Why do I focus on the Landrieu/Nagin election? Because it's instructive. Here's a future scenario that perhaps might be illuminating for Louisiana voters. Please look at this as an EXAMPLE of a way of thinking and politicking, not as a prediction or a perfect historical parallel. Find the similarities, not the differences.
In the fall of 2007, the major candidates running for Governor include Incumbent Gov Kathleen Blanco, Rep. Bobby Jindal, and State Treasurer John Kennedy. Many Democratic voters support Kennedy over Kathleen Blanco and Rep. Bobby Jindal in the open primary, but Kennedy loses. These "Kennedy Dems" represent a crucial swing vote, and have an important decision to make between Blanco and Jindal.
Despite being one of her toughest critics, Blanco offers Kennedy a special "Recovery Task Force" assignment and he reluctantly supports Blanco in the runoff and encourages his supporters to do the same.
During the 2007 campaign season, the popular Dead Oyster News Service asserts a false rumor that Rep. Bobby Jindal orchestrated his son's emergency live home birth as a media stunt to give him positive publicity. This generates a lot of discussion, and Jindal's forced to deny the rumor.
Blanco runs a surprisingly hard campaign, with many sly, murky digs at Jindal. One of Blanco's endlessly repeated phrases is that Jindal represents the "politics of the unknown". Bobby runs a sunny, optimistic campaign and doesn't call Blanco on her "smiling" attacks.
In what seemed like an unthinkable scenario in 2006, Blanco narrowly wins re-election over Jindal in what many considered to be one of the most important gubernatorial elections in Louisiana history. The national reaction to Blanco's re-election is almost uniformly negative. Citizens from other states regard this as the last straw, and decide that LA is too stupid to govern itself and should be defunded and written off as a hopeless basket-case.
Here are the "arguments" that the crucial Kennedy Dem swing vote uses to justify their decision to vote for Blanco:
Better the Devil you know, than the one you don't.
Jindal represents the "politics of the unknown".
Four more years of Blanco is better than eight more years of Jindal.
Blanco will endorse the Democratic candidate in the Presidential election of 2008, and Kennedy Dems want to strengthen the Democratic state party in LA so it will return to the "blue" column in national elections.
Blanco has been tested. She experienced a "$100 billion lesson in failure". We shouldn't waste that.
If Jindal became governor, he might try to help get FRC chairman Tony Perkins elected over Mary Landrieu in the Senatorial elections in 2008. And Kennedy Dems find that future scenario totally unacceptable.
The FRC endorsed Bobby Jindal.
George Bush endorsed and has come to LA to campaign for Bobby Jindal. The Bush family represents "political incest" at the very highest level, and I don't want a governor so closely connected to such political families.
During Blanco's primary win she was wearing a "Queen Bee" pin. What a charming sense of humor she has. It was then that I had "second thoughts" about her. Maybe, hopefully, she will change in substantive ways after being re-elected.
Bobby Jindal has weird hair.
The following summer, another hurricane hits South Louisiana. Blanco dithers, and the state is embarrassed on a national scale.
Again. Jindal supporters are enraged, and smother their autos with "Don't Blame Me" bumper stickers. The crucial Kennedy swing voters then tell the Jindal crowd "Has it ever occurred to you that we might be just as unhappy as you are with Meemaw? The election's over. You need to 'get over it', and help the state rebuild rather than complaining all the time."
Is the above "parallel" exact? Of course not. History rhymes, it doesn't repeat. However, it's this sort of idiotic partisan non-thinking that will perhaps LITERALLY kill the state. It was certainly a factor in Nagin's reelection.
Every single one of those hilariously stupid pro-Meemaw "arguments" you see listed above has a corollary with an "argument" used by conservatives who supported Nagin over Mitch Landrieu.
Can we learn from my depiction?
15 Comments:
Good analogy, but there is one motivating factor that continues to play out over and over in this state.
