Our last Council runoff review:
Dist Christie Moses
======================
A 8,729 3,657
B 3,273 11,539
C 17,743 8,757
D 5,285 13,847
E 16,652 4,324
F 4,108 2,747
G 23,150 4,954
H 4,230 4,405
I 3,716 3,611
J 3,149 1,985
K 6,152 8,582
A 70.47% 29.53%
B 22.10% 77.90%
C 66.95% 33.05%
D 27.62% 72.38%
E 79.39% 20.61%
F 59.93% 40.07%
G 82.37% 17.63%
H 48.99% 51.01%
I 50.72% 49.28%
J 61.34% 38.66%
K 41.75% 58.25%
Jack Christie
CM Jack Christie is a genuinely nice person, the kind of moderate Republican one fears is going extinct in Texas. He’s definitely been fortunate in the opposition he’s faced. He was fortunate to get then-CM Jolanda Jones into a runoff in 2011 – he trailed her in the November vote, and probably would have lost at that time if it had been just him and her in that race – then won in a low-turnout runoff, which unlike the runoff he lost to her in 2009 did not have a Mayoral race on the same ballot. He faced nominal opposition in 2013 from a couple of late entrants, and was put into a runoff again this year against a candidate who was not well known and who did not generate a lot of Democratic excitement. He’s one of six third term Council members who got two bonus years from the term limits change (five second-year members get four bonus years), and as a senior member of Council ought to have plenty of opportunities to help new Mayor Turner make his mark on the city.
Despite having interviewed her for the runoff, I’m still not sure what to make of Sharon Moses. I thought she came across reasonably well in the interview, though like many first-time candidates she didn’t have a deep knowledge of most issues. A lot of Democratic groups were hesitant with both her and Georgia Provost, and while Provost generally won their endorsements, Moses lagged behind, which is one reason why I expected Provost to do better. She was involved in a dustup over HERO and LGBT equality at a meeting of the Meyerland Democrats’ meeting prior to the runoff. Some of you may have seen a report on that elsewhere; Moses disputed that written account, but a couple of people later corroborated it to me in person. I don’t know how much of that was genuine disagreement and how much was a first-time candidate who maybe didn’t express her views as clearly as she could have, but the electoral effect was clear. In the end, the beneficiary was Jack Christie, and perhaps the candidates who will run for his to-be-open seat in 2019, the only open citywide office on the ballot that year barring anything unexpected.
Looking at past council races where the incumbent is term limited.
Every tom, dick and jane without a platform that has been waiting 4 years will be registering for that race.
I see no point in, me or anyone else, running in that race.
Are you suggesting at large four be axed?
I mean at large five.
Burt,
I’m saying if races where incumbent is term limited and it becomes a repeat where there’s 5-7 candidates and no one has a serious platform.
And it’s just a dig and pony show.
Count me out.