Skip to main content

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) official portrait
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D)
PPP's making their way through all the tough Senate seats Democrats have to hold next year, and now they're up to Louisiana, where Mary Landrieu is seeking a fourth term. Guess what? The news is remarkably good, much like it was in Alaska, another top GOP target. Indeed, Landrieu's job approval rating now stands at 47-45, which seems fairly remarkable given the sharp red turn her state has taken. And that's also a healthy recovery from August of 2010, when she had a lousy 41-53 score as Democrats were on their way to an absolute drubbing at the polls.

So speaking of the polls, how does Landrieu actually fare against some hypothetical candidates? (No Republicans have declared yet.) Turns out, she leads all of them, and pretty healthily, too. Note that the numbers in parentheses represent each potential opponent's favorability rating (or in the case of Jindal, job approval):

• 46-43 vs. Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne (41-23)

• 48-42 vs. Rep. Charles Boustany (22-25)

• 49-41 vs. Gov. Bobby Jindal (37-57)

• 48-39 vs. ex-Rep. Jeff Landry (29-27)

• 48-38 vs. Rep. Steve Scalise (21-24)

• 50-40 vs. Rep. Bill Cassidy (19-24)

• 50-38 vs. Rep. John Fleming (20-21)

There are a few themes and observations worth pointing out here. First and most important is that Landrieu is very close to or just at 50 percent against all but one potential candidate, something that has to make her feel good. It'll be a dogfight to make sure she does in fact claw her way to 50%+1, no doubt about it, but I'll take these numbers. There's plenty more to discuss, however, below the fold.

Related to this, all the various current and former congressmen are mostly unknown. That means they have upside potential, but they may first have to contend with an ugly fight to be their party's standard-bearer, particularly if the notorious teabagger Landry decides to go kamikaze on their asses. I shouldn't use that phrasing, though, because Landry could very well win—and amusingly, he's doing a touch better than establishment fave Bill Cassidy, who sits at the bottom of the pile.

Speaking of the bottom of the pile, man do Bobby Jindal's numbers suck. Gov. Kenneth the Page has seen his approval rating absolutely plummet. Tom Jensen points out that when that old 2010 poll referenced above was conducted, Jindal owned a gaudy 58-34 approval score, one of the best in the country among governors. Now his 37-57 is among the very worst. It doesn't matter either way, though, since Jindal's already said he won't run.

By contrast, though, Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne looks quite good against Landrieu, but I have to wonder if the huge crossover support he currently earns from Democrats could possibly survive a heated partisan campaign. Yes, party ID in Louisiana, where party switching is common, tends to be much more fluid than anywhere else in the country. But right now, Dardenne has almost identical favorability scores from Republicans (42-25) and Democrats (43-22). I don't think that's sustainable, but what's more, Dardenne hasn't even been mentioned as a possible candidate—and he didn't run in 2008, either, when his name also came up.

As I said above, Landrieu will have a hell of a race on her hands no matter what happens, but these are the kind of initial numbers you can only hope for. And while you're at it, hope for a brutal fight between Republicans, too. Louisiana doesn't conduct a traditional primary, but rather all candidates from all parties appear on the November ballot, with a December runoff between the top two vote-getters if no one scores more than 50 percent. Landrieu, as the only Dem in the field, is all but guaranteed a spot in the runoff; a GOP meltdown over who gets to oppose her in that one-month sprint would only help our chances, which already appear better than expected.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Geaux Mary! (13+ / 0-)

    What did Bobby Jindal do to become so unpopular?  I thought he had achieved Republican Jesus status after that blowout win in 2011.  Is it the sales tax thing?

    •  That and destroying the state's schools (19+ / 0-)

      Turns out conservative ideology isn't so popular in practice, even in Red states.

    •  His out of state trips get a lot of headlines (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hey338Too, Matt Z

      Still, I'm pretty shocked by how bad these numbers are for him.  

      23, male, CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-01 (college).

      by Jeff Singer on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:38:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  He was himself (6+ / 0-)

      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

      by tommypaine on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:51:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here is one theory this Louisiana resident has... (7+ / 0-)

      Jindal has been unswavering in his (largely successful) agenda to downsize and privatize much of our state's government and services. He has gone beyond coopting Republican legislators to dictating his agenda, and he's even gotten Republican allies mad. Northern LA evangelicals still seem to love Jindal but otherwise it seems that even many conservatives are onto him because he has been so self-serving and downright monarchical in pursuing his legislative agenda.

