Best Houston mayoral debate happened last night

Best performances by the media as well.  Give serious props to moderators Eric Barajas and Rebecca Suarez for solid prep and good questions.  Not tough ones; not softballs.  Update: And to Miya Shay, who wrote them.

Televised in Spanish by Univision and in English by KTRK, the mods asked each candidate about their most-presumed weaknesses.

"I've learned a lot more from my failures than my success," said King, who smoothly pivoted the question into one about becoming a better candidate because of his earlier mistakes.

Current state representative Sylvester Turner was asked about his two failed runs at mayor prior to now, and why voters should take him more seriously this time.

"Those first two occasions are dress rehearsals; this is the real deal," quipped Turner, before turning more serious. "In life, you will go after things and you won't get it. It doesn't mean you get a negative attitude, it doesn't mean you throw in the towel and quick (sic), you keep on."

Neither of these are particularly good answers, you might note.  And after something like 30 of these fora and no traction or buzz surrounding his campaign, Bill King finally decided it was time to come out against the HERO.

King asked to clarify his stance on #hero, says he's opposed to law as it's written. #houstonvote

— Katherine Driessen (@KatDriessen) September 10, 2015

It might be too late for Pothole Bill to recapture the Hate Caucus back from Ben Hall, but since those folks are also racists... there's always a chance.

Since I missed it live (or taped, so far), I can't tell if Turner's answer about Sandra Bland might be an issue or not.  This Twitter exchange set off some alarms.

.@ESmiley4TX I came off couch w/ @SylvesterTurner's comments on #SandraBland! My God... Victim blame/defame=Dangerous #HoustonVote

— Southern Rock (@SouthernRock3) September 11, 2015

We'll wait a bit and see if that's molehill or mountain.

Hall has a commanding presence on stage.  Trained as both lawyer and pastor, he comes off as relaxed and authoritative.  I was astonished two years ago at how poorly done his TV work was.  I suspect we will see better this time.  Watch his one-minute video segment and then King's (scroll down) and see if you agree.

As the perceived (no polling yet? in mid-September?!  The first and last one came out in late June.  WTF, people?) front-runners, Sylvester Turner and Adrian Garcia took the most incoming fire.

Former Sheriff Adrian Garcia was asked about his controversial management of the Harris County Jail, which was first brought to light by ABC-13. Garcia countered that he addressed the problems as quickly as he found out, then added, " If terrible things happen as mayor, I'll take full responsibility, take action."

Garcia just doesn't have it, whatever 'it' may be.  There's no charisma, no real thoughtfulness being demonstrated.  The lights are on but nobody's home.  Maybe he's too scripted or perhaps he over-practiced.  He simply does not show, through either word or deed, the ability to lead the city.  And that's not just me saying that, but the Harris County Deputy Sheriff's union, the people he formerly commanded, who endorsed Turner yesterday in a sharp jab at the former sheriff.

And that's before you even consider his record, which is stained with a lack of accomplishment beyond Bill White's help, and a repetitive cluelessness that crosses the line to malfeasance (not just the jail mess but the no-bid consultant contract) too many times for my comfort level.  I keep trying to give Garcia the benefit of some doubt, but I still find him unfit for public service.

For his part, Chris Bell enlisted Bill King's help in pointing this out again.

.@BillKingForHou we share disappointment in #HPD solve rate. Do you accept @AdrianGarciaHTX response to the crime rate? #houstonvote

— Chris Bell (@ChrisBell2015) September 10, 2015

Only organization in the US with lower clearance rates than HPD was Harris County Sheriff's Office. @AdrianGarciaHTX https://t.co/pitteulQTo

— Bill King (@BillKingForHou) September 10, 2015

Apparently Chris Bell's biggest flaw in the contest is that he hasn't raised as much money as everybody else.  Candidly, that's a benefit and not a problem.  As long as you're not a fan of oligarchy, of course.

It was Marty McVey who got eliminated from contention last night, sadly.

Local businessman Marty McVey was asked about the more than a dozen lawsuits filed against him in the past few years. The lawsuits, one of which is scheduled to go to trial next year, stemmed from his purchase and bankruptcy of Spring Branch Medical Center. 

"We must face litigation and it's part of doing business sometime," said McVey, who countered that the Medical Center was an anomaly in his string of business successes.

Stick a fork in him.  He had some brief shining moments during the early parts of the campaign, but he's not ready for prime time.  Maybe two years from now he can be saying the kinds of things Hall and King are saying now.

