The Aaron Harber Show

Aaron's Real Opinions (Yikes!)

THE MAYORAL RACE: WHAT THE HECK HAPPENED?
05-07-03

The Denver mayoral contest results surprised many political veterans as newcomer John Hickenlooper swept to a substantial first-place victory on May 6th against a field of seasoned political veterans. So what happened? And does Hickenlooper have a chance of breaking the "First Place Jinx" and winning the June 3rd runoff scheduled against Denver Auditor Don Mares?

Hickenlooper won with a positive, self-deprecating message of hope for the City & County of Denver. Although criticized at times for not "being specific," Hickenlooper actually distinguished himself from his competition with deeds rather than words as far as the most important issue of the election was concerned – the Economy. Many candidates talked about how they would solicit businesses and make the City more business-friendly but these were traditional themes and lacked any real punch. What separated Hickenlooper from the crowd was that he actually had a background in business – creating companies and jobs. No one else matched the experience and success he had in what likely now is the City’s most important need. So, ironically, the politically inexperienced candidate had superior experience where it counts today – creating jobs in a dismal Economy.

Don Mares ran a good campaign and his strength cannot be underestimated. He has represented much of the City in the State Legislature and won citywide four years ago when he became Denver’s Auditor. While Hickenlooper went from fourth to first in the polls and saw his numbers range between 5% and 45% – finishing at a surprisingly strong 43% – Mares was in first or second place during most of the contest. His numbers were more constant -- staying in a much narrower range of 15 to 25%.

Mares was hit quite hard the week before the Election with accusations that his office spent public funds on such items as image seminars, his personal law license renewal, and car washes but he showed his strength because the charges, while sticking, did not diminish his very solid base. Other candidates would have been crippled by the charges – especially given their validation by the Administration of incumbent Mayor Wellington Webb. What the charges likely did, however, was prevent Mares from advancing in the polls. They also could end up being a mortal wound which hurts him more in the June 3rd runoff than the May 6th election. If the charges cripple his campaign, it may become difficult for him to get generate the momentum he needs to overtake Hickenlooper.

Examining the other mayoral campaigns, they all were impressive in their own right because of the quality of the candidates but most of them just never got going. Ari Zavaras took an early lead and peaked in January. He poured too much money into staff and was top heavy for too long. He stopped his downward spiral with his very public decision to "not go negative" but it was too little, too late. His initial television ads were awful. And the "Spy Files" controversy haunted him and resulted in the loss of the potential support he desperately needed.

Penfield Tate had some solid momentum at the end of the campaign but started seriously campaigning about three months too late – taking far too long to resign his State Senate seat. While he had a good political base, he took far too long to get it energized. If the campaign had continued for another 90 days, Tate likely would have been in the run-off. Many people looked to him as their second choice but that didn’t help a candidate who needs first place votes (i.e., voters don’t get to make a second choice until the runoff).

Susan Casey ran a grassroots campaign that failed to inspire or catch fire. Being one of two women candidates may have been an advantage but it likely was worth only one or two points in an era where voters are well-informed and discriminating. Like Susan Casey, Elizabeth Schlosser had many good ideas but was an "unknown" with no political base and insufficient resources to overcome that liability. Phil Perington isolated himself by leaving the Democratic Party at the time he entered a race in the State’s largest Democratic city. His gentle campaign never coalesced around any particular group or set of ideas.

Financial resources made a big difference with Hickenlooper spending his money well (any one of his television ads was better than the rest of the field’s advertising spots combined) and Zavaras wasting money early and on generally poor television ads ("Vote for me because I’ll do a good job" was an extraordinarily pedestrian if not altogether unimpressive theme). Tate generated solid dollars but did it too late to deploy them efficaciously. Mares’s fundraising prowess was equally impressive and generally well-spent but did not match Hickenlooper’s one-two punch of large dollars which were then allocated effectively. Given the large vote count gap between Hickenlooper and Mares, one might presume Hickenlooper will take an early and substantial fundraising lead over Mares. Mares will be competitive, however, due to the solid base he retains.

Will one or both winners "go negative?" The experts say "Yes," and it appears Mares needs to do this in order to have a chance. His problem is that "going negative" makes him look like a typical politician – the exact image Hickenlooper is running against. And there may not be all that much to use to "go negative." He might surprise everyone by being the first to announce he will not move in that direction except if he is attacked. In Hickenlooper’s case, he will be tempted to "go negative" but would be even more likely to gain more by publicly rejecting the strategy and appearing to be the candidate who is a true statesman. Given his commanding lead, this is a strategy he might try out for the first week or two of the campaign.

With an endorsement from Mayor Webb, Hickenlooper also can bridge the "newcomer versus career politician" gap while still emphasizing he is the candidate who is an "outsider." The Webb endorsement will give Hickenlooper further credibility and make many Denver voters more comfortable when deciding to vote for him. At the same time, the long-time feud between Webb and Mares is so well known that a Webb endorsement is unlikely to surprise anyone or have a great effect. Furthermore, voters like to make their own decisions – endorsements often don’t do nearly as much as candidates wish.

Hickenlooper’s 43 points and Mares’s 23 leaves 34% which the other five candidates received. Where will the 34 points go? Mares is likely to get the vast majority -- perhaps as many as 60 to even 70% of those votes. But, with a 20-point lead, Hickenlooper only needs slightly more than 1 in 5 of those votes (+20% of the 34 points) to reach a majority. The wild card will be the possible addition of 10,000 to 50,000 new voters who cast ballots in the runoff and did not vote in the first election (as well as those May 6th voters who do not vote on June 3rd).

If Mares can change just a few minds, can gain the majority of support from the other candidates (all of whom were established political persons, unlike Hickenlooper), and can turn out new voters, he has a chance of pulling off an upset. While second place finishers in the first round have historically done well in the runoff, this election is different because all those initial races were close. Hickenlooper’s 20-point lead makes this case different. It seems insurmountable today but, even with less than four weeks left, anything can happen in politics – and usually does.