In less than six months, Congressional elections will have occurred. The
clock is ticking and it’s getting late for prospective candidates, especially
for those in competitive contests. So why doesn’t Rep. Jeff Landry announce
he’s going to run reelection, albeit in a reconfigured district?
The freshman Republican by residence would find himself competing in a
district where another, longer-term incumbent Republican Rep. Charles Boustany already has announced
a try for a fifth term, courtesy of reapportionment that forced combining of
their current districts when the state’s population did not increase as fast as
did others. This new district contains a little more of Boustany’s current
district than Landry’s and Boustany’s longer presence in Washington has built
up more of a support network among fellow elected Republicans for assistance
and cash (about double what Landry has), which makes him the early favorite.
Despite these advantages, early on the putative race would be judged as
close as Landry can count on more fervent support. Already, more than one group
has by word
and by deed
has pledged support to him, so it seems clear he would be quite a competitive
candidate if he would run. Thus, there seems little reason for his hesitation
unless he does not plan to run for this office.
That seems unlikely. The most likely other target of his would be to
challenge vulnerable Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu, but
that is in 2014, and any state election that year or the next. While one could
argue that a good strategy for Landry if the Senate is his actual target would
be to conserve resources for that contest, better would be to use much of those
resources in a present contest to keep name recognition in place in a portion
of the state, and even some statewide, in a contest where current information indicates
great competitiveness on his part, as opposed to a future contest where his
chances are much less certain and name recognition will have deteriorated – and
perhaps against another
tough Republican challenger, Rep. Bill Cassidy.
Also a possibility is that, with a view towards unity, to avoid the
debacle Republicans experienced in the district in 2004,
when in-fighting allowed a Democrat to win and stay there for three terms. That
race featured bitterness between the two leading contenders, where the one aced
out of the general election runoff campaigned negatively against the victor of
the two with an eye towards future elective office. As a reward for not
running, Landry could end up with a plum Washington job in a GOP presidential administration.
But that future is not a sure thing, and neither would Landry’s assertive
conservative politics mesh well with the pragmatic approach that likely
presidential nominee former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney takes.
If then that he will run in 2012 for the facsimile of his current
office, then the hesitancy must have a rationale. Intra-party success may be a
reason, for a different incentive for Landry. By having one GOP candidate hold
off, it provides reduced ability for Democrats to get a candidate that might be
able to exploit a rancorous intra-party Republican matchup and perhaps repeat
that event.
It also allows Landry, with lesser resources, to leverage them better.
It gives him the opportunity behind the scenes to continue to raise money with an
implicit nod to running again while not starting the full-blown costs of the
campaign until he feels necessary. That is, until the point there can be
greater traction in winning an election by active campaigning, don’t, in his
position. As opposed to Boustany, who as the favorite with superior resources
can enter earlier in order to press that advantage.
After two days now, the guy who "loathes hypocrisy ... disparages self-deception ... and does not suffer gladly the misinformed" has not provided, as reasonably requested, his sources for the "facts" he asserts as to the "typical state employee" and the "typical unclassified state employee" and the apples-to-apples comparative private sector employee.
ReplyDeleteHe cannot.
He is a fraud.
He makes up "facts" to buttress his positions.
That is the worst kind of hypocrisy and self-deception.
A GOFER.