As opposed to McVey, I simply don't know what to make of Steve Costello's performance.  He seems a little too bland, unanimated, "low-energy" as somebody has said about Jeb Bush -- and that's saying a lot with McVey and King to compete with.

So... any clear winners and/or losers to you?

Thanks for playing. We have some nice parting gifts for you

The line forms right over there, behind a certain former Texas governor.

-- Jeb! on with Colbert opening night, was neither hit nor flop.  I wish Stephen had asked him about his economic adviser who doesn't believe in democracy.

"Capitalism is a lot more important than democracy. I’m not even a big believer in democracy. I always say that democracy can be two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner. ... Look, I’m in favor of people having the right to vote and things like that. But there are a lot of countries that have the right to vote and they’re still poor. Democracy doesn’t always lead to a good economy or even a good political system."

-- Ted Cruz Huck-blocked at the Kim Davis-palooza.



Absolutely priceless.  Like Governor Oops, Cruz has also turned his campaign over to a super PAC, the one headed by David Barton, who believes that AIDS is a curse sent from God and therefore doctors will never be able to find a vaccine for it.

-- South Carolina Republicans to Lindsey Graham: Please stop already.

-- Scott Walker doesn't want to talk about either the past or the future.

ABC News asked Walker how he would respond to the massive influx of refugees from Syria if he were president today. He explained that the query was flawed. As he is obviously not president, Walker argued, there is no way that he would be able to answer that question. “I'm not president today and I can't be president today,” he said. "Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as a hypothetical" — a sentence that probably would have moved Socrates to set Walker's pants on fire himself. 

Walker has avoided answering questions with similar evasions before — although "I'm not president, so I can't answer that" is the closest he has come to finding the secret cheat code that will allow him to advance to the convention without having to provide much insight into how he might deal with the types of difficult decisions a president has to make.

Walker's next campaign reboot involves renaming himself Chauncey Gardiner.

Sorry, no Trump around here.  Plenty elsewhere if that's what you like.  Update: More yahoos who might as well call it quits: Jindal, Santorum, Pataki, Gilmore.  I wonder why nobody mentions Fat Bastard.

Houston mayoral forum tonight, televised in English and in Spanish, and we'll be back to some local coverage after that with a few contested council district race profiles and analysis, and perhaps some other hot rumors circulating.

Hillary Clinton reinvents herself again

This is worse than watching Madonna through the years.  How many more versions do we need?

The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Democratic candidate will no longer use the term “everyday Americans” when promoting her plans to bolster the middle class. While continuing to draw on her experience as a new grandmother, Clinton will talk in more general terms about bettering the U.S. for future generations, instead of making specific references to her own, privileged granddaughter. And five months after launching her candidacy with a series of small, media-free meetings with voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, Clinton’s fall schedule includes upcoming appearances on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” and “The Tonight Show” with Jimmy Fallon, and plans for larger, more informal gatherings with supporters.

More general terms than she has to this point?

In the face of an email scandal that has swelled alongside the unexpected surge in support for her less-scripted rivals Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, Clinton aides told the Times that they are determined to highlight the former secretary of state’s sense of humor and compassion on the campaign trail.

This is, of course, just the latest attempt to reshape Clinton’s public image. In the many public roles she’s played over the last two decades — from first lady to U.S. senator to secretary of state — appearing down to earth and even human has been among Clinton’s most difficult challenges.

One she is losing. Again.

The word “polarizing” has been used to describe Hillary Clinton since she first hit the presidential campaign trail alongside her husband in 1992. Clearly interested in more than just a supporting role in the White House, Clinton’s unabashed ambition became a source of contention early on in the primary race.

“You know, some people think of you as an inspiring female attorney mother, and other people think of you as the overbearing yuppie wife from hell,” a reporter from Ohio told the would-be first lady in May 1992. “How would you describe yourself?”

By then, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote at the time, Clinton was already “on a mission to soften her image and show that she has a sense of humor.” Months earlier, she’d caused controversy with the now infamous quip, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession, which I entered before my husband was in public life.” So, Dowd wrote, “she smiled and described herself as a wife, a mother and an activist.”

This is simply excruciating.  And it's closing in on its 24th year in syndication.

In 2014, the Clinton Library in Little Rock, Ark., released nearly 4,000 pages of internal White House communications, including a series of confidential memos revealing much of the behind-the-scenes work that went into crafting Hillary Clinton’s public image.

Memos from 1995 show Clinton staff determined to rehabilitate the country’s perception of the first lady in the wake of the health care reform failure and ahead of the 1996 election. In one of many memos sent that year, press secretary Lisa Caputo described the Clintons’ 20th wedding anniversary as “a wonderful opportunity for Hillary” to regain public affection and suggested they throw “a big party” and invite People magazine to do a photo spread of the event.

