Somebody explain John Bel Edwards to me

[538Electoral]

He's a conservative Democrat.

[smoltchanov]

He's a conservative Democrat.

In fact - rather moderate: economic populist, social conservative (both are rather typical for the South). But - in absence of real conservatives (which still existed 10-12 years ago in some areas) this is what goes for "conservative" now.

[Skill and Chance]

JBE won for the same reason Kansas, Vermont and Maryland have "wrong party" governors today.
 The previous governor from the dominant party ran on a base-first platform and won in a one sided state with a wide legislative majority and they just went wild and decided to really push the limits of what they could ram through.  Incumbent governor gets reelected and the dominant party doubles down.  Basic, non-ideological government services stagnate under extremely ideological leadership.
 Formerly collegial atmosphere in the state legislature and between municipalities and the state government breaks down and a backlash builds. 

The dominant party nominates another base-first candidate for the next open seat, often looking past some significant personal baggage.  The opposition party rallies around someone who smartly runs as a moderate taking the majority party's side on some nationalized issues and focuses on competence and functional government services.  They get some high profile endorsements from the moderate wing of the majority party in the GE and win surprisingly easily. 

Bobby Jindal did most of the work to elect JBE.  Vitter's prostitution scandal sealed the deal.  This is the same reason Matt Bevin is at risk of losing in Kentucky despite Trump's sky high approval there.

[Epaminondas]

JBE won for the same reason Kansas, Vermont and Maryland have "wrong party" governors today.
 The previous governor from the dominant party ran on a base-first platform and won in a one sided state with a wide legislative majority and they just went wild and decided to really push the limits of what they could ram through.  Incumbent governor gets reelected and the dominant party doubles down.  Basic, non-ideological government services stagnate under extremely ideological leadership.
 Formerly collegial atmosphere in the state legislature and between municipalities and the state government breaks down and a backlash builds.  

The dominant party nominates another base-first candidate for the next open seat, often looking past some significant personal baggage.  The opposition party rallies around someone who smartly runs as a moderate taking the majority party's side on some nationalized issues and focuses on competence and functional government services.  They get some high profile endorsements from the moderate wing of the majority party in the GE and win surprisingly easily.

Bobby Jindal did most of the work to elect JBE.  Vitter's prostitution scandal sealed the deal.  This is the same reason Matt Bevin is at risk of losing in Kentucky despite Trump's sky high approval there.

Middle paragraph is unconvincing, it sounds a bit like child planning out a turn-by-turn strategy game in his head.

The truth is that in each case, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues. They also tend to win by large margins.
For this reason, it appears to me that a Bevin win is unlikelier than a Hood win (itself rather improbable).

[Skill and Chance]

JBE won for the same reason Kansas, Vermont and Maryland have "wrong party" governors today.
 The previous governor from the dominant party ran on a base-first platform and won in a one sided state with a wide legislative majority and they just went wild and decided to really push the limits of what they could ram through.  Incumbent governor gets reelected and the dominant party doubles down.  Basic, non-ideological government services stagnate under extremely ideological leadership.
 Formerly collegial atmosphere in the state legislature and between municipalities and the state government breaks down and a backlash builds. 

The dominant party nominates another base-first candidate for the next open seat, often looking past some significant personal baggage.  The opposition party rallies around someone who smartly runs as a moderate taking the majority party's side on some nationalized issues and focuses on competence and functional government services.  They get some high profile endorsements from the moderate wing of the majority party in the GE and win surprisingly easily. 

Bobby Jindal did most of the work to elect JBE.  Vitter's prostitution scandal sealed the deal.  This is the same reason Matt Bevin is at risk of losing in Kentucky despite Trump's sky high approval there.

Middle paragraph is unconvincing, it sounds a bit like child planning out a turn-by-turn strategy game in his head.

The truth is that in each case, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues.
For this reason, it appears to me that a Bevin win is unlikelier than a Hood win (itself rather unlikely).

A Hood win would be equally or more likely but for the majority of State House districts language in the MS constitution.   

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

[Calthrina950]

JBE won for the same reason Kansas, Vermont and Maryland have "wrong party" governors today.
 The previous governor from the dominant party ran on a base-first platform and won in a one sided state with a wide legislative majority and they just went wild and decided to really push the limits of what they could ram through.  Incumbent governor gets reelected and the dominant party doubles down.  Basic, non-ideological government services stagnate under extremely ideological leadership.
 Formerly collegial atmosphere in the state legislature and between municipalities and the state government breaks down and a backlash builds.  

The dominant party nominates another base-first candidate for the next open seat, often looking past some significant personal baggage.  The opposition party rallies around someone who smartly runs as a moderate taking the majority party's side on some nationalized issues and focuses on competence and functional government services.  They get some high profile endorsements from the moderate wing of the majority party in the GE and win surprisingly easily.

Bobby Jindal did most of the work to elect JBE.  Vitter's prostitution scandal sealed the deal.  This is the same reason Matt Bevin is at risk of losing in Kentucky despite Trump's sky high approval there.

Middle paragraph is unconvincing, it sounds a bit like child planning out a turn-by-turn strategy game in his head.

