Why Borders tanked so badly, and other thoughts
November 4, 2009 at 3:51 pm by Scott Henry in News
Borders reacts to the shocker
Probably the biggest surprise of Tuesday’s elections was Lisa Borders’ poor showing. Granted, various polls had showed her support waning and Kasim Reed’s numbers growing. But no one I talked to had expected Borders to net only 14 percent in what was widely perceived as a three-way race. I mean, City Hall shouter Dave Walker got nearly 10 percent in the Council president’s race and he didn’t raise a dime!
So how did the former runoff hopeful become an also-ran? A few thoughts:
1. She didn’t define herself — Easy for us to say, but it’s true. Mary Norwood positioned herself as the throw-the-bums-out, anti-City Hall candidate, a spokesperson for everyone sick of business as usual. Reed cast himself as the determined outsider, criticizing those on whose watch the city had faltered and promising to restore hope to inner-city neighborhoods. Quick — what did Borders claim to represent?
As the AJC’s Jim Galloway points out, Borders even studiously avoided self-identifying as black or white.
Self-definitions don’t need to be accurate — remember Bush as a “compassionate conservative?” — but if they connect with an audience, they help a candidate create a base of support. What’s clear now is that Borders never established her base.
2. She let her opponents set the agenda — As I’d mentioned in a post last week, it seemed Borders was making a mistake by taking the bait when Reed challenged her political persuasion.
Asserting herself in me-too fashion as a Democrat very likely undercut Borders’ support in the Northside business community because, y’know, many of those folks are Republicans.
And she seemed to follow Norwood’s lead early on in criticizing city government — a move that seemed counter-intuitive for the No. 2 elected official at City Hall.
3. Her campaign never seemed to gel — This is one of those intangibles because it’s more about how things feel. But Borders did have some real stumbles. For starters, she first announced her formal bid for mayor in April 2007 — more than two-and-a-half years before the election — raised a small amount of money and then ducked out of the race for nearly eight months.
When Borders did get back in, in April, she was never able to catch up with Norwood and Reed in terms of fundraising. It didn’t help that Borders completely replaced her campaign staff a month into the race.
But one thing I and other reporters noticed is that the Borders folks never seemed to have reliable intel about what their opponents were doing. They consistently underestimated Reed’s fundraising ability and, just last week, a Borders operative assured me that Reed had run out of money and suspended his “ground game” — meaning the people who go into neighborhoods knocking on doors and asking for votes.
They couldn’t have been more wrong. When I checked Reed’s campaign disclosure, it revealed dozens of line-item expenditures for canvassers. In other words, unbeknownst to the Borders folks, his ground game was in overdrive.
But I also talked to voters who told me Borders didn’t appear to have the drive and passion of her opponents. People don’t vote for candidates who seem lukewarm about the job they’re seeking.
Borders is still young — 51, I think — and has a job, as president of the Grady Hospital Foundation, that will keep her in close contact with the movers and shakers who would be helpful to any future political campaign.
I expect we haven’t seen the last of Borders. But in order to come back, she has to show that she wants it.
(Photo by Joeff Davis)
November 4th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
You would have to be crazy to want to be mayor of Atlanta.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Good analysis. The outcome of all the above is that she lost the black vote to Kasim AND Mary. That’s pretty embarrassing.
I doubt if her business supporters will blow millions on any future public office runs.
November 4th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
I think Atlanta may be growing weary of corporate candidates.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:31 am
I agree; I was a Lisa supporter but must admit she ran a pretty uninspired campaign, and I reacted to her loss Tuesday with the same sympathy-free disappointment that I felt when Kerry lost in 2004.
As I see it, Atlanta in 2009 (well, before this race got going) is not about black and white as much as it is neighborhoods and developers. It’s not a pair that have to be thought of as opposites, but the neighborhoods here have this almost hysterical bunker mentality when it comes to anything to do with development (never mind that 100,000 people added to the city in under 10 years, most of whom don’t have kids but still pay property taxes to fund schools and public safety, might actually not be a bad thing). Mary has shown a disturbing tendency to try to shut down development activity in the name of being the matron saint of Atlanta populism (and again, never mind that her neighborhood is the only one that has the combined wealth to tell developers what and what not to do). Lisa has ties to the development community and did suffer from a vaguely corporate tepidness, but knew what kind of opportunities her ties to the civil rights/black church communities could do for her. She also seemed to me to be the only one with enough wisdom and maturity to address the state in a meaningful way.
But we will not know, at least for the next four years. It will be a rough ride for anyone who has it, and maybe Lisa’s real place is somewhere else. I think a successfully-operated and functional Grady is more than either Mary or Kasim can manage, and it’s something Atlanta cannot lose, so maybe this is how things should turn out.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:34 am
If she couldn’t even keep her own home safe then how would she keep mine?
November 5th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
@federico, neighborhoods vs developers probably hurt Lisa. Would you were right that development has added to tax revenues. It has not and that is one reason why neighborhoods and development are at odds. Property and sales tax revenues were flat all through this decade despite huge increases in the property tax digest and population. TADs and abatements to developers are part of the reason. The result is that residents now have to pay more taxes for less service per person. And their neighborhoods may be torn up and congestion increased as well by dumb development.
Let’s allow time for the excess construction to be absorbed. Then allow development to occur without TAD distortions and zoning encroachments on single family residential neighborhoods. There is plenty of room for condo growth along MARTA lines that would actually be smart.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
@Wary of Mary: You sound an awful lot like Borders on the Ridiculous.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
@Grant — There’s a reason why Wary of Mary sounds like a Broken Record of the Ridiculous.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Fair enough: it is true that developer abatements have left actual tax returns below what they probably should be. Practically very other American city that has seen repopulation through the 1990s and 2000s has also seen a rise in public infrastructure investment and quality– Chicago’s streets and Portland’s, well, everything are examples that come to mind. Why does Atlanta still look so ragtag?
But I guess my interest in Lisa was that she might craft her various self-given brandings into a complex position that many people could get behind– the developer who understands the city’s unique history and social challenges first hand, or the urban-minded candidate who knows that development, if done well, can make the city stronger. She clearly didn’t do this, and you’re right, probably left herself vulnerable to the NIMBY culture.
It is still disappointing to me that such potential was lost, because I haven’t seen Mary demonstrate a grasp on the fundamentals of urban issues or public administration, much less focus long enough on anything to develop such a grasp. And I want to like Kasim, but it’s hard to feel like he has a vision for this city. We’ll see how it goes.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
@Grant, Joe and Federico
Yes, as announced yesterday, in a bid to remain relevant I retired “Borders on the Ridiculous.” Most other voters saw her the same way I did.
Our broke and broken city is worth a broken record, Joe. Kasim gets the need to solve the budget problem above all else. Vision so often means boondoggles, and Shirley has set enough of those going to bankrupt us three times over. With luck Kasim will rein them in, pensions first, get the cops functioning again and focus on making ends meet for a change. He’s consistently committed to do all that.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Wary, I should at least give you credit for supporting the right candidate.
If the ballot simply had “Not-Mary” as an option, I would’ve chosen it.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Joeventures writes; “If the ballot simply had “Not-Mary” as an option, I would’ve chosen it.”
Your next ballot will have that option, Joe.
Check the box that says, “Kasim Reed.”