      He's also gotten LSU alumni mad because of how he has taken over the LSU board and forced it to downsize to the point to where SACS (our regional accreditors) have taken notice.  The accreditors for our med schools (also run by LSU) have also placed them on notice, since Jindal has cut our public hospitals to the point where they have just the minimum amount of beds open in order to claim they are still physician training hospitals.

      If it weren't for LSU athletics LSU would be in much worse shape.  Say what you like about big-time college sports, especially SEC football, but LSU athletics are completely self-supporting and have donated funds BACK to the academic side just to keep the institution from completely imploding.

      BTW, I work for another university... the rest of higher ed is in much worse shape financially, but Jindal hasn't tried to take us over either like he has LSU. That's the prize they get for being the one institution that must survive no matter what. He's just tried to starve the rest of higher ed in the state into silence and submission.

      But rule #1 in our state... DON'T MESS WITH LSU.

      •  And one more thing about Dardenne... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        luckydog, Neon Vincent, NM Ward Chair

        ...he has not been a loyal Jindal ally, at least not publicly. He has openly complained about budget cuts to fund tourism and tourist marketing, which is what our Lt. Governor is primarily responsible for in our state. The only reason why he hasn't been fired like others who have similarly complained about budget cuts to their agencies is because he is an elected official.

      •  Not only the schools and LSU (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Neon Vincent, NM Ward Chair

        but he's decimating the health care programs in the state as well as programs for seniors. He was bad enough before he was re-elected (we Dems didn't even field any opposition) but he acts like he's the Emperor and it's his way or the highway with anyone who disagrees with him. Some of the legislators have finally started to wake up and make some small attempts to challenge his "ream it through" policies, but don't expect much to come from it.
        Even in super-conservative North Louisiana I don't think you can find too many people who say they like or support him.

        "I'm totally pro-choice in the matter of abortion. But of course I'm also so radically pro-life that I think every person from birth onward must have full and affordable access to healthcare." - Gail Collins

        by gritsngumbo on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 03:00:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  not to jinx anything (13+ / 0-)

    but wouldn't it be amazing if the Republicans are now so extreme that they blow 2014, when everything should be in their favor?

    •  Yeah, seriously, don't fucking jinx it! (7+ / 0-)
      •  I'm conceding West Virginia (7+ / 0-)

        as a likely Republican gain but I think we have a good shot at holding the rest.  I see South Dakota being extremely close but Johnson holding on just barely.  And then in 2016 we'll probably pick up three or more seats.

        •  There are states far more likely to flip than WV (5+ / 0-)

          Just because they hate Obama doesn't mean a Democrat can't win there.

        •  If we can just ride out 2014 (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mconvente

          Then we have great shots in 2016 at IL, WI and PA at the very least; we can do better if it's a good presidential year, although Reid could be in with a REALLY tough challenge if Sandoval runs for his seat.

          All depends on riding out 2014 first though, so let's make it happen.

          •  At this point... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Zack from the SFV

            I have a hard time seeing Sandoval do that. He knows the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex will have a hard time saying no to the Senate Majority Leader. After all, a Senate Majority Leader is FAR more valuable than some no-name backbencher freshman. Perhaps I'm wrong, but so far history suggests otherwise. Whenever Brian Sandoval has had a chance to challenge Harry Reid, he's turned it down (because he doesn't like the odds of that fight).

          •  I think Kentucky too (0+ / 0-)

            It will either be an open seat or Paul running for re-election.  Either way, it will be much easier for Democrats to win there than it would be against well-funded incumbent McConnell.  Paul is well funded but his ideology is very far right even by Kentucky standards.

          •  Reid is the only seat to worry about for 2016 (0+ / 0-)

            Nevada and Colorado are the only states where we have seats up that aren't totally reliably blue at the Presidential level. Everything else is on one coast or the other and reliably blue. We'll win NV and CO for President, but both are states where we could conceivably lose a Senate seat at the same time, as 2012 demonstrated in NV. I'm not worried about CO. Bennett will be well-established by that point and there's nothing about him that shouldn't make him improve with age. He had the tenacity to hold on in 2010 against a weak opponent and his only real flaw then was that he'd just been appointed. Reid, on the other hand, is never going to be personally popular, and is probably not going to get to run against Sharron Angle again. There's a good chance he can win in a Presidential year, but I think it will be a dogfight. And there's always the possibility that he retires, even though I can't picture it. And our bench in Nevada is not as strong as it should be, especially with the various geographic divides in the state.

