The truth in pictures, from last Tuesday

ICYMI:

I feel certain that Republicans -- and some Democrats -- just won't ever understand.  Here's eight maps that explain where the mayor's race, HERO, and term limit changes were won and lost.

"I am a man who goes into women's bathrooms in Houston":

Your city, your state, your country...

Update: Where HERO went wrong

Democrats debate in South Carolina tonight

More to say about Hustle Town's election in just a minute, but I'd like to shift back to the presidential contenders for a bit.

Voters in South Carolina will have their first chance to see the three candidates vying for the Democratic nomination together here on Friday, when Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley appear at a forum at Winthrop University.

The event, hosted by the state party and billed as the "First in the South Presidential Candidates Forum," will be broadcast live on MSNBC and focus on both regional and national issues. One issue, however, has become a flashpoint in the race this week as the candidates campaigned across the country: gun control.

The issues of gun control and criminal justice reform have revealed differences between the candidates on the Democratic side of the race and, as it has grown more competitive, the candidates have sought to take advantage.

It's not really a debate but more of an actual forum, with Rachel Maddow asking the three contenders questions separately, interview-style.  But It sure beats talking about Egyptian pyramids as granaries, or stabbing a close relative, or quarrels over teevee appearances, or whether the temperature in the hall is low enough to prevent Marco Rubio's flopsweat.

Clinton started her week in Chicago on Monday, when her campaign arranged a meeting with family members of victims of gun violence, including Sybrina Fulton and Lesley McSpadden, the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.

"They are determined to do what they can to try to prevent this from happening to any other family, and so am I," Clinton said the next day at a town hall in Coralville, Iowa. Her newest campaign ad, which started running on television in Iowa and New Hampshire that day, echoed her commitment.

It might be Martin O'Malley's last moment, so he'd better make it count.

Separately on Tuesday in Keene, New Hampshire, O'Malley laid out his plan to take seven separate executive actions as president to curb gun violence, including measures to effectively dismantle the law which shields gun sellers and manufacturers from liability if their firearms are used unlawfully.

O'Malley, who is trailing in national polls, has urged Clinton and Sanders to back certain parts of his plan to cut gun deaths in half by 2025. Clinton has also said she would work to repeal the shield law but stops short of suggesting she would use executive action to do so. Sanders, who voted for the law in 2005, said recently that he is willing to reconsider his position. And as the primary contests approach, O'Malley has started to go beyond calling for "consensus" into more personal, direct attacks.

"Secretary Clinton's been all over the place on this issue," O'Malley told NH1 News in an interview on Tuesday. "In the past when she was running against President Obama she was trying to portray herself as Annie Oakley. And in the past she has said she wasn't for universal background checks."

Sounds like sparks will fly.

He took his rhetoric up another notch on Wednesday, when his campaign released an online video comparing Clinton's past position on guns to Jeb Bush's stance. The clip, modeled after a video released by the Clinton campaign hitting Republicans for their views on gun control, showed Clinton in a debate in 2008 saying "blanket rules" imposed by the federal government on guns "doesn't make sense."

It's an argument that O'Malley will continue to use in South Carolina and elsewhere as he fights to gain traction as a progressive alternative to Clinton. 

Clinton has -- as Clintons can do effectively -- triangulated on gun safety, moving to the left of Bernie Sanders on the topic while twisting out a few sexism tropes as she did so.

On Oct. 23, Hillary Clinton opened a new front against Sen. Bernie Sanders: She framed him as a sexist. Clinton took a phrase Sanders had routinely used in talking about gun violence—that “shouting” wouldn’t solve the problem—and suggested that he had aimed it at her because “when women talk, some people think we’re shouting.”

Several journalists called out Clinton for this smear. But she refuses to withdraw it. Instead, her campaign officials and supporters have escalated the attack.  [...]

The next day, Clinton sat down for an interview in New Hampshire. Josh McElveen of WMUR asked her about Sanders: “Do you believe that he’s attacking you based solely on your gender?” Clinton replied: “When I heard him say that people should stop shouting about guns, I didn’t think I was shouting. I thought I was making a very strong case. … And I’m not going to be silenced.” McElveen followed up: “But as far as the implication that Bernie Sanders is sexist—you wouldn’t go that far?” Clinton shrugged, smiled, and sidestepped the question. “I said what I had to say about it,” she concluded.

'Poor me, the boys are pickin' on me' is a whine we're going to hear a lot of for the next year.  Especially tonight.

Clinton used her initial sound bite—“when women talk, some people think we’re shouting”—in at least six places. She posted it on Twitter, Facebook, and her campaign website. She also delivered it in three speeches: in Washington, D.C., and Alexandria, Virginia, on Oct. 23, and in Des Moines, Iowa, on Oct. 24. After that, I didn’t hear it, except in her interview in New Hampshire. I thought she might be done with it. But then, on Friday, she raised a new issue.

Clinton was in Charleston, South Carolina, addressing the local NAACP. She spoke against a tragic background: the massacre of nine black people in a Charleston church by a white racist. Naturally, she talked about guns. But she added a new line: “There are some who say that this [gun violence] is an urban problem. Sometimes what they mean by that is: It’s a black problem. But it’s not. It’s not black, it’s not urban. It’s a deep, profound challenge to who we are.”

You might also look for the dogwhistling Clinton will be doing by using the word 'urban'.