The biggest disappointment, for me, is not the position of the “Couhig Conservatives” or the as yet fictional “Kennedy Democrats” but the other end of the spectrum; those who supported a candidate who so grossly differed from their political ideology over one with a good record of supporting their concerns, from a family who took enormous political risk in pushing for integration (and suffers to this day in many circles because of it). The large numbers of New Orleanians who would not vote for a white candidate over an African-American even in the circumstances of the last election, really cannot be ignored.
And it is not a one sided affair, Blanco’s election was a result in large part of the unfortunately large percentage of Louisiana citizens who will not vote for anyone other than a white, Christian, native. That we have become so inured to this and simply throw out hands up and ignore it, is one of the failings of post-civil rights era politics. And this all plays out to our detriment, over and over.
For what it's worth, I am putting up some of my musings on this at http://some-came-running.blogspot.com/
Very well imagined, Oyster. I particularly enjoyed the fake home birth rumor. I, for one, would like to see Meemaw face a more enlightened and energetic Democratic challenger than Kennedy in the primary.
Unfortunately.. the worst thing about the Governor's race will be the reduced focus on New Orleans (other than as a foil) among the candidates as they try to take advantage of the demographic shift away from the city. This bodes ill for progressive politics in Louisiana in general... but more crucially for the clout New Orleans can expect to have in Baton Rouge in the coming years. Most of the state is already hostile to NOLA. I'm sure that many see the next decade or so as an opportunity to take out some backwoods rednedk frustrations on us already suffering city folk.
Good post, Erster. I think Meemaw is making a slow, steady comeback. The other problem Piyush has is that he's an annoying Eddie Haskell-like smart aleck. He irritates lots of people who could care less that he's Indian. Hell, I'm one of them. He needs to take some chill pills and not speak so fast.
I also think that if John Georges stays in the race it could impact Piyush. John is a jerk but a low key one. He's also richer than Croesus so his effort will be well-financed.
Clecus makes a very good point, many people in Louisiana who actually agree more with Jindal's politics than Blanco's voted for Blanco due to Jindal's skin color and ancestory. That is a damn shame. Then again, our state did have a run-off for governor b/twn Edwin Edwards and David Duke just 14 years ago.
Kennedy vs. Jindal would be a tough race, and would leave people like me with a tough decision. Jindal has already tried to help Louisiana in D.C. with the revenue sharing bill and voting against CAFTA, and Kennedy is a Democrat with some good ideas, who seems to be against taxing businesses out of the state and is not part of the loon far-Left. So the question would be:
If a good candidate, like Kennedy, can be placed in the governor's office, why pull Jindal out of the U.S. Congress?
However, if it's Jindal vs. Blanco, then it's a no-brainer for me.
Jindal vs. Kennedy would be a toss-up for me. I'd take Jindal and Kennedy over Blanco and John Breaux, and I'd take Blanco over Breaux, or not even vote in that instance.
I assume you saw the Jeremy Alford aricle that hinted Kennedy might switch parties, if you google jeremy alford john kennedy, you'll find it.
Celcus' point was correct, but largely irrelevant. The north La. voters that he refers don't comprise the a large chunk of the state's civic leadership. In South La. it was hard to say how much conservative vote was anti-immigrant and how much pro-S.La. cajun.
I'm not as sure as you seem to be, that almost all of Nagin's white vote was conservative. It's impossible to say though, at least I can't tell. I don't anybody who voted for Nagin. I know some blacks and white liberal who won't say and some conservatives who didn't vote for the Landrieus, but no Nagin voters.
The one parallel I can't imagine is a press that knows Blanco shouldn't be elected when it comes to endorsements, but likes her enough to write sympathetic stories. They don't, the state media still keeps hinting that she should have federalized the guard even though every national commentator agrees that she shouldn't have. If you think about it, a front page story in today's paper shows how the local press came to Nagin's defense. Nagin didn't abandon ship when he left on Sept. 5, remember order was restored when John Wayne rode in on Sept. 2.
