LA and NC 2016 Congressional Races

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Potential option I'm thinking of since I don't know much about Louisiana politics - Jay Dardenne bolts to the Democrats to run for Senate. I'm not sure he could gain traction, but it would be an interesting thought if the Landrieu's decide to abandon all hope.

Dardenne has said that his endorsement of Edwards does not mean he is considering switching parties.

[smoltchanov]

Potential option I'm thinking of since I don't know much about Louisiana politics - Jay Dardenne bolts to the Democrats to run for Senate. I'm not sure he could gain traction, but it would be an interesting thought if the Landrieu's decide to abandon all hope.

Dardenne has said that his endorsement of Edwards does not mean he is considering switching parties.

But party itself, which is (generally) much more conservative then he is, may, essentially, force him to do that. It's difficult for me to think him having a bright future in Republican party after so forceful support of Edwards this time.

[Maxwell]

Potential option I'm thinking of since I don't know much about Louisiana politics - Jay Dardenne bolts to the Democrats to run for Senate. I'm not sure he could gain traction, but it would be an interesting thought if the Landrieu's decide to abandon all hope.

Dardenne has said that his endorsement of Edwards does not mean he is considering switching parties.

Politicians change their minds.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The only Democrat who could probably make LA-04 a race is Foster Campbell. Interestingly, he serves on the Public Service Commission with Aneglle - would be something if they both moved up.

Far-right Republicans would probably get behind State Rep. Alana Seabaugh if he ran.

May be Democrats must try Milkovich again?))) He ran for LA-04 twice, both time in hopeless races (against McCreary in 2002  and heavily favored Carmouche in 2008 primary), and seems to gain experience. He won (as a very conservative Democrat) rather difficult (about R+11) state Senate district. Why not? Only a conservative democrat may be competitive there, IMHO...

How about no.

If you intend to run anybody, but conservative, in this district - you already lost it..

There's a difference between running a conservaDem and a Republican in everything but name.  Win or lose, all Milkovich would do is suck money from the coffers of candidates who might actually...you know...vote the way I think they should every now and then.

[smoltchanov]

The only Democrat who could probably make LA-04 a race is Foster Campbell. Interestingly, he serves on the Public Service Commission with Aneglle - would be something if they both moved up.

Far-right Republicans would probably get behind State Rep. Alana Seabaugh if he ran.

May be Democrats must try Milkovich again?))) He ran for LA-04 twice, both time in hopeless races (against McCreary in 2002  and heavily favored Carmouche in 2008 primary), and seems to gain experience. He won (as a very conservative Democrat) rather difficult (about R+11) state Senate district. Why not? Only a conservative democrat may be competitive there, IMHO...

How about no.

If you intend to run anybody, but conservative, in this district - you already lost it..

There's a difference between running a conservaDem and a Republican in everything but name.  Win or lose, all Milkovich would do is suck money from the coffers of candidates who might actually...you know...vote the way I think they should every now and then.

Milkovich is very conservative, but will still be bettter then Republican candidate (who will be far-rightist nut, especially it that will be Seabaugh) on substantial number of issues. I would gladly take Bobby Bright instead of Roby in AL-02, Taylor instead of Pallazzo in MS-04, and Minnick instead of Labrador in ID-01.  Repeat - if district is very conservative - run solidly conservative candidate. He will still be better then Republican alternative in 99% of cases. I don't call for electing conservative Democrats in CA-13 or NY-15, don't i??)))). And what liberals call a conservaDem usually means "moderate liberal, who defects from time to time on some votes". Such candidates have ZERO chances in districts like LA-04.

But this is mostly theory. As Miles said - Milkovich is unlikely to run so soon after winning state Senate seat. I simply wanted to show - which sort of candidates has at least slight chances to win such districts...

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The only Democrat who could probably make LA-04 a race is Foster Campbell. Interestingly, he serves on the Public Service Commission with Aneglle - would be something if they both moved up.

Far-right Republicans would probably get behind State Rep. Alana Seabaugh if he ran.

May be Democrats must try Milkovich again?))) He ran for LA-04 twice, both time in hopeless races (against McCreary in 2002  and heavily favored Carmouche in 2008 primary), and seems to gain experience. He won (as a very conservative Democrat) rather difficult (about R+11) state Senate district. Why not? Only a conservative democrat may be competitive there, IMHO...

How about no.

If you intend to run anybody, but conservative, in this district - you already lost it..

There's a difference between running a conservaDem and a Republican in everything but name.  Win or lose, all Milkovich would do is suck money from the coffers of candidates who might actually...you know...vote the way I think they should every now and then.

