Jump to navigation
Michael Berry Withdraws From Race, Aborts Political Suicide
R. Alex Whitlock
For those of you wondering where I stand on the mayoral race, it can pretty much be summed up as "Anybody But Turner."
I would rather Bill White, Orlando Sanchez, Michael Berry, and even Raymond Hans Rodriguez win than Turner so much so that I really don't care which one of them wins, as long as his name ain't Turner.
Michael Berry has just dropped out of the race, which is ostensibly good for fellow Republican Orlando Sanchez. However, I maintain that Sanchez isn't the real beneficiary - Sylvester Turner is.
I believe that a year from now we will have a Mayor Turner or a Mayor White, not a Mayor Sanchez. Sanchez's campaign thus far has been lackluster to the point that many supporters are disinchanted with him. To win a race in Houston, if it's even possible, a Republican has no margin of error. Sanchez has demonstrated pretty clearly to me that he is not a flawless candidate (neither are White or Turner, of course, but they're Democrats. They don't have to be).
So considering it to be a two-way race, you start running through scenarios in which candidates will make the runoff. That would be Turner, White, or Sanchez. If White makes the runoff, I'm certain that the election is his whether his opponent is Turner or Sanchez. The key, of course, is getting there in the first place. If he fails to, it will be Turner against Sanchez, and I would take 10-1 odds on Turner carrying the day.
This lead to an interesting alignment of political interests. There is essentially the White camp and the Turner camp. Orlando Sanchez is the only way that Turner can win the election, so Sanchez is firmly in the Turner camp. In the same vein, Republican Michael Berry has always been in the White camp because he is taking votes away from Sanchez, preventing Sanchez from getting into the runoff and allowing White to make it to the runoff he'll undoubtedly win. Rodriguez, to the extent that he has any influence at all, would hurt Orlando Sanchez and therefore Sylvester Turner and therefore would be in the White camp.
So now that Michael Berry has dropped out, what does that mean? Since Berry was in the White camp, Bill White is the one most hurt by this. Berry's votes will swing towards Sanchez and propel him at least temporarily past White (In the much-lauded White-leading poll, Sanchez + Berry votes far surpass White's lead).
Of course, this could concievably be bad for Turner because it could bump him out of the runoff. In the end, though, any runoff including White will be lost by whomever the other guy is. I'm also inclined to believe that he is a lock to make the runoff in the first place.
So, a quick review:
Winners:
Michael Berry - He's saved his own political hyde. A lot of people had a lot of homes for him before he launched his quixotic mayoral bid at a point too soon in his political career. Now everyone at least knows who he is, he's got at least four more years he can serve on council, and some suggest that he might be the beneficiary of a new congressional district.
Sylvester Turner - It was starting to look pretty bad for Turner because it looked like he was going to have to face off against White and lose. However, this puts Orlando Sanchez back into the runoff hunt and returns Turner as the man most likely to be our next mayor.
Orlando Sanchez - It would be the end of Sanchez's political career if he failed to make the runoff. I'm not sure what he would do if he makes it and loses, but I'd imagine that he'll be in a much better place. There's also the relatively small chance that he could win, but I doubt it.
Losers:
Bill White - White's primary competition right now is Orlando Sanchez. He needs to pass Sanchez in order to face Turner in the general election and this has made it that much more difficult. White comes from a long line of moderate white Democratic politicians that have been losing since the Lanier mayorality.
George W. Bush - There are rumors that Bush encouraged Berry to get out. Not sure if they're true, but Bush intervened on Sanchez's behalf in 2001 and there's no reason to think that he won't again in 2003. Although it's minor, I think Bush will face embarassment when Sanchez loses the runoff.
Observations
Comment comment comment...
Whee! Posted my comment. Maybe more later. If you want my comment, Alex, drop by my blog.
Read your post.
I've seen White take more stabs at Sanchez than Brown. In fact, what I see most from White in regards to Brown is "Same policies, better management"... which may well work. Brown's policies (except on transportation) are pretty similar to Lanier's, but it's not a scathing attack (and, from a political standpoint, it wouldn't do to be too hard on the city's first black mayor when he's going to need the black vote later on should be wind up in a runoff against Sanchez).
