LA and NC 2016 Congressional Races

[smoltchanov]

No thanks to McIntyre. Wasn't he the most right wing Democrat in the entire House? NC can do better.

He was one one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, yes. But in present days realities that means "slightly right of center" and "more liberal then any Republican". He ideally suited his district, and he was the only one who was able to hold it for Democrats for so long (look at 2014 results without him in the district). And North Carolina is NOT a very liberal state - in fact a median NC voter will be not far different from him.

[smoltchanov]

No thanks to McIntyre. Wasn't he the most right wing Democrat in the entire House? NC can do better.

He was one one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, yes. But in present days realities that means "slightly right of center" and "more liberal then any Republican". He ideally suited his district, and he was the only one who was able to hold it for Democrats for so long (look at 2014 results without him in the district). And North Carolina is NOT a very liberal state - in fact a median NC voter will be not far different from him.

Hagan was far more liberal than he was, and she won in 2008, and would've won in 2014 if the wave wasn't so huge. Obama also won in 2008. McIntyre would be a good candidate for South Carolina, maybe.

Forget about Obama. He was a "fashion" in 2008, that's why he won then. His loss in the state in 2012 has shown that even at highest possible minoruty turnout he was no more popular. And Hagan was more liberal then McIntyre, but not by so much. On social ussues - substantially, on economy - not by much. After all - Hagan lost to such flawed candidate as Tillis in 2014: yes, she gave campaign all she had, but even against him that wasn't enough.. And it was a "purple" North Carolina, not Louisiana or Arkansas.

P.S. IMHO - it's a big error to think that each North Carolina Democrat thinks and votes as people in Research Triangle....

[smoltchanov]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

[smoltchanov]

It would be like telling Republicans that if Toomey loses, they'll need to nominate a Charlie Baker clone if they ever want to win PA again.

And, BTW, Charlie Baker clone would surely win general election in Pennsylvania. In fact - they elected a lot of similar Republicans (Specter, Scranton, Heinz) in this state for Senate and Governorships. At the same time we all know what happened when their candidates became Corbett and his like...

[smoltchanov]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

No more of a suicide mission than running in their deep red districts to begin with.

Frequently - more so. Matheson's disitrict, for example, was the most LIBERAL in Utah, despite being about R+16. Statewide it's even more difficult.

[smoltchanov]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

Oh, I wasn't saying that NCDP shouldn't run moderates. My point is that the old-style blue dog moderates are not the kind of moderates the NCDP should run--they'd be better off running someone more like McCauliffe than McIntyre.

May be. IMHO - there are districts for all types of candidates: for example in McIntyre's NC-07 McCauliffe wouldn't have any chances even in 2012. Statewide - you can run Hagan's type (center-left) candidates in NC, but hardly - more liberal...

[smoltchanov]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

No more of a suicide mission than running in their deep red districts to begin with.

Frequently - more so. Matheson's disitrict, for example, was the most LIBERAL in Utah, despite being about R+16. Statewide it's even more difficult.

True for Matheson, but Barrow's district was actually more Republican than Georgia as a whole is.

True. That's why Barrow is considered a future statewide candidate in Georgia. It will be easier for him to have chances in such race then (especially - in midterms) in his House districts.

[smoltchanov]

Mike McIntyre is intolerable... He used to represent my district (NC-7), and he's arguably more conservative than the actual Republican currently representing our district, David Rouzer.

I would take any other Democrat over McIntyre any day, even if they're less likely to win.

Statistics says otherwise: while McIntyre is, undoubtely, a conservative Democrat, he is much LESS conservative then Rouzer. And, btw, NO democrat, but him, can win present 7th, your wish notwithstanding. It's a FACT. I like to say that if the only Democrat, who can win a particular District, is to the right of James Eastland - Democrats mst run him. Ditto - for Republicans (with Eastland substituted for Jacob Javits and right for left)

P.S. If you want to see REALLY conservative Democrat - look who represented this district in early 70th. He was a REAL conservative Democrat, and, may be, would really be as conservative as Rouzer is..

[smoltchanov]

Mike McIntyre is intolerable... He used to represent my district (NC-7), and he's arguably more conservative than the actual Republican currently representing our district, David Rouzer.

I would take any other Democrat over McIntyre any day, even if they're less likely to win.

Statistics says otherwise: while McIntyre is, undoubtely, a conservative Democrat, he is much LESS conservative then Rouzer. And, btw, NO democrat, but him, can win present 7th, your wish notwithstanding. It's a FACT. I like to say that if the only Democrat, who can win a particular District, is to the right of James Eastland - Democrats mst run him. Ditto - for Republicans (with Eastland substituted for Jacob Javits and right for left)

P.S. If you want to see REALLY conservative Democrat - look who represented this district in early 70th. He was a REAL conservative Democrat, and, may be, would really be as conservative as Rouzer is..

