Louisiana 2023 gubernatorial election megathread

[Oryxslayer]

No reason to be doing anything yet with only one Democrat running in the top-two primary against a series of well-funded Republicans who will spend all their time dragging each other down.

Real question is whether a serious effort is made during the runoff - no definitive signs yet that there will or won't be.

This. If Dems are to make a relevant push, it will be because of factors that play to their benefit of the GOP's own creation, factors that can only emerge once the campaign gets under way. The only thing that could be done right now is ensure a candidate has unified support to make the runoff, which they  are doing.

[kwabbit]

Vitter had a lot of baggage, Reeves does now, Landry doesn’t. There’s no reason to think he’s vulnerable even with a good opponent.

[Vosem]

They found a decent candidate for the Mississippi governor's race, why can't they do the same for Louisiana? It's not like the states demographics are that different from Mississippi and it literaly elected a Dem governor in 2015 and 2019. There is also the advantage that it is an open seat and thus no incumbent to run against. Sure, its still an uphill battle to win but it feels like an error to simply triage this one if you are willing to go all in on Mississippi.

I think they have a similarly decent candidate in Louisiana, but it's just harder because over the past few cycles Louisiana has been more inelastic and MS has an unpopular Republican Governor, while in LA there just isn't anything for Democrats to run against.

[Frodo]

It appears we all missed it, but as of mid-March Republicans (at least on paper) now have veto-proof majorities in both chambers of the legislature, including the House where they now finally have a 70+ seat majority according to Ballotpedia:

State Senate:

Republicans: 27
Democrats: 12

State House:

Republicans: 71
Democrats: 33
independent: 1

Voters in November will have a chance to ratify those majorities.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Democrats won Louisiana in 2015 mostly because of two reasons:

1. EXTREMELY big scandal with Vitter

Vitter's scandal came out before his 2010 reelection. Yeah, I know no Republican senator was going to lose in 2010, but he could've been challenged by another Republican.

It was more just how divisive the GOP primary had been (yes, I know it's a jungle primary, but there were three major Republicans and just one major Democrat). One of his opponents actually endorsed bel Edwards and the other was neutral.

Plus, the Republican Governor was pretty unpopular though he and Vitter weren't exactly allies.

[smoltchanov]

Democrats won Louisiana in 2015 mostly because of two reasons:

1. EXTREMELY big scandal with Vitter

Vitter's scandal came out before his 2010 reelection. Yeah, I know no Republican senator was going to lose in 2010, but he could've been challenged by another Republican.

It was more just how divisive the GOP primary had been (yes, I know it's a jungle primary, but there were three major Republicans and just one major Democrat). One of his opponents actually endorsed bel Edwards and the other was neutral.

Plus, the Republican Governor was pretty unpopular though he and Vitter weren't exactly allies.

Well, i read the book about JBE campaign, and there was a clear statement there, that Vitter scandal came out during gubernatorial campaign (it was basis for famous "Patriots against prostitutes" video). Though i agree, that Republican candidates were different that time, and either Dardenne or Angelle would beat JBE...

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Democrats won Louisiana in 2015 mostly because of two reasons:

1. EXTREMELY big scandal with Vitter

Vitter's scandal came out before his 2010 reelection. Yeah, I know no Republican senator was going to lose in 2010, but he could've been challenged by another Republican.

It was more just how divisive the GOP primary had been (yes, I know it's a jungle primary, but there were three major Republicans and just one major Democrat). One of his opponents actually endorsed bel Edwards and the other was neutral.

Plus, the Republican Governor was pretty unpopular though he and Vitter weren't exactly allies.

Well, i read the book about JBE campaign, and there was a clear statement there, that Vitter scandal came out during gubernatorial campaign (it was basis for famous "Patriots against prostitutes" video). Though i agree, that Republican candidates were different that time, and either Dardenne or Angelle would beat JBE...

It came out in 2007 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-caught-in-dc-madam-scandal/

Now, having said that, you're right that the scandal was still a major issue in the gubernatorial campaign. My guess is that Louisiana just cares more about who their governor is than their senator. And 2010 wasn't happening in a vacuum....it was a national midterm election in which all the focus was on the Democrats as the party controlling the WH & Congress. 2015's an off-year election with just three gubernatorial races.

[smoltchanov]

Democrats won Louisiana in 2015 mostly because of two reasons:

1. EXTREMELY big scandal with Vitter

Vitter's scandal came out before his 2010 reelection. Yeah, I know no Republican senator was going to lose in 2010, but he could've been challenged by another Republican.

It was more just how divisive the GOP primary had been (yes, I know it's a jungle primary, but there were three major Republicans and just one major Democrat). One of his opponents actually endorsed bel Edwards and the other was neutral.