Milkovich is very conservative, but will still be bettter then Republican candidate (who will be far-rightist nut, especially it that will be Seabaugh) on substantial number of issues. I would gladly take Bobby Bright instead of Roby in AL-02, Taylor instead of Pallazzo in MS-04, and Minnick instead of Labrador in ID-01.  Repeat - if district is very conservative - run solidly conservative candidate. He will still be better then Republican alternative in 99% of cases. I don't call for electing conservative Democrats in CA-13 or NY-15, don't i??)))). And what liberals call a conservaDem usually means "moderate liberal, who defects from time to time on some votes". Such candidates have ZERO chances in districts like LA-04.

But this is mostly theory. As Miles said - Milkovich is unlikely to run so soon after winning state Senate seat. I simply wanted to show - which sort of candidates has at least slight chances to win such districts...

I'd gladly take a Walt Minnick over a Raul Labradour.  I'd even back a Gene Taylor who'd be vulnerable every cycle over a Palazzo (Steve Palazzo are just so awful) or a Bobby Bright who didn't switch parties over the likes of Martha Raby (who is worse than generic AL Republican, which is saying something).  However, I don't think Milkovich is the most liberal candidate who can win.  Then Caddo-Parrish District Attorney Paul Carmouche was probably a conservaDem, but IIRC he wasn't as right-wing as Milkovich and only the run-off in 2008 to Fleming in a very similar district by less than 500 votes (which means he'd have almost certainly won the GE were it in November). 

I'm fine with Milkovich in the state senate and if there are some economic issues where he has more populist tendencies, I might feel differently, but from what I know as of this post, he sounds too right-wing to justify the large amount of money it'd take to prop him up every cycle if he even won in the first place.  I'm not saying don't run conservaDems in this district, just to be clear.  I'm saying there are limits to how conservative a Democratic can be (even in a district like this) for it to make sense to spend big on them every cycle.  I support running the most liberal candidate who can win in a given district, but prioritization is also necessary sometimes. 

If we even managed to pick up this seat with Milkovich (hardly a sure thing), we'd get a hyper-conservative Democrat who is 1) a major party-switch risk, 2) unlikely to vote the way I'd like on much of anything, and 3) whom we'll always have to spend big on to defend every cycle.  At a certain point, you can have a candidate who is so conservative that the resources it'd cost to even give them a real shot at winning (let alone keep them in office) would simply be much better spent elsewhere.  I give Democrats in districts like LA-4 a lot of leeway in terms of how conservative they can be, but even compared to someone like Doug Owens in UT-4 or Bruce Ashford in NE-2 (to say nothing of the districts where we can actually win with liberal candidates), someone like Milkovich is simply a bad investment.

TL;DR: I'm fine with running a conservaDem in LA-4 and actually think it'd be a mistake not to try to recruit a strong candidate as wave/gaffe/scandal insurance given that Fleming is running for Senate (Foster Campbell would be my first choice in this district), my issue is with running/spending a ton of money Milkovich specifically.  I also worry that Milkovich might pull a Rodney Alexander and simply switch parties a year or two after getting elected.

[smoltchanov]

^ Well, i understand your arguments, and partially agree with them. Let's see how events will turn in 2016. Carmouche (IIRC) was also a conservative (it's difficult for me to compare them without any suitable ratings) (and he would almost surely win in November 2008, but almost assuredly lose in November 2010), and Campbell (offered by Miles) is, essentially, a Southern populist (liberal-leaning on economy, conservative-leaning on social issues), who will be 69 next year and, IMHO, unlikely to run for federal office again (he ran for LA-04 3 times in the past, losing all 3 races, though he came close once). There are very few other relatively well-known Democrats from this area i know (except Black politicians, mainly from Shreveport, who are, essentially, unelectable district-wide). State representative Reynolds (centrist) comes to mind, but he was just reelected too. And that's all

[Miles]

NC-Sen: Sean Haugh, the Libertarian last year who got almost 4%, will be running again.

[/]

NC-Sen: Sean Haugh, the Libertarian last year who got almost 4%, will be running again.

Who do you think he took more away from last year?

[Miles]

^ Judging by where his votes came from, it looks he got a good protest vote from conservative Democrats. He did well in places like Columbus and Montgomery counties, but relatively poorly in the suburbs (where you'd naturally expect a more Libertarian-leaning constituency).

 

[/]

Well yeah, the Libertarians do generally take away more from the GOP, but hopefully any sort of anti-Dem 'protest vote' present in 2014 will be gone by next year due to the lack of a Hagan and a Republican incumbent.

[Miles]

Ugh, Taylor Griffin filed today in NC-03.

It reminded me that I never got around to making a map of the last race. I really hope Jones can pull it out again:

[/]

^

How do you expect them to do in the 2016 climate? And where does Griffin stand on the issues relative to Jones?

[Miles]

^ The thing is Jones always overperforms in the general because a lot of registered Democrats vote for him. He and Coble were the only two House Republicans in the state to run ahead of Romney in 2012, IIRC.