The idea that urban is code for black has been around a long time. It’s often true. And it’s not necessarily derogatory: In 1920, the National League on Urban Conditions Among Negroes shortened its name to the National Urban League. But why would Clinton suddenly bring up, in a damning tone, people who call guns an urban problem? Who was she talking about? It can’t be the Republican presidential candidates: They haven’t disagreed enough to debate the issue at that level of granularity. The only recent forum in which guns have been discussed as an urban concern is the forum that inspired Clinton’s initial accusation of sexism: the Oct. 13 Democratic debate in Las Vegas. Pull up the transcript of that debate, search for “urban,” and you’ll see whom Clinton is talking about: Sanders.

In fact, it’s from the same moments of the debate that Clinton had already seized on. In the debate, Sanders began by saying, “As a senator from a rural state, what I can tell Secretary Clinton [is] that all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I would hope all of us want.” A couple of minutes later, Sanders told former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley: “We can raise our voices, but I come from a rural state, and the views on gun control in rural states are different than in urban states, whether we like it or not.” O’Malley insisted that the issue was “not about rural and urban.” Sanders replied: “It’s exactly about rural.” [...] So when Clinton, on Friday, spoke scathingly of people who call guns an “urban problem” but mean it’s a “black problem,” it’s obvious to whom she was referring.

This is pretty powerful stuff, because in the wake of our local elections where black and white Democrats split not just on their preferred candidates but also on Prop 1, we're about to see some more of that cleaving between our presidential candidates.

This line of attack is rich in irony. When Clinton ran for president in 2008, she explicitly used race against Obama. She told USA Today that she should be the Democratic nominee because “I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on.” Clinton cited an article that, in her words, showed “how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in [Indiana and Pennsylvania] who had not completed college were supporting me.” A reporter asked Clinton whether this argument was racially divisive. “These are the people you have to win if you’re a Democrat,” Clinton replied dismissively. “Everybody knows that.”

Now Clinton accuses others of playing the race card. In Charleston, she told the NAACP, “Some candidates talk in coded racial language about ‘free stuff,’ about ‘takers’ and ‘losers.’ And boy, are they quick to demonize President Obama. This kind of talk has no place in our politics.”

A digression back to last Tuesday here in H-Town:  Sylvester Turner said all the right things in his victory speech about diversity and inclusiveness.  I'll be proud to vote for him in December.  It's going to a lot tougher to hold my nose and vote for Sharon Moses and Georgia Provost in their At Large runoffs because of their under-the-radar opposition to HERO.  ConservaDems have been a personal scourge of mine for a long time now, and as long as they hold sway locally, statewide, and nationally, there will be very little I will feel like doing for the Democratic Party.  But like I wrote, that's a digression.

Clinton, too, speaks in code. But in this election, her coded phrases—“some people think we’re shouting,” “some who say that this is an urban problem”—aren’t designed to veil racism. They’re designed to veil her meritless insinuations that her Democratic opponent is sexist and racist. You can argue, based on power or privilege, that playing the race card or sex card from the left isn’t as bad as playing it from the right. But even if you believe that, Clinton’s smears bring discredit on the whole idea of bigotry. If accusations of misogyny and racism are casually thrown at Sanders, voters will conclude that these terms are just rhetoric.

Seven years ago, when Clinton’s own campaign was accused of prejudice, her husband was outraged. “She did not play the race card, but they did,” Bill Clinton said of the Obama campaign. The former president went on: “This is almost like, once you accuse somebody of racism or bigotry or something, the facts become irrelevant.” Three months later, Mr. Clinton was still fuming. “They played the race card on me, and we now know from memos from the campaign and everything that they planned to do it all along,” he protested. “This was used out of context and twisted for political purposes by the Obama campaign to try to breed resentment elsewhere. … You really got to go some to try to portray me as a racist.”

They're always running the next campaign like the last one.

Now Hillary Clinton is doing to Sanders what her husband said was done to her. She’s taking Sanders’ remarks out of context and twisting them to breed resentment. You’ve got to twist the facts pretty hard to portray Sanders as a racist or sexist. But politically, it’s easy, because once you start throwing around charges of bigotry, the facts become irrelevant. You’re just another beautiful baiter. And you won’t be silenced.

Let's finish with the topic for tonight: guns.

"There's strong support among Democrats here to try to come up with new initiatives that keep the guns away from criminals and come up with some sensible policies that can make our country safer," added former Gov. Jim Hodges, who has endorsed Clinton. He continued: "In a Republican primary, talking about gun issues is a third rail. That's not so true in the Democratic primary here."

More than 3,400 people will be in the audience at the Byrnes Auditorium with hundreds more expected to turn out for other party events scheduled around the main event.

"People are engaged," said Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic strategist and consultant based in Columbia. "Every time I go to the barber shop, there's always a discussion about national politics and talking about what's next."

Seawright, who worked on Clinton's first presidential campaign but is not involved with her second bid, added that bread and butter issues like jobs, infrastructure and education are also important to voters watching the forum, especially those from low-income, rural communities.

"When you come to South Carolina, it's important that voters feel as if you are going to talk about South Carolina issues," he said, "that you will remember the people in South Carolina."

Both Sanders and O'Malley have to make up some ground here in the Palmetto State, so in many ways it will be a turning point of sorts.  Either the Clinton steamroller picks up momentum, or one of her two challengers slows her roll.

