The so-far civil race for mayor of San Jose will come to an abrupt end on June 3. So far, candidates have understood that to attack their opponent is to demean themselves. When the public has multiple options, attack ads spell defeat for both the aggressor and the target. All participants in the mayor’s race have avoided this route to date.
But things are different in a two-person standoff. When the electorate has to choose between two candidates, the calculus changes and attack ads begin to appear.
So who will make the runoff? Here are some predictions based on known polling, past elections, the current campaigns and my personal experience with campaigns. Like most punditry, the following forecasts could end up erroneous. And I expect a myriad of misinformed miscreants to point out why my analysis is dead wrong. But let’s do it anyway.
Dave Cortese is a favorite to make the runoff. His coalition is solid. He has made no mistakes and he benefits from not being on the current City Council. He wants to unify the city and has good relationships with almost everyone.
His critics are worried that he is a “labor” candidate. They forget that labor opposed Cortese in his first run for mayor. Cortese is no one’s automatic vote on anything. A lawyer by training, he works off of reason and he plays nice in the sandbox. Cortese has a style similar to that of former Mayor Susan Hammer, who was one of our greatest mayors—more of a consensus builder than a chest thumper. After eight years of contentious debate and feuding factions on the council, Cortese could be a breath of fresh air.
Sam Liccardo will probably edge out Madison Nguyen for the second spot. He is well liked, smart and ambitious. He also has a terrific record on housing, the environment and Silicon Valley business people like him. Liccardo’s pedigree from Bellarmine to Harvard is impressive.
Stories of his early fundraising forced Liccardo to return some early campaign contributions, which hurt his message. His early messages also focused almost exclusively on crime, which is not his strength. But while he whiffed coming out of the box, the campaign seems to have righted the ship. Liccardo has solid support from the Mercury News. His downtown base, led by former Mayor Tom McEnery, is formidable and he is personally affable. Many people see the potential and want him to succeed.
If elected, his style will probably be more McEnery than Reed. McEnery was a better mayor. The book on Liccardo is that he tries to take on too much at one time. But he is smart and would surround himself with some of the best minds in the city. His Achilles’ heal is his current relationship with city employees. While Liccardo would undoubtedly try to mend fences, that is only possible if the other side is willing to come together. There has been no evidence Liccardo’s opponents are willing to forgive.
If there is a primary surprise, Madison Nguyen will probably be it. She is the only legitimate female candidate in the race. While Rose Herrera is on the ballot, she has neither the resources nor traction to compete citywide.
Nguyen, on the other hand, has the resources. And her story is compelling. But there is enmity from some in her own community, who feel betrayed on the “Little Saigon” issue. Moreover, her split from labor caused even more hard feelings than those reserved for Liccardo. Had labor not supported Nguyen in the 2009 recall election, she might not be a councilmember today.
Her campaign has been surprisingly low key and positive, which was not expected given her campaign team. That may be the reason she ends up losing. If Nguyen can’t separate herself from Liccardo, the electorate will probably choose him based on the campaign he has run and the endorsements he has procured. Nguyen did, however, recently receive the Metro endorsement.
It is hard to imagine what kind of governing style she would bring to San Jose. Nguyen is more malleable than the other candidates. Flexibility can be an advantage at times, but she remains an underdog for now.
Pierluigi Oliverio will not be mayor. The quixotic councilmember has a radically independent message that appeals to some voters, and he is popular in his own district. He’s also a ubiquitous campaigner. But he is unlikely to gain enough support to make it into the top two. If Nguyen makes it to the runoff, she will owe Oliverio big time. He siphons votes from Liccardo, which is gold in the bucket for Nguyen.
While Herrera has no chance at this point, she can assist Liccardo by taking away female support from Nguyen. She won’t be a winner, but she could have some influence as a spoiler—and that might bode well for her future, depending on the outcome.
Elections are not determined by the most popular candidate, but by those who actually participate in the process. I expect a very low voter turnout, which is the biggest and most unknown quotient in the equation. Short of a Bill Chew victory, nothing is impossible.
MOST important election in SJ history. More of the same with liccardo and city employees leaving at record pace… Or as you say Cortese would be a breath of fresh Air.
