Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Not-quite-an-endorsement-but-close-enough watch: Roy for Annise

As we know, Peter Brown endorsed Annise Parker for Mayor fairly soon after the November election. That left the question about what, if anything, Roy Morales would do. Via Big Jolly, we now know the answer. Apparently, Roy sent out a short questionnaire to Parker and to Gene Locke. Parker responded, Locke did not. So, Roy sent out this mailer, presumably to his supporters (Big Jolly did not indicate the size of the audience), which speaks for itself. Click and see what I mean. David Ortez has more.

Related Posts:

10 Comments

  1. Baby Snooks says:

    Gene Locke didn’t even respond? Amazing. Maybe Bob Lanier pissed him off about something and he decided Bob Lanier could try again next time with someone else?

  2. arthur schechter says:

    more potentially uniformed stuff from baby snooks….come out ,snooks,and give us your credentials…..or are they so full of meaningless ,baseless,uneducated nada as to have little or no value? does truth have any meaning for you?

  3. CG says:

    What I heard was that Morales demanded money to send that out. Annise Parker paid Morales. Gene Locke declined to pay him. Check Parker’s expenses and the roughly 20k (I forget) amount paid to Mary Sergesketter, Morales’s campaign manager.

    Any additional thoughts based on that piece of information? (I am thoughtless…)

  4. Dear Charles Kuff & readers,

    I don’t think Gene refused to answer as much as he refused to pay for a quote “endorsement”

    If you look at her campaign finance report (pg 968 of 990) her campaign paid $45,000 to Mary Sergesketter for “Direct Mail” and then paid her almost $20,000 for “Consulting”(pg 975 of 990).

    BTW Mary Sergesketter was Roy Morales Campaign Manager.

  5. CG says:

    Yikes! I missed that Parker paid $45k to mail it, then $20k on top of that for “consulting.” That sounds like a lot of extra money that was really a pay off of some of Morales’s campaign debt.

    I am not involved on the inside of these things, but I do have personal knowledge in years past of successful runoff candidates in races being “extorted” by the losers for endorsements that sound an awful lot like this looks.

  6. Baby Snooks says:

    You know maybe Gene Locke is really just a nice guy and got a taste of the sleaze finally and decided enough was enough. Wouldn’t shock me to know Annise Parker paid for the endorsement. That has been a pattern going all the way back to the early days of what was I think just the Gay Political Caucus. You all wanted her. You have her. Enjoy.

    “Arthur” be nice or I’ll call the real Arthur.

  7. Baby Snooks says:

    And someone do call the Chronicle so they can run this on Sunday!

  8. Paul Crist says:

    I received the mailer yesterday. It clearly discloses it is paid for by both Morales and Parker (whom I supported despite knowing Roy quite well and having contributed to him in the first Brown at-large race, and couple of races since).

    Other than Blakemorwe, there is no more conseervative campaign consultant than Mary Jane Smith, whose worked Locke’s campaign for months. Why comment CG and Villareal on a Parker hiring Mary Sergesketter but give Locke a pass on either Smith or Hotze robocalls.

    As I have blogged on numerous sites and emails during these long five weeks, I think homophobic conservative activists like David Wilson will be as important to a Locke pull-from-behind victory as black pastors. If Morales’ voters turn out, his quasi-endorsement is not going to impact them. I frankly think much of that 1/5th of primary turn out will sit out the run off. I also am predicting 65,000-80,000 unless weather and GOTV efforts coincide to boost turn out. (Early voting totals at Fiesta on Kirby are about where they were last month the day early voting ends — 7:00 pm tonight; I don’t know anything about other early-voting locations, so am interested in Kaufmann’s totals in tomorrow’s Chronicle).

    As a nominal Republican who has supported Annise essentially since her announcement, there was never a doubt Morales on policy issues would have been my preferance, but Parker comes second (despite lots of bad council votes), well ahead of Locke and at the end of the spectrum Brown with a zero rating. While social consevatives can’t be persuaded, as far as Dominodome, Metro and host of issues White-Parker have left for the next mayor, it is my opinion Locke will be even less fiscally conservative than Parker.

  9. Baby Snooks says:

    One of the interesting aspects of this is finding out that Ed Emmett has been donating to this PAC of Steven Hotze’s. That probably will become an issue in the next election.

    I am not sure Hotze has that much impact. Or Dave Wilson. But obviously some do. Although I suspect this is the last election where Democrats will even respond to questionnaires from Republican groups. Or the losing Republican candidates.

    I don’t like Annise Parker. But I also don’t like the gay-baiting or what really is blatant homophobia. And “rejecting” the endorsement of Steven Hotze doesn’t mean a thing after you’ve sought it. And yes, that applies to Gene Locke as well. And it applies to the endorsement which is now a “questionnaire” by Gary Polland. Who says now he can’t endorse because of PBS policy. And yet went on to endorse in all the races except the mayor’s race. He has made some very homophobic comments on Texas Conservative Review and there is a level of hypocrisy on the part of Annise Parker. Again, I suspect next time most Democrats will say “thanks, but no thanks.”

  10. Baby Snooks says:

    And some Republicans may say “thanks, but no thanks” as well.