Jones votes his conscience, which is refreshing, but problematic from a fundraising/purity perspective. He's mavericky on fiscal issues (calling to repeal Glass-Steagall and Citizens United, for example). Jones is also known for his pacifism on foreign policy - since he represents many military personnel, he was disgusted at the Bush neocons for lying to him about the war and has been in the Ron Paul faction of the party ever since.

Taylor Griffin, a former Bush staffer and lobbyist, ran last year and, was endorsed by Sarah Palin. As you'd expect, Griffin was bankrolled largely by the defense industry and K Street.

The primary this year is will be held with the Presidential primary and should thus generate larger turnout. Good for Jones, considering NC primaries are still open and he has more crossover appeal. Its earlier too, in mid-March compared to early May as in previous years. If, for example, Rand Paul is still in the race, thats would probably help Jones downballot.

Also notice on the map that Jones generally did better in counties with more NC natives, who remember his father. In Carteret and Craven counties, for example, you've seen a steady influx of new, wealthier residents looking for beachfront property - obviously this crowd isn't as loyal to the Jones family.

The county to watch will be Onslow. Its relatively neutral in terms of Jones' base being Pitt and Griffin's being Craven. It went for Jones last time but only by 2.5%.

[Miles]

Ex-State Sen. Troy Hebert (D->I) who represented St. Martin and Iberia parishes is considering running for Senate. He was State Tobacco and Alcohol Commissioner under Jindal, and will leave that as the Jindal Administration comes to a close.

Hebert was a conservative Democrat, as you'd expect. Still if the Democrats don't have a strong candidate, Hebert could feasibly emerge as an Orman figure in a runoff with a Republican.

[Miles]

^ And that just got a bit more likely, as Mitch Landrieu is out:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

^ And that just got a bit more likely, as Mitch Landrieu is out:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He was probably the dems best hope here. Who's the next best? Cedric Richmond? One of the other Landrieu's?

[Miles]

I've heard ex-Rep. Don Cazayoux's name mentioned, and he made a few local media appearances leading up to the Gov. election, IIRC. 

[Frodo]

^ And that just got a bit more likely, as Mitch Landrieu is out:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just as I thought -he is angling to take back his sister's Senate seat in 2020 from the man (Bill Cassidy) who took it away from her.    

[/]

^ And that just got a bit more likely, as Mitch Landrieu is out:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

;-;

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

^ The thing is Jones always overperforms in the general because a lot of registered Democrats vote for him. He and Coble were the only two House Republicans in the state to run ahead of Romney in 2012, IIRC.

Jones votes his conscience, which is refreshing, but problematic from a fundraising/purity perspective. He's mavericky on fiscal issues (calling to repeal Glass-Steagall and Citizens United, for example). Jones is also known for his pacifism on foreign policy - since he represents many military personnel, he was disgusted at the Bush neocons for lying to him about the war and has been in the Ron Paul faction of the party ever since.

Taylor Griffin, a former Bush staffer and lobbyist, ran last year and, was endorsed by Sarah Palin. As you'd expect, Griffin was bankrolled largely by the defense industry and K Street.

The primary this year is will be held with the Presidential primary and should thus generate larger turnout. Good for Jones, considering NC primaries are still open and he has more crossover appeal. Its earlier too, in mid-March compared to early May as in previous years. If, for example, Rand Paul is still in the race, thats would probably help Jones downballot.

Also notice on the map that Jones generally did better in counties with more NC natives, who remember his father. In Carteret and Craven counties, for example, you've seen a steady influx of new, wealthier residents looking for beachfront property - obviously this crowd isn't as loyal to the Jones family.

The county to watch will be Onslow. Its relatively neutral in terms of Jones' base being Pitt and Griffin's being Craven. It went for Jones last time but only by 2.5%.

I hope Jones can pull through again.

[Miles]

LA-Sen: Rob Maness is running again for Senate. Good news for Boustany, as he'll take anti-establishment votes from Fleming. During the Gov campaign, Maness implied that JBE winning would be worse than America losing WW1, so obviously a nut.

[JMT]

I know it was all but assured, but Rep. John Fleming officially announced his senate campaign.
Did it through a video.
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/12/louisiana_congressman_john_fle.html

[Miles]

Former Jefferson Parish President John Young (R) is reportedly considering a Senate run. He ran for LG this year - despite a strong showing in Jefferson Parish (46% in a three-way race), Young barely missed the runoff.

Overall, he has decent crossover appeal. From what I heard during the campaign, if the runoff was R-on-R, Democrats would have coalesced around him against Nungesser. Young also finished first in a majority of northern LA parishes, suggesting he made inroads beyond his base.

As Smolty puts it, he'd be one of the 'saner' Republicans, along with Fleming, Kennedy, and possibly Angelle.

[windjammer]

Which democrat will run?

state senator Gary Smith?