For the Third District of the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Charles Boustany won not
uncomfortably over Rep. Jeff Landry in a
contest pitting Republican incumbents because of redistricting. Boustany, given
the new district contained more of his old one than it did of Landry’s old one,
his several more years in office than the rookie Landry, and, related to that,
larger war chest made him the favorite and he parlayed that to a win.
With records that made Landry only marginally more conservative than
Boustany, Landry was in the position of trying
to accentuate the differences between the two and to paint Boustany as more
beholden to Washington special interests. If he could make it to the runoff
against him, given the different dynamics in the runoff that would put
disproportionately more ideological voters into the electorate that would turn
out, if he could keep it close in the general election, Landry would have had a
good chance to win. But when Boustany put up nearly 50 percent more votes than
Landry in the general election, that
sealed Landry’s fate absent a Boustany blunder.
Landry now faces a problem in that there aren’t many positions open to
him commensurate with his current elective status where he might be competitive.
Democrat Sen. Mary
Landrieu’s seat will be up for grabs in 2014, but already a strong field of
Republicans looks to be assembling with Rep. Bill Cassidy
showing much interest and Gov. Bobby
Jindal not dissuading those who think he might give it a go. In 2015,
statewide elections might afford him an opportunity to grab something left open
by the progressive ambitions of some statewide officeholders shooting for the
Governor’s Mansion. Most intriguingly, were Sen. David
Vitter to respond to that siren song and succeed, then opens up his spot.
But Landry’s problem is the slash-and-burn campaign he felt compelled
to run to stay in Congress. This has turned off some significant portion of GOP
activists that damages his chances. Had he looked somewhat more strategically
to the future, running a less aggressive campaign or even not running at all
(perhaps he could have leveraged a deal out of Boustany supporters to have them
support him for something in the next few years in exchange), he would be in a
better position for a post-Congressional political career. His only realistic shot
now, given these dynamics, might be a minor statewide office, but had he played
his cards differently, he might have been in a much stronger position to claim
one of those.
The Louisiana Supreme Court will see a bit of history when it achieves a
Republican majority with the election of Jeff Hughes for District 5 (this
breaks a tie established only last month when Assoc. Justice John Weimer ran unopposed but
switched from Democrat to no party). Given the demographics of the district
where almost all blacks, about a third of it, vote for a black Democrat while
others vote largely Republican, against such a candidate First Circuit Court of
Appeals Judge John Michael Guidry whoever survived out of the general election among
Republicans looked set to win.
Hughes did so, riding a campaign that unusually mentioned his
preferences on issues of the day and helped with substantial support from trial
lawyer interests as he has ruled more favorable than most in the favor in his
service on the same court as Guidry. Despite some special interest groups who lately
almost always support Republicans over Democrats in races endorsing Guidry or
neither, Hughes’ strategy of presenting himself as allied with conservative
issue preferences while finding plenty of financing from trial lawyers succeeded
in inducing
the normal vote from the district that would favor a candidate such as
himself in this situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment