Carillo's Curse

The Elefante in the Room Texas Tribune)

The article pretty much tells a complete story. We (Texas) had a primary election the other day, and a guy lost. Big deal right?

Well, for me, it was pretty shocking, though it shouldn't have been since I will go ahead and maintain that most people are stupid. We had a simple choice between two candidates running for Railroad Commissioner. One named Carrillo, one named Porter.

Carrillo has a ton of experience as a Railroad Commissioner, worked in the oil and gas industry, and was a judge. Porter is an accountant with ties to the oil and gas industry.

Let me say here that I'm only stating what I found prior to my voting, and I know that experience does necessarily translate into knowledge. That said, from what I could find, Carrillo seemed like a shoe-in, the obvious choice to anyone who took 5 minutes to look at both web sites and find their qualifications.

Porter won... he didn't just win, he decimated Carrillo. People overwhelmingly voted for Porter.

Why?

Carrillo plays the race card, saying it was his surname. Porter says he just rode an anti-incumbent wave.

On my ballot, they didn't show which person was an incumbent. I've seen it before where the put the (I) in there, but it wasn't on my ballot this time. So for people to know, at least in my county, who the incumbent was, they'd have to do the research, which would have also told them Carrillo was far more qualified. So, I don't buy the anti-incumbent argument for that reason, and because there simply wasn't an "anti-incumbent" attitude to begin with, it was "anti-washington" and "anti-too-big-to-fail" and "anti-bailout-for-big-businesses" and "anti-throwing-money-all-over-the-place-that-further-puts-us-in-debt-to-China."

So, maybe Carrillo is right. It sort of sticks out there as an obvious excuse. An "anti-mexican" or "anti-ethnic-other-than-white" attitude among the voters. Well, I'm white, and I certainly didn't vote for Porter. So, I'm inclined that although this argument is probably true to a degree, the real problem is ignorance.

If people had been informed of the difference in qualifications between the two, Carrillo would have won. End of story. For sure. There simply isn't an overriding "anti-whatever" that would make people put in Porter over Carrillo. They simply didn't know, the majority of them are white, so they picked the name that they thought would better represent their interests.

So, who's fault is it? Yes, we need to point the finger.

The typical Texas Republican Primary voter is predictable. They're white. They're not going do any research before they vote. They overwhelmingly watch TV. They'd rather watch TV than read junk mail or flyers. Me included, I hate junk mail and flyers. Newspapers are an endangered species thanks to TV and, more so, the internet. Let's stick to those.

Porter didn't have any money really, so let's not even go there. Let's stick with Carrillo who had over $600k to spend.

So, knowing his basic audience, or at least he should have known, Carrillo didn't advertise on TV at all. At least I never saw one. And the article seems to indicate he didn't buy TV time. And that simply is why he lost.

But wait, why didn't he buy TV time? I'm thinking that maybe after years of being in the Railroad Commission, he thought people would know him by now. Maybe he knew all the above but figured he simply wouldn't need to go all out to beat a "no name." To be fair, I would have thought the same if I were in his shoes.

It's a hard pill to swallow. I feel for Carrillo. He underestimated the ignorance of his audience. But in Texas, apparently a third of us believe man lived contemporaneously with dinosaurs. Yep.

So, the finger has to be pointed at Carrillo for actually thinking that he was dealing with, at least minimally, informed voters. He thought wrong, he was dealing overwhelmingly ignorant voters. He should have bought TV time especially if he knew from prior elections that his name was detrimental.

So, even though I feel bad for him, I blame him. And it's a little cheap to say you know your name is a hindrance when people don't know the candidates, and that it cost you the election... without ever trying to overcome it. If you know how bad your name is plays to an ignorant audience, then why didn't you buy the TV time? That's pretty ignorant on YOUR part, Carrillo. You can't just sit back and say, "If I lose, it's because of my ethnicity since [blah blah blah]." On one had you say you realize the realities, but then you don't act accordingly to win. You lose and blame the realities, but it's because you didn't act on them that you lost. That makes it your fault that you lost.

Sure, it'd be nice to win without having to campaign much. To be so popular, and all that. Sure. But you weren't in that position. You apparently acted like it, but you weren't.

Yeah, I'm disappointed and shocked by this. But it was preventable. Carrillo should have won since he was the better candidate. Period.

But, God works in strange and mysterious ways. Maybe Porter is God's choice. It happens. Maybe Carrillo fell out of favor. Maybe the water in Texas predisposes Republicans to vote for names beginning in P. Who knows. (By the way, I'm an independent that voted in the Republican primary, primarily because of Perry v. KBH)