musings

The Houston Chronicle Endorses Annise Parker in the Runoff

2009-11-21T07:49:00.000-06:00

No dual endorsement this time! There is no link online yet, but I have a hard copy that I've turned into jpegs. Click on the images to make them larger:

The KHOU Mayoral Poll in Full

2009-11-20T10:58:00.001-06:00

Just a couple of comments. I don't think I'm wrong about the validity of the "likely voter" modeling - basically, I'm not enthused. Other negatives: I don't think they got enough Democrats in the poll. Check out the answers about who these respondents voted for in Round 1. Doesn't seem to model Election Night results, mostly because they couldn't get everyone to respond. Positives: Looks like they got the age range, gender and race/ethnic groups right.

Of interest is that they polled other races - Controller and the At-Larges.

Sorry for the formatting - these are jpegs, so click on them to get larger, more readable versions.

Locke Admits He Asked For Hotze's Endorsement

2009-11-20T07:00:00.007-06:00

Miya Shay has the news:

He (Locke) said he asked Hotze before the November elections for his support, Hotze endorsed someone else, and they haven’t had contact since.

Uh. Oh. This admission came on the day Harris County Democratic Party Chair Gerry Birnberg issued the following:

CANDIDATES – ALL CANDIDATES – STAY CLEAR OF HOTZE

Steven Hotze is a hatemonger.

For nearly twenty five years he has stoked the flames of bigotry in this community like no other local politico. In the mid-1980’s he masterminded the repeal of the City of Houston non-discrimination ordinance which had been enacted by Mayor Kathy Whitmire and the Houston City Council. The following year, he fielded a group of right wing zealots to run for City Council on the “Straight Slate.” Their platform consisted of unadulterated gay-baiting epitomized by the reply of their mayoral candidate to a question of what could be done about the AIDS epidemic: “Shoot the queers.” Hotze would not repudiate that response, nor the mayoral candidate who uttered it. Fortunately, they all lost.

Hotze continues vehemently to espouse his brand of extreme intolerance. For example, he regularly insists that the death penalty is fitting for homosexual conduct. And in 2008, he insisted, without one iota of evidence, that gays and lesbians were devoted to “recruiting sexually confused adolescents into their lifestyle.”

Hotze’s bigotry and extremism are not confined to homophobia. His anti-women beliefs are evidenced by his strident insistence that “a wife may work outside the home only with her husband’s consent.” And in 2008, he was reportedly behind the financing of a blatantly racist piece of campaign literature which depicted Barack Obama, Harold Dutton, Congressmember Sheila Jackson-Lee, and the Anglo Democratic candidate state legislature in House District 144, and an ominous line of black crows on a dead tree, with the caption “birds of a feather flock together.” Maybe he wasn’t the person who arranged financing for that shameful piece as has been suggested, but the political consultant with whom he has worked for years was the author of the flyer.

And Hotze is virulently anti-Obama and ardently anti-Democrats. He intently opposes health care reform. And on November 12, 2009, he sent an e-mail across Texas in which he disclosed his commitment to defeating Democratic state legislative candidates in the 2010 elections, asking, “Will we continue down the road of socialism, universal health care, and the leadership of Obama / Pelosi / Reid? Or will conservatives finally stand united and declare ‘Enough!’ in the face of economic and moral starvation?”

Anyone who is as dedicated to destroying the Democratic Party and crushing its candidates and unyieldingly opposed to the anti-discrimination principles of the Democratic Party as is Steven Hotze cannot be embraced by Democrats.

It has been reported that before the November election, more than one Democrat still running for city office in the December 12 runoff sought the support of Hotze or one of the gay-baiting groups with which he is associated. The Houston Chronicle has recently called on all candidates to repudiate the hateful and divisive rhetoric of these folks. (Do The Right Thing – It’s time to disavow the politics of discrimination and bgotry. Click here to read.)

I do, too.

Hotze did not endorse the Democratic mayoral candidate who sought his endorsement before November. Instead, he threw his support to the Republican in the race, Roy Morales. And the Democratic mayoral candidate who solicited Hotze’s help before November has publicly condemned the “divisive rhetoric” and “style of campaigning” Hotze has always embraced. Good for him.

But all candidates – judicial, city council, and mayor – take heed: whether in the December 12 runoff election, the March, 2010 primary election, or the November, 2010 general election, accepting support from anyone who, like Steven Hotze and the right wing extremist groups with whom he is associated, spews homophobic rhetoric, racial hatred, and intolerance, who would subjugate women to the dictates of their husbands, and who is working tirelessly to destroy the Obama administration, block heath care reform, and defeat Democratic legislative candidates would be anathema to Democrats and contrary to the cherished ideals for which we stand.

Courting endorsement from such despicable individuals or groups – or failing unequivocally to repudiate and reject it should such support be unsolicitedly bestowed – would be reprehensible, condemnable, and utterly unacceptable to Democrats.

My Dad used to say, “You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.” He was right.

Gerry Birnberg

Chair, Harris County Democratic Party

November 17, 2009

(Bolded emphasis mine.)

You know it's bad when Birnberg has to step in and point a finger at one of the mayoral candidates and send him to sit in the corner to write 100 times, "If black voters find out I asked that racist, Obama-hater Hotze for his endorsement, I might be in deep doo-doo."

Since Locke might be confused which political consultant Birnberg is referring to who created the racist mailer with the Anglo Democrat in HD 144 and the black elected officials with "birds of a feather flock together" and pictures of scary black crows (picture here), that would be Alan Blakemore whom Locke's campaign manager met with yesterday, to try and get Roy Morales' endorsement.

So, Locke throws black voters under the bus by courting the racist Blakemore just like he threw gays under the bus when he asked for Hotze's endorsement. Who's next under the bus?

KHOU Mayor's Race Poll: Still Searching For City Voters

2009-11-20T06:30:00.014-06:00

Wheeee! KHOU recently called 500 registered voters who said, "What the heck, yes, I'll vote for mayor. I think I will, anyway. There's an election? Is Obama running against that rogue lady in the shorts?" They were asked who they would vote for in the December 12th mayoral runoff, and their responses were:

Peter Brown 24%
Annise Parker 16%
Gene Locke 14%
Roy Morales 5%

When told Brown wasn't running this go round, and neither was that measly 5-percenter Morales, 71% of the dejected, not-so-likely voters, voted for statistical tie. 29% admitted they had no idea what KHOU was asking about.

Unaffiliated political consultants Bob Stein, Keir Murray and Alan Blakemore offered this analysis:

Voters are clearly confused, as are we. We don't know why the numbers look as out of whack as that Oct. 27th KHOU poll that bloggers were so whiny about. Voters deserve to know why Annise Parker has the most predictive polling. It's unfortunate that it's impossible to find out who has ever voted in a city election before - or, dream on, a city runoff - because if we could, this poll could have actually meant something. As it is, voters are left wondering, "who will release a biker ad, so I know who to vote for?"

The crosstabs show Locke admitting he met with Hotze and Morales asking for their endorsement, and incurring the wrath of Gerry Birnberg and and all good Democrats.

(Wondering what I'm talking about and want to see a more serious look at the poll? Check out Kuff. Not that he takes the poll seriously, but he does do a real analysis of it.)

Locke and Parker Polls Both Show Parker Ahead

2009-11-17T18:52:00.000-06:00

Annise Parker released the results of an internal poll today showing her ahead of Gene Locke 47-34 among likely runoff voters, with a high turnout scenario for African Americans. You can read the poll memo here. From that memo:

Methodology: Lake Research Partners designed and administered this survey, which was conducted by phone using professional interviewers. The survey was conducted among 600 registered voters in Houston with previous vote participation in municipal runoff elections and who are likely to vote this December. The survey was conducted November 11-15, 2009. The margin of error for the full sample is +/-3.5 percentage points.

