Precinct analysis: At Large 2 and 3

Lots of action, and lots of candidates in the At Large races this year. Let’s look at the two races that are going to the runoffs, At Large #2 and 3. First is AL2, in which first term CM Andrew Burks trailed challenger David Robinson after Election Day.

Dist Robinson Rivera Burks Gordon =================================== A 3,644 1,475 3,533 883 B 3,419 840 6,239 332 C 12,038 2,808 5,024 1,127 D 4,294 1,228 9,250 729 E 4,647 3,339 3,761 932 F 2,263 981 1,649 438 G 8,313 1,826 6,072 1,592 H 2,484 2,593 1,836 333 I 2,111 2,655 1,963 396 J 1,813 725 1,269 283 K 4,520 1,285 4,818 575 Dist Robinson Rivera Burks Gordon ===================================== A 38.22% 15.47% 37.05% 9.26% B 31.57% 7.76% 57.61% 3.07% C 57.33% 13.37% 23.93% 5.37% D 27.70% 7.92% 59.67% 4.70% E 36.65% 26.33% 29.66% 7.35% F 42.45% 18.40% 30.93% 8.22% G 46.69% 10.26% 34.11% 8.94% H 34.28% 35.79% 25.34% 4.60% I 29.63% 37.26% 27.55% 5.56% J 44.33% 17.73% 31.03% 6.92% K 40.36% 11.48% 43.03% 5.13%

Though Robinson only led by a few points, he sure looks like he’s in good shape going into December. Robinson led in the Republican districts, dominated District C, and held his own in the African-American districts. In short, as Greg noted, he’s basically replicating Annise Parker’s coalition from 2009. His path to victory in the runoff is clear: more of the same, with maximal effort in C and a push for the Moe Rivera voters in H and I.

Andrew Burks also has a clear path to victory in the runoff: Maximize turnout in B and D, and hold his own in the Republican districts, which was his formula for victory in the 2011 runoff. Burks’ problem is that he’s never been good at maximizing turnout. The undervote in Burks’ At Large races is always higher than the undervote in the other At Large races. For example, this year the undervote in AL2 was 29.75%; in At Large #4, it was only 24.85%, and the next highest undervote after AL2 was in At Large #5, at 28.02%. In the 2011 runoff, the undervote rate was 8.63% in Burks’ race, 1.02% in the Jolanda Jones/Jack Christie race. In the 2009 runoff, the numbers were 19.47% and 12.63%. If Burks had approached Jolanda Jones’ numbers in B and D he would have won; in reality, he lost Harris County by nine points. If Burks can perform like Ronald Green or Brad Bradford in the runoff, he wins. If not, he loses. It’s as simple as that.

On to At Large #3:

Dist Batteau Chavez Calvert Kubosh Pool Morales ================================================= A 529 1,284 1,141 3,591 1,689 1,898 B 1,687 1,331 1,842 3,162 1,562 1,172 C 943 2,748 4,941 5,223 5,594 2,997 D 3,233 1,542 2,279 5,120 2,017 1,492 E 669 1,232 1,571 4,305 2,062 3,614 F 432 586 806 1,337 1,154 1,217 G 795 1,068 3,786 6,254 2,724 4,179 H 422 2,467 790 1,453 1,136 1,705 I 531 2,049 599 1,337 955 2,085 J 333 450 736 1,155 821 892 K 1,361 1,073 2,181 3,214 2,045 1,621 Dist Batteau Chavez Calvert Kubosh Pool Morales ==================================================== A 5.22% 12.67% 11.26% 35.44% 16.67% 18.73% B 15.68% 12.37% 17.13% 29.40% 14.52% 10.90% C 4.20% 12.24% 22.01% 23.27% 24.92% 13.35% D 20.61% 9.83% 14.53% 32.65% 12.86% 9.51% E 4.97% 9.16% 11.68% 32.00% 15.33% 26.86% F 7.81% 10.59% 14.57% 24.17% 20.86% 22.00% G 4.23% 5.68% 20.13% 33.26% 14.48% 22.22% H 5.29% 30.94% 9.91% 18.22% 14.25% 21.38% I 7.03% 27.12% 7.93% 17.69% 12.64% 27.59% J 7.59% 10.26% 16.78% 26.33% 18.71% 20.33% K 11.84% 9.33% 18.97% 27.96% 17.79% 14.10%

I’ve heard some grumbling from fellow Dems about how this race wound up as a runoff between two Republicans. I get the frustration, but I’m not sure what one would recommend doing about it. There were three good Democrats in this race, and they split the vote just evenly enough to keep themselves out of the top two slots. Short of going back in time and convincing one or more of them to not file or drop out, I don’t know what else there is to be done. Shrug it off as a fluke and put this one on the priority list for 2015.

