I'm obviously still running days and weeks behind on a lot of election/campaign news going on. In the case of the San Antonio mayoral race, I'm only a few days behind. With that, here are the three traditional views of the results (map courtesy of the Express-News):
» San Antonio Express-News: Taylor dominated key voting precincts
» Texas Tribune: Taylor's San Antonio Win a Wake-Up Call for Democrats
SAN ANTONIO MAYOR ---------------------------------------- Ivy R. Taylor .......... 50,659 (51.7%) Leticia Van De Putte .... 47,328 (48.3%)
There's obviously a great deal of angst expressed by folks who (like me) supported Leticia Van de Putte. In particular, a lot of that is directed at "those lazy people who don't vote." I'll offer one contrarian take to this and be done with it. I've worked on campaigns that have won and lost. I've worked on campaigns where I had a negligible impact on that outcome and those where I've had a bit more. But I know enough to say that when you've lost, the first questions shouldn't be aimed at voters who didn't support you. I guarantee you that there had to be something the LVP campaign wishes they had done differently that had an impact on the election. I doubt that lack of money was a significant issue for the campaign. So, as much as it pains me, there should have been a better campaign run. Period. That doesn't seem to reflect what's getting written about, but I hope the folks who go from LVP's campaign to work on other campaigns operates on that basis in their next campaign.
The oddity of it all, for me, is that San Antonio seems to be the most fought-over mayor's seat that involves a City Manager form of government. There have certainly been mayors in San Antonio's recent history that have exceeded what most weakish-mayor systems tend to produce. But still. San Antonio will be fine.