I would have voted for McIntyre if he had run again but he didn't.

I now live in the 13th so the point is moot anyway.

Of course. I simply get mad from time to time because of misuse of common terms "liberal" and "conservative". Since at least FDR they have very precisely defined meaning. And when someone uses term "conservaDem" or RINO where they absolutely unapplicable - well, that's either intentional slander or ignorance at best. Want to see REAL liberal Republican? People like Javits, or Ogden Reid (or former San Rafael (California) mayor Al Boro at local level, who routinely got over 75% of vote in a city which voted about 70% Obama) are your men. Need REAL conservative Democrat? Eastland, Larry McDonald, John Rarick, Bob Stump and Phil Gramm (while both were Democrats) or David Satterfield would do. Even Alton Lennon from NC-07 in the past (whom i hinted at in previous post).... But i begin to laugh sarcastically when Gwen Graham or Patrick Murphy are called "conservatives" and even more when Frank Guinta or even Dave Reichert are called "liberals"...

[smoltchanov]

Is Vitter leaving the Senate because everyone in Washington hates him?

Surely no. Conservative Republican Senators and congressmen do, most likely, love him))) May be - even strongly.  You may hate a person, sure, but that doesn't mean that everyone else does....

[smoltchanov]

^ Old as its getting, his prostitution scandal effectively precludes him from moving into the caucus leadership at any point down the road.

Probably. But that doesn't mean that everyone hates him. In Washington or Louisiana. After all - the universaly hated politician has little chances to be elected Governor, isn't he?

[smoltchanov]

Well, with both parties having relatively large and committed bases in the state, they must either mobilize their base to the utmost and hope, or (IMHO - better approach) run a candidate able to win undecideds and the middle. Burr is a known quantity and, generally, works along first approach. May be  - Democrats need a candidate able to work along second one?

[smoltchanov]

Ross is very liberal. IMHO - too liberal for statewide North Carolina seat. Would she run in district like NC-04 - then, of course, it  would be no problem, but statewide - probably will...

[smoltchanov]

If Vitter loses, he'll definitely be a primary target, and Angelle (or Dardenne) would be in great position to take him on.

Angelle. Dardenne essentially burnt all bridges with his party by his very strong support of Edwards, and scathing criticism of both Vitter and Jindal. He will not be "forgiven"...

[smoltchanov]

If Vitter loses, he'll definitely be a primary target, and Angelle (or Dardenne) would be in great position to take him on.

Angelle. Dardenne essentially burnt all bridges with his party by his very strong support of Edwards, and scathing criticism of both Vitter and Jindal. He will not be "forgiven"...

Even Republicans hate Jindal these days. And if Vitter loses this race, the party will disown him. He might stay on as a Senate backbencher due to LA being so republican, but no one will care about him anymore.

We shall see. I am reasonbly sure that in "official" Republican circles Dardenne now stands above Benedict Arnold as "first and foremost traitor"...

[smoltchanov]

LA-Sen/LA-03: Boustany will have a "formal announcement" soon in Lafayette. I think we know what that means.

He and Kennedy are, probably, the most "sane" Republican candidates we can expect..

[smoltchanov]

^ I like Angelle the most - mainly because he didn't buckle under the party's pressure on him to endorse Vitter for Gov. That said, I expect him to run for LA-03 now, as it's looking like it'll be open

But yeah, Boustany and Kennedy are better than anyone from the far-right (Fleming, Maness, etc.).

I too expect him to run in LA-03. Well, he is (IMHO, of course) a typical (for Louisiana at least) former conservative Southern Democrat - solidly conservative, but still sane.

Sometimes i ask himself - whether there were a far-right-wing conservative Democrats (say, in Legislature) after Woody Jenkins?... I remember some REAL conservatives, like former state Senator "Mike" Smith or Randy Ewing, but all of them are of genial and relatively low-key type....

[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...

[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..

[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.

[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...

[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

[smoltchanov]

Which democrat will run?

state senator Gary Smith?

Smith, IMHO, would be one of the best. Moderate conservative, from somewhat Republican-leaning district,with crossover appeal. But to win he would need a very polarizing Republican candidate (like Manes or, may be, Fleming). Against more pragmatic Boustany, Kennedy and Angelle probably no Democrat has really good chances...

[smoltchanov]

NC-03: FreedomWorks endorsing Jones.

Far-right wing organization supports candidate, who has one of the most moderate voting record  (among Republicans, of course) at least on some issues (yes, yes, i know about Jones "specific" voting))))))))

[smoltchanov]

NC-03: FreedomWorks endorsing Jones.

Far-right wing organization supports candidate, who has one of the most moderate voting record  (among Republicans, of course) at least on some issues (yes, yes, i know about Jones "specific" voting))))))))

Jones' "moderate" votes generally come from the right, not the center.

On foreign policy too?