The truth is that in each case, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues. They also tend to win by large margins.
For this reason, it appears to me that a Bevin win is unlikelier than a Hood win (itself rather improbable).

A "lower-ballot red wave election"? Edwards, as you should know, was elected in 2015, which certainly wasn't a Democratic wave year, and whose elections took place under the Obama Administration. And what you say about "large margins" can go both ways. Are you completely ignoring the fact that Baker won reelection in an absolute landslide last year, in a "blue" wave?

[Kingpoleon]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

[smoltchanov]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

+100

[Mr. Smith]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

[Cashew]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Let's not pretend his opponent wasn't the main reason for that.

[morgieb]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Let's not pretend his opponent wasn't the main reason for that.

Yeah he wouldn't have won if his opponent was purely unpopular rather than a probable pedophile. And 12 points is a much bigger margin than one and a half.

[Epaminondas]

The truth is that in each case of blue-state Republican governors, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, red-state Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues. They also tend to win by large margins.

Edwards, as you should know, was elected in 2015, which certainly wasn't a Democratic wave year, and whose elections took place under the Obama Administration. And what you say about "large margins" can go both ways. Are you completely ignoring the fact that Baker won reelection in an absolute landslide last year, in a "blue" wave?

Please read my post more carefully.

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Let's not pretend his opponent wasn't the main reason for that.

"Show me a pro choice Dem in a Red state"
"Jones"
"Not fair, that doesn't count"

Why do you shift the goalposts?
Jones may or may owe his victory to Moore's weaknesses (he himself doesn't believe he did); it remains true that only the GOP give their crazies the nod. That's the real problem.

[smoltchanov]

He's pro life, pro death penalty and nauseatingly pro prison industrial complex.

#Moderate

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Not much more, but - slightly more (and particularily on choice - Louisiana may be more conservative of two), against the only opponent, who could lose, and so on. Jones's case is absolutely unique combination of circumstances, which can't be repeated elsewhere.

[Cashew]

The truth is that in each case of blue-state Republican governors, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, red-state Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues. They also tend to win by large margins.

Edwards, as you should know, was elected in 2015, which certainly wasn't a Democratic wave year, and whose elections took place under the Obama Administration. And what you say about "large margins" can go both ways. Are you completely ignoring the fact that Baker won reelection in an absolute landslide last year, in a "blue" wave?

Please read my post more carefully.

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Let's not pretend his opponent wasn't the main reason for that.

"Show me a pro choice Dem in a Red state"
"Jones"
"Not fait, that doesn't count"

Why do you shift the goalposts?
Jones may or may not have won on Moore's weaknesses (although he himself doesn't believe that); it remains true that only the GOP give their crazies the nod. That's the real problem.

Oh come on, the context of the question was clearly referring to normal circumstances. Jones is delusional if he thinks he cold have beaten any other republican. In you case though I guess I need to specify and say would have been beaten by any other republican except for a pedophile or a marxist, atheist, or Muslim coming out of the closet after winning the primary so you don't try to argue by bringing up unlikely situations I obviously wasn't referring to.

[Calthrina950]

The truth is that in each case of blue-state Republican governors, an unconvincing and poorly backed Dem nominee was pipped at the post by a socially progressive Republican in a lower-ballot red wave election. Neither Baker (2014), Scott or Sununu (2016) hit 53% of the vote.

Conversely, red-state Democratic governors tend to win on folksy-ness, constructive populism, and toeing the line on social issues. They also tend to win by large margins.

Edwards, as you should know, was elected in 2015, which certainly wasn't a Democratic wave year, and whose elections took place under the Obama Administration. And what you say about "large margins" can go both ways. Are you completely ignoring the fact that Baker won reelection in an absolute landslide last year, in a "blue" wave?

Please read my post more carefully.

Let me know when you get a pro choice, anti death penalty Democrat elected statewide in Louisiana.

Doug Jones pulled it off in a much more Republican state, in a much more polarized type of race.

Let's not pretend his opponent wasn't the main reason for that.

"Show me a pro choice Dem in a Red state"
"Jones"
"Not fair, that doesn't count"

Why do you shift the goalposts?
Jones may or may owe his victory to Moore's weaknesses (he himself doesn't believe he did); it remains true that only the GOP give their crazies the nod. That's the real problem.

Now, I understand what you were saying. You seem to be arguing that Republicans in some of these blue states can only win by the skin of their teeth, and that this ignores their later wins. And one of the three governors whom you list (Sununu) is in a competitive swing state, not a state which is safe for one party or the other.

[Skill and Chance]

An underrated part of this is that white Catholics in Louisiana haven't really secularize over the 2nd half of the 20th century like they did almost everywhere else in the country (the impact was especially pronounced in New England).  This means that there is still a base for the JFK coalition in Louisiana, with pro-life/pro-universal healthcare views being unusually common.  There's basically a 3rd party coalition of moderate D's and R's with those views that has historically controlled the state for most of the late 20th century.  Jindal was really the first governor with down-the-line national Republican views to break through (in part because of the botched response to Katrina) and no one with down-the-line national Dem views stands a chance.