Picking up the pieces

-- Read, please, the definitive account of why HERO went down in flames even as Sylvester Turner surged.  Look at the precinct maps if you're into that.  My own two Meyerland/Willowbend precincts had turnout in the mid-forties, and turned back the ordinance with low-50's percentages.

-- Business leaders are concerned about the future of Houston's tourism, an economic engine meant to sustain the region during the oil economy's latest collapse.

Business and tourism leaders worried Wednesday that voters' rejection of a citywide anti-discrimination ordinance has hurt what had been one of their best recruiting tools: Houston's emerging reputation as a diverse metropolis that supported an openly gay mayor and welcomes young talent looking to launch careers in a progressive environment.

Suddenly at risk, they say, are corporate relocations, nationally prominent sporting events and the lucrative convention business that generate millions of dollars and help the region thrive.

"In recent years, we have done a remarkable job of changing the perception and attracting people to Houston," said Bob Harvey, president and CEO of the Greater Houston Partnership. " ... We have to quickly re-establish that this is a modern, open city."

Statistics show that the economic arguments against rejecting HERO found traction among African Americans, and particularly black women.  When the rationale was employed, that is.   Indeed, at Houston's leading voice for transgenders, Transgriot all but pleaded for Houston Unites to canvass the black communities for support.  That did not happen until too late (if it happened at all), and the "not getting it" part is reflective of a societal concern that transcends GLBT and even politics generally: white privilege.  The HGLBT Caucus has far too many middle-aged white guys and gals wearing white collars running the show; they're more clique-ish and exclusive than anybody, and they did the things they wanted to do without much input from the locals on the ground, which resulted in reacting too late or dropping the ball altogether.  The paid professionals at ACLU and HRC helped them lose this.  Why does a guy from Minnesota need to be in charge?

Moni wasn't a big fan of the #BeyBeaHERO thing either.  Another big red flag -- waved in mid-August, mind you -- that was missed.

-- One thing that didn't surge was the Latino vote.  Again.  "The community turning out in historic numbers" is now as prevalent an urban legend as La Chupacabra, except that she's engaged to Bigfoot and they're shacked up somewhere between the "boarder" and the East Texas Piney Woods.

If they're already having babies growing up to be Republicans... I'm moving to Syracuse.

-- Speaking of hideous creatures... it's the Ghost of Lee Atwater.  Seriously, fuck this Jeff Norwood dude.   Dead, face-down in a ditch, on the side of the road. 

-- And finally, let's hope that the mayoral runoff really doesn't come down to "Linebarger Goggan versus Linebarger Goggan".

Where HERO was lost

And also, in more topographic terms, here.

As long as the supporters of Sylvester Turner are unable to acknowledge that many of the voters who put him in the runoff also voted 'No' on HERO, then we're going to have some cognitive dissonance about who Democrats are and what they stand for, who and what liberals are, and of course the meaning of 'progressive' and who qualifies by word and deed.  And who do not.  These are distinctions with great differences (as long as you're not a Republican, that is).

We've seen it already with self-described progressives (sic) declaring that Hillary Clinton is more liberal "than some think", and supporting her in the primary because of the 'Supreme Court', two facetious premises rolled into one.  We'll see it again when Bernie Sanders supporters finally realize he's been defeated for the nomination, and then helpfully allow themselves to be herded onto the Clinton bandwagon.  (Way back in the summer I offered a Plan B for them when this happens.  It's time to at least start considering that, Berners.)

These things (HERO's defeat, the false choice of Clinton or Sanders, how each of these uses its version of our cash-corrupted politics to get what they desire, losing several times before finally succeeding) are, as my brother Neil says frequently, all connected.

We just don't need two major parties in this country when most Americans have no use for either one.  Try as they might to distinguish themselves, they both still look alike to the vast majority of people who have quit voting, having all but given up on the "democracy" we thought we knew, loved, and that soldiers believed they died for.  It would be best if the Tea Party hurried up and cleaved itself away from the Tories, and the Whigs finished pushing out the Progressives (or Democratic Socialists, or what have you).  So that we could all better find our own way.

Hope I live to see it, but don't believe I will.

Turner and King move on, HERO falls, some incumbents in trouble

Winners:

-- Sylvester Turner and Bill King.

Hats off to Bob Stein, who called it early and kept whipping it until it hit the wire.  Adrian Garcia coming in third has to be something of a moral victory, but a shallow and short one.  He's mostly a loser this morning: unemployed by choice, with a horrible mess left at his last gig that a nasty Republican isn't interested in cleaning up, and a soiled reputation as a lousy manager and lousier politician.  I wouldn't want to be him or any of his supporters, who are feeling more sour than anybody after last night.

What the mayor's race is telling you:  Ben Hall's black support -- and some of Sylvester Turner's as well -- put the blade through HERO's heart.  It won't mean much for the runoff unless Sylvester makes an issue of it.  He didn't say much about it in the general and I doubt he says much in December.  If he does, he'll leak support to King, who will certainly be saying all of the worst things Republicans usually say in order to win elections.

-- Among At Larges and incumbents: Kubosh, Stardig, and Greg Travis join Dave Martin (all Republicans) as a solid red wall on Council next year.  Mike Knox and Bill Frazer in the controller's office look to join them; they both lead their races going into the runoff.  Among the Blues: Jerry Davis, Ellen Cohen, Robert Gallegos, David Robinson, and Amanda Edwards showed the most strength.  But incumbents Mike Laster, and Richard Nguyen even more so, need help to return to the horseshoe.

