LA-Sen JMC Analyisis (Fleming Internal): Boustany and Campbell tied, Fleming 3rd

[Heisenberg]

This poll shows an extremely competitive jungle primary.

Charles Boustany 15%
Foster Campbell 15%
John Fleming 14%
Caroline Fayard 12%
John Neely Kennedy 11%
Rob Maness 4%
David Duke 3%
Other 1%
Undecided 25%

Full results here

[windjammer]

As expected, Kennedy's lead was mostly because of higher name recognition.

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

The bad news for Democrats is that Rob Maness and David Duke, who they could conceivably beat even if Senate Control depends on the runoff, are not getting any traction. The good news is they have a chance at locking out R's entirely. While I'm still carefully watching the state after last year's events, if this is a D vs. R runoff, it will likelier than not either decide Senate Control or decide whether the majority is real (51-49) or dependent on the support of the vice president, which means that R's should enjoy a very strong messaging advantage. The only way I see a D beating an R here is if one side or the other has already clinched 51 seats, and even then it might not be enough.

[JMT]

A D vs D runoff would be fantastic (and it looks like it is possible)

[Phony Moderate]

Jungle primaries are a bad idea: Part 3454455328112

[Maxwell]

we just need a Maness and Duke surge to like 7-8% and we'll get some beautiful numbers folks, believe me. A Campbell-Fayard run-off would just be fantastic!

also how is a low energy loser like Fleming doing so well?

Blacks are still 33% undecided, and Others are 40% undecided, so the Campbell-Fayard dream team has room to grow.

[Figueira]

This is the perfect example of how jungle primaries can result in a win for the less popular party. I feel bad cheering for it, though.

[mencken]

also how is a low energy loser like Fleming doing so well?

It is his own internal.

[Maxwell]

also how is a low energy loser like Fleming doing so well?

It is his own internal.

ah okay we can disregard Fleming's number then.

[Heisenberg]

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

[SATW]

Kennedy is the strongest republican and the party needs to coalesce around him.

[Figueira]

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

[Figueira]

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

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

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

Well yeah, but Toss-Up means a 50% chance.

[Heisenberg]

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

Both Democrats are very good campaigners, pretty moderate (like JBE), and overall good recruits. Duke would lose the runoff to either, Maness would be the underdog (unless it decides control, in which he'd be favored), and Fleming would keep it competitive. Kennedy or Boustany would make it Likely R.

[Maxwell]

Fleming won't drop out, he's too prideful. Nor will ALLIGATOR WRASSLER ROB MANESS, perhaps David Duke might but probably not.

If it is a D vs. D race, my guess is that oil interests in the state will bury Campbell with ads and elect Fayard.

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

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

Both Democrats are very good campaigners, pretty moderate (like JBE), and overall good recruits. Duke would lose the runoff to either, Maness would be the underdog (unless it decides control, in which he'd be favored), and Fleming would keep it competitive. Kennedy or Boustany would make it Likely R.

Also keep in mind that the GOP sucks at winning open seats in red states. If Hoeven and Thune had retired this year, those states would be pure Tossups if not Lean D already.

I'm convinced that 2012 ND was the result of divine action.

[Heisenberg]

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

Both Democrats are very good campaigners, pretty moderate (like JBE), and overall good recruits. Duke would lose the runoff to either, Maness would be the underdog (unless it decides control, in which he'd be favored), and Fleming would keep it competitive. Kennedy or Boustany would make it Likely R.

Also keep in mind that the GOP sucks at winning open seats in red states. If Hoeven and Thune had retired this year, those states would be pure Tossups if not Lean D already.

They would be tossups. I don't know what Missouri, Montana, and the Dakotas' obsession with liberal Senators is, but the GOP does have a problem with those states. The GOP does not have another Rounds/Thune-type figure in South Dakota, and Democrats can put up Herseth-Sandlin, Brendan Johnson, or even a backbencher, as retail politics work there. Same thing in its neighbor up north.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

Both Democrats are very good campaigners, pretty moderate (like JBE), and overall good recruits. Duke would lose the runoff to either, Maness would be the underdog (unless it decides control, in which he'd be favored), and Fleming would keep it competitive. Kennedy or Boustany would make it Likely R.

Also keep in mind that the GOP sucks at winning open seats in red states. If Hoeven and Thune had retired this year, those states would be pure Tossups if not Lean D already.

They would be tossups. I don't know what Missouri, Montana, and the Dakotas' obsession with liberal Senators is, but the GOP does have a problem with those states. The GOP does not have another Rounds/Thune-type figure in South Dakota, and Democrats can put up Herseth-Sandlin, Brendan Johnson, or even a backbencher, as retail politics work there. Same thing in its neighbor up north.

Their present Governor is one of the most popular Governors in the country. And Rounds himself nearly blew it in 2014.

One thing that never changes on this forum, is overestimating red state Democrats. At the end of the day campaigns matter. Partisanship means a lot of red state Republicans get complacent and that complacency creates that openings that in a few instances a good Democratic candidate like a JBE or so far Kander, can exploit to win. Most of the time though, the partisanship will determine the outcome.

Ugh, looks like this race is a Tossup.

I hope Fleming just comes to his senses and drops out. It would be good for Republicans.

Tossuo? More like Likely R. Probably becomes near Safe R in a D vs R runoff, unless Duke or co. manages to pull through. I won't say completely safe because it's Louisiana.

There's a real chance of a D vs. D runoff happening here. Don't underestimate how incompetent the LA GOP is.

A real chance, sure, but I wouldn't call the race a tossup quite yet.

