November 10, 2008
So was there an HGLBT endorsement backlash?

Back in August, a couple of sitting Republican judges, Mike Miller Mark Davidson and Sharolyn Wood, broke with recent history and became the first GOP judicial candidates in some time to seek the endorsement of the Houston GLBT Political Caucus. At the time, there was some speculation that in doing so, they would risk a backlash by conservatives who disapproved of such action. How'd that play out in real life? Well, as we know, the average Republican judicial candidate got about 540,000 votes in this election. Sharolyn Wood beat that average by receiving 544,440 votes; no backlash there. Miller Davidson fell slightly below the average with 538,105 votes. He did, however, receive more votes than 13 of his GOP colleagues; in fact, he was the median votegetter among Republican judicials. That doesn't sound very backlashy to me, either. So, my verdict is that there is no evidence to suggest that either Judges Wood or Miller Davidson suffered at the ballot box for their gesture of equality and inclusion. I suspect - indeed, I hope - many of their soon-to-be-former colleagues will follow their example in 2010. Especially now that it's clear they'll need all the help they can get, I don't see any valid reason why one wouldn't.

UPDATE: Mark Davidson, not Mike Miller. Right race, wrong candidate. Sorry about that.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on November 10, 2008 to Election 2008

Mark Davidson is the other judge you were looking for. Mark Davidson.

Miller is a Dem who won.

Posted by: I. P. Phreely on November 10, 2008 9:13 AM

Backlashy? Surely not...

Posted by: Melissa on November 10, 2008 10:49 AM

There may have been no backlash in the voting, but did you notice that the mailings that went out from various Republican groups for the "Republican Judges" did not include Judge Davidson? I believe I saw more than one, but the only one I can remember specifically was signed by Gary Polland.

Posted by: Temple Houston on November 10, 2008 10:56 AM

When those 2 Judges (Davidson & Wood) stated they were seeking the GLBT endorsement, Jared Woodfill immediately threw them under the bus. Obviously, therefore, they did not have clearance from the party to do so.

Further, they were not ever likely to get the endorsement, so why bother. It's a lose-lose.

Wood had reportedly renounced a prior endorsement by GLBT in the 90s after there was backlash then.

Posted by: I. P. Phreely on November 10, 2008 12:02 PM

What is increasingly frustrating for me is I have talked this morning with frend that know Goodwille Pierre but have never heard of the name Tad Halbach and then one who knows Halbach but could not tell me when I reflexively asked him who is or was Pierre.

I have talked with some this morning that voted straight ticket Democrat telling me they knew no one other than Obama but gave their precious vote to countless others they did not know and some who did the same on Republican side.

This is sad. If you do not know who someone is on the ballot do NOT give your vote to them or their opponent!

Posted by: burt levine on November 10, 2008 12:23 PM

How do you make the logical jump from a simple vote total to a differential impact from having sought the GLBT vote?

Posted by: Guy McLendon on December 11, 2008 8:44 PM
Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)