The To-Be-Determined-in-Decembers:

-- Richard Nguyen versus Dr. Steve Le in District F:  After defeating the Republican incumbent two years ago, Nguyen switched parties and became a Democrat in 2014.  That appears to have drawn the ire of the conservative Vietnamese in this far-west district, who have Le in the lead after the first round.

-- Karla Cisneros versus Jason Cisneroz in District H:  My choice was "Z"; Campos and the Chronicle picked "S".  You may remember a comment here pointing out Karla is a stealth Latina.  Runoffs are all about turning out your vote, so let's see how it goes.

-- Mike Laster versus Jim Bigham in District J:  In this bathroom election cycle, Laster was bound to draw some haters and get forced into a runoff.  He could have done worse with the odious Manny Barrera but he gets Bigham instead.  Bigham's got a good ground game so Laster will be pushed hard.  He'll need all the help he can get from HGLBT Caucus and other progressives to return to council.

Mike Knox versus Georgia Provost in At Large 1:  As I wrote in my early advance for this race, Provost had a chance to prevail based on her business connections and her previous run for council.  Heavy black turnout lifted her into the runoff, and I'll be curious to determine where she stood on HERO and whether that factored into her support.  Knox, the archtype Republican Hater Caucus member, is going to benefit from King and Frazer up the ballot turning out R's to help his bid.  The question in my mind is where do the old white Democrats go for this faceoff: to Provost or back on the couch.  The city's alleged base voters need a reason to vote in this one.

Update: Provost was under my radar as a HERO hater.

If Provost can earn the endorsements of the also-rans -- Tom McCasland, Lane Lewis, Jenifer Rene Pool, Chris Oliver -- and if she has the ground game, then she can take this seat from its soft Republican termed-out council member, Steve Costello.

Update: I question whether Lewis and Pool, at the very least, will be endorsing Provost.

David Robinson versus Pastor Willie Davis in At Large 2.  Once more, if the Black Bigot Caucus wants to turn out next month and flip a seat from blue to red, they're going to have give it all they've got.  Robinson should have all the resources he needs to hold his seat.

Amanda Edwards versus Roy Morales in At Large 4.  This ought to be a cakewalk for Edwards; it's the so-called 'black at large seat" on council; she was far and away the best choice in the first round, and the woman who could have been her nemesis in a runoff, Laurie Robinson, just missed.  So she draws Morales, who's lost more runoffs than I feel like counting right now.

Jack Christie versus Sharon Moses in At Large 5.  Christie has perennially been the weakest At Large incumbent during his duration on council, and his luck may finally run out with the qualified Moses taking him on in round two.

Update: As with Provost, Moses ran a stealth campaign, whispering that she was against the ordinance to her base vote.  They'll probably turn back out in a month to support Turner, Provost, and Edwards.  At least she should hope.

Bill Frazer versus Chris Brown for Controller.  In many ways this will be the race to watch next month, as the two powers draw all of their supporters and assets for a final holiday showdown.  Frazer was a strong challenger to a wounded incumbent two years ago and Brown is a legacy.  Both men will raise and spend a lot to try to win.  It's going to come down, as usual, to whether Democrats will show up and support their candidates.

Losers:

HERO of course; Mayor Parker, who leaves a legacy unfinished; my candidate Chris Bell and the moderate Republican Steve Costello, a host of good Democrats in AL1 and a handful of lousy ones (and some perennials and Republicans, too) scattered elsewhere, like Adrian Garcia and Ben Hall, Griff Griffin in AL1, Manny Barrera in J, Eric Dick and Andrew Burks in AL2, and the foul-smelling Carroll Robinson in the controller's race, who got way too many votes from rubes and dupes.

More after I rest some.

Houston and Harris County election returns *updates*

This template from two years ago worked pretty well for me, so here we go again, with updates through the evening.

The first returns posted are for early votes cast prior to Election Day and flashed to the harrisvotes.com website after 7 p.m.  The first Election Day tallies will be posted after that, and the closest races below will be updated, with the previous numbers appearing as a strike-through.

State propositions 1-7 (from the TXSOS website):

1.  80% For, 20 Against
2. 89-11
3. 64-36
4. 70-30
5. 81.5-18.5
6. 76-24
7. 81-19

Harris County propositions:

1.  73% For, 27 Against
2.  63-37
3.  61-39
4.  74-26

-- City of Houston propositions:

1. (HERO) 38% 39% For, 62% 61% Against
2. (Term limits) 63% 65% For, 37% 35% Against

A smashing victory for hate and bigotry in this city.

-- Houston Mayor (major candidates, alphabetical order):

Chris Bell 6.16%  7.41%
Steve Costello 6.5%  6.72%
Adrian Garcia 13.14%  17.14%
Ben Hall 10.47%  9.5%
Bill King 26.3%  25.27
Sylvester Turner 34.88%  31.32%
All others: 2.65%
Undervote: 2.19%  2.88%

Marty McVey, at 0.54 % of the EV, was outperformed by the Vietnamese candidate, Nguyen Thai Hoc, who doubled him up with 1.04%.  At 8:40 p.m. Chris Bell conceded, followed by Steve Costello.  Adrian Garcia is rumored to be doing the same at 9 p.m.  Late update: Note that the 2.88% undervote exceeded the total of all votes for the seven also-rans (2.65%), including McVey.

Final: It's Turner and King next month, as the poli-sci profs guessed.

