Google Ads


Site Stats

LA-GOV: Campaign Season Begins

by: pointecoupeedemocrat

Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 9:01 PM EDT


I am actually quite fond of this one minute, introductory commercial: Boasso covers the issues; he announces his party affiliation; the commercial is playful but substantive; Boasso outlines a biography of success, Louisiana style; and it is organized and coherent.  What do all of you think?  What are your impressions of Walter Boasso? 

Here is the link:

http://link.brightco...

Watch the video entitled "Big Challenges."
pointecoupeedemocrat :: LA-GOV: Campaign Season Begins
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

LA-GOV: Campaign Season Begins | 64 comments
Boasso
Yeah, I really liked that "Big Challenges" ad.  What are his chances?  I know that Jindal is the GOP nominee and Foster Campbell is another Dem, but does Boasso have lots of Dem support throughout Louisiana?  Also, has any polling been conducted for a Jindal v. Boasso v. Campbell match-up?
there is also Republican
John Georges, who has $5.5 million to spend, and he will not leave the race.  Jindal and Georges will split the Republican vote, while Boasso will appeal to Democrats and to centrists who sway one way or the other.  There is also Lee Horne, a libertarian, Tony Gentile, an Independent, and an attorney from Lake Charles who is a Democrat.  I imagine a few more may jump in.  But as I see it, and I am not being optimistic, Jindal will be in a runoff with either Campbell or Boasso.  That is when the real fight begins.
[ Parent ]
Other variables
I would hope that a certain unpopular mayor will decide not to run. If he does, I would hope someone would run to make sure he doesn't make the runoff.

As for Georges, I think he'll fold or falter. He's not eligible for the "Hunt Downer Trophy" (for the legislator who puts up the worst showing in the race), but he's a Republican, and I think he won't get a lot of votes against Jindal.

Will anybody prominent (iow, an elected official) bother to challenge Donelon or Dardenne?

[ Parent ]
i have not read
about any candidates for those races, but donelon and dardenne are preparing for races, which to me reveals that they are anticipating the worst.
[ Parent ]
Hunt Downer
won Terrebonne and Lafourche parishes during the 2003 jungle primary, which is no small feat, as both are very populous parishes.  Georges, according to sources, will not fold, and he will not hand his warchest to Jindal.  Republicans have already tried to smear Georges on their radio stations and on their websites, but he is still in the race.  That Georges has not caved to Villere and the Republican machine reveals that he wants the job.  I would not underestimate him.
[ Parent ]
Downer and Georges
Georges: How much advertising do you think he is doing so far? both on TV and on the Conservative radio stations.

As for Downer. He won 37% in those two parishes, and 5% in the rest of the state (and he won 6% overall). Outside of those two Parishes, he did not recieve 10% anywhere else. If that's not underperforming, what is?

Another trophy that might be at stake here: "The Melinda Schwegmann" for 'worst showing by a statewide officeholder' (in reference to Schwegmann's 1995 Gubernatorial bid)

[ Parent ]
But even if Georges
wins what Downer won, those are still votes that keep Jindal out of the runoff.  I think he has aired two commercials, and he has been on the stump. 
[ Parent ]
Now...
This govenor election will still be the typical Louisiana free-for-all election right? I'm not completely up to date with Louisiana politics, but thanks to this site, I'm learning a lot. Hasn't the law changed, I thought I read somewhere that they were going to go to a closed primary system? Is that only for certain elections, or future elections, or am I just making stuff up? lol
[ Parent ]
No
it's only a closed primary for the Federal elections.

And that will definately help Landrieu in 2008.

[ Parent ]
exactly
and it will help a whole set of challengers for the US House seats presently held by republicans.  2008 will be an interesting year.
[ Parent ]
yes, it is.
all state races will have jungle primaries to be followed by runoffs if no one garners 50% + 1 in october.  because jindal already skipped two debates, and now that he has an opponent from his jefferson parish base, i imagine he will be forced into a runoff with either boasso or campbell.  the nagin rumor fell on its face when cleo fields tersely refused to comment about nagin's candidacy.  if nagin does not have fields support, he can forget gaining any of the african-american vote outside orleans parish, where nagin is already struggling.
[ Parent ]
I imagine
I imagine Boasso doesn't have a terribly large amount of Democratic support in Louisiana, since he just became a Democrat a month ago.