Gene Locke released an internal poll to Bill King who sent out his own interpretations of it by email. Kuff blogged it here. Note that the Locke campaign did not release the results of the poll by press release, email or on his website. It also showed Parker in the lead, 43-39. All we know about the poll's methodology is from King's commentary - 4% MOE and a turnout scenario of 170,000 voters.

I woud take King's musings with a big giant salt pill. King made a lot of loud noises that he was going to run for mayor, and the rumor mill got cranked up very high that Locke kept him out by promising him a Metro board seat. That gets closer to being confirmed in this blog post by Miya Shay:

Similarly, almost-candidate Bill King is widely rumored to be eyeing the job as head of the Board at METRO. King has never denied the rumor the few times I've asked him about it.

Remember, Gene Locke was the general counsel for Metro, and while Parker has been vociferous about cleaning house at Metro, Locke has been tepid about changes. Greg has blogged extensively about King's opinions on Metro (here's one example.) Let's just say Greg and Bill King disagree.

Bottom line: The polls agree - Annise is ahead. Voting by mail is going on right now. Early voting begins in 13 days on November 30th. There is a lot of work to be done in a short amount of time, for one of these candidates to go over 50%. Parker's poll memo has this statement: "only a substantially negative campaign from Locke can interrupt her momentum."

Locke: "I Will Be Very Visible In Advocating for Gay Rights"

2009-11-17T10:52:00.001-06:00

I've got rock solid proof in my hands that mayoral candidate Gene Locke told a gay endorsing group what they wanted to hear in order to secure their endorsement, before he sought the endorsement of anti-gay social conservatives Steven Hotze, David Welch and the Houston Area Pastor Council.

Houston Young Stonewall Democrats, a group of progressives aged 14 to 40, who fight for GLBT civil rights and get out the vote for fair-minded Democrats, had a questionnaire and screening process earlier this year for consideration of their endorsement in the Houston municipal elections. I am looking at Gene Locke's completed HYSD questionnaire right now.

His answers are ardent in his support for equality for gays. He points out that as City Attorney (1995-1998), he wrote the policy that prohibited discrimination based on sexual preferences. He talks specifically about the need to ensure the City does not discriminate on the bases of sexual preference or gender identity.

There are two questions HYSD asks that take the candidate's temperature on how visible they will be as an officeholder in advocating for gay rights and how significant LGBT rights will be as an issue in their campaign, and Locke checked the boxes indicating the highest level of support. As a contrast, Annise Parker, checked boxes indicating a mid to low level of visibility and issue advocacy. Yes, I'm looking at her questionnaire as well, and she makes it clear - in bold print - that she is asking HYSD to endorse her only if they believe she is the most qualified candidate to be mayor of Houston in these tough economic times, and that she is not running to be the first lesbian mayor of Houston, but instead to focus on the priorities of the city as a whole.

Many other questions were asked by HYSD about LGBT issues, including laws protecting LGBT employees, the right to adopt children, same sex couple marriage benefits, and same sex couple rights for tax benefits, inheritance, death benefits and wrongful death claims. Locke answered yes to all of those questions.

So, when Locke sought out Hotze's endorsement, what did he know that endorsement would mean? He knew it would be the endorsement of a man who believes the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for homosexuality. When Locke appeared at the Houston Area Pastor Council gala, who was he consorting with? Pastors with an agenda and political plan to mobilize church goers to vote against Annise Parker because she is gay:

“The bottom line is that we didn't pick the battle, she did, when she made her agenda and sexual preference a central part of her campaign,” said Dave Welch, executive director of the Houston Area Pastor Council, numbering more than 200 senior pastors in the Greater Houston area. “National gay and lesbian activists see this as a historic opportunity. The reality is that's because they're promoting an agenda which we believe to be contrary to the concerns of the community and destructive to the family.”

Welch said he had “no doubt” there would be numerous independent advocacy efforts urging voters not to choose Parker, most of which would involve mail.

Locke knew that seeking these endorsements would mean those groups would work against the issues and members of the HGLT groups whose endorsements he sought previously. It's obvious Locke will talk out of both sides of his mouth for political gain. It's been four days since the Chronicle revealed he sought Hotze's endorsement, and we haven't heard a denial from Locke, or a promise he will repudiate an anti-gay smear campaign by Hotze or the Pastor Council that endorses Locke for mayor.

Come clean Gene: Do you stand with the gay community, or do you stand with those who believe gays are immoral and destructive? I know the gay community wants to know why you courted them, then slept with the enemy.

UPDATE: Sticking to the issue of gay rights, someone asked me how Annise answered the yes/no questions. She answered all of them the same way Gene answered them - all the "right" answers for someone who is pro-equality. Where she had narrative answers, she was clear her first priority would be leading all Houstonians through the tough economic times ahead. For Team Lockers who want to keep pounding the "Gene is gayer than Annise" meme, I say, go right ahead. It worked so well for Peter Brown to say, "I'm blacker than Locke," so hey, go for it. Plus, I think the social conservative voters need to hear that over and over again.

Texas Democratic Party Piles on Hotze

2009-11-17T07:09:00.003-06:00

The TDP gets in on the act, slamming Steven Hotze for recruiting right wing candidates to run against Democratic Texas legislators by email. So, it's not just us here in Houston, appalled that mayoral candidate Gene Locke has sought Hotze's endorsement. We have Austin piling on Hotze. TDP's Ruben Hernandez reminds Democrats that Hotze is an extremist, only concerned with advancing the Republican's harshly partisan agenda.

And, here is the little tidbit that someone needs to uncover about Locke seeking out Hotze's endorsement. Hernandez reminds us that Hotze's demands money for endorsements. Did money exchange hands between Locke and Hotze?

The TDP email is below. It includes a reminder that Hotze declared DWI laws are in place to enforce morality - then he was arrested for DWI.

Dear fellow Democrat,

Following the election of 74 Democrats to serve in a more equally divided Texas House during the 2009 legislative session, Texans immediately saw the benefits of electing more mainstream, common sense Democrats to restore balance in Austin.

Unfortunately, while our responsible Democratic legislators have demonstrated that they will work with anyone - Democrat, Republican or Independent - who is willing to put aside labels and solve problems, the extreme elements within the Republican Party are only concerned with advancing their harshly partisan agenda.

Last week, Dr. Steven Hotze, a self-styled "Christian conservative" from Houston with a history of questionable and improper activities, used a blast email to announce plans that his right-wing Republican group was working to recruit Republican extremists to run in 11 Texas House districts held by Democrats. In February 2000, Hotze's political action committee was fined $5,000 by the Texas Ethics Commission, which was the largest fine in the Commission's history at the time. Hotze has also been accused - by his own siblings and by other Republicans - of demanding contributions in return for endorsements, laundering political funds through his family's business and he was once arrested for DWI despite his sanctimonious claims that DWI laws were needed to enforce morality.

The House Democrats that Hotze wants to defeat have worked hard to do what real Texans do - tackle tough challenges head-on to make our great state even stronger. House Democrats put a roadblock in the path of Governor Perry’s Trans-Texas Corridor, restored CHIP coverage for hundreds of thousands of Texas children, and led the effort to end the freeze on school funding imposed by a 2006 Perry-Republican school finance plan that had forced hundreds of local school districts to consider property tax hikes, teacher layoffs and reduced academic offerings.