Some of Caputo’s other image-conscious ideas for the first lady included an appearance on ABC’s family-friendly sitcom “Home Improvement,” a birthday celebration for Eleanor Roosevelt to make her look “less extreme” and monthly meetings with women’s magazine editors in an effort to “turn the editors into Clinton surrogates.”

I feel like Malcolm McDowell's character in A Clockwork Orange, forced to watch the carnage until I am desensitized to it.

“For someone like Hillary Clinton, who has gone through so many incarnations in the public eye, at some point they lose themselves,” (author of the 2006 biography Hillary Rodham Clinton: Polarizing First Lady Gil) Troy said. “It’s not just about her finding her voice, it’s also about her trying to convince people that she’s authentic.”

Somebody pleeeeze tell the lady that ship has sailed.

Update: "Clinton's bungled reboot", from The Atlantic.

She could win more votes in the 18-59 demographic -- and thus the election, hands down -- in five seconds if she would say, 'I support the full legalization of marijuana', but she won't say that because of the millions she's taken from Big Pharma and the private prison industry.  And I swear to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, if she starts twerking I'm voting for Trump.

The Weekly Wrangle

(We're back to Wrangling after one week of Wangling.)

"Nobody can think straight who does not work. Idleness warps the mind." -- Henry Ford

The history of Labor Day was, as we know, once quite radical.  The Haymaker Martyrs -- along with these other forgotten heroes of the labor movement -- are best remembered as such.  The battles of labor against their oppressors is somewhat lost to the history books Wikipedia pages, but the struggles represented by the birth of the Black Lives Matter movement remind us that, as Frederick Douglass said, power concedes nothing without a demand, and that there will always be reactionary pushback against that demand.

"One machine can do the work of 50 ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." -- Elbert Hubbard

Here's to the radicals, the anarchists, and the actual socialists (not to be confused with our generation's Democratic ones) who gave us this day of rest, along with the elimination of child workers, the establishment of the 8-hour day and the forty-hour work week, the paid vacation, healthcare and retirement programs that were defined by their benefits and not by the employer's contributions.  They are precisely why we had a prospering middle class in the 1950s -- you know, the good old days for white men every Republican wants to take us back to -- and the reaction to their success from the greediest people history has ever seen is why we don't have one today.

“The only place success comes before work is the dictionary.” -- Vince Lombardi

People fought and died for those freedoms, too.

"Genius begins great works; labor alone finishes them." -- Joseph Joubert

Here's the blog post roundup from last week.

Off the Kuff reported on a busy week at the state Supreme Court, which heard the school finance appeal as well as a case involving the city's of Houston's anti-pollution ordinances.

Libby Shaw at Texas Kaos, and contributing to Daily Kos, is disgusted by the right wing's politicization of a horrible tragedy in Houston. Harris County needs a new sheriff.

SocraticGadfly, having edited photos from last month, shares National Parks' geographic beauty, wildlife, history and astrophotography, in photos, narrative and photo album links from his most recent vacation.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme thinks Bexar County Sheriff Susan Pamerleau should be ashamed of herself for inviting death threats and hate on the TV station that broadcast video of her deputies shooting a man. Now we're supposed to trust her investigation of the incident?

PDiddie at Brains and Eggs finished posting about Houston's citywide races on the November ballot with At Large 4, At Large 5, and the controller's contest.

Egberto Willies has an example of how white allies can dispel misinformation about BLM.

Dos Centavos wants to know why Bernie Sanders doesn't have his own Hispanic billionaire funding his campaign.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston exposes more WARTS on the GOP, and questions the motives of Harris County Sheriff Ron Hickman and District Attorney Devon Anderson.

Joe Deshotel at Left in Texas has the latest podcast on 'Guns, Alcohol, and the Confederate Fail Army' posted at Burnt Orange Report.

Gaswork, a new short film by anti-fractivist and actor Josh Fox, premieres in October, and TXsharon at Bluedaze has the details and the trailer.

And last, looking for a balance in a complicated world, Neil at All People Have Value visited the place were Deputy Darren Goforth was killed in Harris County and the location in Prairie View of the incident that led to the police death of Sandra Bland. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

================

And here's more posts from other great blogs from last week....

Scott Braddock reports on how Texas Republicans are sending mixed signals to business interests.

Better Texas Blog is ready for a school finance solution.

TransGriot gives you some reasons to fight for the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance.