There's been no polling yet on the new dynamics of the race. However, Jindal was beating both Breaux and Blanco by twenty points, and its undoubtable that Breaux and Blanco were better known and more competitive challenges to Jindal than either Campbell or Boasso.

Campbell, I imagine, is going to have troubles with his "eliminate-the-income-tax, tax-the-hell-out-of-oil-businesses", especially since even stalwart Democrats in Louisiana think the plan sucks. And Boasso is a state senator with not a lot of statewide ID, who has switched parties twice now.

Georges will barely pull any support from Jindal.

[ Parent ]
no
Georges will cut into jindal's base in jefferson and st. tammany parishes, and his statewide blitz will yield votes.  boasso has been well received during his visits in lafayette and alexandria, and i notice many republicans on local blogs are interested in his biography and message.  campbell already has a base of support in north louisiana, and he will tap into a sentiment many citizens have against the oil companies.  jindal polled well, as the field of the democrats was not formed.  now that it is formed, and now that candidates are announced and campaigning, a lot of the numbers you cite are basically irrelevant.  and he only polled strongly against blanco, while with breaux in the race, jindal was hovering at 39%.  i would no underestimate georges, and i certainly would not underestimate boasso, who has clearly tapped into the electorate's desire for change and for a new candidate. 

are you from louisiana?

[ Parent ]
Boasso and St. Tammany
Any chance that Boasso will recieve a nice percentage there too?

I think St. Bernard and Plaquemines goes to Boasso easily. But Orleans is up in the air.

[ Parent ]
Boasso
does represent portions of Slidell, and he may gain votes, and a lot of his former St. Bernard neighbors now reside in St. Tammany.  Boasso will have his appeal throughout south Louisiana, and Orleans will split between all the Ds.  Campbell will monopolize the north, and he may have a strong showing in the River Parishes and in some of the more populist south Louisiana parishes.  Regarding the "Bobby" juggernaut and the notion that "Bobby" represents change as ariculated by VA blogger, who I do not believe resides in Louisiana, Jindal's base is the same base he had in 2003, although now they are louder and more obnoxious than ever.  This race will be a fun one, and do not be surprised if there is a nasty runoff, because I do not see Jindal passing 50% + 1. 
[ Parent ]
If...
If the same detective skills that led you to conclude that someone named "Va Blogger" isn't from Louisiana are the same skills you're using to analyze this race, then you may be onto something.

However, at this point, you're basing it on wishful thinking and selective analysis. The only commissioned polls show Jindal with a huge lead, and with Campbell, Boasso, and Georges as mere blips:

-A January poll put Foster Campbell at 6% against Jindal and Blanco;

-A March poll put Campbell at 5%, and Boasso at 2% against Jindal and Breaux;

-And an April poll put Campbell at 2% and Boasso at 1%. That poll, which was paid for by Georges, had several positive statements about Georges precede the ballot question, and Georges still only captured 10% against Jindal and Breaux.

What does this all mean?

First, it means that Bobby Jindal is the only widely recognized candidate in the race. He's rocking a 90%+ name ID, while Boasso, Georges, and Campbell have probably 20-30%, and other, less candidates mentioned in this thread have even less than that. In a statewide election, it takes more than simply being from an area to get people to vote for you.

There is obviously room for the the second-tier candidates to grow, but there's not a lot of room to pull support away from Jindal, who has a 67% favorability rating and only 12% unfav, according to the April Georges poll. When two-thirds of the voters know and like Jindal, negative attacks on him are less effective on the target and more poisonous to the person attacking.

Moreover, Campbell and Boasso are unlikely to pull voters away from Jindal, and are instead competiting for the same bloc of voters who wouldn't vote for Jindal anyways, which simply splits their vote. Georges, as the only other Republican in the race, could buy a portion of Jindal's support; however, Jindal has the support and resources of the state party and all the key leaders, coupled with the percieved "inevitability" that he will be elected Governor. There's little reason for Jindal supporters to buck him in favor of Georges.

