Heights88

12 hours ago, editor said:

It's a trope that's centuries old: Blame the messenger. When you can't refute an argument, argue something else. 

The article very clearly cites dozens of sources and interviews with experts to back up the writing.  Since you have a contrary view, we'd all benefit from seeing your sources and studies  

It's also laughable to call the New York Times anti-development, and suggests a knee-jerk reaction, rather than any knowledge of the Times, or it's history. 

I am simply acknowledging the messenger and their bias. The NYT has a very strong bias against anything that isn't abiding by the 'smart growth' theory of urban design. NYT has a point of view...nothing wrong with that, but their arguments are not persuasive in my view. The induced demand theory underlying this piece is what I really am attacking. The theory basically posits that building new roads is useless because they will just fill up and the problem won't get better. It's a false argument that is waged inconsistently...do we not build new rail or bike lanes or hospitals because they would just 'fill up'? Well executed Highway / roadway expansions relieve congestion while expanding citizen's access to employment opportunities, commercial ventures, and lower cost housing. I think we could do a better pricing the usage of road use, but overall roads are not the problem. Perhaps the NYT should spend a bit more time looking into the utter catastrophe facing the MTA rather than attacking the Katy freeway. 

This is a pretty silly (typical) NYT take...Does anyone remember how terrible 290 was before expansion? The NYT staff lives in a fantasy world where everywhere else is as dense as Manhattan and everything is free. The 'induced demand' argument is really not persuasive, but it's one we continue to hear from anti-development, anti-growth outlets like the NYT. 

On 11/9/2022 at 12:59 PM, mattyt36 said:

As I have stated multiple times, I did not vote for Lina in 2018 but did in 2022, not necessarily because I was all about voting for her, but more because I was voting against the absolutely corrupt State GOP, which at this point is just a bunch of professional politicians with few ideas who just want to stay in power for their own sakes.

The anti-crime message was STRONG and resonated, but somehow not enough.  Despite law enforcement professionals basically flanking Mealer at all of her press conferences (which I for one consider to be extraordinarily provocative and outright scary . . . ) and her essentially implying that we were all going to be murdered walking on the Bayou or coming home from the Astros because of "Democrat" judges happily putting murderers on the streets, I think the majority saw that she was a puppet at best (an uncharismatic weirdo most likely, and an entitled, sanctimonious, condescending, crazy woman at worst) with zero experience and no meaningful plan to reduce crime.  I'm not even sure Mattress Mack helped her, to be honest.  People of course love Mattress Mack, but it telegraphs the appearance of "buying" an election.  It's kind of creepy, actually.

The Harris County GOP needs to CLEAN HOUSE and get rid of all the crazies.  Ed Emmett could've won easily, assuming he ran a campaign like he did in the past.  Tell Steve Hotze and his merry band of religious nutjobs to go off and form their own d*mned party--the Harris County Baptist Taliban--that ideology has no place in government because by its very nature and by its own admission, it wants to screw over half of the constituency.  Sit down Mack, sit down Dave Ward, sit down Ed Young, sit down partisan law enforcement leadership and law enforcement unions, sit down Crime Stoppers propaganda, sit down Permian Basin political donors, sit down State GOP with your ridiculous shenanigans to co-opt the county, and truly focus on returning to responsible governance instead of fearmongering--it is not good for anyone. 

But the fact remains:

1) Hidalgo proved to be a relatively awful candidate at the end of the day, but still eked out a victory despite being overwhelmingly outmatched in advertising spending over the past several weeks.  (I mean, she pulled out a win with all those Mealer ads during the ASTROS WORLD SERIES WIN.  I mean, those are some serious headwinds that she met!)

2) Mealer was hand-picked by the State GOP and got support from donors farther afield, and, while she came very close due to fearmongering, she lost.  

This was NOT a good environment at all for Democrats locally, so it should be expected that results would be worse than the last cycle.  But bad candidates hung on, and non-controversial County candidates ran a good 3 points ahead of Mealer.  

That, my friends, is the major political shift.  A major difference from, say, Tarrant County, which just elected a Republican County Judge who is a personal injury attorney from Southlake and has prior experience as a councilman and mayor of Farmers Branch.  I mean, just gross.  I think I'd take Mealer over that bio.

Still, the margin was extraordinarily slim and should not be considered a mandate by any means.  I pray that Hidalgo and the other Democratic commissioners do not take this as some sort of validation of progressiveness--municipal governments just cannot be a meaningful source of social spending.  I hope she tries to build relationships with the business community, and likewise, I hope the business community makes a good faith effort to build a relationship with her.  And I pray Hidalgo will make a good faith effort at crime reduction and repairing relationships with law enforcement, although I am not sure how much of that problem is on her shoulders to be honest.  