I'll just say this -- If you want to get Houston closer to having zoning laws, then by all means vote for Bill White. Turner's big on rhetoric, but he hasn't gotten the support of Metro. That sets off alarm bells in my mind that Turner isn't the real threat. When the chair of Metro starts throwing money at a candidate, you ought to become very afraid.
I also think your basic analysis is incorrect. Sanchez would be competitive against Turner in a runoff, so you're being wayyyy too quick to write him off. Turner lacks incumbency and, shall we say, temperate views (this is how White was able to out-poll him). Accordingly, he's actually in a worse position than Brown was. Sanchez hasn't run a good campaign thus far, yes, but his numbers are still positive relative to Turner's.
Before you consider throwing your hat in with White, you ought to consider these factors. White's stock is falling -- he lit himself up too early, and now he's burning out. Like Bell and Grenias, I don't believe he ever really had a chance of breaking into a runoff.
Well, first of all, I can't vote to begin with because I'm registered to vote in a little town called Taylor Lake Village in Tom DeLay's district. It's part of a deal I have with Mom. She heeds my advice on who to vote for in statewide elections and I vote for who she tells me to in local ones (where my vote counts considerably more).
Turner may not have the support of Metro right now, but he will if Sanchez doesn't hedge (further) on rail and if Sanchez does, I think that his campaign is dead-in-the-water for lack of base support.
Maybe I am too quick to dismiss Sanchez as both left (Ginger) and right (you) seem to take him more seriously than I do. I think that the incumbency did not particularly help Brown and that nearly everything was in Sanchez's favor. If this city was ever ready to elect a Republican (or specifically Orlando) I think that was the year.
They didn't and I don't believe 2003 will prove any different. Sanchez is extremely off-putting to moderate liberals and liberalites to the point that they will stomach voting for anyone instead of him.
Maybe a Republican can win in Houston, but Mosbacher didn't (lack of Hispanic vote) and Sanchez didn't (lack of moderate white support). Perhaps Gabriel Vasquez will have more luck in that regard, but I don't see Sanchez getting further along this time than he did last.
As for whether Turner or White would be worse for the city, it's my position that Turner will be a worse mayor than Lee Brown. Brown may be ineffectual and incompetent, but he's not personally corrupt to the degree that Turner is. Nor is White or any other candidate in recent memory.
One major quibble with the Berry+Sanchez math ... why would supporters disgruntled that the establishment money brokers who were behind Brown and now Sanchez are going to just push that aside and opt for Sanchez all of a sudden? It's a bit like the Gore+Nader or Carter+Anderson fallacies.
Without a doubt, I think a lot of Berry's 7% will move to Sanchez, but there will likely be a notable group of support that stays home, also.
Touching on Owen's laughable premise that a) White is peaking too soon, ala Chris Bell and b) Art Schechter's money is out to influence zoning ...
a) Chris Bell never peaked. George Greanias peaked about 4-6 years before he ran for mayor. Neither had the money White has, neither had the monetary LEAD that White has, and neither had the bank account or rolodex that White has. Point being that White's advantages are a bit more firm than you suspect.
Sanchez, I suspect, will get some heavy support from Austin and Washington. That may yet make it an interesting race between him and White, but look for outsider money to be a major issue when the checks start coming in.
b) Art Schechter pretty much throws money at any and all Democratic candidates ... he's a Democratic fundraiser. As for White's trilateral-esque involvement with smart growth organizations, I look forward to your rants on that topic as the campaign heats up. Somehow, though, I keep reminding myself that with all the years of Jim Greenwood, Eleanor Tinsley, George Greanias, Vince Ryan, etc on city council ... and we still have no zoning in Houston. Go figure.
Obviously, Alex, we disagree on Turner's strength. I don't see it this time around. I supported Turner in 91, I watched as Lee Brown steamrolled into City Hall, and I'm watching now ... and outside of some inarguably helpful allies (Garnet Coleman being first and foremost), I don't see the enthusiasm for Turner that people had for Brown. Part of it is the lack of liberal white or Hispanic support - Brown had just enough Hispanics, Turner had some whites distrustful of Lanier in 91 (*raises hand*), where's that this time around? If once assumes Turner in the runoff, he's got to add something to black votes - something he doesn't have, and there's not even a lot of goodwill for should it even come down to Sanchez v Turner.