In an election where the candidates start from equal positions, then the arguments that you make would make sense: someone's natural base would be where they are from; previous elections can be a decent indicator of future support; Jindal's base hasn't made any real gains. However, Jindal isn't facing someone on equal footing, like a well-known figure like Blanco, Breaux, or even someone like Mitch Landrieu or Ray Nagin. He's facing lesser-knowns. And in a statewide election, people are more likely to vote for the person they know, rather than for someone they don't. Previous elections aren't as great of an indicator, because those were elections between two candidates with roughly equal name ID, and this is not. And Jindal's base has grown just by nature of being on the only recognizable candidate to date. Also, there are a decent amount of people who didn't vote for him in 2003 who may now have buyer's remorse. Given Jindal's low unfavorability ratings, few people outright disapprove of him. In addition to Jindal's base, which is already very large, most of the state is open to voting for him, and would most likely be more willing to vote for Jindal than someone they don't know, like Georges or Boasso.

Finally, how can you say that Jindal doesn't represent a change from the way the state was run the last four years?

[ Parent ]
he was mike foster's
butt boy, and he was in bush's health cabinet.  and he is bought and bossed by david vitter.  same people, same corruption, same story: bobby jindal is a baton rouge and washington, dc, insider with no platform, no spine, no ideas and no real strategy.  and the people of louisiana will learn this in the next few months. 
[ Parent ]
Well,
With great messages like "Bobby Jindal is Mike Foster's butt-boy", then I have no doubt that his support will drop. The ads practically write themselves.

Its nice to see that you've been able to maintain your maturity and composure during this discussion as well.

[ Parent ]
Oh great
va blogger, please enlighten us and show us the way towards true Republican enlightenment.

Maybe later you can write a diary about how Democrats didnt actually win in 2006.  Or maybe you can write one about how its useless for Democrats to challenge Republicans in any state other than Oregon.

Or you could always be less of a troll and be involved in some meaningful conversations.  Its up to you.

"Keep the Faith"

[ Parent ]
Again, you people seem not to understand what a "troll" is.
At any rate, I have not at one point contended that my Republican positions are superior to Democratic positions. I have never once contended that the Democrats did not win in 2006, or come anywhere close to saying that its useless for Democrats to challenge Republicans. Your weak strawmen and obtuse sarcasm is hardly neccesary.

Moreover, I have provided well-reasoned claims to the subjects here in the thread, and in response, I am told that Bobby Jindal is "Mike Foster's butt-boy". Is that the standard of "meaningful conversation" that I'm not living up to?

Perhaps you would like to refute any of my posts where the original poster could not?

[ Parent ]
Do not respond to my diaries in the future,
as I do not want them cluttered with a discussion about you and your imagined sense of superiority.  I prefer comments that pertain to the substance of my diary.  I thank you for your prompt and anticipated cooperation.
[ Parent ]
You're joking, right?
Are you twelve?

You: The polls show Jindal is vulnerable.
Me: The polls show Jindal beating Blanco and Breaux by thirty points.
You: I'm not talking about those polls, I'm talking about the newest poll.
Me: That poll shows Jindal has a 67% approval rating.
You: Polls don't matter. They're hypotheticals. They're irrelevent.
Me: No, they're not. They're actually the most accurate indicator of strenght.
You: Don't respond to my diaries anymore. I prefer comments that pertain to the substance of the topic.

I assure you that my posts are fair, even-handed, and well-reasoned. I am upfront about my beliefs, and they always pertain to the subject at hand. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly ignored my points, refused to answer direct questions, called me "devoid of anything that approximates intelligence", then turned around and said that *I* resort to ad hominem attacks.

So how about this: As long as I'm allowed to, I will comment on any diary or article that I choose to. And you can either choose to defend your points from my comments, or hide.

