suburban areas in the US. 

Dallas County has moved more than Harris, but lost Tarrant County (Fort Worth) and rapidly growing Collin County (Plano and McKinney) during the 80s and early 90s to the Republicans.  Fort Worth used to be strongly Democrat (mainly blue-dogs), ironically.

Harris County (Houston) has shown little change.  Fort Bend County has shown more of a trend than anyplace in that area and Montgomery and Brazoria counties are growing extremely fast exurbs.

The Dallas and Houston metro areas make up roughly 50% of the Texas voting pop.  Statewide Republicans in the last 10 years have been getting roughly 55%-60% of the vote in both areas.

The second big if is the east and west Texas rural vote (but moreso east Texas as it's more populated).  Before 1994, east Texas never voted for Republicans (until Hutchinson actually), now they've moved more towards an independent line, leaning Democrat in State House and Senate races, sometimes Congressmen and Republican in all statewide and contests.  Clinton did good here, but it still wasn't enough in 1992 or 1996.  West Texas is even more Republican, except for county races and some other local races.

The third big if is the Hispanic vote.  As Al has pointed out countless times, the Texas Hispanic vote used to be one of the most Democrat in the nation, now it is one of the most Republican, perhaps second to Florida.  There used to be an old saying for Republicans in the 1980s, that if you won 35% of the Hispanic vote, you were guaranteed election.  But that was when the Democrats had the east Texas rural vote.  Republicans took that message and ran with it, using every opportunity to work their way in with the Hispanic vote by emphasizing high education spending, open borders and social conservatism (the George W. Bush thing, you see?  ), which works especially well with Hispanics in rural and suburban areas.

Now, in every statewide race, I have not seen a Republican pull less than 35% of the Hispanic vote in quite a while, most have pulled within 40-45%.

If the Democrats have any hope of regaining statewide control again, they have to at least start pushing against one of these three ifs above.

Probably two of the ifs above will be necessary to switch the state to their side again, unless they somehow manage to push Dallas and Houston into the Democrat category, which I think will be very hard at least for another 15-20 years, maybe longer.

[Gustaf]

Quite a lot of info, thanks Sam. That pretty much means no Dems in a while then.