The Texas Election Law Blog fears that with redistricting still unsettled, the 2016 primaries could be a mess.

Newsdesk looks back at the Austin smoking ban, ten years after its implementation.

Bonddad has five graphs for 2015, and four bonus ones for a look ahead at our economic forecast.  Don't miss his summary at the end.

Socialist Alternative explains what the two faces of capitalism in the world represent, and the options for left movements going forward.

Mock Scissors Paper has a "Happy Labor Day" message from Scott Walker.

If You Only News presents the perfect TeaBagger socialist-free Purity Pledge.

And Fascist Dyke Motors tries to start a rumor that she is having an affair with Huma Abedin.

The Houston city controller's contest

Once more from the top of your ballot to the bottom.

• M.J. Khan
• Chris Brown
• Bill Frazer
• Jew Don Boney
• Dwight Jefferson
• Carroll Robinson

Both of my previous postings about this race got lots of clicks, so if you want some recent past history about these men then there it is.  Here's one relevant excerpt...

Frankly I am delighted to see Jew Don Boney run for city controller against Carroll Robinson. They have squared off before, and it wasn't pretty. No matter his own bumpy history, I will be pleased to support former councilman Boney's campaign -- unless I vet the potential candidates for a better one -- because Robinson is not only shady himself but also aligned with the absolute worst political mafia in Houston politics. I'm looking at you again, Hector Carreno, you slug. And Reps. Miles and Thompson, you should know better.

But this "lesser of two evils" option once again might let the Republican slip into office.

As a reminder: one of the easiest choices you can make as a voter is to never, ever vote for a candidate who doesn't understand what the responsibilities of the office he is running for are.

Also in the doomed-to-repeat-history department, both of the two Republicans bidding again for this seat barely lost to outgoing incumbent Ronald Green.  From 2013, here's my live-blogging as the returns came in that night (scroll all the way to the bottom):

Bill Frazer - 47% 47.89% 48.28% 49.02% 48.86%
Ronald Green - 53% 52.11% 51.72% 50.98% 51.14% 

The incumbent may yet hold off the Republican challenger, but late returns will tell the tale. At 9:00 p.m., Election Day results continue to narrow the gap for Frazer. 

At 9:30 p.m., just 2200 votes out of 110,000 cast separate the two. But the real news is the 30,500 undervotes in this race. At 10 p.m. Green gets a little breathing room, leading now by 3000 votes 

At 10:20 p.m., when the votes from Fort Bend and Montgomery are added, Controller Green has a 5,062 vote lead. He has narrowly avoided being upset. 38,134 Harris County voters did not vote in this race.

Khan is experienced as a former three-term council member, came very close to beating Green himself in 2009 when the term-limited Annise Parker first ran for mayor, and benefits from being tops on the ballot in a race filled with qualified candidates.  But Khan's greatest value is in siphoning off enough of Frazer's Republican support to force him into a runoff with a Democrat.  Frazer is in the catbird seat with the four Ds squaring off and "bathroom election" turnout looking promising for the city's conservatives.  He's hosted fundraisers with David Dewhurst and state comptroller Glenn Hegar, and earned the endorsement of the Kingwood Tea Party (that covers all the the GOP bases, from plain old stupid to stupid, mean, and crazy).

So who has the best chance of advancing to the December playoff with Frazer?

Morning-line handicappers might favor Son of Brown-Schlumberger.  He's been the city's deputy controller throughout the Green years, has access to all the money he needs not to lose, and he's a legacy.  Constable David Rosen wrote his own forecast of this race in the Daily Court Review praising Brown's "colossal network", evaluating the candidates most particularly on the basis of their campaign finance reports.

At least two of those four are reasons are why I cannot support Brown, though many Democrats of the Caucasian persuasion will, and that could be enough to get him over the hump.  There's also the fact that African American voters both liberal and conservative will split their votes among Boney, Robinson, and Jefferson.  The two Democratic former city council members and one former Republican state district judge (in that order) have some divergent opinions about how the office they seek helps manage the city in harmony -- or discord -- with the mayor's office.  There's an opportunity here among all these controller hopefuls for some very strategic voting.

Consider some mayoral runoff possibilities: Hall-Garcia, Hall-Turner, Turner-Garcia for just a few. With a conservative Democrat or quasi-Republican mayor and Frazer (or Khan) crunching the numbers, you can pretty much count on a lot of municipal employee layoffs to try to balance the looming crisis of a city budget, a hard line on firemen and police pensions, lots of closed libraries and swimming pools, city parks going to seed, and yes, more potholes.  If the cons sweep some of the swingy seats on council as well, a new dark day of severe austerity and homophobia takes reign over Houston.