[ Parent ]
No, i will pass.
instead, i will ask the editor and the owner that you be banned immediately, as you have disrupted multiple threads.  and besides, you are not here to contribute to the focused discussion we desire to have.
[ Parent ]
My discussion has been very focused.
I'm sorry that you don't like people challenging your beliefs. I can only hope that you respond more maturely and appropriately in the real world when you encounter people who disagree with you.
[ Parent ]
I do, actually,
and I interact with them everyday.  I recommended your removal.  Take care.
[ Parent ]
Wrong once more
I highly doubt that there's as many people with opposite views who are as annoyingly badgering as you are. Most people who know me also know where I stand and know enough not to badger me. Heck, I've met more than a few sane republicans in my studies and almost none of them are as annoying as you. All you've done is constantly derail thread after thread and done nothing more than further illustrate the vacuous nature of many on your side. Point Coupee (sorry if that's misspelled), count me in on the efforts to ban this joker.
[ Parent ]
thanks,
this helps immensely.
[ Parent ]
"thread after thread"?
As far as I know, I've only taken part in two contentious threads: this one, where my conversation was strictly about the Louisiana gubernatorial race until the original poster insisted on challenging me instead of discussing the points I raised; and the Alaska thread, where my handful of posts hardly derailed anything.
[ Parent ]
Va Blogger
Don't let these people get to you. We're on a liberal posting site and trying to educate them on the opposite view. Obviously, they want to simply bad-mouth "neo-Conservatives" to each other and not hear any dissenting opinion.

Although, I do find it strangely ironic that most Democrats have the First Amendment tattooed on their arms and memorized so that they can spout "Freedom of the Press" everytime someone tries to censor soemthing. However, as soon as we begin having debates and they can't back up their opinions, they want to "have us removed and banned."

BTW, when was the last time you actually "did" anything about the state of the state, Pointe Coupee? When was the last time you travelled to Baton Rouge and stood in the back of the House or on the side of the Senate and actually spoke with someone regarding a bill that you supported/opposed? Have you ever arranged a one-on-one meeting with one of them to discuss your views? How many committee meetings have you submitted "Support" or "Oppose" cards? For that matter, at how many committee meetings have you testified?

What are you doing to ensure that the Democratic party holds onto the House this fall? And the Governor's Mansion? Are you just preaching to the choir on this and other boards, or are you actively stumping to "likely voters" in your district?

While you think about your answers/retorts, I'll be trying to make this state a better place for my kids.

Oh, and if I get "banned", then I guess that just leaves me more time to convince people that change in LA is needed!

[ Parent ]
I appreciate the kind words
A minor note, though: I'm not trying to educate anyone on my views. I'm simply giving my opinion on the state of races and campaigns. But because I don't view it through rosy-colored glasses, I'm called a troll and asked to leave.
[ Parent ]
You are called a troll because...
...you cast aspersions on our honesty, and do not seek any real form of debate.

I've had it with you.

You can join your buddy, Trans Am.  You're banned, va blogger.

[ Parent ]
Welcome to Bansville, USA.
The Swing State Project welcomes respectful dialogue and discussion, but your pompous attitude clearly does not fit with the tone of this community.  Therefore, your wish is our command: your account is banned.

And speaking of rights, fortunately, the GOP respects private property, so you'll have no problem with us enforcing our private property rights by ejecting you from our sandbox.

[ Parent ]
with bush
polling at 41% in st. tammany parish and 37% in jefferson parish, both of which comprise jindal's base, i imagine he will have a difficult time once voters in the state realize he is bush's rubberstamp.  the voting record does not lie, and the people of louisiana are not stupid, although republican strategists constantly assume we are.  the cannabalistic tendencies of the louisiana gop also do not help in this respect, nor does jindal's assumption that he and vitter can win this campaign over the phone and through pretaped video responses to debate questions they write before the debate actually occurs.  and polls taken before the field even formed are irrelevant.  you should know that.
[ Parent ]
The polls aren't irrelevent.
For starters, it shows Jindal's large support. If he is trouncing Blanco and Breaux by 30 points, then it shows that many people are open to the idea of him as Governor. It also shows exactly how much of an uphill battle people like Georges, Campbell, and Boasso have in order to be on equal footing with Jindal.

The most significant part of the polls, though (which I mentioned in my post and seems to have gone unnoticed by you) is Jindal's name ID and favorability ratings. A 67/12 rating is difficult to overcome, especially with a 94% name ID. There's little room for negative opinions of Jindal to grow.

Polls also are very important in showing trendlines.

Finally, this is a 2007 election, which means that we are a mere four months away from the primary. If polls don't count four months out, then when exactly do they start counting?

I'm sorry; trying to argue that the polls don't matter does little more than prove that you've buried your head in the sand.