Texas Republicans are caught up in a civil war within their Party, struggling to maintain relevancy with everyday Texans while their candidates sing to the tune demanded by the fringe rhetoric of the radical elements that control the Texas GOP today. The Republicans know Democrats can win a Texas House majority in 2010, and people like Steven Hotze will stop at nothing to maintain a Republican majority that will march to the drumbeat he and his extremist allies demand.
We strongly encourage you to support your Democratic State Representatives as we enter the 2010 campaign season.

Your fellow Democrat,

Ruben Hernandez
Executive Director
Texas Democratic Party

Come Clean Gene on Your Conflicts of Interest

2009-11-16T09:10:00.001-06:00

Wow. I just barely scraped the surface on Locke's potential conflicts of interest when I blogged on cityethics.org's concerns that led them to question if he should even be running for mayor of Houston. The Parker campaign has more details and more questions about Locke's conflicts of interest. We'll tap our toes and wait on the answers to these questions, while we also wait on his answers as to why he was seeking the endorsement of virulently anti-gay groups.

Parker Calls on Locke to Come Clean on Conflicts of Interest

His firm billed millions to city and public agencies; A challenge to publicly answer list of questions

The Annise Parker campaign has called on Gene Locke to come clean on his conflicts of interest.

The Parker campaign today released information revealing that Gene Locke and his law firm have profited by over $17 million from his legal and political relationship with local taxing authorities in just the last six years – a situation that constitutes a serious conflict of interest.

“If elected, Gene Locke would have inescapable conflicts of interest,” said Parker.

Lawyer-lobbyist Locke has billed local government agencies like Metro at rates of up to $640 an hour. He billed $574,000 in fees to the Sports Authority alone in the last 30 months.

Locke is a partner in the politically-connected law firm of Andrews Kurth. The firm has made more than $17 million in the last six years alone from the City of Houston, Metro, the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority and the Port Authority of Houston, the same public agencies whose boards Locke would appoint members as Mayor – while his law firm, Andrews Kurth, continues to work for the City and each of those agencies.

The mayor of Houston appoints half the members of the Sports Authority, five of nine members of the Metro Board, and jointly appoints the Chairman of the Port Authority. Andrews Kurth represents all of those agencies. Andrews Kurth also does millions in legal work for the City of Houston.

Locke has not said whether his law firm would continue to seek business with the City and those agencies if he serves as mayor. Nor has he said what continuing financial ties he would retain with the firm, including payout and divestment plans.

The city’s ethics law specifically prohibits any city official from holding a financial interest, directly or indirectly, that would even “tend to create a conflict between the public trust held as an official of the city and the official’s private interests.”

“Voters have a right to know if their potential leaders can serve free from bias,” said Parker. “They deserve a mayor who does not have to choose between what’s good for his law firm and what’s good for Houston. It’s time for Mr. Locke to come clean about his conflicts.”

Locke has withdrawn as General Counsel to the Sports Authority, but that doesn’t solve the ethical problem of his past and continued connection to Andrews Kurth and clients they do business with.

Locke has refused to answer questions about his potential conflicts, responding only that he would make decisions “solely on what is best for Houstonians.” Parker said, “That’s not good enough.“

“Mr. Locke’s intertwined legal and lobbying relationships are so massive that he may literally be unable to serve effectively as mayor,” Parker added.

“Locke is in an ethical trap. He would either violate city ethics rules or serve under a constant cloud of suspicion because of the appearance of impropriety involving business with his former associates or render himself incapable of discharging his mayoral duties by recusing himself from votes critical to the future of our city. It is unethical for him not to recuse himself and it’s impossible for him to serve effectively if he has to recuse himself from all business involving Andrews Kurth, Metro, the Sports Authority and the Port Authority.”

Parker demanded that Locke answer the following questions:

1. Will you release within one week your divestment and payout plan with Andrews Kurth? Will Andrews Kurth’s future income affect the size of your payout? Will you retain any interest in a pension or retirement plan or any other interest tied to the income of Andrews Kurth?

2. Will you permanently resign from Andrews Kurth if elected mayor and enter into a legally-binding agreement never to have a financial interest or association with the firm or any relationship with the firm after you leave the office of mayor?

3. Will you as mayor recuse yourself on all questions involving clients of Andrews Kurth, including all business with Metro, the Sports Authority and the Port Authority and bond transactions and other business done by Andrews Kurth for the City?

4. Will you prohibit Andrews Kurth from representing the city and affiliated public agencies during your tenure as mayor, so as to avoid the inevitable appearance of impropriety involving any city business done with your partners and firm?

“Our city spends literally billions of dollars each year,” said Parker. “It cannot function in the best interest of taxpayers if a cloud of impropriety hangs over major financial decisions. The voters deserve an answer to these questions by Mr. Locke.”

###

Sources:

1) Locke billed the Sports Authority $640 an hour (Texas Watchdog, 10/2/09)

2) Fees paid to Andrews & Kurth (2003-2008):

By Metro: $11,952,105 (Metro public records)
By City of Houston: $4,939,313 (City of Houston public records)
By Sports Authority: $574,000 (Texas Watchdog, 10/2/09)

3) Locke has refused to answer questions about his potential conflicts, responding only that he would make decisions “solely on what is best for Houstonians.” (Texas Watchdog, 10/2/09)

4) City of Houston Code of Ordinances, Chapter 18, Section 18-3

Locke Step with Hotze on Homosexuality

2009-11-16T06:30:00.005-06:00

Let's be clear about a couple of things. According to the Houston Chronicle:

Locke has also met with and sought the endorsement of Dr. Steven Hotze, a longtime local kingmaker in conservative politics and author of the Straight Slate in 1985, a coterie of eight City Council candidates he recruited who ran on an anti-gay platform.

Locke has not denied having this meeting or seeking Hotze's endorsement. Instead, he gave a weak, lawyerly, non-response.

Who is Hotze and what does he have to say about homosexuality? Straight (pun intended) from the Conservative Republicans of Texas website, of which he is the president, there is this "Hotze does box turtle" lecture:

Does it make sense to create a minority status for any group based upon its members' chosen sexual actions or lifestyle? Where do we stop affording minority status once it is based on sexual actions? Do we give adulterers a minority status? How about men who visit topless bars or prostitutes? What about pedophiles or those who perform bestiality? What about cross dressers? It seems absurd to think that any group of people should be elevated to a minority status based upon their participation in sexual activities. Yet this is what is being promoted under the term "sexual orientation," as in "no one shall be discriminated based upon their sexual orientation."

And, Hotze helpfully defines homosexuality as sodomy:

Homosexuality has been condemned by all societies since recorded times. Under English Common Law, homosexuality, defined by the act of sodomy, was a felony. It was a criminal offense in Texas until the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Texas Anti-Sodomy Law because it was restricted to men only.

And, for those who are motivated by fear and lies, Hotze makes things up:

Those who practice homosexuality, representing less than 5% of society, have worked for the past 30 years to change society's view of their activities. Homosexuals want to gain public approval for their actions and be recognized as a minority group. They want homosexuality taught to our children as an acceptable and even preferential lifestyle. This will make it easier for homosexuals to recruit sexually confused adolescents into their lifestyle.

And then there is Hotze's "end of the world as we know it" scenario:

If marriage is redefined, then the liberal courts will impose acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle upon the rest of us.

What does Gene Locke think about homosexuality? He sought the endorsement of the Houston Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Caucus. He wrote the City of Houston's first non-discrimination policy to include sexual orientation when he was the City Attorney. As a member of his law firm's diversity committee, he spearheaded efforts to bring domestic partner benefits to his firm. In the KHOU mayoral debate, he said he would support a referendum to provide same-sex benefits to City of Houston employees.