            •  See above. (0+ / 0-)

              It's more complicated than you think. Sure, Republicans here have succeeded in dragging down Harry Reid's favorables (ever since he became Democratic Leader). But again, the most powerful interests in this state do NOT want to lose the Senate Majority Leader!

              Last year, the "gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex" overall didn't lean too strongly either way. But up in Reno, they were quite united behind Dean Heller because he's "one of them". Either way, the Senator would be a bottom-of-the-totem-pole freshman with minimal juice.

              But with Reid, the GML has a "Juice Master" who can deliver the goods from DC. And on top of that, he has the President on speed dial! GML power players in Vegas and Reno don't want to lose that. And if Reid looks anywhere near as vulnerable in 2016 as he did in 2010, they will circle their wagons around him (again).

          •  my thoughts on 2016 (0+ / 0-)

            AL - unless there is some Howell Heflin type still around, I'd give Shelby or whoever replaces him a pass. Sewell is probably focused on climbing the house seniority ladder

            AK - unless Murkowski is doing something blatantly corrupt she's probably safe

            AZ - its an open seat and the dems could at least contest it. Carmona, Pastor, Grijalva and Goddard are all too old. Sinema is an oppo researcher's dream and Kirkpatrick is also a little too old. Giffords would be the best candidate and it depends if she has recovered fully by then

            AR - I'm waiting to see if Pryor survives 2014 to see if AR is worth contesting anymore. Even if he does, I doubt Boozman can be defeated unless someone like Beebe runs (who has said he's uninterested)

            CA - Boxer may retire. If she does, someone like Michael Rubio could be the nominee

            CO - Bennet is inoffensive and will be okay. There's been talk of Gardner running for the seat, but I would think he'd be more interested in climbing the seniority ladder

            CT - I had heard that Blumenthal was an "emergency" candidate in 2010, but he will probably run again and win easily

            FL - Depends what Rubio does between now and then. If he becomes too "national" then it gives the dems an opening against him. After all, combining the Crist+Meeks voters can amount to a majority against him. If he looks beatable in 2-3 years then someone like Castor or that Jacksonville mayor could run against him

            GA - this is the ultimate "teaser" state. Isakson won only 57% but there are a lot of robot voters in this state. He might even retire

            HI - probably the safest dem seat in the entire Class III. Schatz could be a lifer

            ID - The only thing interesting about this is the GOP primary. Will people have forgotten about Crapo's drunk driving episode in three years?

            IL - I would think Foster would be the best candidate but he might want to stay in the house. Otherwise someone like Madigan or Simon could easily run

            IN - depends if Coats wants to stay (where he would be safe) and if he retires, who is nominated.

            IA - Grassley I think retires. Without Braley, the dems don't have a deep bench since the state only has four congressional seats. Tom Miller would be a good candidate but he's already old.  

            KS - Kansas hasn't elected a democrat to the senate since 1932. Next.

            KY - Paul I think would be easier to beat than McConnell. I think Grimes would be the most feasible option

            LA - Lousiana doesn't throw out incumbents. Vitter's safe.

            MD - Mikulski, despite being chair of appropriations, probably retires. I think O'Malley should run

            MO - Blunt is a hack of the worst order and Nixon could maybe defeat him. Other than that, he is likely safe

            NV - I envision a Sandoval vs Horsford matchup. Sandoval could pick it up if he's still popular

            NH - depends if Hassan is popular. If she is, she should run. There's no reason for NH to be represented by a freeper.

            NY - the second safest seat after HI. I doubt Schumer retires since he could become majority leader eventually

            NC - Burr has two unconvincing wins despite being the first person to win reelection to the seat since 1968. If the dems think he's vulnerable, they should get Easley or Schuler to run against him.