But great points.
Oh one more thing, I can see tthis post being used against Blanco next year, in internet circles anyway. I can honestly give Blanco a C on her performance since things calmed down after Rita. Well, it would average out to a C, every time it starts to move to B range something pulls it down, and vice versa. I didn't hear anybody say even that much for Nagin.
When I made that last comment, I thought Nagin went to Dallas on Sept. 5, not the 7th. That's why I was really shocked to be reminded that the Danziger bridge incident occurred on the 4th. Still, after Brinkley's book criticized Nagin for going to Dallas on the 7th, we kept hearing about the guard arriving on the 2nd.
Oyster,
Here's the take from the CC Camp. Points well made by Celcus (God, that hurt!!!) but not enough emphasis. You can't compare the two races (no pun intended) because of what I refer to as the "Northerners" those living above I-10. Although not black, Jindal is brown and that's enough tint to turn their heads. YOu have to remember that these people beat their bibles in church for hours on Sunday while you and I are sleeping off a hang over. You know the type, they wear leather suspenders and keep a lot of knick-knack crap around their homes as decorations. You know, the crocheted toilet paper holder for that spare roll.
They are startled by the blackness of their own shadow. I'm afraid that unless Bobby's behind the counter of a Circle-K selling Slurpie's in Shreveport or Monroe, he's not welcome up there.
However, what will be interesting is the degree at which New Orleans voters impact state elections.
Those that have not yet been incarcerated, are they going to continue vote absentee or come back to cast votes. At some point they will figure out that if they change their residence to Texas or Georgia they will get a whole lot more benefits from being a citizen as opposed to an refugee.
You also need to consider that the Landrieau's don't know where to send the buses to pick up these people and bring them to the polls. Ironically, Mary and Mitch could have single-handedly evacuated this segment of the population by merely saying that there was a big election the Saturday before Katrina and that the people should look for the nearest yellow school bus in their neighborhood to hop on for a ride to the polling location and a little "tata" (not to be confused with my tottie Dambala).
I'm amazed. You guys still don't get it after all that has been said. Kisten and just believe me. Couhig Conservatives or whatever the du jour name for the City's wealthy and elite is (not the nuveau riche) but the old timer blue-bloods, vote for candidates for one reason. They simply vote for who they can control. Along these same lines, they sometimes might vote "against" he or she who will try to take away that control. They vote to preserve their way of life because it is very comfortable. It's not much harder than that. Don't try to make it harder.
Anon #1
Alright, perhaps I need to clarify and re-emphasize a few things.
The "Couhig Conservative" moniker refers, roughly, to people who voted for Couhig in the mayoral primary and who then voted for Nagin in the runoff (because Landrieu represented the "politics of the past" and Nagin "understands business"...etc). Most, but not all, CC's were concentrated in the Lakeview precincts.
The CC's are NOT the silk-stocking Uptown rich conservative elites, for the most part (although my criticisms could transfer to some of them as well). The real old-line families were mostly Forman supporters. (I have a rough draft of a massive "case study" about Forman's campaign, but I doubt I'll post it because I don't think anyone cares at this point. But I think it's instructive about politics in general.)
It's extremely difficult to judge exactly how much impact the Couhig Conservatives had in the election. I don't think they comprised all of Nagin's white support, but, in my view, they were a crucial swing vote, and couldn't justify their vote for Nagin with a solid reason if their life depended on it.
SIMILARLY, there might be a crucial Democratic swing vote in a future gubernatorial election. Some Dems might be faced with the prospect of voting for a candidate whom they don't adore, but who would be better for the state than the current occupant. It's a possibility. The Blanco/Jindal and Landrieu/Nagin parallels are extremely inexact. However, I can imagine Blanco trying to persuade a certain block of "swing vote" Dems with vague, inert, talking points. This crucial "swing vote" should reject such overtures, and be prepared to vote for Jindal if Blanco's supporters can't give them a decent reason to re-elect her. The stakes are too high to not do what is best for the state, and that very well might mean voting for Jindal next election.