Locke has a gay friendly agenda, yet he seeks out the endorsement of a known gay hating fear monger? Why? Because he wants so desperately to win the mayor's race, he'll do anything, including selling his soul? He's willing to tell the HGLBT community one thing, and the far right Christian conservative community just the opposite. I'd love to see a copy of the HGLBT screening questionnaire Locke filled out, signed and turned in when he sought their endorsement.

If he gets to be mayor of Houston, how is anyone supposed to trust what he is saying, knowing he'd do anything to get and retain power. How does any real Democrat would stand with Locke, knowing he sought to throw the gay community under the bus? And, I can't imagine why the Hotze followers would stand with him knowing he is on record supporting a same-sex benefits referendum.

To paraphrase Bush, fool me once shame on you. And, don't be fooled again by Locke.

Locke's Lawyerly Response

2009-11-15T10:18:00.002-06:00

It probably took Gene Locke about two seconds to come up with his non-response to being caught with his pants down with Steven Hotze and the right wing ministers who are planning an organized anti-gay hate campaign in the mayoral race. After all, he makes $640/hour off the taxpayers, representing Metro, the Port, and the Sports Authority. I would expect for that kind of hourly rate, he is very skilled at giving the answer that satisfies the letter of the law, but doesn't go any further. And, that's what we got. Here's the timeline:

1. It was rumored he was sleeping with Hotze.

2. He got fourth place in most of the Republican precincts on Nov. 3rd.

3. Rumors surfaced again that he was sleeping with Hotze in order to be a part of a mailer (and possibly TV, robocalls and radio) that would attack his opponent for being gay. The anti-gay campaign would target conservative voters and would have a "family values" message. I heard rumors that Hotze would be spending $250,000 to $500,000 on this effort and that Locke wanted to be a part of it so that he could revive the pincer strategy, getting blacks and conservative whites to vote for him around the gay lifestyle issue.

4. The Houston Chronicle confirmed that he met with and sought the endorsement of Hotze, as well as appeared at the Pastors Council annual gala.

5. Having been caught actually in bed with hate mongers, the affirmative action law making, gay friendly, civil rights activist Locke had this to say:

As I have previously stated, I reject any association with the style of campaigning that was the subject of an article in the Houston Chronicle today. We have serious issues to deal with in our city that requires us to work together as one Houston and I trust that Houstonians will choose a new mayor based on the issues that effect our lives every day and not to be swayed by divisive rhetoric.

Does Locke confirm or deny he's going to be a part of the anti-gay campaign? No.

Does Locke specifically disavow the gay-hating rhetoric of Hotze and the Pastors Council? No.

Does Locke give a reason why he was meeting with Hotze and asking for his endorsement? No.

Does Locke assure voters if he ends up as part of the "family values" campaign, he will strongly condemn it? No.

Are we buying what Locke is selling with this lawyerly response? No.

As Kuff rightly notes, this is only one baby step above his spokesperson's namby-pamby response to the Chronicle:

Locke spokeswoman Kim Devlin said he has met with “thousands of people” and promised from the outset of his campaign to be “mayor for every Houstonian … no matter their political party or their ideology.”

When that laughable "Mayor for all Houstonians" lawyerly response didn't work, what was a lawyer to do, but throw out another one.

Locke's responses dodge the facts. The Chronicle has strongly condemned the rhetoric of hate. Kuff and John have more. Question is, does Locke have more? I'm waiting for some real answers.

UPDATE: Stace is waiting for answers, too:

Let’s get real. Knowing Hotze’s anti-diversity record, what would make a former civil rights activist even think of meeting with him? Even if the possibility existed that Hotze could provide Locke a victory, at what cost would it come? And will Locke tell Hotze to cease and desist with “helping” his campaign?

These are questions Locke must answer beyond the usual “coalition-building” responses because we all know Hotze is only about uniting small minds against whole communities.

Gene Locke's Gay Friendly Agenda

2009-11-14T06:30:00.022-06:00

Imagine my shock and surprise to read the Houston Chronicle's article on organized anti-gay efforts aimed at keeping Annise Parker from getting elected and to see this (everything in red from here on out are things I've pulled from newspapers, press releases, blogs, etc. If it's in black, they are my words, if in red, they are someone else's):

Locke has also met with and sought the endorsement of Dr. Steven Hotze, a longtime local kingmaker in conservative politics and author of the Straight Slate in 1985, a coterie of eight City Council candidates he recruited who ran on an anti-gay platform.

There must be a mistake because Locke had this to say on September 17th about negative attacks, and we all know Hotze is all about ugly negative attacks:

"focus on the issues and refrain from engaging in third-party personal attacks in this campaign."

And when a bogus anti-gay endorsement email went out with Gene Locke on the slate, he had this to say:

STATEMENT BY GENE LOCKE REGARDING CHRISTIANS FOR BETTER GOVERNMENT

September 20, 2009 - “I vehemently reject this so-called ‘endorsement’ from a group calling itself ‘Christians for Better Government.’ Furthermore, as a church-going Christian, I reject any association with this bogus and divisive style of campaigning. I find the message contained in their press release to be reprehensible, and the people of Houston do, too. I trust Houstonians to choose a new mayor based on the issues and the candidates, and not to be swayed by this kind of ugly rhetoric."

And, after the KHOU televised debate, Locke staffer Grace Rodriguez posted this on her blog, making it crystal clear that there is no better friend to gays than Gene Locke, and that includes Annise Parker:

This issue is really important to me, because I have family and friends in the LGBT community who are still treated as second-class citizens when it comes to equal civil rights.

There is a New York Times article going around on Twitter that Annise Parker may make history as “the first openly gay woman to be elected mayor of a major American metropolis.” In it, however, Parker says “I always told voters the truth…” then goes on to state she has “no current plan to offer [same-sex benefits] for a referendum.”

I’m shocked that Annise Parker, the “openly gay” candidate, does NOT support same-sex benefits. The NYTimes article reports:

In a televised debate on Oct. 25, for instance, she was asked if she would push for a referendum to give benefits to the same-sex partners of city workers. A similar measure was soundly defeated in the past.

Ms. Parker has lived with her partner for 19 years and has two adopted children, so she has a personal stake in the question, but she replied that, while she supported the idea, she had “no current plan to offer that for a referendum.”

“Personally it’s very important,” she said, “but, as mayor of Houston, do I want to engage resources in fighting that battle, or do I want to tackle the budget? Do I want to tackle drainage? Do I want to try to put more police officers on the street? It’s the difference between the personal and what this city needs.”

It seems, then, what her base - Houston’s vibrant GLBT community and its supporters - needs is NOT equal rights.

The interesting thing is that Gene Locke, who is also running for mayor of Houston (and one of my clients), DOES support equal rights. On Gene Locke’s Facebook profile, I found the following comment thread:

Jody Miller: Where do you stand on Houston City Charter, roman numeral II, section 22 Denial of Benefits?

Matt Burrus: Jody, I can respond to your question on behalf of Gene. Gene believes that all people should be treated fairly and equally. He wrote the City’s first non-discrimination policy to include sexual orientation when he was City Attorney in the late 1990s. He also spearheaded the efforts to bring domestic partner benefits to his law firm, as a member of its diversity committee. He most recently stated during the KHOU debate that he would support a referendum to provide same-sex benefits to City employees. He was the only candidate to say they would support the referendum. Gene believes that the City needs to recruit the best employees possible, regardless of sexual orientation, race, nationality, religion, etc., and he would look to be competitive with a majority of Fortune 500 companies, Dallas, Austin, El Paso, and other cities across the country that already offer domestic partner benefits.

