Why, oh why, do Democrats who know they’re unelectable choose to run and siphon off votes from good Democrats like Gina Ortiz Jones who can win? I find that sort of behavior truly flabbergasting – and it hurts our party.
In this particular case, with a few less Democratic opponents, Ortiz Jones would likely have won an outright majority, …
Why, oh why, do Democrats who know they’re unelectable choose to run and siphon off votes from good Democrats like Gina Ortiz Jones who can win? I find that sort of behavior truly flabbergasting – and it hurts our party.
In this particular case, with a few less Democratic opponents, Ortiz Jones would likely have won an outright majority, eliminating the risk of a time-consuming and costly runoff.
And a 10 percent turnout?? Except perhaps to JD Vance, when has the couch seemed that much more attractive?
I suspect the huge number of people running might have turned some voters off.
I don't know anything about the local dynamic in San Antonio, but it is a general phenomena that when presented with a plethora of options people make worse decisions than when given a smaller number. This may have translated into people just skipping the primary.
The election occurred in the midst of the annual Fiesta, citywide merriment that distracted many voters. It was officially nonpartisan, and in fact the campaigns focused on local issues not easily reduced to red vs. blue.
Not entirely true. Many of the other candidates were members of the city council who had legitimate shots at the mayoralty. Also, because of a recent change in the city charter, this was the first time that the term would be four years rather than two; that especially attracted candidates. The race was not conceived of as Democrats vs. Republicans.
Assuming the runoff is between only two candidates, thus meaning that no pouty-pants losing Dem can run as a third candidate and potentially hand the race to the GOP.
Yes, but, given rational decisions by marginal Democratic candidates not to run in the first place, that runoff – and the risk it entails – would not have been necessary.
You just can't expect candidates not to run for open seats. It's like musical or sports competitions. The only reasonable thing to fault candidates for is if they attack fellow Democrats in injurious ways or act sullen after being knocked out, instead of giving the runoff candidate their wholehearted endorsement.
Not going to beat a dead horse, but as a San Antonian I'll second the other reasons given.
1) Election was during Fiesta.
2) Our city elections are non-partisan. It does happen that political affiliations emerge, but they usually take a back seat. One of the biggest issues this time was over the funding of Project Marvel and whether taxpayer dollars should be used to fund a new Spurs arena downtown. On this issue alone, the unofficial Democratic candidates had differing views on it, but it seemed to be matter of degrees.
3) It was an open seat, and the new mayor will get four years instead of two.
As an aside, I didn't vote for Gina Ortiz Jones. I actually voted for District 6 Councilwoman Melissa Cabello Havrda, who happens to be my current council person. I will be voting for Jones in the runoff.
The major paper, San Antonio Express-News, endorsed the District 4 Councilwoman for mayor and then followed it with their 2nd (CD8), 3rd (CD9), and 4th (Jones and Pablos) choices for mayor.
My biggest surprise was Beto Altamirano not doing better considering his supporters read like a who's who of city leaders who usually back the front runners.
How prominent is Tommy Calvert in local politics there? There was an election for freshmen seats on the student senate immediately after we moved in and one of my first memories of college was Tommy canvassing me for my vote.
I first worked with Tommy on a U.S. Senate race in 2007 (the candidate eventually didn't run). He does stay active in local politics and makes sure to get his name out there. He's now the most senior member on our Commissioners Court and seems to have solidified his hold as the incumbent for Precinct 4. I remember when he first won the seat and his name would pop up whenever there were open seats. Depending on how long the new county judge stays on, I could easily see Tommy running to replace him.
Now that I think about it, Tommy might have been the first person I ever voted for, I had just turned 18 the month before and the 1998 midterms were a few months away.
I’ll just add that none of the other major Dem-aligned candidates were “unelectable.” They were very good and qualified, and in a race where only three of them were running, would’ve done better. The field was just spread too thin, even disregarding the 18 or so candidates who had zero chance of getting more than a few hundred votes. It helped GOJ (and Pablos) to have a ton of PAC money behind them — I got so many more mailers from GOJ’s campaign than any other, by far. I’m not saying anything bad about GOJ here — just that it’s not that the other major candidates inherently had no chance. Gina’s resources allowed her to drive up name ID and break apart from the pack in a big way, but that wasn’t a given / it’s not that she was obviously a better candidate from the beginning and the others just decided to run because why not.
