While I'm quite comfortable writing about the Elections that are for positions within the actual building of the CJC, I'm much more reserved in commenting on races outside of it. I don't usually comment on Nationwide elections or even Statewide ones. I don't talk about the various Courts of Appeals because I don't do Appellate Law.
I make exceptions every once in a while when a member of our CJC community (whom I know well) is venturing off the lily pad to run for a non-CJC office.
This year, I profiled Mark Bennett's race for the Court of Criminal Appeals and Ann Johnson's race for State Representative. I did not do a post on HCDA prosecutor Gene Wu's run for State Representative, but not because I don't like Gene. I just don't know him as well as I know Mark and Ann.
In the end, Gene should be grateful for the lack of attention, as it appears my support may have been the kiss of death for my friends outside of the CJC. Gene won his race handily.
Congratulations to Gene on his new job description and his lovely new bride, Miya Shay. Gene is passionate about helping out this community and I have no doubt that he will be a persistent and driving force in politics for years to come.
In regards to Ann's and Mark's races, I'm so very proud of both of them for the races they ran.
Anyone remotely familiar with Ann's campaign knows that she redefined the word "tireless" for the past several months. She poured her heart and soul into making phone calls, attending events, and walking neighborhoods. She ran for all of the right reasons and she had a grassroots campaign that loved her for it. She is a true example of what I wish all politicians exemplified.
Brother Mark ran for the right principle, too.
He's a smart guy and knew that running as a Libertarian was not likely to carry an election for him -- especially not one where he went mano y mano in a Statewide race against an incumbent Republican. But as he articulates very thoroughly in this post on his blog, winning wasn't the goal -- getting his voice heard was.
Mark's point was to show that a Third Party candidate can directly affect the two major parties in their races. Mark got 22.1% of the vote. There was no Democratic candidate. If there had been, Mark would have been a game changer.
You may not always agree with Mark Bennett. Lord knows, I don't. But I think you can agree with the principle that there is something worth discussing when it comes to taking judicial elections away from partisan machines.
I will be interested to see whether or not Mark takes his Libertarian campaign to a county-wide race in 2014. He may just be onto something.
Congratulations to Gene Wu on his victory and congratulations to Mark and Ann for their well-fought races.
All of you have so much to be proud of.
9 comments:
Thank you to all of my HCDAO and Criminal Defense friends who supported my campaign from the very beginning. We couldn't have done it without you.
Gene
Mark's point was to show that a Third Party candidate can directly affect the two major parties in their races.
Well, if his point in 2012 is to make a point that Ross Perot made in 1992 and 1996, well, he's not exactly on the cutting edge of political discourse.
As usual.
Rage
Don't be an ass.
Murray,
It's hard for Rage to be anything different than what he is.
Eh. I'm a scorpion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog
But I don't understand your love for the guy. He's been an outright dick to you and others, while refusing to live up to the standards to which he holds them.
And now he feels he made some unique point?
Perhaps in the micro-poilitical realm the point could be made that finally this tactic is ripe to change politics in Harris County, and I would agree. But third-party spoilers are well-known tactics. Perot delivered the White House to Clinton; Nader, possibly, to Bush. Just because it might be possible in the future in judicial races here doesn't mean he reinvented the wheel.
Rage
So because he didn't reinvent the wheel it can't be commented on, or discussed?
The scorpion couldn't be anything but a scorpion. You could choose not to be an asshole, you just don't choose to do so.
And when Arthur Seaton says you are an asshole, he knows whereof he speaks.
Seaton
At least when Mark calls someone a dipshit, he has the balls to sign his name to his comments.
Not Mark
7:48, he doesn't do it though. He gets on to other people for not doing it, but doesn't do it himself.
I voted for Mark knowing he would not win and encouraged others to do so because I share your feeling that our judiciaray branch would be better off if it were somewhat insulated from the dominant political parties.
Post a Comment