When I made the same statement on Twitter, Kris Banks, President of the Houston GLBT Political Caucus, responded:

“She understands the political fight b/c she’s been involved in it for decades. Not going to make empty promises. Ballot initiatives are not our forte. We lost CA and Maine looks bleak. Has to be done right. She gets that. I think everyone should support same-sex benefits, but that’s different than doing what it takes to win initiative fight. She said there wasn’t a plan right now. @AnniseParker doesn’t just talk, she gets things done. Ballot initiatives are overwhelmingly tough for our community, @AnniseParker knows that b/c she’s fought that fight.”

Yet, if Annise has really fought this fight before, shouldn’t she have a plan to continue fighting it? She may not make empty promises, but if she hasn’t promised to continue fighting for equal rights for the GLBT community, her commitment to Houston’s diverse community seems empty itself.

In any case, if she doesn’t have a plan, Gene DOES. Maybe Annise should ask Gene to help her draft her plan? After all, Gene Locke “wrote the City’s first non-discrimination policy to include sexual orientation” when he was Houston City Attorney under former Mayor Bob Lanier.

I support equal rights for ALL of Houston. If you do, too, please VOTE FOR GENE LOCKE FOR MAYOR ON NOVEMBER 3RD!

*UPDATE: Jody Miller followed up his conversation with Matt Burrus with this comment:

“After much research and countless conversations with all four major candidates campaigns running for Mayor of Houston, I have decided to back Gene Locke. He is the most genuine of all of the candidates and the only one wanting to rewrite current descrimination laws in Houston and support a referendum to change the city charter to include Domestic Partnership benefits for city workers. This is a huge step in the right direction friends. Join me in voting for Gene Locke on Nov. 3rd!”

So, bottom line, Locke's senior advisor Kim Devlin needs to retract her extremely lame "response" to Locke being accused of sleeping with Steven Hotze. I suggest she replace it with:

"Gene Locke is 100% gay friendly. You can find proof in the video from the KHOU debate where he was the only one who promised a referendum on same sex partner benefits. He signed the HGLBT statement saying he is 100% gay friendly and sought their endorsement. He's on record on our own website being against the gay-hating people behind the Christian for Better Government slate. He wrote the City's first non-descrimination law against gay people. No one is more friendly to gays than Gene Locke."

I mean seriously. No way Gene Locke has sold his soul, right? So, I'm sure he will be up and at 'em Saturday morning to go over to the west side to tell the Republican voters all of these truths about his gay friendly agenda.

UPDATE: More from Kuff and John. Read what Matt Burrus has to say in the comments. I'm waiting for Locke to speak out, as well, so I can find out why someone who is on record as being gay friendly was seeking the endorsement of the gay hater Steven Hotze. Already, we have Locke's campaign response. As it stands, Devlin speaks for Locke and she is excusing his appearance at the gala for the pastors who are behind the anti-gay effort, as well as his seeking Hotze's endorsement, with a statement about how Locke's behavior is acceptable because he wants to be the mayor of all of Houstonians. And, inexplicably, she tears down Parker's character. I think Locke needs to quit letting Devlin speak for him. Here is what she told the Chronicle:

Locke spokeswoman Kim Devlin said he has met with “thousands of people” and promised from the outset of his campaign to be “mayor for every Houstonian … no matter their political party or their ideology.”

“Annise Parker is letting Houstonians in on her true character by leveling these highly incendiary, baseless and ridiculous attacks,” said Devlin.

Texas Conservative Review: Parker is a Fiscal Conservative

2009-11-13T19:26:00.010-06:00

I blogged recently about the Texas Conservative Review (TCR) and noted that they graded Annise Parker a B. On page 3 of their November Voter Guide, they had this to say about Parker:

TCR was pleasantly surprised that Annise Parker scored near the top. Clearly her answers indicate she is a fiscal conservative. She is a former executive at Mosbacher Energy and has been involved in City government for 12 years. She is a skeptic when it comes to more sports stadiums at City expense and is running on her ability to control spending and run an efficient City Hall.

TCR has a post-election update (the emphasis in red is mine):

Conservatives Impact City of Houston Elections

As conservatives, we should be involved in non-partisan elections. This year in the Houston City Elections, conservatives were the main battleground and were instrumental in victories and runoff candidates success. TCR, as a public service, sent out a questionnaire of ten questions related to fiscal issues and public safety. Based on the results, TCR endorsed or editorialized about the choices and mailed and emailed the results. Eight of the nine candidates endorsed by TCR were victorious, four won outright (Clutterbuck, Bradford, Sullivan, and Pennington) and four are in runoffs (Khan, Stardig, Christie, and Costello) and the mayoral candidates with top grades, Morales and Parker, got a combined 51.29% of the vote. All of which proves that our votes matter and candidates, regardless of party in a non-partisan election, want our votes. This creates an opportunity to encourage fiscal conservatism and advance our common sense agenda. There is a runoff coming on December 12th and yes, you should vote for the most fiscally conservative candidates running and there are differences. TCR in a future mailing and email edition will make recommendations and comments on those choices.

They graded Locke a D in their Voter Guide. Let's stay tuned to what they put in their future mailing. I've already made it clear why I think Annise Parker is the fiscally conservative choice. She's got a track record of saving the City millions of dollars. She is focused on basic city services in tough economic times - police and infrastructure - while her opponent, Gene Locke is promising stadiums and museums. He's got conflicts of interest from his $640/hour government lobbyist/attorney work representing Metro, the Sports Authority and the Port that caused cityethics.org to ask if the responsible thing would be for him to not run at all, as well as comment that good government advocates are right to hound him.

I think there's a reason Parker performed well in Republican precincts and that's because of her proven, common sense leadership, and because city voters, who by their very nature are good government advocates, questioned Locke's agenda. In round 2, there are more of these voters who are up for grabs, and the questions are will they vote - I believe they will - and who will they decide is the fiscally conservative choice.

Hotze on the Move: Targets Texas Democratic House Members

2009-11-12T18:51:00.004-06:00

A couple of reasons I'm not terribly impressed by the e-blast below from Conservative Republicans of Texas (CRT):

1. Recruit Republicans to run for the Texas House by email? Really?

2. CRT endorsed a slate in the Nov. 3rd City of Houston elections, and didn't exactly get results. Six out of nine lost out right: Roy Morales, Amy Peck, Joe Chow, Mills Worsham, Griff Griffin, Curtis Garmon and Pam Holm. You may be asking yourself, "who are some of these people?" Well, all Conservative Republican of Texas-Hotze backed candidates have these stands on issues in common:

ant-public education

anti-affirmative action

anti-choice

anti-gays

among other things, under the guise of "family values" which is anything but. Basically, it's your haters who say things like you read below, about "liberals who seek to destroy our identity." It's the tea party folks before they knew they were tea partiers. For a taste of the kind of "support that stands ready to assist you" read about one of Hotze's mail ballot programs from the past.

I'm sure this email campaign will drive a lot of crazies out of the woodwork to run against Chris Turner, Carol Kent, Pete Gallego, and other Democratic Texas House members. I think the economic and moral starvation Steven Hotze speaks of is his own, and that it's time to close the door on the tired family values agenda. Certainly the email below does not speak to solutions: instead, it invokes hatred and fear.