If a someone more moderate, like Turner (or Steve Costello or Chris Bell) makes the runoff and prevails in it, then a controller like Brown or Boney or even Jefferson gives the city a little less talk and a little more action that demonstrates tolerance for threatened municipal employees, be it their jobs or their retirement plans.  In short, consider whether your choice for mayor is going to have someone in the beancounters' office he can work with... or will have to fight with.  And which of those scenarios you think might be preferable, depending on how things turn out on November 3rd.

Chris Brown straddled the fence on this matter when asked about it at the Sunnyside candidate forum.  That's not leadership, IMHO.

Prediction for the general: Too close to call on whether there will be a runoff, or whether who on either the left or the right might make one.  This is the least predictable contest on the ballot, and one which depends completely on whose voters show up.

Labor Day Weekend Funnies

Robert Reich: "Labor Day 2028"

To celebrate the kickoffs of the high school and college football seasons, the 29th anniversary of the marriage of the lovely Mrs. Diddie and I -- no, neither of those.  This is a reason-for-the-season reposting of former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich's blog post about a Labor Day in the near future, predicted from 87 years in the past.

In 1928, famed British economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that technology would advance so far in a hundred years – by 2028 – that it will replace all work, and no one will need to worry about making money.

“For the first time since his creation man will be faced with his real, his permanent problem – how to use his freedom from pressing economic cares, how to occupy the leisure, which science and compound interest will have won for him, to live wisely and agreeably and well.”

We still have thirteen years to go before we reach Keynes’ prophetic year, but we’re not exactly on the way to it. Americans are working harder than ever.

Keynes may be proven right about technological progress. We’re on the verge of 3-D printing, driverless cars, delivery drones, and robots that can serve us coffee in the morning and make our beds.  But he overlooked one big question: How to redistribute the profits from these marvelous labor-saving inventions, so we’ll have the money to buy the free time they provide?

Without such a mechanism, most of us are condemned to work ever harder in order to compensate for lost earnings due to the labor-replacing technologies.  Such technologies are even replacing knowledge workers – a big reason why college degrees no longer deliver steadily higher wages and larger shares of the economic pie.  Since 2000, the vast majority of college graduates have seen little or no income gains.  The economic model that predominated through most of the twentieth century was mass production by many, for mass consumption by many.  But the model we’re rushing toward is unlimited production by a handful, for consumption by the few able to afford it.

The ratio of employees to customers is already dropping to mind-boggling lows.

When Facebook purchased the messaging company WhatsApp for $19 billion last year, WhatsApp had fifty-five employees serving 450 million customers.  When more and more can be done by fewer and fewer people, profits go to an ever-smaller circle of executives and owner-investors. WhatsApp’s young co-founder and CEO, Jan Koum, got $6.8 billion in the deal.  This in turn will leave the rest of us with fewer well-paying jobs and less money to buy what can be produced, as we’re pushed into the low-paying personal service sector of the economy.  Which will also mean fewer profits for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because potential consumers won’t be able to afford what they’re selling.

What to do? We might try to levy a gigantic tax on the incomes of the billionaire winners and redistribute their winnings to everyone else. But even if politically feasible, the winners will be tempted to store their winnings abroad – or expatriate.

Suppose we look instead at the patents and trademarks by which government protects all these new inventions.

Such government protections determine what these inventions are worth. If patents lasted only three years instead of the current twenty, for example, What’sApp would be worth a small fraction of $19 billion – because after three years anybody could reproduce its messaging technology for free.  Instead of shortening the patent period, how about giving every citizen a share of the profits from all patents and trademarks government protects? It would be a condition for receiving such protection.  Say, for example, 20 percent of all such profits were split equally among all citizens, starting the month they turn eighteen.  In effect, this would be a basic minimum income for everyone.

The sum would be enough to ensure everyone a minimally decent standard of living – including money to buy the technologies that would free them up from the necessity of working.  Anyone wishing to supplement their basic minimum could of course choose to work – even though, as noted, most jobs will pay modestly.  This outcome would also be good for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because it would ensure they have customers with enough money to buy their labor-saving gadgets.  Such a basic minimum would allow people to pursue whatever arts or avocations provide them with meaning, thereby enabling society to enjoy the fruits of such artistry or voluntary efforts.

We would thereby create the kind of society John Maynard Keynes predicted we’d achieve by 2028 – an age of technological abundance in which no one will need to work.

Happy Labor Day.

