Welcome to the Runoff!: LA 2015 Liveblog

[/]

^ Unless turnout is worse than the primary and only a few rich people Uptown vote, Vitter would never carry Orleans Parish.

Atlas colors (read the title)

How would it possibly be that bad?  Did Obama drop down and decide to run for governor or something?

but Kentucky ;-;

[Asian Nazi]

Okay if Louisiana votes for that absolute scumbag Vitter over the man of true integrity and honesty John Bel Edwards because OOGILY BOOGILY BROWN PEOPLE then they no longer deserve the rights and privileges of this great Union and should be ejected immediately tbh. But I do believe that at least a slim majority of Louisianans will see through Vitter's slimy and desperate tactics and make the right choice (though the South hasn't given me much faith in that as of late...).

In what world are "integrity" and "honesty" more important than policy?  I'm sure there are a lot of Louisianans who think they are.  But really, sure, Edwards is considerably more right-wing than the national Democratic Party, but he's still either identical or to the left of Vitter on literally every issue. 

I'm going to be completely honest, I'm not really sure how any well-informed individual who cares about policy can be a split ticket voter in the context of the modern party system.  We don't live in a country where there are Democrats who are more conservative than Republicans.  Above the local level, literally every Democrat is to the left of literally every Republican.  If you vote for a Democrat, you are going to get considerably more liberal policy than if you vote for a Republican.  And yet, I'm sure that there will be thousands of Louisiana conservatives who will vote for Edwards later this month.  The same way that Massachusetts and Maryland liberals elected Baker and Hogan last year. 

So if Louisiana actually elects Edwards, my question will be, do these people just care that little about policy, or are these voters really that low information?

[Maxwell]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

[Asian Nazi]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

[RI]

Okay if Louisiana votes for that absolute scumbag Vitter over the man of true integrity and honesty John Bel Edwards because OOGILY BOOGILY BROWN PEOPLE then they no longer deserve the rights and privileges of this great Union and should be ejected immediately tbh. But I do believe that at least a slim majority of Louisianans will see through Vitter's slimy and desperate tactics and make the right choice (though the South hasn't given me much faith in that as of late...).

In what world are "integrity" and "honesty" more important than policy?  I'm sure there are a lot of Louisianans who think they are.  But really, sure, Edwards is considerably more right-wing than the national Democratic Party, but he's still either identical or to the left of Vitter on literally every issue. 

I'm going to be completely honest, I'm not really sure how any well-informed individual who cares about policy can be a split ticket voter in the context of the modern party system.  We don't live in a country where there are Democrats who are more conservative than Republicans.  Above the local level, literally every Democrat is to the left of literally every Republican.  If you vote for a Democrat, you are going to get considerably more liberal policy than if you vote for a Republican.  And yet, I'm sure that there will be thousands of Louisiana conservatives who will vote for Edwards later this month.  The same way that Massachusetts and Maryland liberals elected Baker and Hogan last year. 

So if Louisiana actually elects Edwards, my question will be, do these people just care that little about policy, or are these voters really that low information?

John Bel Edwards is hardly your standard Democrat. A one-issue typically-Republican pro-life voter, for example, has every reason in the world to vote for Edwards over Vitter.

[DrScholl]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

Absolutely not.

[tpfkaw]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

The obvious analogy is Bill Clinton, so clearly the answer is no.

[Vega]

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

Absolutely.

[tpfkaw]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

The obvious analogy is Bill Clinton, so clearly the answer is no.

It's not really hypocritical for a liberal to have sex with whomever they please.  You need a different type of scandal to make the comparison.  For example, a documented history of race/gender discrimination would instantly sink just about any Dem against a moderate Republican.

Clinton has had, IIRC, 19 different women accuse him of rape or (extreme, like jerking off in front of them) sexual harassment, several of whom made their accusations before he ever started his political career and many of whom were Democratic Party activists who were volunteering for his campaigns at the time of the alleged incidents. Plus you have his confirmed behavior with his 19-year-old intern and with Paula Jones, and you have to say that, like Bill Cosby, it's a case where if there's smoke there's fire.

[DrScholl]

Let's get back to the subject, which is the admitted lawbreaker David Vitter, who is losing his race in a red state.

[Asian Nazi]

Let's get back to the subject, which is the admitted lawbreaker David Vitter, who is losing his race in a red state.

Yeah, sorry for derailing the thread.  I just was a bit shocked when I saw that guy calling for kicking Louisiana out of the Union if they vote for Vitter.

[gespb19]

Is anyone watching the Vitter-Edwards debate?
 

Not in Louisiana, the Saints chaos is the dominate story.

The moderators should have asked the candidates their thoughts on the Saints firing Rob Ryan (Who Dat!). :-)

[DINGO Joe]

Is anyone watching the Vitter-Edwards debate?
 

Not in Louisiana, the Saints chaos is the dominate story.

The moderators should have asked the candidates their thoughts on the Saints firing Rob Ryan (Who Dat!). :-)

I was just over at the T-P website, the firing of Rob Ryan  had more than 400 comments, while the story about the debate had 22.  Gotta have priorities.

[BigSkyBob]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

The obvious analogy is Bill Clinton, so clearly the answer is no.

It's not really hypocritical for a liberal to have sex with whomever they please. 