That's why I titled the post "It works both ways".
Another way of putting this is:
If you ever, EVER see me using bullshit arguments like those I listed in my post to support a lame candidate over a superior one, then you should call me out as a stupid partisan hack who cares more about the State Democratic Party than the fate of Louisiana.
I would very much like to see your study on the Forman race. As someone who voted for him, fitting into the Uptown/silk stocking wearing category, he was my best candidate. Why? Simple. Socio-econimcally, he was most closely alligned with my way of life. At the end of the day, and hopefully one day you will get this. After all the bullshit settles at the bottom, and the idealist have spoken there peace, people vote with one simple thing in mind. Their wallet!!!
Is anyone really disputing this fact?
Anon. #1
I'm starting to like this Anon #1 guy. I especially liked his anti-yuppie tirade a few posts below... although I don't think his straw man description actually fits most of those he is targeting with it.
Also... not entirely certain if the guy is.. you know... for real. But quite entertaining nonetheless.
Oh and I would also probably like to see your case study
Here's another scenario:
1. A "conservative blog" backs Bobby Jindal
2. Bobby Jindal loses.
3. Rather than analyze the shortcomings of Jindal's campaign, this "conservative" blogger proceeds to thrash those who voted for Governor Blanco, erning a solid rep. as a whiner.
Anonymous, you'd maybe be right if a local TV station in every market had a political analyst who belonged to a Democrat group (the Greater New Orlean Demopcrats) that ran anti-Nagin ads and that analyst repeatedly out how new house leader Pelosi and Senate leader Reid indicated that they would rather give aid to a state with a Democratic governor. That would also be roughly analogous to the mayoral campaign, especially if viewers weren't told of the connection between the analyst and the anti-Jindal group. But the real difference is that there would be nothing stealth about Dems attacking Jindal, that would expected.
Oyster, I didn't think your arguments were serious, but the premise implies that Blanco and Nagin's post-Katrina performances have been comparable. Nagin backers rarely tried to defend his post-K performance, instead they changed the subject to defend from "unfair" criticisms of his performance during Katrina. I wouldn't lable Blanco's post-K performance "good," but enough of it has been good to make the overall performance defensible.
Of course, a major part of my negative view of Nagin is based on my opinion that his use of the word "NIMBY" was far worse than his use of the term "chocolate city." If I weren't thoroughly convinced that Nagin would have milked that crisis for months, I'd have one less thing to give Blanco credit for.
Sorry to keep adding to my comments, but I missed the obvious answer to the last anonymous comment, the typical Republican response is to say whiner when Dems point out responsibility for a problem. If anyone point out that Repubs bear some responsibilty for Nagin's re-election, he's a whiner. Just lovely, if you're a Repub who wants to blame the Dems for Nagin.
"Oyster, I didn't think your arguments were serious, but the premise implies that Blanco and Nagin's post-Katrina performances have been comparable."
I'm not saying that, but a crucial, potential "swing vote" demographic might more or less believe that. Perhaps more importantly, the rest of the country might view Nagin and Blanco negatively, and LA voters must consider how re-electing a Blanco might look to the rest of the country (whom we lobby for money).
---
Anon#1 sez: "After all the bullshit settles at the bottom, and the idealist have spoken there peace, people vote with one simple thing in mind. Their wallet!!!"
Nope. Too simplistic. how do you explain the Uptowners in District 6 voting out the long-entrenched Al Coman family and putting in Reform IQ candidate Nancy Marshall who explicitly promised to radically raise most property assessments (upon which property taxes are based). How do you explain the security proposition that overwhelmingly passed in an a section of St Charles Uptown where homeowners raised taxes on themselves to pay for a stupid "security patrol service"?
It's not always about one's wallet. People will gladly pay more for certain services (roads, crime, infrastructure, school...) if they believe some improvement will occur.
