Sound Politics Public Blog: Louisiana- Fertile Ground for Republicans?

December 08, 2008

Louisiana- Fertile Ground for Republicans?

Just a few typical musings but is Louisiana become a fertile ground for Republicans? And, if so, why?

The latest is the election of http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/07/louisiana-boots-william-cold-cash-jefferson/ to take over the William "Freezer" Jefferson in the 2nd District.

Jefferson should have been defeated in '06 when his scandal regarding payoffs and the cash in his freezer, but he won. So, this time against Cao- a Vietnamese-American, he lost. Add to that Bobby Jindal and you begin to wonder why the switches after Katrina.

Is it the fact Democrat voters fled the State?
Is it the fact Republicans are doers and Louisiana now has men front and center that know how to get something done?

Or, was it simply the lack of an Obama factor this time?

I think it is that fact Republicans are doers. In a complacent society or welfare society, it seems Democrats do better since there are a lot of giveaways and no desire or need to improve. In Louisiana or in the Plain States (where the weather makes life a challenge during the frequent winter blizzards), Republicans get stuff done.

Posted by tedtrepanier at December 08, 2008 07:26 AM | Email This

Comments

1. Well, the lack of the Obama factor clearly helped defeat Jefferson, but I don't know about other things. Obama only did worse then Kerry in 5 states I think, Louisiana is one of them.

Had a lot to do with Jindal I think.

Posted by: cliff on December 8, 2008 07:41 AM

2. I lived in New Orleans 1983-1987 and am familiar with that district, and with William Jefferson's pre-congressional career.

Jefferson first ran for congress in 1990. Louisiana has a primary system similar to our new top two primary, so Jefferson often faced little or no Republican opposition.

Jefferson's district is one of the most extreme Democratic Party districts in the nation. In some years, Jefferson was unopposed in the first round.

In other years, he faced only Democratic opposition and won more than 50% in the first round, and was automatically elected. In some years, he missed the 50% mark in the first round, but beat a Democratic opponent in the runoff.

In only four of the previous nine elections (prior to 2008) was there a Republican candidate in the first round.

There was no Republican in the first round in 1990, 1992, 1996, 1998, and 2000.

When Republicans entered the first round, the received 19% of the vote in 1994, 11% of the vote in 2002, 21% of the vote in 2004, and 13% of the vote in 2006.

This year's first round was held on December 6 instead of November 4 - it was delayed because of hurricanes earlier in the election year.

The Republican candidate had slightly more than 50%, Jefferson had 47%, and scattered other candidates had a total of 3%. No runoff was needed since Cao received slightly more than 50%

Posted by: Steve Beren on December 9, 2008 01:18 PM

3. Steve, what was the breakdown in the voting this time around or hasn't it been reported? What was the effect of people leaving the State and staying out?

Were people ready for a do-something Republican? (I realize not all Republicans are do-somethings)

Posted by: tedtrepanier on December 10, 2008 10:34 AM

4. From my reading of media reports, it appears that turnout was particularly low. As with the Georgia Chambliss-Martin race runoff, the New Orleans congressional election (delayed to hurricane) was held on a day where there was no increased turnout to vote for Obama. I am sure that had a lot to do with it. Nevertheless, Cao received slightly more than 50% of the vote, quite an accomplishment for that district. Some media reports stated that Black turnout was low and white turnout was high. The number of voters was much, much less than usually vote in a typical U.S. congressional election. Some reports I've read noted that Cao (who was an underdog, not expected to win or even come close) was not particularly ideological, and did not emphasize issues as much as competence. I don't know whether this is true or not, but that is what I read (especially in the New York Times report).

Posted by: Steve Beren on December 10, 2008 03:55 PM

5. Steve -- Louisiana has changed its election system for U.S. House and U.S. Senate after the 2006 election. It is no longer "Top Two" for these federal offices. Instead, there are party primaries, runoff elections if nobody gets a majority in a party primary, and then a winner-take-all general election between all the party nominees and independent candidates.

The party primary was delayed by Hurricane Gustav, and moved to the date when the party runoff would have been held. Since no one got a majority in the Democratic primary, the Democratic runoff was moved to the normal general election date of November 4, at least for U.S. House districts 2 and 4. (The other five U.S. House districts did not require party runoffs, and held their general elections on November 4.) So the winner-take-all general election was moved to December 6 in House districts 2 and 4.

Anh Cao would have been elected on December 6, even if he ended up with less than 50% in the four candidate general election, so long as he was the highest vote getter. There is no longer a runoff after the general election for federal office in Louisiana.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 14, 2008 11:59 PM