-- Houston City Council District A (contested races only listed):

Iesheia Ayers-Wilson
Brenda Stardig (i) 85.52%  84.3% (with a 18.8% undervote)


-- District B:

Jerry Davis (i) 69%  53.3% with the same percentage of undervotes as A)
Vince Duncan
Isaac Mayhorn
Kenneth "KP" Perkins
Ben White Jr

-- District C:

Ellen Cohen (i) 66%  67.93%. Undervote in this district tops 1 out of 5 voters, at 21.3%.
Carl Jarvis
Michael McDonald

-- District F:

Kendall L. Baker 24.86%
Steve Le 36.56%  40.38%
Richard Nguyen (i) 38.57% 34.09%

The tightest contest of the night pits the Republican-turned Democratic incumbent against his fellow Vietnamese challenger.  And it turns ominous for Nguyen, as he finishes the first round trailing Le.  Fewer undervotes here, under 16%.

-- District G:

Sandie Mullins Moger 49.01%  48%  49%
Greg Travis 50.99%  52%  51%


It's a dead heat in this Republican district for the right to replace Oliver Pennington.  As late returns (after 9 p.m.) come in, Travis begins to ease away.  The largest number of undervotes recorded in a district race was here: 22.49%.

-- District H:

Roland M Chavez 22.68% 22.29%  21.85%
Karla Cisneros 33.77% 35.29%  34.99%
Jason Cisneroz 23.46% 22.47%  24.3%
Abel Davila 19.92% 19.98%  19.86%

In this Latino district, Chavez and Cisneroz are neck and neck for the runoff against Cisneros in December.  And Cisneroz prevails, and will face Cisneros in December.  Just over 20% undervoted this race.

-- District I:

Robert Gallegos (i) 59%  57.29%
Herlinda Garcia

One of Council's best members stiff-arms his anti-Hero opponent. About 16.33% of the district's voters did not cast a ballot.

-- District J:

Manny Barrera 21.04% 20.70%  20.78%
Jim Bigham 18.51% 20.08%  21.17%
Mike Laster (i) 45.64% 43.99%  43.62%
Dung Le 14.8% 15.24%  14.42%

The anti-HERO candidate Barrera -- or Bigham -- looks to push the incumbent Laster into a runoff. And the late returns push Bigham into second, with the runoff between he and Laster coming in December.  Here the undervote was just above 17%.

-- Houston City Council At Large 1:

M. "Griff" Griffin 11.68%
Mike Knox 26.97%  24.75%
Lane Lewis 11.6%
Tom McCasland 11.89%
Chris Oliver 11.34%
James Partsch-Galván 3.2%
Jenifer Rene Pool 7.55%
Georgia Provost 15.78%  14.81%

Provost leads for second place and the runoff, with Republican Knox at the front and four more -- Griff, McCasland, Lewis, and Oliver all chasing her 4,000 vote lead.  Late update: And that's how it finishes, with Knox and Provost in the runoff.  28.56% of the 268,000 Houston municipal elections voters picked 'none of the above'.  That was good for first place.

-- At Large 2:

Andrew C. Burks Jr 14.87%
Willie R. Davis 23.97%  22.5%
Eric Dick 20.23%
Moe Rivera 8.69%
David W. Robinson (i) 32.24%  32.6%

In the clearest sign on the ballot that African American HERO haters turned out their vote, the incumbent will be a runoff with their chosen candidate Davis, eliminating attorney Dick (who finished second in the mayor's race two years ago to Annise Parker) and the former incumbent of AL2, Burks, finishing fourth.  There was a 31% undervote in this contest.

-- At Large 3:

Michael Kubosh (i) 64.42%  60.22%
John Christian Bullitt LaRue 6.51%  8.01%
Joseph McElligott 5.06%  6.31%
Doug Peterson 24%  25.46%

The fat man skates.  A nice showing for the Green, McElligott, who lost his own party's endorsement, and a poor showing for the progressive Democrat Peterson.  Another indication that black voters chose an anti-HERO Republican over two lefties and a center-righty (Bullitt LaRue).  One third -- 33.09% -- of the city's voters skipped this race, the most of any.

-- At Large 4:

Larry Blackmon 5.43%
Amanda Edwards 36.57%  34.93%
Jonathan Hansen 2.98%
Roy Morales 14.03%  16.9%
Matt Murphy 9.38%
Laurie Robinson 16.64%  16.42%
Evelyn Husband Thompson 14.97%  13.44%

The perennial Morales and the NASA widow Husband Thompson trail Robinson for the right to face Edwards in the runoff.  Late update: And Morales comes from behind to overtake Robinson and qualify for December against Edwards.  A total of 28.35% of all votes picked no one here.

-- At Large 5:

J. Brad Batteau 10.12%
Jack Christie (i) 48.66%
Sharon Moses 22.46%
Philippe Nassif 18.76%

The incumbent hopes for late returns to avoid a runoff with attorney Moses.  Late update: But they don't.  Here is Houston's best chance to knock out a Republican incumbent next month.  Once more, nearly one of three voters, or 32.34%, pick 'none of these'.

-- Houston City Controller:

Jew Don Boney 11.05%
Chris Brown 23.06%  24.92%
Bill Frazer 34.13%  31.35%
Dwight Jefferson 3.38%
MJ Khan 14.16%
Carroll G Robinson 14.22%

The easiest race to predict on the night.  22.89% cast no vote at all for the city's top accounting post.