Contact: Chris Elam Executive Director, CRT 713-234-0499 (cell) 281-404-4695 (office)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 12, 2009

Conservative Republicans of Texas PAC Launches Statewide Candidate Recruiting Email Campaign Across 11 State House Districts

Email blast seeks to identify strong Republican challengers to Democrat incumbents

(HOUSTON, TEXAS) - Conservative Republicans of Texas (CRT) PAC has begun an email campaign to tens of thousands of Republican primary voters in 11 State House districts, as part of a statewide initiative to recruit a full slate of conservative GOP challengers in the 2010 Elections. The targeted districts are widely considered by political observers as Republican-leaning areas, and potential pickups for the GOP majority in 2010.

In the email, CRT President Steven F. Hotze, MD, promised Republican voters that “This email serves not only as our own electronic ‘Help Wanted’ sign, but also as a demonstration of the support that stands ready to assist you.”

Hotze continued, “This email is a call to arms - a plea to Texas patriots to step forward and be counted among those who will defend Texas from the liberals who seek to destroy our liberty. The 2010 elections serve as a referendum on the future of our State and our Country. Will we continue down the road of socialism, universal health care, and the leadership of Obama / Pelosi / Reid? Or will conservatives finally stand united and declare ‘Enough!’ in the face of economic and moral starvation?”

Stating the broad support of other statewide organizations in launching the campaign, Hotze said, “Groups such as Texas Eagle Forum, Heritage Alliance, Vision America, the Republican Party of Texas, and many others too numerous to list here, agree that Texas needs more conservative leaders in Austin. They have urged me to use CRT's powerful email capabilities to seek out our newest candidates and potential leaders. We strongly believe that the greatest potential of Texas comes not from our networks of power brokers in Austin and other metropolitan areas, but from you - the citizens of this great State.”

Given the immediacy of the short campaign season, CRT has created a “Candidate Recruitment” webpage at www.ConservativeRepublicansofTexas.com/recruit - where potential Republican candidates can log on to request more information and express their interest in running for office. Potential candidates are also encouraged to contact CRT by phone by calling 281-404-4695.

Target Districts include: 1- Stephen Frost, 3 - Mark Homer, 21 - Allan Ritter, 35 - Yvonne Gonzales Toureilles, 45 - Patrick Rose, 74 - Pete Gallego, 85 - Joe Heflin, 96 - Chris Turner, 102 - Carol Kent, 106 - Kirk England, 107 - Allen Vaught.

UPDATE: Bay Area Houston follows the yellow brick road and has more about Hotze.

UPDATE 2: Someone had sent me the CRT email, and it's reported on Quorum Report. Just wanted to give you that link, although I can't seem to link to the original story. Here you go. What QR also has, are the individual emails to each targeted House District.

Parker's Field Campaign: By the Numbers

2009-11-11T17:12:00.000-06:00

I personally did some phone banking and blockwalking with the Parker campaign's field program and I was very impressed with the targeting and the response. Some of our phonebanking nights were huge, and there were a ton of people at HQ the weekend before E-Day, so I'm not surprised by these numbers from a campaign press release today. Not surprised, but impressed, nevertheless!

In just the last 90 days, our volunteers have made more than 179,000 phone calls and knocked on over 50,000 doors. On just the weekend before the election, our field operation knocked on 14,000 doors! Now that’s how to win a campaign when you are outspent more than two to one.

I spoke with someone associated with the Parker campaign's Latino outreach effort yesterday, and got confirmation that there was a large door to door voter contact program in the East End, which apparently worked very well, since the results in those precincts were so good. For those complaining that the mayoral campaigns did not reach out to Latinos, I know one mayoral campaign that took the candidate's message straight to the voters' doors - in Spanish.

The internal memo from the Parker campaign yesterday revealed that their field campaign increased turnout 10% in targeted precincts. That's pretty impressive data on ROI on field.

I'll be blockwalking and phonebanking for Annise for the runoff. Last time I walked, they handed me Annise's precinct, which was fun! If you want to join in on all the volunteer goodness, sign up online here.

Check out Greg's latest map which shows 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th place finishes in all of the precincts. Numbers don't lie - Annise finished strong in Round 1. My prediction is that her motivated volunteers will show up big again in Round 2, possibly even surpassing these outstanding field numbers.

Peter Brown Urges Houstonians to Vote for Annise Parker

2009-11-10T19:40:00.001-06:00

I was very impressed with Peter Brown's speech endorsing Annise Parker for mayor. He was sincere, passionate and enthusiastic. He drew a sharp contrast between Parker and Gene Locke, saying we cannot be sure what Locke's priorities are or who will advise him. He described Parker as the one candidate who cares about the things he has fought for, including efficient, transparent government and quality of life issues. Several times he got very direct in his urging for all Houstonians to vote for Parker.

Parker repeated some of his themes when it was her turn to speak. She thanked him, his family and supporters for being so gracious and generous. She repeated one of the best things I've heard her say on the campaign trail, "I will always tell you the truth." She reiterated that her administration will be transparent and said, "when I am Mayor, lobbyists and special interests will not run City Hall!" She and Peter were very warm with each other, and I got the impression they were both having fun. His supporters nodded their heads in agreement with everything Parker was saying. I think bloggers came to an agreement that we counted five fist pumps by Brown!

The most effective thing was that Brown and Parker both openly criticized Locke and his lobbyist/special interest ties and warned against the style of government that would result from the promises he's made to them vs. Parker's commitment to efficiency, transparency and focusing on basic city services.

A special thank you to Team Locke for the delicious snacks. How kind!

I would have liveblogged this, but I forgot that City Hall is the one place you want to be if terrorists ever figure out how to attack you through your AT&T phone, because there is a 100% certainty that a "No Service" message will save your life.

UPDATE: Stace was there, and he has more, including some great photos!

Parker Campaign Releases Internal Memo on State of the Race

2009-11-10T09:16:00.000-06:00

Click on images to make them larger:

Hispanic Leadership Council Event for Annise Parker

2009-11-10T08:47:00.000-06:00

Mayor's Race: 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th in Top 50 Precincts

2009-11-10T08:21:00.002-06:00

I've been taking a look at the precinct level data in the Nov. 3rd mayoral election in lots of different ways. This look is at the top 50 precincts for number of votes cast (check out how high the turnout was in these top 50 - most are well above the 19% average turnout for all precincts).

I'm thinking about what a Peter Brown endorsement means to the candidate he endorses today. He got approximately 40,000 votes, with a little over 10,000 of them coming from these 50 (out of the 750 or so of total precincts in the City of Houston). Where do these 10,000 voters go in the runoff?

In this precinct set:
Parker came in first in 29 precincts, second in 16 and 5 in third. She did not come in last in any.
Morales came in first in 19 precincts, second in 12 and 13 in third.
Brown came in first in one precinct, second in 21 and 28 in third.
Locke came in first in one precinct, second in zero, 4 in third, and 45th in fourth.

Morales coming in first, second and third in so many of these tells you that many of these top performing precincts are in Republican areas. A big question is how Republicans vote in Round 2. I believe they'll turnout, because they love a Saturday runoff in December (not kidding), and they want to cast their vote for a Republican in the Controller, At-Large 1 and At-Large 5 races. Will a bunch of them skip the mayor's race? I doubt it.