Both Democrats are very good campaigners, pretty moderate (like JBE), and overall good recruits. Duke would lose the runoff to either, Maness would be the underdog (unless it decides control, in which he'd be favored), and Fleming would keep it competitive. Kennedy or Boustany would make it Likely R.

If Fleming is surging then he might be best positioned to avoid a D vs D runoff. Let us not forget that you had both the combined effects of Jindal's unpopularity and Vitter's personal scandals creating the opening for JBE to win.

This is an election for Senate and LA has not been favorable ground for Democrats in Federal races. It used to be that for a long time every congressional seat would flip once open save for LA-01 and LA-02 of course. That trend first broke if memory serves me in LA-04, in December 2008 during the delayed LA Congressional elections. The Republican was "not suppose to win", and he trailed most of the night even until just inching ahead at the last minute, winning by less than 400 votes. That Republican, was Fleming.


Hopefully Fleming has a learned a thing or two about campaigning since then in terms of campaigning or indeed, the concerns might be correct. But I think presuming he would automatically lose a runoff is a mistake.

The main problem here is the establishment type voters are split.

[Heisenberg]

Senator Yankee, (not posting quote since it got long), Rounds has apparently recovered his popularity, he is one of the top 10 most popular Senators according to a new poll (but less popular than Thune). And he still won a majority in 2014, and would have gotten more if Pressler (I), who took votes from both him and Weiland, were not running.

And I doubt Fleming is really surging (too much), this is his internal. He isn't even a good runoff candidate, he's the Tea Party candidate. I also agree with the consensus that Kennedy is doing great because of his name recognition, he has been slipping lately. I bet he'll be remembered as "long-time treasurer and perennial Senate candidate" when his career ends.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator Yankee, (not posting quote since it got long), Rounds has apparently recovered his popularity, he is one of the top 10 most popular Senators according to a new poll (but less popular than Thune). And he still won a majority in 2014, and would have gotten more if Pressler (I), who took votes from both him and Weiland, were not running.

There were points that it looked like Pressler might win SD and pretty late in the season as well (August if I recall). So much so there was talk and of an indy caucus with him, Orman, King and Sanders. Rounds did not take that race seriously at first and it nearly slipped away from him, especially if Weiland had dropped out like the Dem in KS did. But what is your point? You initially said that SD lacked another Thune/Rounds. And my response was that there present Governor is rather popular as well.

There are no shortage of Republicans in SD. This always happens on this forum where some insanely popular Democrat is going to take a seat in a red state, because they are just so awesome. This fails to recognize that 1) Red State, 2) Deep GOP Bench, 3) Just 1 or 2 of said Star Democrats who may end up not running.  90% of time these scenarios play out with a GOP landslide occuring and said Democrat never runs, has an affair/scandal or loses regardless.

Take ND and MO. There are half a dozen GOP candidaes who could and would have won those seats in 2012. It just so happens that Republicans nominated candidates with the right vulnerabilities and in ND nominated the only Democrat remaining of any stature.

And I doubt Fleming is really surging (too much), this is his internal. He isn't even a good runoff candidate, he's the Tea Party candidate. I also agree with the consensus that Kennedy is doing great because of his name recognition, he has been slipping lately. I bet he'll be remembered as "long-time treasurer and perennial Senate candidate" when his career ends.

I came into politics during a time when we prayed for insurgent (what you would call TP candidates today) to knock off incumbents and establishment candidates because they were so bad and so unpopular. We lost our majorities as scores of these corrupted, power hungry idiots went down in general elections and we had one example where that was staved off thanks to Sarah Palin knocking off an incumbent Republican Governor with an 18% approval rating, and who was trailing by 20%. Meanwhile we pissed away a Montana Senate seat because Conrad Burns was buddy buddy to Jack Abramoff and nobody serious wanted to challenge him.

When you have seen just as many seats shot by the establishment because of sticking with the SS Titanic as opposed to an insurgent life boat, you realize that whether or not one is a tea party candidate or not matters little and what matters more is candidate quality.

The Tea Party was the best thing that ever happened to the Republican Party because it saved it from spending 30 years in the wilderness. Its height it was one of the most popular political movements in the country. It was destroyed by craven opportunists on the fringe of political institutions (like Angle and O'Donnell) and long time insiders from the far right (Akin), who hijacked it for their own personal benefit, followed by the Bush era GOP establishment bombing it into submission. Look how that worked out for us in 2016.

The natural path for the GOP in response to both the unpopularity of Bush and opposition to Obama was a Libertarian-Populist direction. The Tea Party provided that and enabled tremendous success for the GOP despite being credited with a disastrous war and tanking the economy just two years prior. But the establishment rallied to their donors and discredited politicians who tanked the party in 2006 and 2008, meanwhile the outsiders stupidly rallied behind nutcases in opposition to them. When both sides are stupid, the money usually wins, until people get too pissed off (2016).

So long story short, just being tea party is not enough to impress me as to a candidate being horrible.

[Heisenberg]

Thanks for the analysis, Senator Yankee. I feel like a Tea Party Republican is the weakest type against Fayard or Campbell, but I guess I'm worrying too much about that seat (though a D vs. D runoff is still not quite out of the question yet).

[Young Conservative]

Thanks for the analysis, Senator Yankee. I feel like a Tea Party Republican is the weakest type against Fayard or Campbell, but I guess I'm worrying too much about that seat (though a D vs. D runoff is still not quite out of the question yet).

As long as a Republican is against either democrat one on one, this election will go for the Republican. Although, Fayard would make it close.

[DINGO Joe]

Can't recall an election this competitive being this invisible.  I'd have to see a real poll to believe that Fleming isn't really at 5% and Kennedy isn't ahead of the R pack.