Last thoughts before Election Day (maybe)

-- Kuff's Sunday morning post about voter turnout for Houston's elections is definitive, the best last word before Tuesday night.  He blew up the newspaper guy's numbers, paid homage to the paid politicos for their turnout prediction, and gave us HEROes a little glimmer of hope.  Surely not all Republican voters are hateful bigots, after all.

My takeaway?  Thirty-five thousand people voted last Friday, or about 18% of the 194K total.  That's kind of ridiculous.  That may be as many people as vote on Election Day proper.  I'm conflicted about hoping it's greater or smaller turnout tomorrow, because the conventional wisdom -- that high turnout aids the liberal side --  is flipped on its head this cycle.  The evidence suggests that the cons may have more to celebrate tomorrow night.  Old and white and Democratic has been the typical muni voter; how much will that meme change after we see what happens Tuesday night?

If that Republican vote already in the can is not monolithically anti-; that they, possibly more than some Democrats, see the threat to the city's business interests beyond lost major sporting events and conventions with a defeat of HERO, then we don't have to feel gloomy about the outcome.  Even kingmaker douchebags like Gary Polland and Terry Lowry seem to get that.

The most interesting thing to me is that while Big Jolly has harped on bathroom fears -- he knows better; he's just a cheerleader for the team -- he and others have attacked their own party chair, Paul Simpson, for saying Ben Hall was for HERO before he was against it.  The current chairman of the Harris County Republican Party is being shat upon for a sidebar argument, while the guy he defeated, Jared Woodfill, is out in front of the Hate Parade.  (Rumor has it he wants to be state party chair, and a win on Tuesday greases those skids.)

If there is some significant percentage of the swollen turnout in the conservative boondocks voting for Steve Costello and 'yes' on HERO, and some similar minority vote (no pun) among the high black turnout casting ballots for Ben Hall and 'no', maybe the poli-sci professors have oversold Bill King's prospects.  (Remember that the last poll conducted two weeks ago essentially found a four-way tie for second place.)  But if Sylvester Turner's voters are voting no on HERO, then we can surmise the ordinance has already lost.

The historical election data that supports the premise that Democrats are also homophobes comes from 2005, when just under 18% of the state's voters approved the Texas equivalent of DOMA with 76.25% of the vote.  In Harris County it was 72.5%.  That was more than just a solid Republican bloc codifying marriage discrimination into the state's constitution.  Tolerance has come a long way in the decade since -- mostly thanks to the SCOTUS ruling last summer -- but still has a long way to go here in Deep-In-The-Hearta.  We're about to find out exactly how far.

So in the post-election analysis I will be looking for evidence that a high percentage of Houston black Democrats voted 'no' on Prop 1.  (I would define 'high percentage' as a number at or above 33% of the total.)  You may recall that HBAD made no endorsement of either of the city's ballot propositions but did endorse the anti-HERO Republican incumbent in At Large 3 over three progressive candidates.  IMHO, and certainly absent a big turnout on Election Day in District C and Meyerland and other inside-the-loop, Caucasian-heavy Democratic precincts, that -- how the African American votes went for and against -- is where the ordinance's fate will turn.  Turner came in second to Chris Bell on my ballot for a very small number of reasons, the main one being the state representative's relatively late conversion to marriage equality.  If Turner's electorate puts him in the runoff but also helps knock down the ordinance... is he accountable for that?  What will the HGLBT Caucus say publicly if that should happen?  That the mayoral candidate they endorsed brought voters to the polls that killed HERO?

Update: At this blog's Facebook page, Noah Horwitz has called my attention to this FB post by Kris Banks w/r/t the Turner campaign's talking points on HERO.  So good on them for that.

One more thing, from the Chron link in the first graf:

Former Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia also spent $20,000 to advertise in the Texas Conservative Review and City Councilman Steve Costello paid $30,000.

Still think Adrian Garcia is a good Democrat?

-- Worth relinking: these two posts on tomorrow's Texas scorecard, from this morning's Weekly Wrangle... "If Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick, and Joe Straus are for it, the rest of us should vote against it".   And why is one HISD trustee candidate attacking another in a way-down-the-ballot race for a job which pays nothing?

And yet another newspaper's opinion on turning down all state props except for 2.

-- There are, of course, other elections going on around the country, and the governorships in Kentucky and Louisiana are the most interesting.  If you haven't been following the Amazing Bayou Tale of Diaper David Vitter's Collapse, it's a novella all its own.  And holding the Bluegrass State's governor's seat is also in the Democrats' reach.  The Daily Kos Elections Digest is a great place to get primed and then to watch the returns come in without turning on your teevee.

Get Your Vote On Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance hopes everyone takes advantage of their opportunity to make their voices heard at the ballot box as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff noted that one way to improve turnout in municipal elections is to hold them in even-numbered years.

Libby Shaw at Texas Kaos, and contributing to Daily Kos, calls out Republican lawmakers for their cowardice in failing to pass a viable budget that will actually pay for things, in TX Prop 7: GOP asks voters to rob Peter to pay Paul.

SocraticGadfly notes that unless the Clinton Foundation completes a massive accounting cleanup in just two more weeks, Hillary (and the other Clintons) could face a problem far worse than her email server or Trey Gowdy, and that would be the IRS.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants the world to see the 27 immigrant women standing up for themselves at Hutto immigration center.