[ Parent ]
the polls you discuss are relevant
if and only if blanco, breaux, mitch landrieu, chris john and richard ieyoub were announced candidates in the race.  none of them are, and this forces us to ask a few questions about the validity of the polls.  one also knows that polls two or three months stale tend to only have so much veracity, for dynamics can change radically over night, let alone over three months.  and lastly, boasso's new ad launched last week.  he is one of two democrats; there is no longer any confusion about the democratic field; and issues are finally discussed, not all the republican hysteria over breaux's residency.  politics in louisiana tends to be quick, unpredictable, highly polemical but always entertaining.  anything can happen in the next four months, and this is why i believe we need to direct our attention to the nascent dynamics of this race.  but i will agree with you on one small point: the polls reveal jindal will be forced in a runofff.  who will qualify is still an open question, but the real campaign always occurs in the runoff.  notice blanco's win in 2003: anything can occur in one month in louisiana politics. 
[ Parent ]
Polls
Polls are a lot more than just hypothetical matchups. If 59% of the people are willing to vote for Jindal against someone like Blanco or Breaux, then its safe to say that Jindal has a very large base to build upon. Its a show of strength; actual, tangible support in the state, rather than relying on past election results and a few blog posts.

For instance, something I've mentioned five or six times by now, which you have yet to acknowledge: You mentioned a poll earlier in this thread has has Jindal "hovering at around 39%". That very same poll, which you thought was relevent enough to mention, showed Jindal with 94% name ID and 67% favorability. So regardless of who else was asked about in the ballot question, two-thirds of likely voters approve of Jindal. That is a show of strength.

So going off two things: Jindal's strength against the two most prominent Democrats in the state (three if you include his 20-point lead on Mary Landrieu in a hypothetical Senate matchup), and the fact that 2/3rds voters like him, we can conclude that Jindal has a lot of strength going into the election. Compare that to the fact that Boasso, Campbell, and Georges all top out at 25% name ID, max, with lower favorability.

You're right: Louisiana is volatile politics. Its unpredictible. There's no guarantee that Jindal will face a run-off. There's no guarantee he won't. For all we know, Boasso, Campbell, Georges, or hell, even Ray Nagin may be elected the next Governor of Louisiana. But for all its volatility, there are indicators of strength, and they all point in Jindal's direction.

[ Parent ]
and if you are also
a low information victim of the jindal "juggernaut," then perhaps you should join one of the louisiana gop echo chambers, because your arguments lack puissance, lack rigor, lack conviction and lack substance.  you are wasting space and time.  you are out of touch.
[ Parent ]
We'll see.
A Southern Media and Opinion Research poll had Jindal at 56, Breaux at 26. I also think people generally need more to go on to vote for somebody than simply being from the same area as the candidate.

As for the electorate's desire for change, how would that not be accomplished by going from Blanco to Jindal?

Say what you want; there's simply no denying that Bobby Jindal is the juggernaught in the race, and its going to take a lot more than a state senator, a public utility commissioner, or a checkbook to stop him.

[ Parent ]
how is a poll
of jindal versus breaux relevant, especially when breaux did not even announce when that poll was taken?  do you measure the strenghts of a candidate by comparing them to just any politician?  is a candidate's viability a result of their ability to beat spectral candidates?  obviously not, which reveals once again how your arguments are predicated on republican axioms and not on verifiable dynamics on the ground in the state about which you feel entitled to write.
[ Parent ]
You're being selective.
Elsewhere in this thread, you:

1) tout a poll that has Jindal leading Breaux. Apparently, if you can twist the results of the poll to match your pre-determined reasoning, then its relevent. If it cannot, then its not relevent.

2) use previous elections to determine support, despite the fact that so many factors, including opponents, year, issues, and position, are different. Polls are much more reliable than a surface look at previous elections.

3) further the notion that simply being from an area grants somebody a portion of the electorate, despite the fact that there is no evidence to support it.

Reading poll results isn't a "Republican axiom". If you're going to refute the most telling indications of a candidate's strength, please attempt to do so with more than hypocrisy and knee-jerk name calling.

