What Will/Would Louisiana Look Like Under A Governor Edwards?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:13:50 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  What Will/Would Louisiana Look Like Under A Governor Edwards?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What Will/Would Louisiana Look Like Under A Governor Edwards?  (Read 2354 times)
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 20, 2015, 12:32:18 AM »

Will the legislature be able to work with him, since that will be overwhelmingly Republican still? He DOES have bipartisan support for his campaign right now, clearly. Will this constant threat of gridlock make the state better with bipartisan solutions, etc?
Logged
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2015, 12:39:42 AM »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.
Logged
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2015, 12:45:35 AM »

Its probably worth noting that in Louisiana, its tradition that the Governor picks the legislative leaders (Speaker, Pro Temp, etc.). We could very likely see a coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats leading under Edwards.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2015, 01:29:15 AM »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.

I break with Republicans on a TON of stuff, but Jesus, man ... there really is a double standard for what Republicans and Democrats can say.  If a Republican said that about an Indian-American Democratic governor ... wouldn't be pretty.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2015, 01:38:41 AM »

Its probably worth noting that in Louisiana, its tradition that the Governor picks the legislative leaders (Speaker, Pro Temp, etc.). We could very likely see a coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats leading under Edwards.

I think there has been a bit of slight of hand. The Senate will probably be 26R-13D. Peeling the away seven "moderate" Republicans is achievable. What the Senate does not have is 13 "moderate" Democrats. Some of the 13 Democratic Senators are liberal. Shifting right enough to pick up some not-so-conservative Republicans risks loosing liberal Democrats. On the other hand, the most liberal of Democratic Senators are going to want something for going along with the Edwards program. Voting for Edwards over Vitter is a vote for empowering liberals.

Were Edwards to win, and if the ideological and policy differences between Vitter and Edwards are as slight as you have suggested, the best path forward for John Edwards would be to simply switch parties after the election. I don't see that happening because Edwards isn't the "conservative" his surrogates are claiming that he is. That's rather ironic for a candidate running on the slogan that his opponent is a "liar."
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2015, 02:03:16 AM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2015, 02:32:24 AM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 20, 2015, 02:56:28 AM »

Its probably worth noting that in Louisiana, its tradition that the Governor picks the legislative leaders (Speaker, Pro Temp, etc.). We could very likely see a coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats leading under Edwards.

Absolutely. And i would add that Edwards will surely toe conservative-leaning line on social issues (you can't pass a "progressive legislation" in so socially conservative state, especially -  in State Senate, which is 2:1 Republican), but at least somewhat populist on economy, education and so on. There he may have considerable support from legislature, where there is substantial number of former Democrats (who now compose considerable part of "saner" fraction of Republican caucus).
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 20, 2015, 02:57:10 AM »
« Edited: November 20, 2015, 03:00:34 AM by smoltchanov »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.

I break with Republicans on a TON of stuff, but Jesus, man ... there really is a double standard for what Republicans and Democrats can say.  If a Republican said that about an Indian-American Democratic governor ... wouldn't be pretty.

+100. When i see how many Democrats treat Republican (or - simply conservative-leaning) minority candidates and officials - an old 6-letter "n...er" word, so beloved by segregationists of the past, immediately springs to my mind..
Logged
Intell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,817
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -1.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 20, 2015, 02:58:44 AM »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.

I break with Republicans on a TON of stuff, but Jesus, man ... there really is a double standard for what Republicans and Democrats can say.  If a Republican said that about an Indian-American Democratic governor ... wouldn't be pretty.

People who would cry about that, are pretty stupid people though.
Logged
user12345
wifikitten
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,135
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 20, 2015, 07:38:18 AM »

They'll probably be able to expand Medicaid
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2015, 12:03:30 PM »

I hope Edwards appoints Dardenne to something high up.

It would be amazing if Dardenne runs as an independent for Senator in 2016 and picks up a large coalition in LA.
Logged
Hydera
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,545


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2015, 12:34:41 PM »

No difference considering the legislature is totally controlled by the GOP.

Thinking back to McAuliffe in Virginia who has mostly kept the previous governor's fiscal policy in place. The only difference would be that some tweaks for democratic leaning policies but thats it.  Medicaid expansion is off the table without support of legislature which won't happen.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2015, 01:52:32 PM »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.

I break with Republicans on a TON of stuff, but Jesus, man ... there really is a double standard for what Republicans and Democrats can say.  If a Republican said that about an Indian-American Democratic governor ... wouldn't be pretty.

Err... Wasn't Jindal the one who initially and awkwardly described himself as "tanned"?
Logged
Horsemask
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,274


Political Matrix
E: -1.81, S: -4.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2015, 09:50:15 PM »

I sure hope so. After 8 years of that tanned trainwreck Jindal, Lousiana deserves someone better.

I break with Republicans on a TON of stuff, but Jesus, man ... there really is a double standard for what Republicans and Democrats can say.  If a Republican said that about an Indian-American Democratic governor ... wouldn't be pretty.