PCT	TURNOUT	Brown	Morales	Parker	Locke
0265	38.14%	318	443	348	201
0258	39.55%	236	445	376	187
0234	34.77%	268	402	358	225
0439	37.49%	251	393	367	137
0129	23.27%	243	345	394	176
0407	30.12%	286	343	299	110
0309	42.73%	239	391	292	113
0204	30.13%	250	224	410	123
0303	32.71%	245	259	296	214
0461	29.64%	273	291	342	90
0620	16.95%	272	208	262	191
0281	38.63%	206	159	477	147
0270	28.17%	241	265	377	71
0448	28.32%	185	292	383	90
0286	17.85%	167	42	139	589
0469	26.62%	237	424	220	69
0385	44.28%	216	293	279	119
0760	24.27%	204	457	208	49
0262	22.89%	214	300	295	91
0217	36.18%	223	158	384	159
0040	35.20%	239	83	529	75
0222	39.10%	195	86	520	111
0057	31.18%	156	127	561	64
0483	22.07%	217	308	265	91
0095	29.38%	198	349	274	61
0663	26.69%	166	210	415	82
0444	27.84%	227	264	276	72
0148	35.17%	176	122	484	75
0070	29.23%	188	149	388	126
0054	25.89%	157	197	384	107
0718	21.69%	246	272	233	87
0200	27.60%	170	115	483	78
0118	41.37%	164	312	271	83
0199	27.87%	225	420	144	48
0135	32.34%	200	157	337	131
0563	27.90%	224	340	194	59
0435	27.99%	170	248	305	92
0038	31.76%	138	60	529	79
0287	31.10%	153	214	362	75
0274	29.02%	170	186	248	160
0130	35.48%	221	240	241	91
0324	35.31%	187	271	264	71
0233	20.86%	161	140	384	109
0612	24.08%	169	348	196	52
0053	29.50%	143	106	456	72
0034	30.47%	114	49	578	33
0499	34.00%	182	235	259	95
0304	34.49%	160	170	355	74
0039	31.00%	114	51	539	62
0437	39.44%	135	359	182	67

Peter Brown to Endorse in the Mayor's Race

2009-11-09T23:10:00.002-06:00

MEDIA ADVISORY: PETER BROWN ANNOUNCES ENDORSEMENT IN MAYORAL RUNOFF

Peter Brown will host a press conference, joined by family, friends and supporters, announcing his endorsement in the mayoral runoff.

WHO: Houston City Council Member and former Candidate for Mayor Peter Brown
WHAT: Peter Brown makes an official endorsement in the mayoral runoff
WHEN: Tuesday, November 10^th at 1:30 PM
WHERE: Steps of City Hall, 901 Bagby St., facing the reflection pool

CONTACT:

Lucinda Guinn, Campaign Manager

Telephone: 713-528-0049

www.peterbrownformayor.com

(You'll find me there liveblogging! I am threatening to do a blogger hayride to City Hall. By the way, at 1 PM MJ Khan is having a press conference at the reflection pool - my guess is Pam Holm is endorsing him for Controller.)

Runoff Early Voting Locations, Dates, Times

2009-11-09T07:00:00.001-06:00

Dates and Times for Early Voting (City of Houston, HISD):

Monday, Nov. 30: 8 AM to 5 PM

Tuesday, Dec. 1: 8 AM to 5 PM

Wednesday, Dec. 2: 8 AM to 5 PM

Thursday, Dec. 3: 8 AM to 5 PM

Friday, Dec. 4: 8 AM to 5 PM

Saturday, Dec. 5: 7 AM to 7 PM

Sunday, Dec. 6: 1 PM to 6 PM

Monday, Dec. 7: 7 AM to 7 PM

Tuesday, Dec. 8: 7 AM to 7 PM

Locations:

Humble ISD Instructional Support Center, 4810 Magnolia Cove, Kingwood

Freeman Branch Library, 16616 Diana Ln., Clear Lake

The Power Center, 12401 South Post Oak

Courtyard by Marriott, 12401 Katy Freeway

Lac Hong Square, 6628 Wilcrest Dr., Suite A

Metropolitan Multi-Service Center, 1475 W. Gray

Trini Mendenhall Sosa Community Center, 1414 Wirt Rd.

Bayland Park Community Center, 6400 Bissonnet

Tracy Gee Community Center, 3599 Westcenter Dr.

Acres Home Multi-Service Center, 6719 Montgomery

Hardy Senior Center, 11901 West Hardy Rd.

Northeast Multi-Service Center, 9720 Spalding

Julia C. Hester House, 2020 Solo St.

HCCS Southeast College, Learning Hub, 6815 Rustic St.

Fiesta Mart, Inc. 8130 Kirby Dr.

Sunnyside Multi-Service Center, 4605 Wilmington

Palm Center, 5300 Griggs Rd.

Moody Park Community Center, 3725 Fulton

Ripley House, 4410 Navigation Blvd.

Henington-Alief Regional Library, 7979 Kirkwood

Harris County Admin Bldg, 1001 Preston, 1st Floor

Want to Know More About the Mayoral Runoff Candidates?

2009-11-09T06:30:00.002-06:00

I guess I'm a little surprised that anyone would think that Gene Locke and Annise Parker should drop everything once a week and answer social media questions. If you think it's a great idea - or a silly one - let us know in the comments. Below are some resources to get acquainted with the candidates, if you haven't been paying attention and you have a burning desire to figure out who to vote for in the runoff. These are links to places where you can hear Parker and Locke - in their own words:

Kuff's interview with Gene Locke where his first remark is "I have two personalities"and then he goes on to clarify that one of those personalities is enjoying the trappings of being a lawyer (and a $640/hour one).

Kuff's interview with Parker.

Here's ABC13's mayoral debate in full:

KUHF had conversations with the candidates. Listen to Parker here and Locke here.

Ch. 2 held a mayoral debate in partnership with the League of Women Voters and you can watch that at this link.

Here's the Chronicle's live chat with Annise Parker and here is the live chat with Gene Locke. Readers chatted with the candidates in real time.

And, you can watch the Fox 26 mayoral debate here:

(I can't find a link to the Ch. 11 debate - if you have it, please leave it in the comments.)

As far as social media goes, @AnniseParker on Twitter makes it clear that it's actually her tweeting when the tweet ends in "-A". She is also featured talking to voters on Twitter via short twit vids (here's an example).

My guess is that voter interest in the runoff is very low right now - and will continue to be that way - except for those who are very passionate about their particular candidate. I think Republicans are fairly ho-hum right now (but I do believe they will lurch into action and vote, because nothing stir R's into action more than a Saturday runoff election in December - I'm actually not kidding). I believe those who didn't vote the first time couldn't care less. I think those few who voted in Round 1 were very informed.

But, anyway, here you go - this is your resource post if you are just now starting to pay attention. My understanding is that there will be four televised debates for the runoff - Ch. 2, 11, 13 and 26. That may be just supposition on the part of the person who told me that, so stay tuned.

Again, early voting begins in three weeks on November 30th, and Election Day is December 12th.

Gene Locke and the Latino Vote

2009-11-09T06:00:00.012-06:00

We have plenty of evidence from the precinct level data, that Locke's brown-black coalition did not materialize, with only the black portion of the coalition showing up for him at the polls. I did a quick analysis of the total votes in some East End precincts:

Precinct	Brown	Morales	Parker	Locke
9	37	31	66	50
10	57	65	39	27
11	44	36	61	32
19	40	21	82	48
24	12	0	18	60
26	56	48	118	50
27	98	83	176	116
62	95	64	44	26
64	62	48	40	38
65	66	79	66	33
66	13	17	23	46
69	22	33	9
72	69	66	90	67
79	124	71	91	21
154	40	38	50	53
207	55	59	145	71
218	113	88	182	64
226	63	41	56	24
530	16	38	35	16
560	52	16	32	12
Totals	1134	926	1423	854
%	25.56%	20.87%	32.07%	19.25%

In this East End precinct set, Parker took the most votes with Locke taking the least - 13 points behind.

