I missed this KTRK story from Tuesday about Martha Wong’s phantom endorsement, in which she claimed that some generically nice things said about her by HISD Superintendant Abe Saavedra constituted an actual statement of electoral support. Seems Martha really really doesn’t want to recognize the obvious here:
There is a piece of mail at the center of the debate. Inside the brochure touting Martha Wong’s support for education is a quote from HISD Superintendent Abe Saavedra stating “Martha has always been supportive of our needs in HISD and an advocate for us.”
Wong says it’s perfectly appropriate.
“We didn’t ask for an endorsement,” she said. “He stands by his quote.”
But last week, after the brochure hit mailboxes Dr. Saavedra issued a statement to the contrary, saying, in part, “it is unfortunate that a misunderstanding may have occurred, but I have not authorized my name to be used in campaign materials. I have not endorsed a candidate.”
Wong says the mailer simply used a quote, not an endorsement.
“We have worked with Dr. Saavedra. He knows us,” Wong said.
When asked if it is a misunderstanding, Wong answered, “That’s something you should ask Dr. Saavedra.”
That’s quite the intriguing response. Dr. Saavedra is quite clear about what his words mean. Martha Wong refuses to acknowledge that and implies that Dr. Saavedra is the one that’s confused here. Does that really seem like a smart approach to take with this?
Political science professor Michelle Carnahan says while one brochure may not mean the difference between winning and losing, Wong’s campaign staff should not have made such a rookie mistake.
“Ellen Cohen’s campaign, part of her being not being the incumbent is that she doesn’t have a record to stand on, but Martha Wong does,” Carnahan said. “She’s defending her record, and this is something she should’ve known.”
“Rookie mistake” is a good way to characterize this, but given Martha Wong’s response I’m beginning to wonder if this is more of a deliberate choice than a bobble. I’m really stunned that she hasn’t backed down and moved on. Is she trying to force Dr. Saavedra into issuing a more strongly worded refutation of her endorsement claim? Maybe she thinks if she holds firm people will believe her, I don’t know. Weird, just weird.