But, that wasn't the real issue with Bill Clinton. In 1992 a series of women stepped forward to note that they had had sex with Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton had the option of not commenting on the allegations, but, instead of his own volition chose to go before the American people and kinda, sorta admit his indiscretions [while continuing to adamantly deny the particulars of every accusation against him] as a humbled and repentant man who had "caused pain in his marriage." He vowed to never do it again. At that point, he was making a promise to the American people as to what his character was, and would be while he was President.

Turns out he was lying through his teeth. It was as big and as shameless of a lie as, "Read my lips! No new taxes!"

Relating back to a previous post in this thread, Miles stated that David Vitter "made" his wife and his son cut campaign commercials. Back whenever Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Vitter first became aware of their husband's infidelities they would have been within their rights to leave. For their own reasons each decided to stay with her husband. One of the possibilities is that Mr. Vitter has in fact regained his wife's trust over the intervening years. If the Edwards campaign, or Miles, wishes to call her a liar, or claim she is acting under duress, then it/he ought to do so soon. Otherwise, it/he ought to take her words at face value.
 

[Senator Cris]

Okay if Louisiana votes for that absolute scumbag Vitter over the man of true integrity and honesty John Bel Edwards because OOGILY BOOGILY BROWN PEOPLE then they no longer deserve the rights and privileges of this great Union and should be ejected immediately tbh. But I do believe that at least a slim majority of Louisianans will see through Vitter's slimy and desperate tactics and make the right choice (though the South hasn't given me much faith in that as of late...).

LOL.

[Figueira]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

Honestly? Yes, and I'm not even a Democrat. It sounds wrong, but I care more about policies, since they actually have an impact on the lives of millions of people.

If Vitter loses, it will most likely because of this scandal. But I would prefer if they rejected him because of his policies.

[smoltchanov]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

Honestly? Yes, and I'm not even a Democrat. It sounds wrong, but I care more about policies, since they actually have an impact on the lives of millions of people.

If Vitter loses, it will most likely because of this scandal. But I would prefer if they rejected him because of his policies.

And i - NO. Even if i would agree with his policies. A scumbag with right policies remains a scumbag not worthy of my vote...))))

[Figueira]

Not every person thinks like people on this site think - people vote for a lot of reasons beyond the person with the right policies.

Okay, Atlas Democrats, would you vote for a Democrat with Vitter's character issues over a Generic Republican?

Honestly? Yes, and I'm not even a Democrat. It sounds wrong, but I care more about policies, since they actually have an impact on the lives of millions of people.

If Vitter loses, it will most likely because of this scandal. But I would prefer if they rejected him because of his policies.

And i - NO. Even if i would agree with his policies. A scumbag with right policies remains a scumbag not worthy of my vote...))))

That person would definitely be a scumbag, but I don't see voting as a way of rewarding or punishing politicians; I see it as a way of doing what I think is best for the world. I can see how having that sort of character would raise questions about their ability to do what's right in office, but if their opponent guarantees that they won't do what's right, then that argument doesn't work.

In the primary though, I would happily vote against that person.

And Vitter is an unusual case because his main character issue actually does call into question his abortion policy, so if I was a single-issue anti-abortion voter, I'd probably vote for Edwards.

[Miles]

This thread is getting very cluttered up very quickly. Can we please save the "would you vote for candidate X if ..." talk for a Individual Politics thread?  

[smoltchanov]

This thread is getting very cluttered up very quickly. Can we please save the "would you vote for candidate X if ..." talk for a Individual Politics thread?  

Yes, Miles, i will do it. But it seems to me - we will not get a lot of news before real voting begins.. Last RRH poll seems very strange to me, Caldwell percentage especially...

[DINGO Joe]

This thread is getting very cluttered up very quickly. Can we please save the "would you vote for candidate X if ..." talk for a Individual Politics thread?  

Yes, Miles, i will do it. But it seems to me - we will not get a lot of news before real voting begins.. Last RRH poll seems very strange to me, Caldwell percentage especially...

THe RRH poll seems pretty accurate, all Vitter has to do to win is get 30% of the black vote.

[DINGO Joe]

I tried to imagine a county map for this and this is what I came up with



Then I realized, this is very similar to Landrieu's 52-46 win in 2008. It looks like Louisiana is reverting back to when a sizable number of whites voted Democratic (30-40%). I tried to work out a reasonable scenario:

Whites (65%): 65% Vitter, 35% Edwards
Blacks (30%): 95% Edwards, 5% Vitter
Other (5%): 65% Edwards, 35% Vitter

Equates to 54.5% Edwards, 45.5% Vitter. Edwards needs just 28% of the white vote to win, more if black turnout isn't as good.

I don't have Edwards winning Ouachita, but I do have him winning Rapides, Allen, Jeff Davis and Ascension

[Miles]

This thread is getting very cluttered up very quickly. Can we please save the "would you vote for candidate X if ..." talk for a Individual Politics thread?  

Yes, Miles, i will do it. But it seems to me - we will not get a lot of news before real voting begins.. Last RRH poll seems very strange to me, Caldwell percentage especially...

The JMC poll had the exact same result. I'd like to see the AG crosstabs for the RRH poll, but it looks like Caldwell is in trouble.

[DINGO Joe]

The AG race will be determined by people who have no idea who either man is.

[Torie]

Here is a link to the RRH poll, in case it was not put it. The most interesting thing is that of the close to half of the voters who have already voted, Vitter leads 48% to 44% over Edwards. The poll has those who have not yet voted, but likely to vote, going 52% to 36% for Edwards. That strikes me as a rather amazing discrepancy.