I found this posting called "Latinos for Locke" on Mary Benton's On the Beat blog curious, especially this:

"We haven't seen his opponent in our neighborhood," said one of the speakers.

Three things:
1. The restaurant, El Jardin, where "dozens of people packed into," (looks like 24 at best, to me) is in precinct 65 where the result was:

Morales: 31%
Parker: 26%
Brown: 26%
Locke: 13%

2. Also, I'm curious where folks think SEIU and HOPE (Annise Parker supporters) blockwalked and talked to Latino voters. I'll take a wild guess: East End, maybe?

3. I saw Annise Parker with my own eyes at a party in the East End held by Rick Noriega.

Marc Campos has more (where he shows that Parker probably got the greatest share of the Latino vote city-wide and Locke the least), as does Stace here and here (where he makes a good point that Morales' Latino vote share may have been Republican Latinos, not Latinos voting according to last name.)

Next up: Locke's African American-Republican pincer strategy also didn't work. What's left for Locke to do in the runoff? Turn out the African American vote in even larger numbers and . . . and what?

That's the real question: And, what? Early voting begins three weeks from today on November 30th, so Locke is going to have to implement the "and what" strategy very quickly. Got any ideas of how Locke can win? Leave them in the comments!

December 12th Runoff Information - City of Houston Election

2009-11-05T12:24:00.011-06:00

From the Harris County Clerk's Office:

First Day to Apply for Ballot by Mail: Wednesday, Nov. 4

Last Day to Register to Vote: Thursday, Nov. 12

First Day of Early Voting: Monday, Nov. 30

Last Day to Apply for Ballot by Mail (Received, not postmarked): Dec. 5

Last Day of Early Voting: Tuesday, Dec. 8

Election Day: Saturday, Dec. 12

Thanks to Mikey P for leaving a comment, clarifying the times for voting:

Monday, Nov 30 – Friday, Dec 4th: 8am-5pm

Saturday, Dec 5th: 7am-7pm

Sunday, Dec 6th: 1pm-6pm

Monday, Dec 7th and Tuesday, Dec 8th: 7am-7pm

Election Day, Tuesday, Dec. 12th: 7am-7pm

Why Brown Isn't in the Runoff

2009-11-05T07:46:00.002-06:00

I'm glad Bradley Olson of the Houston Chronicle ran the numbers on cost per vote for the Houston mayoral election. There's an enormous difference between what Roy Morales spent per vote ($1.88) and what Peter Brown spent ($122.14), yet Brown only bested Morales by around 4000 votes. Brown finished third and Morales finished a close fourth. Olson ends with an adage that money alone can't buy an election. True.

There is another old adage that you need to raise money to win, but you don't need to raise as much money as your opponent to win, if you have lots of grassroots support, your opponent has negatives, and you have other advantages, such as being a terrific candidate with the right qualities at the right moment in history for that electorate. That's really what happened here. To have any chance at all to win the Houston mayoral race, there is a bar you have to cross in terms of money raised. Parker, Locke and Brown all crossed that. Republican Morales did not win and will not ever win a mayoral race with such anemic fundraising (~$68K). But even a well funded Republican would have little to no chance of winning in a Democratic town, which is why one didn't run.

There are a lot of Wednesday morning quarterbacks pointing fingers at Brown, because of the enormous amount of money he spent for such a poor result. But, lets's go back to the question we all had about back in January - who is Brown's base? That was answered when voters went to the polls, and with probably the same answer we had eleven months ago. Absent exit polling, my guess is that his base was the one we all thought it was - some white liberals who supported him in the past, as well as some African Americans and a few Republicans, but not enough to get him into the runoff. His only way to get past his lack of a base was to spend a lot of money trying to keep Republicans from voting for the Republican, African Americans from voting from the African American, and then finding something negative on Parker, to peel away any soft support she might have. The one negative he tried against Parker did not work, and in the end, as I've said, affinity matters. His only other hope was that Parker or Locke would do something extremely stupid or be affected by a scandal and that did not happen.

Parker has the built in base from running for 12 years and her long time activism in Houston. She has experience with the City budget that hits a sweet spot in these tough economic times. She had the most donors and the most volunteers. Locke has a lot of support from African American voters, and has insider connections to City Hall, including some Republicans. These two candidate profiles, which eleven months ago seemed the most likely to be the right ones for the two person runoff, in the end, garnered Parker and Locke the top two spots.

Morales Wants to Get Back Up on the Bike?

2009-11-04T06:30:00.002-06:00

You beat down Roy (Peter Brown beat him for At-Large 1 in 2005) and then you beat him down again (Melissa Noriega beat him in the 2007 At-Large 3 Special Election). Then once more (Melissa Noriega beat him in the 2007 At-Large 3 General Election), and again for good measure (Parker and Locke best him in the 2009 Mayoral race). Then, Roy shrugs and says, "Oh what the heck, maybe I'll run one more time." After all he's only run city-wide four times. Two more and he'll have his own monument in DC:

Morales, meanwhile, was getting the brakes fixed on his car and trying to decide whether to endorse. The three-time candidate and Harris County Board of Education member would not rule out another citywide run.

It took Lincoln six times,” he said.

(Yeah, Chron, he's run city-wide four times, not three - count 'em up. The two At-Large runs in 2007 were two separate races. Roy could have opted out after he got beat in the Special, but he loved the thrill of defeat so much, he signed up again for the fall.)

The Chron seems to have found out there was even more E-Day GOTV for Roy than I suspected:

Although major Republican stalwarts largely were missing from his campaign, he was the beneficiary of several last-minute lifelines that may have increased his appeal to conservative voters.

Perhaps the most significant was a shout-out he received at a Tea Party rally Monday night at Sam Houston Race Park. The estimated 10,000 people who attended were urged to vote for him.

He also was the beneficiary of two huge mail pieces sent to voters in West Houston, Clear Lake and Kingwood, urging party activists to cast their ballots for him. One came from a voter guide mailed out by the Texas Conservative Review and the other from the Harris County Republican Party, which endorsed him Oct. 19. The party's mail piece was sent to 70,000 households, and volunteers made more than 200,000 calls on his behalf on Election Day.

Yeah, well, here's the deal. I think the Chron got played on that "volunteers made 200,000 calls for Morales on Election Day" thing. If you are using phones and a call list you can make about 25 calls per hour. So, you would need 8000 volunteer hours on Election Day. Or, you could do virtual phone banking and double that rate, so 4000 volunteer hours. Or, you could use predictive dialing, with one caller making about 100 calls per hour, so you'd need 2000 volunteer hours on E-Day. If each spry Republican volunteer took a 2-hour shift on the predictive dialer, they'd need 1000 volunteers.

Are you telling me the Harris County GOP got 1000 volunteers to call voters on Election Day asking them to vote for Roy Morales? Color me skeptical. Actually, I just plain don't believe that. This begins to sound like more of Morales' over inflated claims like these he made in 2005, running against Brown:

I have provided the White House with plans to deter nuclear war. During a Korean peninsula exercise, I crafted a plan to greatly reduce Korean civilian causalities. I authored the Global Information Operation Planning Order for defeating terrorism.

Roy seems to be having fun running city-wide. He doesn't have to raise very much money. The media treats him like a serious candidate, so he gets a lot of attention. He gets a chance to tell his "deterring nuclear war in Korea" stories. Bikers make an ad for him. And, now we learn he can snap his fingers and 1000 volunteers appear.

I think he should run for Mayor again in 2011. He can always use tape and a sharpie and spruce up his 2009 yard signs.