            ND - Hoeven is probably the safest republican in Class III

            OH - Portman won a convincing win in 2010 but his approval numbers haven't been great. Dems should wait and see how he is in 2-3 years. If they think he could be beaten, someone like Ryan could run against him

            OK - Coburn is retiring and unless Boren runs, this is safe R

            OR - Wyden is safe and I don't see him retiring

            PA - I don't care if people say he's popular, Toomey is beyond the bounds of acceptability. He's no Schweiker/Scott/Specter type. A catholic, mildly pro-life dem type should run against him.

            SC - Scott, while very conservative, doesn't seem as abrasive as DeMint. He should be safe

            SD - another Live Boy/Dead Girl seat

            UT - Lee ran below generic R in 2010 but he's still safe

            VT - Leahy may retire. If he does, I see Shumlin running

            WA - Murray will probably run for re-election and should be OK

            WI - run Ron Kind and RoJo will be fast approaching Santorum territory.

            RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

            by demographicarmageddon on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:34:49 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Frankly, the thing that can hurt her (6+ / 0-)

    is if the President insists on a vote on gun control measures beyond something fairly bi-partisan, like a universal background check.  The one thing she does not want, I think, is a vote on an assault weapons ban or something stronger.  That's a no win for her. It will be a very high-profile vote, and if she votes yes, it will really hurt her here in very red state Louisiana.  If she votes no, she loses support with her party.  

    Mary keeps her seat because she is pro-business enough (and pro-oil and gas industry) so that LABI, the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, doesn't come out strongly against her.  She needs to do two things:  (1) keep that pro-business, pro-oil and gas industry reputation.  For example, here's what she said on "closing oil company loopholes" as part of avoiding the sequester:

    “My position is that no industry should be singled out to be punished because they are a legal, robust industry,” Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who is up for reelection in 2014, told reporters on Tuesday. “And so while I most certainly am supportive of a review for the whole tax code of all industries, I don’t see why the oil-and-gas industry should have to be ever singled out.”
    (2) She needs to avoid casting any votes that will be "red flags" to all the conservatives in Louisiana.  And, frankly, if she is forced to cast a vote on an assault weapons ban, or something stronger in terms of gun control, I suspect that will really hurt her here.

    Louisiana is a very red state, but they are generally happy with Mary because she is not perceived as "too liberal."  If she casts any votes that give her opponents ammunition, that could hurt her.  

  •  This poll was conducted Mardi Gras weekend (8+ / 0-)

    Given how nuts the state, and especially the NOLA area was during that time with people going to parades (or avoiding parades), this may have introduced an unexpected hurtle for getting accurate results.

    PPP is an excellent pollster, but it may be worth waiting for another poll taken at a less crazy time before drawing any firm conclusions about the state of the race.  

    23, male, CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-01 (college).

    by Jeff Singer on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:36:00 AM PST

  •  Good news (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atdnext, Aquarius40

    but off all our endangered seats this is one of the least concerning to me from what I understand of Louisiana politics. Seems to me Landrieu has standing in the state and is in fact a good fit for it for a Democrat. Nothing can be taken for granted here but there are other states I worry a lot more about before I start worrying about this...

    West Virginia
    South Dakota
    Arkansas
    North Carolina

    ... and only then do I worry about Louisiana.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 11:52:03 AM PST

  •  She also has $2.5 mil in the bank (8+ / 0-)

    Or 3x what she had at this point in 2008.

    http://www.nola.com/...

  •  Is Louisiana gov. term limited? If not, it would (0+ / 0-)

    seem risky for Jindal to go against Landrieu.

    "They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

    by TofG on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:04:33 PM PST

    •  TofG - Jindal is at the start of year two (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Darth Jeff

      of a second four year term after which he will be term limited and out of office in early 2016. Running for the Senate in 2014 could make sense. By election day in 2014 he would have only one more year left on his second term as governor.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:17:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He can also run again in 2019 fwiw (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hey338Too

        His people have talked about him running again then.  If a GOPer is Governor then Jindal still may run: there's a big rivalry between Jindal and likely candidate David Vitter, and Jindal and Dardenne aren't exactly close either.  

        23, male, CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-01 (college).

        by Jeff Singer on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:24:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for info. While Jindal could make it a (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NM Ward Chair, Gygaxian

        competitive race, a Jindal-landrieu race would be great political theater. Tweety would probably have to go on medication.