Plus, the Republican Governor was pretty unpopular though he and Vitter weren't exactly allies.

Well, i read the book about JBE campaign, and there was a clear statement there, that Vitter scandal came out during gubernatorial campaign (it was basis for famous "Patriots against prostitutes" video). Though i agree, that Republican candidates were different that time, and either Dardenne or Angelle would beat JBE...

It came out in 2007 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-caught-in-dc-madam-scandal/

Now, having said that, you're right that the scandal was still a major issue in the gubernatorial campaign. My guess is that Louisiana just cares more about who their governor is than their senator. And 2010 wasn't happening in a vacuum....it was a national midterm election in which all the focus was on the Democrats as the party controlling the WH & Congress. 2015's an off-year election with just three gubernatorial races.

Well, quite possible. Though i am honestly surprised, that for 8 years no one was really interested in this scandal. I understand, that before 2015 and after 2007, the only election Vitter came through was for Senate in very good for republicans 2010, and agree with your reasoning, but still - surprised...

[Mr. Smith]

With what bench?

[smoltchanov]

With what bench?

Democratic bench in Louisiana is, essentially, a "Black bench". And - no Black politician i know now in Louisiana is able to get a crossover support needed to win statewide. Period (well, a sort of reverse happened recently in Shreveport, where Republican candidate got considerable Black support and won convincingly in usually Democratic-leaning city. Democrats need, essentially,  the same, but i don't expect it to happen this year).

[Dave Hedgehog]

It's pretty obvious that the D's have just had their "turn" in LA now and the pendulum is simply swinging naturally back towards the R's. They should try again in 2031 when JBE's inevitable R successor is termed out, maybe keep the pattern going then.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Democrats won Louisiana in 2015 mostly because of two reasons:

1. EXTREMELY big scandal with Vitter

Vitter's scandal came out before his 2010 reelection. Yeah, I know no Republican senator was going to lose in 2010, but he could've been challenged by another Republican.

It was more just how divisive the GOP primary had been (yes, I know it's a jungle primary, but there were three major Republicans and just one major Democrat). One of his opponents actually endorsed bel Edwards and the other was neutral.

Plus, the Republican Governor was pretty unpopular though he and Vitter weren't exactly allies.

Well, i read the book about JBE campaign, and there was a clear statement there, that Vitter scandal came out during gubernatorial campaign (it was basis for famous "Patriots against prostitutes" video). Though i agree, that Republican candidates were different that time, and either Dardenne or Angelle would beat JBE...

It came out in 2007 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-caught-in-dc-madam-scandal/

Now, having said that, you're right that the scandal was still a major issue in the gubernatorial campaign. My guess is that Louisiana just cares more about who their governor is than their senator. And 2010 wasn't happening in a vacuum....it was a national midterm election in which all the focus was on the Democrats as the party controlling the WH & Congress. 2015's an off-year election with just three gubernatorial races.

Well, quite possible. Though i am honestly surprised, that for 8 years no one was really interested in this scandal. I understand, that before 2015 and after 2007, the only election Vitter came through was for Senate in very good for republicans 2010, and agree with your reasoning, but still - surprised...

It's not so much that no one was interested, but Vitter refused to resign and I guess he hadn't committed an indictable crime or no prosecutor thought it was worth pursuing. It takes a two-third vote to expel a member of Congress. Blanco would've still been governor when it first broke (Jindal being elected later in the year) so Republicans weren't about to give up a Senate seat. He was lucky that he wasn't up until 2010.

[Skill and Chance]

JBE was a one-man show and was clearly viewed as more of a de facto independent candidate than a Dem.  If you look at the 2019 results, no one else even came close.  Louisiana is shaping up to be one of the most Republican states in the country so long as national Dems make abortion a centerpiece of their campaigns. 

[Skill and Chance]

I mean, I don’t think we should be wasting our money in MS either. All signs are pointing towards ds collapsing even further in the Deep South.

Yes, I think this is being overlooked.  R's don't have to win the black vote, they just have to get to ~20% overall with ~30% in rural areas and D's totally wiped out in these states.  Frankly, I think there are better opportunities in places like Kansas and even Kentucky.   

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a Runoff

[smoltchanov]

JBE was a one-man show and was clearly viewed as more of a de facto independent candidate than a Dem.  If you look at the 2019 results, no one else even came close.  Louisiana is shaping up to be one of the most Republican states in the country so long as national Dems make abortion a centerpiece of their campaigns. 

