After a low voter turnout and what many have characterized as a dull mayoral race, Nashvillians were treated to an amazingly close finish and indications of a potentially nasty runoff election to come, at least from one candidate. The stories of the night, in my opinion, were the emergence of “Angry Bob” and the excellent campaign run, despite a narrow defeat, by Howard Gentry.

Other local bloggers have already pointed out what also seemed apparent to me: The one old-school career politician in the race, Bob Clement, quickly going on the offensive against opponent Karl Dean. On the one hand, it is certainly interesting to see a clearer distinction between the candidates emerging after so many bland forums this summer, but at the same time, is this kind of politicking where we want Nashville to go under the next administration? In my opinion, absolutely not, and I have confidence that the electorate will feel the same way come mid-September. I thought Sean Braisted’s remarks were right on the mark:

It’s quite amazing to see Desperate Bob, minutes after finding out he didn’t win the top spot, go so negative, so quickly…

Now, Bob may not like all the legal mumbo jumbo that caused Dean’s legal department to come to the conclusion that it did, and he can certainly lobby the State to change the laws, but lil’ Bob’s pandering on the issue is just indicative of the administration he will run. Not one based on reason or logic, but on saying whatever the hell he thinks will get him the most votes. Do we really want to move away from the steady leadership of Purcell and Bredesen to the populist pandering of Bob Clement? I sure as hell hope not.

S-Town Mike observed much the same:

That was one angry Bob Clement giving his speech tonight after finishing a close second (24%)–which seems akin to finishing last for a popular former U.S. Representative from one of Tennessee’s renowned political families having a hugely financed campaign–to Karl Dean (24%). I’m not sure whether he was just following a handler’s advice to be more passionate, but “Angry Bob” embraced the anti-immigration mantle and said something to the effect that Nashville should claim its “Manifest Destiny.” Was he saying that Nashvillians have some kind of divine right to expand and acquire new territories? Should Texans (or maybe just Belle Meadeans) worry?

Despite what promises to be an intriguing runoff, I agree with Clint Brewer that Gentry’s strong showing that had him ever-so-close to the runoff spoke volumes about his campaign:

Perhaps the story of the evening was a losing candidate - Gentry. He conceded early in the evening despite coming within only a handful of votes  of overtaking Clement. Clearly, Gentry was a lot stronger than either of the two winning campaigns in phase one or the majority of the local press thought. Imagine if he had only been better funded what could have happened. Given his showing with literally a fraction of the resources of Clement and Dean, given an equal campaign coffer Gentry might have gotten into the mid 30% range. Hopefully, he will be back.

I sure hope so, too, and I’m convinced that Nashville would have been better off with a Dean-Gentry runoff. Instead of what would likely have been a civil and engaging debate about where Nashville is headed and how we as a city can keep heading in the right direction, it looks like we may be treated–or tortured–with Angry Bob and his familiar, tired refrain against a reasonable and practical approach from Karl Dean. If nothing else, I expect that the stark contrast between these two candidates and their operating models will be hard to miss, and I trust that Nashvillians will have the wisdom to make the best choice for the city.