Another topic we seem to differ on is the certainty that the GOP cannot win in Houston. Given that past partisan elections have gotten something like 53-47 results, I don't think anything is a given here. Sanchez obviously would be able to get a winning formula of GOP and Hispanic votes against most candidates. Turner cannot peel into that coalition ... White peels away GOP votes (the poll referred to had him with roughly 20% of the GOP vote), he maintains enough Hispanic support (from those aware that Sanchez is a Republican, I suppose one could characterize) - so White at least has the ability to pry into Sanchez's support some.
Regardless of the two candidates that end up in the runoff, I do think this is going to be another 53-47 type election. That doesn't leave a lot of room for error on anyone's part. It makes bold predictions difficult to come by, but I likewise don't think some of the certainties you establish hold up, as indicated above. While I tend to lump "Turner Can't Win" as a certainty of my own, there's obviously some give to even that. I have a hard time seeing it obviously, but if he were to say, I dunno - run an effective last second smear campaign against his opponent, I suppose anything would be possible.
Mind you, I know full well the power of cynicism and the allure of hope - having waited and waited for results 2 years ago only to watch Bell concede right as the 10pm news went live.
You thought that Bell had a chance at making the runoff? Goes to show YOUR precognitive abilities!! :)
More seriously if it comes down to Turner vs. Sanchez, I'd imagine that at the end of the day people like you, Ginger, Charles, and likeminded liberals would hold your nose and pull the lever for Turner. All of the bellweathers that I have among the moderate Democrats that Sanchez would need to peel he cannot.
I'm also aware that the Berry + Sanchez arithmetic is flawed but even taking 60% of it puts Sanchez in a pretty solid position that I think he'll gain steam from by Republicans with nowhere else to go but Sanchez or D's.
I certainly like your predictions better than mine and hope you do a better job this time than you did with Bell last time ;).
Oh, and one more thing, if it's White against Turner, I strongly suspect that it will NOT be a 53-47 election. I'm more sure of that than of any of the other predictions that I've made.
With Bell, I blame my eternal optimism for misleading me. With White vs Turner, I tend to agree that it will go beyond 53-47. To his credit, White has run a very positive campaign. He's not had a lot of pressure to go negative, a sizable portion of Houston GOP voters feel safe with White if it comes down to it, and Hispanics will be there for him in such a runoff, even if not quite inspired to max the turnout.
To the extent that bold predictions can be made, I suppose here's my runoff predictions based on the possible scenarios:
White - Turner (56-44 ... possibly even 60-40)
White - Sanchez (52-48)
Sanchez - Turner (50.4-49.6)
November outcomes are still a crapshoot.
<i>"More seriously if it comes down to Turner vs. Sanchez, I'd imagine that at the end of the day people like you, Ginger, Charles, and likeminded liberals would hold your nose and pull the lever for Turner."</i>
As for this, let's just say I'm on the fence for now. My hunch is that a lot of non-activist types who don't share my own compulsion to vote at every possible chance might sit out the runoff. As for me ... tough choice: it may come down to which candidate I think can be offed next time around, which would favor Turner. But since I hate voting on that methodology, I'll likely see what Sanchez has to say to win over people such as myself (call me crazy, but actually taking positions on a few issues *might* help a bit).
Greg,
Whoa, there! You're taking my comments to places I never intended.
I did compare White to Chris Bell in terms of making the runoff, but I didn't claim that they BOTH peaked too soon. I'm a big enough poll watcher to have known that Bell never garnered a substantial amount of support. That being said, I did state that I believe White's performance will taper off (i.e. he'll flame out) because the type of candidate he presents himself as hasn't performed well in past elections. A laughable premise this is not.
It is true that White has more advantages than Bell and Grenias, which is why he was sitting on 25% in the last poll. But even with his money and rolodex, he still must deal with the fact that he lacks a large ready-made constituency. White Democrats and independents aren't that big a group, and I don't think he'll ultimately sway many more Republicans than Bell did.
Add an Observation
Comment spam is an ongoing problems that we're trying to address. Previously we required people to create accounts and log in. I am thankful to say that is no longer the case. We're giving Captcha another try and are playing around with a text-based Q&A variant of Captcha. So bear with us as we try to figure out how to best get a handle ont he problem. Please note that any comment on a post more than 30 days old will go into the moderation queue, where I will get to it when I can which could be once a week.