I wanted to post about something besides Houston city elections

-- But I am really not interested in talking about Sheriff Ron Hickman, or Fox News pushing his white conservative lies further out, while Hickman himself doubles down.  Other people have spoken for me anyway.

Hickman's rhetoric only pours gas on an ever-expanding forest fire.  More people will be shot down, unarmed black people and peace officers alike, as a result of his bloviating.

Thanks, Adrian Garcia!  One hell of a parting gift you left us.

-- I don't want to talk about Kim Davis, either.  It's "factually impossible" for me to talk about her.

-- I also won't be spending many pixels talking about Donald Trump, in Spanish or in English.  Not going to run many cartoons of him in the future, either.

These are all jokes that just aren't funny to me.

-- Nobody could have foreseen that Hillary Clinton would be struggling in the polls.  Bless his poor old hippie heart, Ted still can't see it.

-- Do you think we have immigration problems in the United States?  Do you think they have immigration problems in places like Syria, or Turkey, or Greece?  Who's got the bigger problem, do you think?  Us or them?  I'm thinking it's humanity that has the problem.

So... aren't you glad I'm blogging about those boring old city council races?

The At Large 5 contest

For those who wish to catch up, here are my posts on the state of play in the mayor's race from last week, along with AL1, AL2, AL3, and AL4.  Somebody is going to release a poll very soon in the mayoral; I'm kind of surprised we haven't seen one yet.  As a reminder, we don't talk about advertisements, or fundraising, or viability scores 'round these parts.  My humble O is that those things are by degrees undemocratic and have no place in estimating the value of potential political officeholders.  Issues, policy, clearly-staked positions, and how hard a person is actually trying to encourage people to vote for them, by their presence online and offline at various functions is how I evaluate worth.  YMMV, of course.

For you deadliners, the last day to register to vote in this election is October 5th; and early voting begins on October 19.  On to the participants in this race, listed in ballot order:

• Brad Batteau
• Jack Christie (incumbent)
• Philippe Nassif
• Sharon Moses
• Tahir Charles

Perennial candidate Batteau was instrumental in helping CM Michael Kubosh get elected in AL 3 two years ago.  He, Rogene Calvert, Roland Chavez (running again this year in District H), and Jenefer Rene Pool (running again in AL1) all split the vote neatly enough between themselves to allow Kubosh to go into a runoff against Roy Morales (who is also running again, in AL4).  That could happen once more here in AL5.

Batteau, sixth in a field of six with 8.6% of the vote in 2013, doesn't really seem to be getting the message voters are sending him.  Perhaps he's still holding on for an Andrew-Burks-in-2011-ish miracle.  He's running the same campaign he's run in the past, which is to say nonexistent.  This KTRK piece from four years ago is evidence that some things never really change.

And then there's J. Brad Batteau. He has run for an at-large position before. He says he's the man to represent the whole city. He hasn't raised any money or posted many signs but did address his robbery conviction 30 years ago.

"It shouldn't matter because what I'm going to do for the people doesn't have anything to do with my past back in 1987. I was a teenager ... I'm now 42," he said.

It's important to note that Batteau didn't know Rebuild Houston is when we asked him.

I would be surprised if he knows anything about it today.  Name recognition and first-on-the-ballot can't be completely discounted in municipal races, unfortunately.

Conservative Republican Christie defeated two half-hearted Democrats challenging him in 2011 with 55% of the vote, and four years ago finally prevailed in a third try over incumbent Jolanda Jones in the runoff by a similar 54.2% margin... with a helping hand from former mayor Bill White.  It is never-say-die candidates like Christie and Burks who give hope to the likes of people such as Batteau.  Greg Wythe's Texas Political Almanac has a good summary of that race in 2011...

The "Jack & JoJo Show" earned its third season as candidate Christie once more filed to run against CM Jolanda Jones. While many of the ethical charges brought against CM Jones during the past two years failed to merit serious attention, the spotlight brought attention on Jones' often combative approach to representing the city. While Jones remained popular in African-American communities -- particularly on the south side -- not enough voters elsewhere saw her as an independent voice at Council. Jones was the most frequent member on council to tag items on the city agenda, delaying action for a week on numerous items. The result was not dissimilar to the previous campaign and runoff. But the one thing missing from this election was that of a well-funded African-American candidate for mayor in a runoff that would help boost turnout to benefit Jolanda.