Harris County and its residents have zero interest in employers and government officials being at each other's throats.  Houston is the welcoming city it is because we have largely avoided these lose-lose political fights, which, in the end, are only good for disingenuous politicians and bad for the County and its residents.  Thanks Alexandra and the Harris County GOP for telegraphing to the suburban counties and the rest of the state that Harris County is a crime-ridden hellhole teetering on the edge of disaster--you have done definite damage and it is glaringly obvious you do not have this County's interests at heart, only your own.

/rant off and now a little gloating . . . if Cagle loses it will really be my favorite story of the cycle as it shows there's a price to pay for being an absolutely unserious and disingenuous blowhard . . . which is pretty rare in Texas politics.  (Well, being an absolutely unserious and disingenuous blowhard is certainly not rare, but paying a price for being one sure the hell is.)

This is quite the delusional rant...It's pretty plain to see that Hidalgo has demonized moderates in her own party and Conservative voters. Hidalgo has made no "good faith efforts" to reach out to anyone but the hard-core progressive left. Lina's campaign was built on fear mongering with national issues. Mealer campaigned on real kitchen table issues - crime is not a "boogeyman" issue as you make it out to be. 

I do have to hand it to you...A+ rant with just no tether to reality. 

On 11/9/2022 at 9:44 AM, mattyt36 said:

DAMN!  I guess all those blue-ribbon endorsements threatening us with even more crime if we didn't do their bidding didn't work!  "Thank you to all of those who supported our campaign for good governance?!"  I must have been getting a special set of ads because that message sure as hell didn't come across.  

Still, I must commend Mealer on conceding and not breaking out one of her surely many AR-15s.  HCSO will get some additional manpower, but it looks like it won't triple its headcount of 5,000 to 15,000 on a whim.

As far as I can tell looks like Cagle lost, too, which is absolutely appropriate considering the guy couldn't be bothered to do his d*mned job and show up to a vote.

P.S. SORRY MIDLAND DONORS!!!!!  And keep the faith, San Antonio!  (Remember, your County Judge is actually . . . someone else.  #LocalRule)

 

Good governance was pretty much the foundation of Mealer's campaign (Alex's Priorities | Alexandra Mealer for Harris County Judge). It's pretty hard to argue that Lina has governed well - Lina has focused most of her attention on national politics (heavy focus on abortion, pretty much her only campaign theme), fighting local infrastructure projects (except for bike lanes), and engaging in pay-for-play scandals. 

I see you are very upset about Mealer campaigning with Mattress Mack, but Lina campaigning with Hanoi Jane Fonda last week is just dandy!

I understand you are ranting to celebrate your candidate and party's narrow victory, but Lina is just not a great example of engaging in common sense, moderate solutions. She is a devout progressive ideologue who is narrowly focused on politics - it's the only thing she knows.

apartment complex?

Struggling with the regret for light rail to be built here. Do we consider the green, purple, and red line LRT extensions a success? Ridership on these new lines has been pretty abysmal (even controlling for effects of the pandemic). 

University Line BRT construction is already estimated at $84MM per mile. Building light rail here would likely require at least triple the investment per mile for little to no incremental return.

1 hour ago, Ross said:

If you look up "transportation" in the Dictionary of Texas, it says "Roads and highways built to facilitate the quick and efficient movement of cars, trucks, and people from one place to another. Railroads were once a type of transportation, but are no longer relevant, as the technology is too old"🤣

It's not that rail is not relevant or too old a technology (but that is also kind of true)...it's that it's just not even close to being cost effective. These light rail projects cost $200-500MM per mile (conservative estimates)...highway projects move more people at less than half the cost of rail. The choo choo fans on this board need to come to grips with the fact that cars are far more effective and efficient at moving people to and from decentralized population/job centers. 

s3 - it is true many 'Conservatives' oppose such efforts to intentionally limit roadways to car traffic, as you highlighted above. That WSJ oped you cited casts an opinion that road diets are ill-conceived, counter-productive projects that make ordinary peoples' lives worse...that may be a 'Conservative' view point, but it's also defensible, rational, and supported by at least some facts. Bike lanes aren't inherently bad, but there are trade-offs to removing miles and miles of roadway that are used by the vast majority of people for car traffic. Acknowledging and weighing the trade-offs...sounds like a good place to start. 

I am not sure how this devolved into a struggle session against crazy 'right wingers.' There are many Houstonians who, with good reason, oppose top-down efforts to reduce roadway access. City and County leadership have utopian visions of removing cars and reducing road ways at taxpayer expense...we can have a debate on whether that's a good idea or not.  This isn't a vast right-wing conspiracy.