I covered some of this ground yesterday, so let me just say again that I think Michael Kubosh has the advantage going into the runoff, and his path to victory is clear. Roy Morales needs help from the Annise Parker voters, which may or may not be there for him. It’s entirely possible we could see a sizable undervote in this race. It’ll be interesting to see whether more people skip this race or the one in At Large #2. I should add that while I’ve talked about Morales trying to convince the Parker voters to support him, there’s nothing stopping Kubosh from doing the same. He’s been cast as an adversary for the Mayor, but he can make a case that he was only opposing her on issues where he thought she was wrong and that on other things they’re reasonably in agreement. The field is open, and there’s plenty of room for either candidate to move to fill the space without having to move too far.

Anyway. This one can go a variety of directions. All I know for sure is that I have no idea yet how I will vote in that race. Houston Politics has more.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in Election 2013 and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Precinct analysis: At Large 2 and 3

  1. Tim Bacon says:

    You can vote for Kuback or not vote at all, which amounts to the same thing. Nothing can make me vote for Kuback. Now is Morales so bad to not vote in the race, simply because I don’t like either one of them and, by doing so, hand a “vote for” Kubosh? I vote. So I’ll hold my nose, click my heels 3 times and scrub with a brillo pad when I get home.

  2. Paul kubosh says:

    Tim…I am curious why wouldn’t you vite for kubosh….don’t be shy let him have it.

  3. Paul kubosh says:

    Vote…fat fingers on cell phone.

  4. Hobby Lobby says:

    I am in much the same boat as Tim Bacon. I have an issue with Kubosh going against the Mayor at all costs. Backing a wingnut like Helena Brown, which I’m sorry, she may have improved over her term, and certainly once she got rid of Ablaza, the media issues seem to calm down, (I suspect there is a correlation). It also gives me pause that Kubosh would be so behind Ablaza in her initial run, even though she was so clearly unqualified except for her opposition to the Mayor. That apparently trumped everything. The last straw for me is a recent post I saw where Noel Freeman of the GLBT political caucus is calling Kubosh out for lying to the Meyerland Democrats. Supposedly Kubosh told the Meyerland Dems that he had screened with the caucus and had conversations with Mr. Freeman about a non-discrimination ordinance. Not true. According to Noel Freeman, that never happened.

  5. Hobby Lobby says:

    I am in much the same boat as Tim Bacon. I have an issue with Kubosh going against the Mayor at all costs. Backing a wingnut like Helena Brown, which I’m sorry, she may have improved over her term, and certainly once she got rid of Ablaza, the media issues seem to calm down, (I suspect there is a correlation). It also gives me pause that Kubosh would be so behind Ablaza in her initial run, even though she was so clearly unqualified except for her opposition to the Mayor. That apparently trumped everything. The last straw for me is a recent post I saw where Noel Freeman of the GLBT political caucus is calling Kubosh out for lying to the Meyerland Democrats. Supposedly Kubosh told the Meyerland Dems that he had screened with the caucus and had conversations with Mr. Freeman about a non-discrimination ordinance. Not true. According to Noel Freeman, that never happened.

  6. Paul Kubosh says:

    Hobby, if you can’t vote for Mike because he aggressively stood his ground on issues that are opposite of the Mayor fine. We can’t change that. Secondly, please don’t confuse my support of people with Mike’s support of people. Lastly, I wasn’t at the Meyerland Democrat function and apparently according to your post neither was Noel. Mike didn’t screen with them nor the Fire department. I personally screened with them when we Ran the Red Light Camera Campaign.

    This is Paul Kubosh, NOT Michael Kubosh and I do not represent the campaign nor do I make statements for the campaign. I am just addicted to checking this website to see the arguments.

  7. joshua ben bullard says:

    lol lol lol lol lol let me settle this,mike kubosh has a lot of positive name id threw out Houston,i don’t know if roy has another rabbit in his hat,but if so, now would be the time to pull it=if the race went tonight I see the results at 58% kubosh and 42% roy .Joshua ben bullard

  8. Ross says:

    I wouldn’t vote for Mike because he’s not a real resident of Houston. Until such time as he gives up the homestead exemption on his house in the County, I will not consider him a real resident here in the City. Next legislative session, I plan to write asking my legislators to change the law to make a homestead exemption prima facie evidence of a persons actual residence, and require that address be used for voting purposes.

  9. Paul kubosh says:

    Ross…I will help you push that bill…but lets not stop with city council lets do it for all politicians. You will see how fast your state representative laughs you out of his office.

  10. Pingback: Precinct analysis: At Large 1, 4, and 5 – Off the Kuff

  11. Cyndi Payton says:

    lol Ross must have been conversing with Roy Morales to come up with that mess. It was a nice try Morales, signs of desparate times, He thought if he could get Michael thrown out of the race, he could take it. LOL

Comments are closed.