        "They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

        by TofG on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:25:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Landrieu always has a race on her hands (6+ / 0-)

    and always seems to pull it out in the end. Hope the tradition holds.

  •  Always Close Always Wins (7+ / 0-)

    Mary Landrieu always has never had a comfortable win in any of her Senate election efforts. They are always close and she always wins. She always puts on a strong GOTV effort particularly in South Louisiana and knows how to raise cash. She unfortunately plays the conservadem card from time to time and its also unfortunately probably what has gotten her reelected time after time at the statewide level. Her greatest attribute is her devotion to children's causes which win her precious few votes, but earn her a place in my heart. Her biggest drawback is that she is in the pocket of the petrochemical industry, but otherwise is typically a reliable vote for dems. She has never had to face anyone at the level of Bobby Jindal, but the bloom has obviously long come off that rose so we will have to see.

  •  Do we actually want her to win (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ron Thompson, stevej

    I may be misremembering things but I seem to recall her having a lot to do with public option never being debated, as well as some nasty positions on things like the patriot act.

    Actualy no it turns out I'm not misremembering things.

    “when people hear ‘public option’ they hear ‘free health care.’ Everybody wants free health care. Everybody wants health care they don’t have to pay for.”

    That's what she had to say about the public option, She also voted for the protect America act. And she's a PIPA cosponsor.

    “Every year Internet piracy costs the United States billions in earnings and compromises the jobs of millions of American workers...I understand that this bill is a work in progress, and I plan to work closely with all interested parties to ensure that the effect of this legislation on individual rights does not outweigh the overall benefit of combating the theft of intellectual property.”

    She is not a better democrat, and while I would hate to see the balance shift in any way towards republicans in the Senate she's not doing our party any favors by listing herself as a dem and voting as a blue dog.

  •  Y'all are talking like (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sourbrew, Ron Thompson

    Landrieu would be a GOOD thing for Democrats?  Tell me again, exactly why having a Senate full of Democrats whom you can't count on voting for Democratic issues is good for Democrats?!  And how is it that Landrieu being in a tight race with any Republican won't be pulling her rightward for the next year?  Are we really going to rehash the "lesser of 2 evils" argument again?  If you want Democrats to be in charge of policy, you need to vote Democrats in, not moderate republicans.

  •  You ask much of me (12+ / 0-)

    to join in a cheer for the re-election of Mary Landrieu, but I accept the argument that any Republican would be not only a little, but much worse.

    Visit Lacking All Conviction, your patch of grey on those too-sunny days.

    by eataTREE on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 12:52:24 PM PST

    •  That is fair n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eataTREE
    •  Why we need all kinds of Democrats (10+ / 0-)

      We can't do anything in the Senate if it is run by the GOP.  We need 51 Democrat Senators or 50 plus a Democrat Vice-President.  

      If any of you aren't old enough to remember what it is like for the GOP to control the House, Senate and Presidency, do some research.  Also, we are a large and diverse country.  Our government should reflect this, and so should our party, which it does, a lot more so than the GOP, especially on the issues.

      We can't win elections and win the presidency if we are too far in the extreme.  We have to take into account that there are Democrats in red states that have certain things in common with us and some differences.  

      Senator Kennedy was one of the most successful legislators of all time because he was able to find common ground with others and make progress, sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly.  But, progress is progress.

      Mary Landrieu will vote for a Democrat for majority leader of the senate.  She will more than likely support us on most issues, even if she has to create a little drama.  

      You want to be a purist, look at where it is taking the GOP.

      As progressives, we always have to push extra hard for what we believe in.  If we push for a little, we get very, very little, but if we push extra hard, we certainly make some progress.  We also have to know that we have friends in the middle who can stand with us sometimes, but not every time.  

      I do know that individual legislators have to have some core beliefs.  Make up your mind, then, either be a Democrat or be a Republican.  You can't be all things to all people.  It is alright to piss a few people off here and there.  Frankly, most voters respect someone who has a core.  But, legislators also have to be willing to work with others too.  Balance, balance, balance!

      •  Amen (0+ / 0-)

        23, male, CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-01 (college).

        by Jeff Singer on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:34:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, we need all kinds of Democrats (6+ / 0-)

        but we also need to get the most progressive Democrats we can.