Louisiana may not be "one of the most Republican states in the country" (it's easy to name about 10 more Republican states), but, surely, one of the most "pro-life". In the past it was reflected in composition of state Democratic caucus: even most of Black Democratic legislators were "pro-life". That slowly changes (and, probably, will change more with such pro-life state legislators as Smith and Tarver reiring), and Democratic caucucs will, most likely, become more "pro-choice" (though still to lesser degree, then nationally) in the near future. But that alone will almost guarantee a permanent minority status for Democrats by itself...

[Spectator]

I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see another Democrat Governor of Louisiana in this century. JBE was probably the last of his kind to be able to win over the requisite rural support to win. You can’t win Louisiana based on doing well in suburbs like you can in other states.

[Skill and Chance]

I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see another Democrat Governor of Louisiana in this century.

I wouldn't go that far.  In the American system, governor is by far the easiest thing for the "wrong" party to win.

[Spectator]

I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see another Democrat Governor of Louisiana in this century.

I wouldn't go that far.  In the American system, governor is by far the easiest thing for the "wrong" party to win.

We’re going on over 40 years of one party rule in about half a dozen states, and that includes time periods where the minority party won some Senate races and other statewide races back in the 1980’s through mid-2000s. That era is gone and is showing no signs of a renaissance unfortunately.

If you include 25+ years of continuous party rule, the list gets to almost half the states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a Dec Runoff since Landry falls short of 50% and watch both parties pour monies into this race don't listen to AZ Iced Tea he said Trump is gonna win GA and PA lol Trump is down 10 in WI.

[smoltchanov]

I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see another Democrat Governor of Louisiana in this century. JBE was probably the last of his kind to be able to win over the requisite rural support to win. You can’t win Louisiana based on doing well in suburbs like you can in other states.

Well, 77 years is a long time (and, most likely, no one of us will live so long to have a possibility to confirm or refute this statement), and anything may happen. I expected Louisiana (with its rather populist past combuned with deep social conservatism) being very receptive to trumpism. But even i was startled to see how a well-known (and at most - centrist, sometimes even conservative-leaning) Democratic candidates (including many present or past officeholders) not only lost, but lost overwhelmingly to absolutely "bland" republican candidates in rural areas of the state in 2019 legislative elections (including Cajun areas, which quite recently elected a lot of Democrats, even if conservatively-leaning on social issues). Solely because of "D" letter after name. The rural areas of Louisiana became a "scorched earth" territory for Democrats (except, obviously, areas with Black majorities).There is some slow movement of suburbs to Democrats, but - not everywhere (Jefferson parish - mostly "yes", Livingston and Plaquemines - mostly "no"), and for now it can't compensate an almost absolute collapse of party in rural parts of the state.

P.S. The only plus for Democrats i see now - they already lost on legislative level almost everything that could be lost. No more then 1 (Smith's) state Senate seat and no more then 1-2 state  House seats (say, Brown's, or some similar...) are endangered this year, and that may be compensated by small gains in suburbs. No more party switches (maximum 1-2), almost all, who wanted - already switched. And so on. Democrats essentially hit (or - are close to) natural "bottom", and can't fall  substantially lower...

[Del Tachi]

The simple answer no one has mentioned yet:  there simply isn't a Democratic recruit of Brandon Presley's pedigree available in Louisiana.  MS Democrats regularly land good recruits (2023, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2014, etc.) in a way that Democrats in other Deep South states (AL, LA, etc.) do not.

Presley may be the last of this streak, however.  The bench is pretty thin after he exits.     

[smoltchanov]

The simple answer no one has mentioned yet:  there simply isn't a Democratic recruit of Brandon Presley's pedigree available in Louisiana.  MS Democrats regularly land good recruits (2023, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2014, etc.) in a way that Democrats in other Deep South states (AL, LA, etc.) do not.

Presley may be the last of this streak, however.  The bench is pretty thin after he exits.     

Just as in Louisiana, bench in Mississippi gradually becomes a "Black bench", and in a state like this it isn't a plus... Espy was as "non-frightening" as possible, and still failed.... And i don't see better Black candidates right now. The same - in Louisiana, the same - in Alabama. Not enough Blacks "per see", and very few urban white liberals (except, may be, New Orleans, but it's still decimated by Katrina) because there are  almost no really big and economically advanced cities.

[Pollster]

I do have to wonder if Jeff Landry is being overestimated here, in both the primary and runoff. He seems to have a lot of enemies, significant institutional players who don't want him to be in the Governor's office, and has the profile/rhetorical style of the exact type of Republican who can put off the exact types of voters that John Bel won in places like Jefferson Parish. He benefits in a runoff of course from the state that he's running in but it feels like Wags or Schroder should be able to gain ground as the ~20-25% of voters who seems stably undecided in polls here begin to engage and real money gets spent.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a tossup now I don't care what ratings have it , I always had LA Gov Lean D