A few late-breaking developments in Houston's forthcoming elections were posted by PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.  And Egberto Willies smells something funny in the attack mailers in a contested HISD race between Dr. Ann McCoy and Jolanda Jones.

Texas Leftist blogged about Sally Field's endorsement of the Houston ERO.

jobsanger quoted a recent Rasmussen poll as indicating that 62% of Americans want government regulation of campaign contributions.

McBlogger linked to the NYT story about the ominous greening of Greenland.  And TxSharon at Bluedaze reminds you to smarten up before the arrival of the Grim Fracking Reaper (not limited to All Hallows Eve).

Neil at All People Have Value took a picture of recent high water in Houston. Everyday life is interesting. All People Have Value is part of NeilAquino.com.

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

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

The Texas Observer has a moving and emotional photo essay entitled "The Things They Left Behind", which documents the possessions found with immigrants who died while making their journeys.

Trail Blazers reports that there were two Texas holdouts who did not vote for Paul Ryan to be Speaker of the House.

Somervell County Salon wonders why Hillary Clinton is so quick to play the 'sexist' card.

The TSTA Blog ponders the end of the standardized testing regime.

RG Ratcliffe names and excoriates the main climate villain at Exxon.

Carol Morgan notes the transformation of Texas into a Christian theocracy.

Paradise in Hell grades the last week's GOP debate.

Better Texas Blog highlights the second year of modest rate increases for the Texas health insurance marketplace.

Grits for Breakfast asks if Daylight Savings Time all the time would reduce crime.

And Fascist Dyke Motors has the West Gray Multi-Service Center blues.

Sunday Ghoulish Funnies

VICE: "How Houston is Being Duped by Bigots and Zealots"

Nails it right to a cross.

The first half of the article resets the history, the middle portion reveals -- as if we did not know this already, too -- what and who we are dealing with.  And Annise Parker's cogent analysis identifies the root of the problem: ignorance and fear.

"Most Houstonians, like most Americans, have gay and lesbian friends, family, and coworkers. Yet most people don't personally know a transgender person—at least that they know of," Mayor Parker told VICE via email in an attempt to explain the oppositions' effectiveness. "That lack of familiarity means that it can be easy for people to have questions, or concerns, or made to be afraid. People often respond that way to something they haven't experienced before. The fact that they are facing this attack affirms the need for this ordinance."

If you somehow missed it, there's been a national campaign to teach HERO's tolerance that went viral on social media the past month.

Chris Valdez is the co-founder of Primer Grey, a Houston-based design and marketing company that has joined the fight in support of HERO. Along with photographer Lauren Marek, Valdez is tapping social media with a powerful, image-heavy project called we are HERO. The project's goal is to shine a light on a diverse array of Houstonians who would be protected under HERO. They've seen much success since the website's October 1 launch. "Facebook has spread this project further than we could have ever imagined," Valdez says from his Houston office.

"... The main reason was that we had a stance as a company on this, and we knew that as communicators—and often times visual communicators—we had the tools in our toolbox to correct the story. We wanted to talk about the 15 different categories of people that are protected by HERO and what was at stake for them," he says. "We wanted to put faces to those stories and have them look people in the eye and tell them who and what was in jeopardy. It's a lot harder to tell people to their face that you're not interested in protecting them from discrimination. More specifically, we wanted to point out that the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance is a civil rights conversation; not about one group."

That last point is an important one, and something the mayor recognizes as well: "I don't believe the public is aware that half of the complaints filed during the time HERO was in effect were for racial discrimination," she told us.

[...]

"We'll win this," says Valdez. "It's a shame that we're putting equal rights on the ballot, but I know that Houston will come out on the right side of this, because that's the kind of city this is.

Support Houston Unites in any way that you can so that becomes a reality.  If all you can do is make a few phone calls to those who have not voted yet this weekend, while the rains keep us indoors, then that's enough.

(I would rather have fought on the "H-Town: Good for Bidness" turf, but we'll get to fight this battle again if the forces of hate win out.  It WON'T be over after next Tuesday, no matter the outcome.)

Local chattering class predicts HERO goes down

Not 'too close to call' as in the headline.

Turnout is up sharply from previous Houston municipal elections, with the largest increases occurring in predominantly Republican and African-American precincts, where a majority of voters are likely to oppose HERO, according to Bob Stein, a political scientist at Rice University. 

“I’ve actually looked at the scenario, and think [HERO] could go down, and go down by a big margin,” Stein said. “That’s the worst part. If it goes down closely, the council members and the mayor might try to amend it, but if it goes down by a big margin, it really becomes difficult to do much with.”

I've thrown rocks at Stein's polling conclusions and then been wrong before, and it's accurate that he called the Bill King surge -- though I still think he has oversold it.  Campos gets King's email and he's been bragging about "he and Turner pulling away" of late.  I'm hoping Stein's misreading the entrails, because even the city's worst political pundit is less committed to a HERO fail.

Mark Jones, another Rice political scientist, agreed that early voting returns, along with public opinion polls showing only a slim margin in favor of the ordinance, should be cause for concern for HERO supporters. 

“If I had to do an even-money bet, I’d say it may not pass, but I think it really is too close to call,” Jones said.

Not Dr. Richard Murray at U of H is less than sanguine also.

Brandon Rottinghaus, a University of Houston political scientist, said the rare ballot presence of a viable Republican mayoral candidate, Bill King, is driving up GOP turnout. Meanwhile, well-known Democratic state Representative Sylvester Turner, the mayoral frontrunner, is fueling an increase among African-American voters, who polls show as less likely to support HERO than whites, or Hispanic or Latino voters. 