Wythe left out the Bill White part, probably because he was a White acolyte from the get-go in the former mayor's bid for the Governor's Mansion in 2010.  But the history he did write reminds us to watch for this African American dynamic in play in this cycle's runoff.  You can rest assured that either Sylvester Turner or Ben Hall -- or both -- running off for mayor in December changes the calculus of downballot council runoffs.  Christie wanted to run for mayor this time, but was crowded out by CM Oliver Pennington, himself an early dropout.  Both men are probably kicking themselves as they watch Hall ascend to the conservative throne.

Nassif is the Democrats' standard-bearer.  For whatever his reasons, Durrel Douglas wound up not filing to run here, and that clears the field a little for the liberal activist of Mexican and Lebanese descent.  He's got all the endorsements and support flowing his way.

Sharon Moses seems to have good qualifications for a potential council member if in fact this is her LinkedIn profile, but no other web presence and no past experience in running for office works against her.  Tahir Charles' website has a good bio of him but his Facebook page was last updated in May.  Both candidates -- and Batteau, for that matter -- might bite into Nassif's tally among African American voters.

Prediction for the general: If the four Democrats -- one establishment (Nassif) and three unorthodox (Batteau, Moses, Charles) succeed in canceling each other out, then the odious Christie goes back to council for a third term.  If the best hope for Democratic liberals, Nassif, can force the incumbent -- whose ceiling in past elections has been around 55% -- into a runoff, they should raise their expectations for knocking off the Republican on council.

Scattershooting Adrian Garcia and Hillary Clinton, two of the worst possible options for public office

-- Chris Bell reminds everybody in Houston again that Adrian Garcia, much like Hillary Clinton, is simply unfit to serve as a public leader.

"If you're leading what you call the largest mental health institution in our city, then how those inmates were treated becomes a very significant issue," Bell told a packed auditorium at the University of St. Thomas, where candidates had gathered for a mayoral forum on behavioral health. "You were supposedly the leader of that jail, and how could you have created a system where nobody told you of such a horrific incident?"

In response:

"It shouldn't have happened. It definitely should not have happened under my watch. But when I found out about it, I took full responsibility. I took action," Garcia said. "I put policies and procedures in place to keep it from happening again."

That's an admission of guilt. While a noble gesture, it still disqualifies him from office.

-- Speaking of Clinton...

While she was secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote and sent at least six e-mails using her private server that contained what government officials now say is classified information, according to thousands of e-mails released by the State Department.

[...]

The extent of the redactions in e-mails sent by Clinton and others, including ambassadors and career Foreign Service officers, points to a broader pattern that has alarmed intelligence officials in which sensitive information has been circulated on non-secure systems. Another worry is that Clinton aides further spread sensitive information by forwarding government e-mails to Clinton’s private account.

Benefit of the doubt:

But it also highlights concerns raised by Clinton and her supporters that identifying classified material can be a confusing process, and well-meaning public officials reviewing the same material could come to different conclusions as to its classification level.

Yes.  Why hasn't someone ever fixed this since email became prevalent (at a minimum of) fifteen years ago?

Is Hillary Clinton as president the person most capable of fixing it?  If you think so, there's a bridge in the desert on sale with your layaway tag on it.

-- More and more people are coming to the inevitable, inexorable conclusion that she is one final, small disaster away from fumbling the White House to the Republicans.  They're still imploring other Democrats to join the race.  I don't think any more candidates are needed personally, but whatever.

She is still going to beat Trump, or Carson, or Bush, or Cruz, or whatever other piece of flotsam the GOP floats.  But she is also in the excruciating process of beating herself, and the outcome of that fight is still to be determined.

More lighter, funnier fare on emails from Vox.

The At Large 4 contest

Now that we know ballot order, let's go forward listing the candidates that way.  As a reminder, Kuffner has audio interviews with a lot of these folks posted already, and Wayne is posting questionnaires returned to him from those responding.

• Amanda Edwards
• Jonathan Hansen
• Larry Blackmon
• Laurie Robinson
• Evelyn Husband Thompson
• Matt Murphy
• Roy Morales

It might be worth repeating (scroll to the end) that Houston blacks consider AL 4 to be theirs, and that is likely to hold true in this cycle with Edwards and Robinson, both African American Democratic women with solid networks of support.  They present as the best qualified and most progressive choices.  Robinson ran for AL 5 previously in 2011, finishing third behind then-incumbent Jolanda Jones and now-incumbent Jack Christie.  She is the chief executive of a high-profile management consulting firm.  Edwards practices law at Bracewell & Guiliani, and has a wide-ranging background of political and social justice efforts.  Blackmon -- this Chron piece thinly describes him as a retired school teacher active in local politics -- also carries a good resume' and the endorsements of three black Texas House members; he's been overshadowed to some degree by Edwards and Robinson.  Edwards has racked up most of the endorsements from Democratic clubs and groups to this point.