Why, oh why, do Democrats who know they’re unelectable choose to run and siphon off votes from good Democrats like Gina Ortiz Jones who can win? I find that sort of behavior truly flabbergasting – and it hurts our party.
In this particular case, with a few less Democratic opponents, Ortiz Jones would likely have won an outright majority, eliminating the risk of a time-consuming and costly runoff.
And a 10 percent turnout?? Except perhaps to JD Vance, when has the couch seemed that much more attractive?
I suspect the huge number of people running might have turned some voters off.
I don't know anything about the local dynamic in San Antonio, but it is a general phenomena that when presented with a plethora of options people make worse decisions than when given a smaller number. This may have translated into people just skipping the primary.
The election occurred in the midst of the annual Fiesta, citywide merriment that distracted many voters. It was officially nonpartisan, and in fact the campaigns focused on local issues not easily reduced to red vs. blue.
Because ego and vanity.
and plain old stupidity
Not entirely true. Many of the other candidates were members of the city council who had legitimate shots at the mayoralty. Also, because of a recent change in the city charter, this was the first time that the term would be four years rather than two; that especially attracted candidates. The race was not conceived of as Democrats vs. Republicans.
Why is that so bad? Take your shot and then work for the finalist in the runoff.
Assuming the runoff is between only two candidates, thus meaning that no pouty-pants losing Dem can run as a third candidate and potentially hand the race to the GOP.
Correct.
Still, isn't Ortiz Jones favored to win the runoff?
Yes, but, given rational decisions by marginal Democratic candidates not to run in the first place, that runoff – and the risk it entails – would not have been necessary.
You just can't expect candidates not to run for open seats. It's like musical or sports competitions. The only reasonable thing to fault candidates for is if they attack fellow Democrats in injurious ways or act sullen after being knocked out, instead of giving the runoff candidate their wholehearted endorsement.
Not going to beat a dead horse, but as a San Antonian I'll second the other reasons given.
1) Election was during Fiesta.
2) Our city elections are non-partisan. It does happen that political affiliations emerge, but they usually take a back seat. One of the biggest issues this time was over the funding of Project Marvel and whether taxpayer dollars should be used to fund a new Spurs arena downtown. On this issue alone, the unofficial Democratic candidates had differing views on it, but it seemed to be matter of degrees.
3) It was an open seat, and the new mayor will get four years instead of two.
As an aside, I didn't vote for Gina Ortiz Jones. I actually voted for District 6 Councilwoman Melissa Cabello Havrda, who happens to be my current council person. I will be voting for Jones in the runoff.
The major paper, San Antonio Express-News, endorsed the District 4 Councilwoman for mayor and then followed it with their 2nd (CD8), 3rd (CD9), and 4th (Jones and Pablos) choices for mayor.
My biggest surprise was Beto Altamirano not doing better considering his supporters read like a who's who of city leaders who usually back the front runners.
How prominent is Tommy Calvert in local politics there? There was an election for freshmen seats on the student senate immediately after we moved in and one of my first memories of college was Tommy canvassing me for my vote.
I first worked with Tommy on a U.S. Senate race in 2007 (the candidate eventually didn't run). He does stay active in local politics and makes sure to get his name out there. He's now the most senior member on our Commissioners Court and seems to have solidified his hold as the incumbent for Precinct 4. I remember when he first won the seat and his name would pop up whenever there were open seats. Depending on how long the new county judge stays on, I could easily see Tommy running to replace him.
Now that I think about it, Tommy might have been the first person I ever voted for, I had just turned 18 the month before and the 1998 midterms were a few months away.
Melissa gang represent!! (Seriously are you me lol, same name and Melissa supporter. Not that there aren’t ten million Jacobs in San Antonio lol)
God forbid a candidate for mayor of a city of over a million people has to actually win more than 50k votes in an open seat, nonpartisan election!
I’ll just add that none of the other major Dem-aligned candidates were “unelectable.” They were very good and qualified, and in a race where only three of them were running, would’ve done better. The field was just spread too thin, even disregarding the 18 or so candidates who had zero chance of getting more than a few hundred votes. It helped GOJ (and Pablos) to have a ton of PAC money behind them — I got so many more mailers from GOJ’s campaign than any other, by far. I’m not saying anything bad about GOJ here — just that it’s not that the other major candidates inherently had no chance. Gina’s resources allowed her to drive up name ID and break apart from the pack in a big way, but that wasn’t a given / it’s not that she was obviously a better candidate from the beginning and the others just decided to run because why not.