Rich & ET Smokey: Cortese will be a breath of same old organized labor puppet stale air that put us in the fiscal mess we are in.
So you would vote for Liccardo who with Reed lied to you about being 650m short,,, see NBC Bay Area story. You know the only city with this mess is SJ … SF has 3 times the amount of police and are hiring. They took some of the best of ours. But if you trust people that lie to you I do not know what could change your mind? But breath of fresh air or liccardo fighting and suing the police who protect us. What part of cops do not want to work in SJ do
You not understand?
You got it
The thing that no one is talking about is what would happen if the library parcel tax fails. Normally there is no opposition to things like that, but the folks that want porn filters are using it as leverage to get what they want.
If it fails, there will suddenly be even less money available for city services, and the Council will have to make plans accordingly. That has to color the council and mayor’s races.
Well, if it does fail it won’t be for lack of trying on the Registrar of Voters’ part.
“Inadvertently” leaving the Argument Against off the sample ballot was an inspired bit of cleverness.
Leaving the against argument re library tax off the ballot cost the taxpayers a ton of money to send out the separate ballot statement. The least that should happen is a couple of terminations. Better still, a criminal investigation. Neither will happen, though.
I don’t understand how software intended to filter pornography from San Jose public libraries came to be perceived locally as some sort of right-wing fringe, Christian Fundamentalist issue. It seems to me that all San Jose citizens should be united in the idea that the public computers at the San Jose public libraries are not intended for meth users to view harcore pornography while they fondle themselves through a hole in the pocket of their jeans (and no, I’m not exaggerating). I’m a HUGE supporter of the public library system, but if this is the only way to get the public library administrators to initiate such a simple, basic, and common sense policy, then just maybe we SHOULD vote down their parcel tax?
Here here Kevin.
It came to be perceived as such locally because locally we are mindlessly guided like nobody’s business by an absolute obeisance to the doctrine of political correctness. The book tells us what to think- and we obediently think it.
It’s weird. Scary and weird.
Kevin:
Jane Light, the former SJ library system head honcho, and a bunch of libs, saw free access to porn at public expense solely as a First Amendment issue. Their feeble minds were unable to grasp that there are two issues–one, everyone has a right to view porn; two, they don’t have the right to taxpayer money to support that right. It’s not a poverty issue either. Just because you’re poor or homeless doesn’t mean you have the right to have the taxpayers pay for your porn viewing.
Election’s over, Rich.
Liccardo won.
http://sjoutsidethebubble.wordpress.com/2014/05/12/poll-san-jose-mayoral-election/
A conscientious political consultant would tell his clients that nothing more can be done, and then refund the clients’ consulting fees.
If Liccardo is the choice , I would rather have “None of the Above”
Oooops!
I made mad you mad, Rich, didn’t I.
You slammed my online poll.
Well, we’ll see if you can do it twice. The poll resets after a week.
It’s not just about personalities.
Here is a poll on San Jose mayoral race ISSUES;
http://sjoutsidethebubble.wordpress.com/2014/05/17/san-jose-mayoral-election-issues/
WR Smoke: And the Gonzales crew with Cortese on board never lied to us? A lying politician is a redundant phrase. Oliverio seems to be the only one who hasn’t lied. That nets him fourth place in a field of five.
Would stealing signs be a form of lying or trust?
Your so-called poll doesn’t even list “fix the roads.”
It’s not a so-called poll, it’s a real online poll.
It does not mention “fix the roads”, it does not mention “global warming”, it does not mention “end the Federal Reserve”, it does not mention “end water fluoridation”, it does not mention “labeling of GMO foods”.
You are correct. It IS an incomplete poll.
I hope you are not irretrievably damaged.
Those clever Democrats!
Someday, Rich, you’ll have to explain to us little people how Democrats are able to pull off stunts like this:
http://sjoutsidethebubble.wordpress.com/2014/05/23/democrat-crime-watch-john-conyers/
http://sjoutsidethebubble.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/democrat-crime-watch-the-john-conyers-miracle/
http://sjoutsidethebubble.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/strange-that-a/
Who needs election laws when we have courts with Democrat appointed judges?