Either of the three has the skill set to be an effective council member.  But two of the three are unlikely to be in a runoff together, so we must handicap the likely (conservative) challengers.

Morales is a name we all know and distrust by now.  He's lost more city council and mayoral general elections and runoffs than I care to document.  But his Republican activism and Latino surname may once again be enough to get him second past the post.

Husband Thompson is the widow of astronaut Ron Husband, who perished in the 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster.  That's pretty much it for her online campaign as a prospective city council member.  No website, no Facebook page.  There's a story here about how she met, courted, and married her second husband, and too much for my digestion about the strength of their faith.  I'm going to presume, until she says otherwise on the record, that she's a Christian conservative and an opponent of HERO.

That leaves Hansen and Murphy.

Hansen is your basic pro-business, inherited-wealth, pull-yasef-up-by-ya-bootstraps Republican.  He recently engaged in some good old-fashioned political ball-busting of Murphy on HERO, without revealing his own position on the ordinance.  Murphy is the "pro-family fiscal conservative" in the contest, and I would surmise based on his flip-flop on HERO -- as detailed at Hansen's blog -- that he indeed does have the requisite hypocrisy needed for Houston's worst Republicans to vote him into the runoff.

Prediction for the runoff: Toss-up between Edwards and Robinson (with a small chance given to Blackmon) squaring off against Murphy.

HEROes and haters

The Chron chronicles a thirty-year of history of proud homophobia in Houston city elections (too much alliteration?), and outs the 'Bathroom Caucus' on your ballot in November.

A flurry of candidates opposed to Houston's anti-discrimination ordinance finalized bids for City Council in the waning hours before last Monday's filing deadline, setting the stage for a multi-race campaign against the controversial ballot measure known as HERO.

With the latecomers, the fight to repeal HERO now is poised to extend into all of the at-large and most of the district council races, in addition to the mayor's race.

At first glance, the lineup harkens back to the "Straight Slate" of 1985, when conservative power broker Steven Hotze organized challengers to run against incumbent council members who supported job protections for gays employed by the city.

Dr. Hotze, you haven't evolved a bit since 1985.  That was the year Louie Welch's "shoot the queers" comment went viral without an Internet, and in one night, "Don't Shoot Louie! T-shirts became best-sellers.  Read Mayor Annise Parker's account of the irony of representing the city of Houston (as comptroller at the time) at Welch's funeral in 2008.

"We have been approached by candidates who oppose the bathroom ordinance," said Jared Woodfill, spokesman for the anti-HERO campaign. "And we have encouraged people to run who oppose the bathroom ordinance, as have other organizations who have the same goal of defeating the ordinance."

[...]

Of City Council members running for re-election, five oppose the ordinance... They are joined by at least 11 council hopefuls, many of whom launched their bids before it became clear the ordinance would be on the ballot.

Others, such as pastors Willie Davis and Kendall Baker, as well as former teacher Manny Barrera and Siemens sales executive Carl Jarvis, filed to run on the last day.

Emphasis mine.  If you need to reminded why it's important to tax the churches...

Houston Area Pastor Council Director Dave Welch, who is helping to run the anti-HERO campaign's church-based efforts to rally voters against the law, said his group does not "officially enlist or recruit candidates."

He added, however, that he did broadly encourage those active in the church to seek office.

"In general, we encourage people to run for office and be politically involved," Welch said. "It's pretty hard to have a good government if you don't have good people in government. (HERO) certainly, it certainly provided an inspiration and motivation for some of the folks in our churches to run."

It reminds me of Ken Paxton's brethren and sisteren asking their local TeaBagger sheriff candidate why more lethal force is not used at the border.  But that's a digression.

You should go and finish Rebecca Elliott's and Kat Driessen's article; Chron municipal election coverage scores a D- in my gradebook, but the blind hog found a few acorns in this piece.  Nothing against the two reporters; responsibility for the newspaper's continued failure to cover local news adequately rests higher up the Hearst food chain (another digression).

Just note the names in bold above, and ask the question every chance you get of any candidate: "Do you support or oppose the equal rights ordinance?"  Everybody running for office needs to be on the record.

Texas Leftist posts the map and the list of all the American cities that have similar ordinances on the books (dozens) and the instances where a transgendered woman assaulted someone in a bathroom (not once).  And TransGriot reminds us about the potential economic losses associated with repealing the ordinance, which reminds me that it's time to remind you to sign this petition.