“There are significant splits in communities that are otherwise inclined to vote more with Democrats or vote more liberally on HERO that create problems for its passage,” Rottinghaus said. “We’ve had kind of a perfect storm of alignment between conservative politics and conservative voters in a way we don’t normally see in Houston mayoral elections.” 

And finally some turnout analysis that makes sense. 

Through Wednesday, 133,594 Houston voters had cast early or mail-in ballots. With two days left in early voting, that figure was already nearly double the number who cast early or mail-in ballots in 2009, the last time the mayor’s seat was open.

HERO supporters suggest the increase in turnout is part of a historic trend toward more voters casting ballots early as opposed to on Election Day.

But Stein countered that much of the increase has been among “unexpected voters,” which he defines as those who haven’t cast ballots in at least two of the last three mayoral races. A significant number of those unexpected voters are from heavily GOP and black precincts.  

Stein said he now expects overall turnout to be as high as 230,000 of the city’s nearly 1 million voters, up from fewer than 180,000 in 2009. 

Charles thinks Stein's number is too high, at least from what I can tell.  But Stein definitely gets this next premise correct.

Stein said Houston Unites should have done more to highlight the potential negative economic consequences of repealing HERO, an argument the KHOU/KUHF also found to be persuasive, rather than trying to humanize transgender people or characterize the ordinance as “the right thing to do.”

I did my part in this regard.  So did Doug Miller at KHOU.  The LBGT folks focused on a Beyonce' hashtag, and that got them nothing.  Campos is already blaming Houston Unites for not buying teevee on Spanish-language stations.  (This FG always has a ready-made excuse for losing, and it's always because somebody didn't kiss enough Latino ass.  It's sickening how he so consistently plays the La Raza card.)

There's more gloom and doom at the link, but note this at the very end from Rottinghaus.

“How much can the Democrats push Texas to be more liberal?” he said, pointing to an anti-HERO TV ad from GOP Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick. “The fact that he’s put his own money behind this shows there’s a growing concern amongst Republicans that as the demographics in Texas change, that some of the politics will change, and the Republicans need to find ways to counteract this progressive movement before it starts.” 

My humble O is that the liberal and progressive non-voters of Houston, Harris County, and the entire state of Texas simply aren't interested enough in the future of this city, county, and state to make the effort to move away from the conservative ways bidness has always been done.  And in my personal precinct mobilizing experience, they do not try hard enough to overcome the obstacles to voting that the TXGOP throws in their way.  Because of outfits like True the Vote, and all the way to the harshest photo ID law in country, too many potential liberal voters have just quit.

(If I'm wrong, please prove me so on Election Day next Tuesday.  It's your last chance.)

Nobody outside Texas is going to help us fix this fucking mess until it looks like we're trying to help ourselves.  Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro supporters need to keep this in mind for next year. 

Update: More scary stories from Texas Monthly.  At least the Texas Progressive Alliance's nonsequiteuse got quoted (though she is not upbeat either).

Update II: Charles throws a little shade on the professors too.

Updates to yesterday's "Last minute Houston elections developments"

Too many to add there so we start fresh.

-- Sometimes I have a little trouble understanding what these two guys are trying to say with respect to voter turnout, and wish for an executive summary.  The dude at the newspaper isn't much more helpful in telling us -- or maybe just me -- What It All Means.

So what I'm divining from all this number-crunching is that voter turnout is goosed up a little all over town, and particularly in Republican strongholds that ring the city.  If Election Day turnout is good -- most of the cautions about turnout note behavior modification, i.e. former ED voters now casting ballots early -- especially in Democratic neighborhoods like Meyerland  (see Kuff about this in the link above), then things might look better for the blue team.  But we can't really know until Stan Stanart flashes some Election Day numbers to HarrisVotes.com, and that might not happen until 9 p.m. (as is his typical).  The five-day weather forecast predicts a rainout for Halloween activities but a gorgeous day on Tuesday.

So in the meantime, work those phones to GOTV, you pizza-eating millennials.

-- The ReBuild Houston referendum was invalidated by a state judge yesterday.

Visiting Judge Buddie Hahn ordered the city to hold a new election on the drainage fee, though that is unlikely to happen any time soon if the city appeals the decision. Hahn sided with a ruling issued by the Texas Supreme Court in June that said the city had obscured the ballot language surrounding the drainage fee, a major funding source for ReBuild Houston.

By omitting the drainage fee, the Supreme Court said, the city failed to adequately inform voters about the intent of the ballot measure.

In a brief court hearing Thursday, Hahn said he had little discretion because the "Supreme Court has just about said as a matter of law" that the election should be voided.

"Has just about said".  That sho' nuff is a Texas judge talkin'.  This is a late hit on the prospects for Steve Costello, the godfather of drainage in H-Town, but the Republican who is most unlikely to be in the runoff for mayor.

And yes, fodder for debates between the two of the four below that are.

-- Watch Isiah Carey's 30-minute forum taped last night with Chris Bell, Adrian Garcia, Bill King, and Sylvester Turner at this link.  And for a couple of good laughs, turn on the subtitles for "lost in translation" errors.

-- HERO added endorsements from Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton yesterday alongside the one from Sally Field.  The Houston Unites supporters are worried about being outspent by the haters on teevee, so throw a few bucks their way.