        Did Landrieu bash the public option? Yes.

        What would have happened if Landrieu hadn't been there at all and a Republican had instead? No healthcare reform at all, since we needed all 60 votes to pass it.

        We need to be prepared to wage primary challenges where it makes sense (like against Joe Lieberman), but there are some states where we should just be grateful to have someone who will vote for a Democrat as majority leader, vote for Obama's nominees, and vote with us some of the other times depending on the issues (and in fairness to Landrieu, depending on the issue, she can be a passionate advocate for our causes). There's no possible progressive challenger to Landrieu who could win the seat, and Landrieu is far better than some like Manchin who are really not good for much beyond the majority leader vote. I'm a big advocate of the fact that we need 51 (or, unfortunately, 60) votes on each issue we care about, not just 51 (or 60) people with a D next to their name. And if I had a choice between spending time or money on Landrieu or a progressive with a solid chance somewhere else, I'd choose the progressive. But it doesn't usually have to be an either/or, and there's no point in wishing ill to someone who is going to be way more help to us than the alternative.

    •  Agreed. See 2010 Arkansas Senate race. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Meh (0+ / 0-)

    I could hardly care less about this DINO.

    Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

    by Big River Bandido on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:23:49 PM PST

  •  Isn't Landrieu like DiFi? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ron Thompson, shaharazade

    Frustratingly difficult at best for core Democratic principles?

    The only reason people want to be masters of the future is to change the past - Milan Kundera

    by Suvro on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 01:32:22 PM PST

  •  The fight for this seat seems assured (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBraden

    Still, I hope this be one of the 51 senate seats that the Democratic Party must have after 2014 elections.

    I begin to think that T Johnson has good numbers vs M Rounds in South Dakota. If it would be bad we would have some poll released at this point, but we have not.

    Until now WV seems the most difficult seat to hold. The rest of the difficult seats seem winnable at this point, if the Republicans find not the right candidate, and even finding the right candidate, they will need to fight very hard to win.

  •  2014 Senate races (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atdnext

    I predicted two years ago that the Dems would break even or possibly pick up 2-3 seats in 2012.  I predict that they'll break even or possibly pick up 1-2 seats in 2014.  And winning back the House is definitely doable.  Then there are all those Teabaggers who snuck in in 2010 that we can remove from office at the ballot box next year, too.  I think 2014 will be a good year for the Democrats and the buzz among the chattering classes will be about how the Republican Party is all but dead in national politics and even statewide politics in some states.

    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:41:47 PM PST

  •  I wrote Landreu off years ago. (0+ / 0-)

    I won't vote against her, but I can't really support her (financially or otherwise). She's voted too many times on the wrong side of Democratic supported issues. If course as many have said the Republican alternative is much worse (with the possible exception of Jay Dardenne).
    BTW: I think she's WAY too conservative and my F.I.L. thinks she's WAY too liberal, so I guess that's the way she keep getting elected.

    "I'm totally pro-choice in the matter of abortion. But of course I'm also so radically pro-life that I think every person from birth onward must have full and affordable access to healthcare." - Gail Collins

    by gritsngumbo on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 02:55:14 PM PST

  •  My prediction is that like always she wins by 50K (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBraden

    voters.

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

    by dopper0189 on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 03:05:59 PM PST

  •  If/when Bill Cassidy runs (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    psychicpanda, atdnext, Darth Jeff, jncca

    Landrieu should tar him for his opposing a Hurricane relief bill early this year.

    "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

    by KingofSpades on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 03:53:22 PM PST

  •  Landrieu is a lousy democrat. I'd rather lose her (0+ / 0-)

    and pick up a better democrat somewhere else.... if I had a choice between the two.

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

    by CTMET on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 06:27:11 PM PST

    •  you might want take a look at the map (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jncca, JBraden, stevenaxelrod

      cause there really aren't many/any big pick ups for us. Majority of the seats in Republican strongholds.

      Maine is the only blue state on the table and that will be uphill assuming Collins runs for another term. Every other senate race is in a state that Romney won. So it we don't have to many options (GA, KY)

      You'll have to really wait till the 2016 election if you want to see a year where the Dems can make decent gains in the senate

      In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

      by lordpet8 on Wed Feb 13, 2013 at 08:06:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site