What are the most conservative parts of the San Antonio metro? (college, wealthy)

[rynetwo]

Originally Posted by Kthnry

I thought it was interesting that Ron Nirenberg won the mayor's race, given that Ivy Taylor was the more conservative candidate. Would the results have been the same a year ago?

That is due to the fact that most of the American voters are pathetic. Less than 20% even voted in the mayoral race. Ivy won the initial race but because she did not get to the 50% mark they headed into a runoff. Runoffs are always anyone's game.

Please keep in mind that because a city votes for a democrat does not mean it is liberal. Think about the base of the democratic party.

[supfromthesite]

Originally Posted by rynetwo

Please keep in mind that because a city votes for a democrat does not mean it is liberal. Think about the base of the democratic party.

I think that is his point. We are more of a Conservative but Democrat community (on average.)

But he is surprised that the more liberal candidate won.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by rynetwo

That is due to the fact that most of the American voters are pathetic. Less than 20% even voted in the mayoral race. Ivy won the initial race but because she did not get to the 50% mark they headed into a runoff. Runoffs are always anyone's game.

This was mostly because the more liberal vote was split. AND, as often happens in San Antonio, the run-off gets more voters than the general election.

Ivy lost because she was out of touch. She didn't engage with voters, she barely interacted with them. She relied on her religious base and it failed her. A lot of conservatives are fiscal conservatives (like Ron) but socially liberal. they didn't want to vote for a Democrat, but were willing to vote for an Independent. Ron knocked on doors, Ron built up a huge volunteer base, Ron got many high level business and community leaders behind him. Ivy had....churches, and not even many of them.

[supfromthesite]

Ron a fiscal conservative???

[Chaka]

I think it's reasonable to say that Ivy won in 2015 because of low voter turnout. In 2015 (and in 2017), the more Republican precincts turned out to vote in the largest numbers in the city. Those precincts had 70-80% voter turnout. The most Democratic precincts, had turnout in the 30% range. The urban precincts were closer to 50-60%. Had we had much higher voter turnout, it would have been Democrats voting. In a non-partisan race, it's difficult to say how they'd vote, but one could guess.

[resonator]

Did they ever get a raise from the tiny pay they used to receive ? If so, I'm sure it is still not enough to be worth it for the pay.

Must be other perks.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by resonator

Did they ever get a raise from the tiny pay they used to receive ? If so, I'm sure it is still not enough to be worth it for the pay.

Must be other perks.

https://ballotpedia.org/City_of_San_...nt_2_(May_2015)

Charter Amendment 2 increased the salary of city council members from $20 per meeting, amounting to $1,040 per year, to $45,722 per year. Amendment 2 was also designed to increase the salary of the mayor from $4,040 per year to $61,725 per year.[1]

[resonator]

not enough

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by resonator

not enough

It's not, but it's livable. Any more and people would freak. At least it makes it possible for real people to do the job and to commit to it full time. Before it was basically volunteer, which is not realistic.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by resonator

not enough

Even so, the job seems to be attracting polished professional people. If it was only attracting gadflies and people at the fringe, I imagine there would be greater interest in making it pay more.

It isn't enough for people who don't either have a well-paid spouse or enough personal wealth to take a pay cut for a few years. You can't serve on the council and have a "day job."