Volume 59, Issue 11  - October 30, 2006

A complicated dish of charm, intelligence and know-how
By Mark A. Castillo
Columnist

For the record, I'm not political either.

Castillo

That doesn't mean, however, that when it comes to politics I'm completely clueless. The fact is, I know a thing or two about a thing or two.

I know that in elections, the most important thing is to get people out to the polls to vote for you. I know that glad-handing and baby-kissing are staples of the whole affair. I even know that if someone registers to vote and then moves to a different county, that person has to register all over again.

Sadly, and perhaps most importantly, I also know that the best candidate does not always win the election.

In the 2006 Texas gubernatorial election, such is likely to be the case.

This is because although the four candidates, in part if not in whole, represent exactly what it is that voters want out of legitimate candidates for Texas governor. The fact remains that they do so only in part and not in whole. They are a divided and incomplete lot with not one of them encompassing all the traits demanded of them by the voting populace.

Charm, intelligence, political clout and know-how, that's what people want to see.

Unfortunately for Texas voters, that is simply not the case with this year's candidates.

Rick Perry, the incumbent candidate, is a shining example of what is lacking in the governor's seat: namely, direction. In six years, he has yet to guide Texas in the direction most would agree Texans would like to move toward: To be the state that leads the nation in energy production, upholds sterner child-molestation laws and sets the model for educator compensation and standardized testing reform.

With Perry in office, only one of those items--child molestation laws--is likely to garner any real attention. But as was stated by Carole Keeton Strayhorn during the recent Belo Corp.-sponsored debates, Gov. Perry has been in office "six long years and 10 legislative sessions and still no" such law.

It's no small wonder then that although a recent poll conducted by the Dallas Morning News shows that 38 percent of likely voters say they'll likely vote for Perry, two-thirds of likely voters within the same poll want Perry to lose the election.

The question is, who is going to take the position from him?

Enter the dilemma of the split vote.

With the three other candidates vying for the spot in the capitol and not one of them sufficiently gaining enough ground as of yet to seriously contend with Perry, it begs the question of whether this election has too much diversity. Are voters too divided by the plethora of options, without one candidate encompassing all that we look for?

Case in point: independent hopeful Richard "Kinky" Friedman, the face and voice of the 2006 election. As a humorist, he has taken the grass-roots approach to this election that many people find refreshing, and done so to substantial amount of success. However, the issue with Friedman--whom I first heard of over a year ago on Bill Maher's HBO show--is that his bit is all he's really got going for him.

As I said, I heard of him over a year ago, and as of the Oct. 10 visit to the SET-B Lecture Hall, he's yet to say anything new. More than once during the brief time I was in attendance did he avoid answering students’ questions with anything substantial, instead relying on his well-worn campaign slogans and cigar gestures. Of course, that's not to say he doesn't care.

And, all is not well in the land of Strayhorn, the current state comptroller and self-described "tough grandma," who has a great track record within the Texas political landscape and has set many milestones for women in Texas politics.

I need only point out her apparent befuddlement during certain instances of the Belo Corp. debate, including a damaging gaffe in which she could not name the president-elect of Mexico. In a Strayhorn administration, it seems keeping up to date with international matters is not as important as making sure to say the slogan "in a Strayhorn administration" to open and close each of your sentences.

Is it any wonder then, that with characters like Friedman and Strayhorn in the election, that Democratic candidate Chris Bell is so awesomely overshadowed?

Seemingly the only candidate with anything to say that is remotely tied to realistic solutions for Texas' woes, Bell is nevertheless this election's Al Gore, a candidate who has viable plans for the future welfare of his constituents and a credible--if short--political record, but is done in by his total lack of charisma.

And so it is, that in this 2006 election, the best candidate will most likely not win the race. Not because Friedman and Strayhorn are siphoning off votes from the seemingly more competent Bell, but because the best candidate simply does not exist at this point. Not unless there's a way to genetically splice together the three contenders for Rick Perry's crown.

Personally, I blame the ban on stem cell research. But then, I'm no expert on much of anything.

But for those of you who are in the know politically, who will you have to blame when Perry becomes the longest-tenured Texas governor in 2010? Indecision is not an excuse.

And as was the case in the 2004 presidential election, a lack of a palatable alternative will not alter the fact that when change is needed, the majority of people must grit their teeth and vote for that change--even if it means breaking party lines or the status quo.