His campaign slogan was "Tanned, Rested, Ready"

Not making this up
Logged
DINGO Joe
dingojoe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,700
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2015, 11:49:30 PM »

Broke.  The current occupant and low energy prices are the reason why.
Logged
The Arizonan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,543
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2015, 11:59:42 PM »
« Edited: November 22, 2015, 08:45:31 AM by The Arizonan »

There is a double standard when it comes to Democrats and Republicans.

When former Senator Bob Byrd (D-WV) died, they barely mentioned that he was a Klan member. If he had been a Republican, they would've kept mentioning it throughout the news cycle.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2015, 12:12:03 AM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

'Conservative Democrat' means 'conservative for a Democrat', not 'Democrat who is A Conservative'.

I've pointed out your tendency to speak as if 'conservative' is a binary, yes-or-no, non-relative descriptor before. It's a very curious belief you have there.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2015, 12:15:02 PM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

'Conservative Democrat' means 'conservative for a Democrat', not 'Democrat who is A Conservative'.

I've pointed out your tendency to speak as if 'conservative' is a binary, yes-or-no, non-relative descriptor before. It's a very curious belief you have there.

And, I consider your belief to be rather odd yourself.  In general, "conservative" and "liberal" a nexus of beliefs about issues of public concern. Either "conservative" as a label refers to the former nexus or it does not.

The English language has a term for a somewhat liberal Democrat who is further to the right than a liberal Democrat: "a relatively conservative Democrat."

When you conflate, "a relatively conservative Democrat" with "an [actually] conservative Democrat" then you negate any ability to distinguish between the two [which, is probably the point to this particular abuse of the English language. "Conservative Democrat" is much easier sell than "somewhat liberal" south of the Mason Dixon line.]
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2015, 12:22:43 PM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

'Conservative Democrat' means 'conservative for a Democrat', not 'Democrat who is A Conservative'.

I've pointed out your tendency to speak as if 'conservative' is a binary, yes-or-no, non-relative descriptor before. It's a very curious belief you have there.

And, I consider your belief to be rather odd yourself.  In general, "conservative" and "liberal" a nexus of beliefs about issues of public concern. Either "conservative" as a label refers to the former nexus or it does not.

The English language has a term for a somewhat liberal Democrat who is further to the right than a liberal Democrat: "a relatively conservative Democrat."

When you conflate, "a relatively conservative Democrat" with "an [actually] conservative Democrat" then you negate any ability to distinguish between the two [which, is probably the point to this particular abuse of the English language. "Conservative Democrat" is much easier sell than "somewhat liberal" south of the Mason Dixon line.]

OK, but nobody is going to campaign while referring to themselves "a relatively conservative Democrat" (and the media certainly won't either) because that essentially is word-vomit and sounds stupid.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2015, 12:29:16 PM »

Pictured here: losing candidate JBE's logo at the behest of campaign manager BigSkyBob

Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2015, 01:23:32 PM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

'Conservative Democrat' means 'conservative for a Democrat', not 'Democrat who is A Conservative'.

I've pointed out your tendency to speak as if 'conservative' is a binary, yes-or-no, non-relative descriptor before. It's a very curious belief you have there.

And, I consider your belief to be rather odd yourself.  In general, "conservative" and "liberal" a nexus of beliefs about issues of public concern. Either "conservative" as a label refers to the former nexus or it does not.

The English language has a term for a somewhat liberal Democrat who is further to the right than a liberal Democrat: "a relatively conservative Democrat."

When you conflate, "a relatively conservative Democrat" with "an [actually] conservative Democrat" then you negate any ability to distinguish between the two [which, is probably the point to this particular abuse of the English language. "Conservative Democrat" is much easier sell than "somewhat liberal" south of the Mason Dixon line.]

OK, but nobody is going to campaign while referring to themselves "a relatively conservative Democrat" (and the media certainly won't either) because that essentially is word-vomit and sounds stupid.

Umm, "moderate" would suffice, as would "moderate Democrat." Note that "moderate Democrat" would connote a Democrat that is "moderate" on the issues. So, why shouldn't "conservative Democrat" refer to a Democrat that is conservative on the issues?

Nor, do people say "liberal Democrats" to refer to Democrats that are relatively further to the left than a generic "liberal" or a generic "Democrat."

"Conservative Democrat" is a marketing ploy akin claiming one particular model is "the sporty Yugo!," or "the fuel-efficient Hummer!"
Logged
DINGO Joe
dingojoe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,700
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2015, 01:31:34 PM »

Edwards has said that the expansion of Medicare is his top priority and the hiring of Ben Nevers would seem to reinforce that idea.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,504
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2015, 11:45:51 PM »

Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

Edwards' key to success is to NOT switch parties.  It didn't work for Buddy Roemer.  Roemer, I believe, would have been reelected in 1991 had he remained a Democrat, governing as a conservative, but demonstrating nominal loyalty to the national party.  Instead, Roemer drank the Bush 41 Kool Aid and switched parties, causing Democrats and Republicans alike to hate him.  Edwards's key is to be both a conservative Democrat and a loyal Democrat.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 12 queries.