[ Parent ]
I think you
are more interested in refuing arguments with specious evidence than actually allowing the users here to engage in productive conversation. Perhaps you should ask a friend to start a blog, as you are clearly not here to raise optimism in important races. 
[ Parent ]
No
I'm not here to raise "optimism" in important races. I'm here to raise "reality" in important races. If a cornerstone of your coverage of an important race is the suspension of reality, well, then by all means knock yourself out.
[ Parent ]
Because there
are reasons to be confident about a Democratic victory in Louisiana, I will continue to write about the candidates challening Jindal and the mindless drones who tout him online.  If Democrats had no chance to win this race, I would invest my energies in something more meaningful.  But because I understand the dynamics on the ground in Louisiana, I will write on this race, even if it is to the chagrin of those who rely on irrelevant talking points scribbled on a warped sheet of paper by the nervous and desperate hand of Karl Rove.
[ Parent ]
For starters
Never once have I said or implied that you should not write about the race or spend your resources on it. I think you're getting a tad too defensive, and its quite troubling to see.

Second, I don't rely on talking points. I rely on indicators of the race, which include fundraising and polls, both of which are tested, proven, and accurate descriptors of on-the-ground support.

Third, I don't know how a sheet of paper can be warped, but okay.

Fourth, (speaking of ad hominem attacks) why do you dismiss my posts as "nervous and desperate" scribbles from Karl Rove? What do you have to lose by defending your assertions on their merits, rather than attacking me?

[ Parent ]
Again,
stay out of my diaries.  That you mistake Jindal's DC money for support in Louisiana is laughable, as is your reliance on polls that included Chris John and Mitch Landrieu, neither of whom announced for the race.  Your analyses ignore crucial facts about the polling data, and you are again assuming a supercilious tone neither I or others appreciate.  I think everyone has been clear: LEAVE.
[ Parent ]
Money aside,
He is still the most popular figure in Louisiana today. The poll that you yourself touted showed him with near-universal name ID and a 67/12 fav/unfav rating.

I rely on polls that have Chris John and Mitch because there have been only three polls conducted. Since I have no bearing in how polls are conducted, I can only work with what I have.

You've said, repeatedly, that my analysis of the polls are wrong. Please, I'm asking you to enlighten me. You say I ignore crucial facts. What facts am I ignoring? I really want to know.

[ Parent ]
And if you are not part of the solution,
then you are part of the problem.  L-E-A-V-E.
[ Parent ]
differences between VA and LA
do you even know what a jungle primary is or are you already blabbering on about what will happen in a runoff before we know who will be in it and what kind of fun happens in the primary.

"Keep the Faith"
[ Parent ]
Actually, its the difference between LA and everywhere else
Yes, I know what a jungle primary is. In addition to polling the jungle primary (which had Jindal leading Breaux and everyone else barely register), they had a head-to-head matchup that also had Jindal leading Breaux.

And we already know that Jindal will be in the run-off.

Blue South, you're the one who has touted poll results showing Easley beating Dole, and showing competition from Cooper and other NC pols. Do you agree with the OP's assertion that polls testing candidates who aren't running are irrelevent? He has stated that many times. Or do you agree that polls, even for hypothetical matchups, can show the relative strength or weakness of an opponent, as well as the general attitude of the electorate at the time of the poll?

[ Parent ]
Your questions
are irrelevent, and you have hijacked the thread of my diary.  The diary is to focus on Boasso as a candidate, not Jindal and certianly not Elizabeth Dole.  Stay out of my diaries, as you are incapable of addressing the topic proposed therein.
[ Parent ]
My questions weren't directed at you.
n/t
[ Parent ]
Because this thread
needs to be refocused, I will post the question once again: "What do you think of Walter Boasso and his commercial?"  I cannot wait to see the polling after this ad, as many here in Louisiana, including Republicans, love the ad. 
Out of curiousity
I saw the ad. It was an adequate introduction, though I guess I've seen so many ads I'm rarely impressed by them anymore. Anyways, is there any support for you saying that many Republicans loved the ad, other than anecdoctal evidence?
[ Parent ]
visit
wesawthat.blogspot.com.  both that blogger and a blogger named Cenlaugh, cenlaugh.blogspot.com, both republicans, support boasso.  and these are rapides parish republicans.  rapides parish is not friendly to democrats.
[ Parent ]
visit
cenlaugh.wordpress.com, although his comments on boasso are at We Saw That.
[ Parent ]
And by the way, did
you log off yet?  Because I frankly do not believe I need to engage in debate with you, as you are obviously not interested in supporting Democrats.  I would rather engage in debate with those who can get excited about Democrats, not those who prefer to demoralize those of us who want real representation, not more Republican rubberstamps.
[ Parent ]
I
I don't believe this post contributes to the focused discussion at hand.
[ Parent ]
did you visit
the blogs?  and if so, what do you think?
[ Parent ]
Honestly?
Its an ugly looking site, hard to navigate, and painful to read with all the grammatical and spelling mistakes.

As far as the content goes, its sort of scattered. First they hate Boasso, then they like him. They mockingly call Jindal "Bobby", for reasons passing understanding. I'm not exactly sure who they support or what they stand for. I'll take your word that they're Republicans.

[ Parent ]
About the Gov race
Let me tell you, Georges will not be able to eat into Jindal in any of the parishes in his district or even in SE LA. Jindal is viewed too well already.

Let me tell you what both the Republican AND Democratic leadership in Baton Rouge are saying right now. They are saying that the Gov mansion is as good as Bobby's. No runoff, no nothing. Also, the House will most likely go to Republicans. And, with a Republican governor, all of the Committee chairs will again be Republican.

Now, to prove that I am fair, I'll say some things that aren't so "Republican-friendly". Because the Senate will probably stay predominantly Democrat, they will be able to stall much of the legislation that goes through the House (ala what the House is doing to HB 3 right now).

A word about "blogging Republicans". Easily 95% of Republicans don't blog - they don't even know what it is. It is mainly the younger, more Democratic generation that blogs and posts. Politics is not a venue that responds to technology - it's about face time and who you know. Sorry - that's how it is and that's how it will stay for at least another few decades. So, when you say that "so-and-so Republican blogger is excited about Boasso or Georges" I'm not too impressed. They are the fringe, not the norm, of the Republican party. I'm even somewhat of an enigma - I'm conservative, young, and from Louisiana. Weird, huh! :)

As an FYI about my philosophy - I don't think that Republicans are "always right". I don't think that Republicans should have an iron-fisted, super-majority rule of both Chambers and the executive branch. Diversity is good. Debate is good. We need dissenting opinions. I simply gravitate to Republican ideals because I believe in the basic "less government, more individual accountability" dogma of the Republican party platform.

[ Parent ]
You and I hear different voices.
And if you are a Republican for the reasons you state, you are conflicted, for Republicans, especially Jindal, are responsible for the expansion of government.
[ Parent ]
There are many
Republican sites in Louisiana, and perhaps you would find a better home there.  I use this site, as there are only one or two Democratic sites in the state.  I notice you established your membership at a time when another writer here was writing on the state legislature.  I find that interesting, especially as David Vitter's PAC misquoted that writer in a mailer they sent to voters in Orleans Parish during a special election.  And no, the Governor's mansion and the state legislature are not guaranteed for the Republicans.  Although Rove and his surrogates in LA try to convince everyone it is inevitable, the dynamics on the ground will make such an effort very difficult.
[ Parent ]
...
Actually, the Republican Party is the party of small government and state's rights. Now, the current Federal administration is not a good example of that. Because there is a "war" going on, Fed govt has grown crazily. That's not my philosophy. To me, the Fed is there to provide national defense and represent the 50 states to the world. Most of the other stuff should be handled by states.

I don't think that Trans Ram was that other writer you mention. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it. Let's put it this way, he sure was not aware that anything of his had been quoted by Vitter.

As for the dynamics on the ground, they are very different from the Republican view, you are right. However, it is my job to be non-partisan from 8-5 M-F. I speak with Democrats and Republicans equally and have great friends on both sides of the fence.

If you want to see what the Democrats actually THINK is going to happen (as opposed to what they SAY they want to happen), look at their voting blocs. The Dems are trying to consolodate their base for next year so that they can present a united front. While you are a majority, it's OK to have factions (the Black caucus, the Orleans delegation, the democratic caucus). But, when you're in the minority, you cannot afford to split your votes (hence, the Republican caucus has put differences aside and voted together). The Democrats are trying this out right now with HB 3, but are running into problems because they need a 2/3 majority.

Let's see - no name calling, no insults, no pompousness - I should be good to go without getting banned.

[ Parent ]
Sadly no...
You're still a troll.
[ Parent ]
LA-GOV: Campaign Season Begins | 64 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox