Mary Landrieu

:wtf:

On Tweety tonight, she said she will "wait until after Bush's speech to decide" whether or not to stand with Biden, et al.

I am sick of her. Olympia Snowe would make a better Democrat!

Also, she said ... "that's the CRUXED of it". What an ignoramus. Can't Louisiana get rid of her?

Of the Dems need to be thrown out. I am not impressed with any of the nonbinding resolutions.

let's hand the place back to the Republicans. That will be just great.

Grab the pitchforks, we're storming the castle!!

:eyes: :puke:

Unfortunetly it will be replaced with a "actual" Republican. You see for the past six years the Bayou has been trending Republican for six years now, you can see that by looking at the 2004 election, Mary is all but gone and I have no hope she will win a 3rd term so you'll get your wish.

In fact everyone on DU will be gone cause I know everyone who comes on this board hates her guts cause she isn't a full blown liberal, I myself can tolerate her center voting record though.

except the center voting record. What exactly is centrist anyways?

Let's just say that "centrist" means you vote with the Democrats and the "left" half of the time...does that sound reasonable?

Here is how I score Landrieu's voting record in the 109th Congress.

Lincoln (Arkansas) DLC 31.03448276
Salazar (Colorado) DLC 24.13793103
Pryor (Arkansas) DLC 22.4137931
Nelson (Florida) DLC 20.68965517
Landrieu (Louisianna) DLC 17.24137931
Nelson (Nebraska) DLC 3.448275862

I do not believe voting with the left only 17% of the time on bill passages and Bush nominations makes one a "centrist", but rather, a "conservative Democrat". If she is a conservative Democrat, she should stand up proud and tall as a proud conservative Democrat and not hide behind a misleading "centrist" label.

It makes too many people think that the left's problem with her is over minutia, not the whole ball of wax as my evidence seems to indicate.

she loves to beat around the bush...

WTF? Wait until AFTER Little Lord Pissypants speaks Tues.? Wait for f*cking WHAT? Hell to freeze over? Hey Mary...it already has! :banghead:

if we can get an electorate like Maine in Louisiana. But the world isn't that way, so you need conservative Dems to win in places like Louisiana.

Hell running as a conservative Democrat dosen't even seem good enough to Louisiana unless your a acutal RW Republican.

Sad but true

Just like with Lieberman.

Furthermore, she's a governor and does affect the balance in congress (yes, yes, unless there's an appointment, but in all likelihood...)

She's a Senator. There is a huge difference between a 50 percenter and one who is never with you. The difference between a Jesse Helms and Landreau is quite large.

She is far below a 50 percenter.

Clinton is a 50 percenter. Landrieu is below 20, according to my calculations. The difference between her and say, Trent Lott is about 4.4 votes on bill passages and nominations in the last congress. Sad but true.

Only Ben Nelson is worse.

in 05, ADA gave her a 95 percent rating. Vitter had a 15 percent rating that year. I would gather, she votes with the party at least 50 percent of the time.

they pick 20 votes on select issues, and those votes are rife with amendments and sparse on real bill passages for my tastes. Also ADA makes Congress look far more partisan than it actually is (in other words, it seems to artificially separate Republicans from Democrats) When ADA rated Feinstein as more liberal than Boxer, I decided to do this sort of thing myself to see if my results jibed with ADA and progressive punch....som of those numbers just weren't passing my "gut check".

What I score are only bil passages and controversial Bush nominations. The big issues where there was heat (not 100-0 votes like on appropriations bills) or great interest to the "liberal" community.

Here is the list of issues (and how they "should" have voted, if liberal).

Condi confirm (nay)
Gonzales Confirm (nay)
class action law (nay)
bankruptcy bill (nay)
confirm negroponte (nay)
energy bill (nay)
CAFTA (nay)
CAFTA (2nd vote) (nay)
ohiovote (no to certification, 5 points for at least giving a speech)
firearm manufacturer immunity (nay)
confirmation of radical judges (gang of 14 = 5 pts, voting for one or more of these judges 0)
tax relief act of 2005 (tax cuts for rich) (nay)
deficit reconciliation act (spending cuts for poor) (nay)
Alito cloture (nay)
Alito nomination (nay)
Tax cut protection (favor the rich) (nay)
Extend Patriot Act (nay)
Raise limit on public debt (nay)
Flag burning Amendment (nay)
US-Oman FTA (nay)
Roberts Confirmation (nay)
Gates' confirmation (nay)
Atomic cooperation w/ India (nay)
Border Fence (nay)
Military Commissions act (nay)
Pension protection act (nay...not sure about this one, actually..Feingold and Boxer voted nay)
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (nay)
Child Insterstate Abortion Notification Act (nay)
Stem Cell Enhancement Act (yeah)

On all of these issues, Landrieu voted 17% of the time with "liberals". Second to last on my list under Ben Nelson.

You can go by ADA if you like...I am not here to tell you different. As I said, these are my calculations. But you must ask yourself...why are my results so different? I promise you that I made this list as comprehensive to the last Congress as possible, as long as it was bill passages or controversial nominations...I did not want to introduce a sampling bias. Why are so many Senators not on our side on these issues when all of these issues affect us directly?

My guess is that when the rubber meets the road on the most important votes, a part of our party meets the Republicans...habitually. Landrieu is one of the worst, although I can tell you I wish it were different. A 50% liberal voter would be a welcome change.



If you would like, click on my journal and you can get the full list and a more detailed description of the methodology.

I still think we need REAL Democrats.

Angela. :eyes: what a moron. She is so fucking out of touch.

She gives blondes a bad name.

actually two. She does not go out of her way to make other Dems look bad. Secondly, she represents a solid red state. Lieberman represents a solid blue state.

Landrieu is not wielding a poisoned dagger at our backs like Leiberman is.

:puke:

a statewide race in Louisiana, considering its current political leanings. Consider some of the other high-profile Dems in the state. Governor Blanco is one of the most conservative Democratic politicians in office, and is still pretty unpopular in the state (though not, tellingly, because of her conservatism.) Ex-Senator Breaux is probably the most popular Democrat in Louisiana and he was more conservative than Landrieu, and more conservative than any current Democratic Senator with the possible exception of Ben Nelson (NE).

Still, I do agree that on some issues Landrieu could afford to be more liberal and it would actually be to her advantage. That may seem ridiculous considering how the state is trending more and more "red" with the heavy Democratic-voting population losses from her base of New Orleans. But Louisiana politics are pretty weird. There are strong strains of both reactionary social conservatism and economic populism. There have been times when I think Landrieu has missed opportunities to vote in the interests of the state on economic issues because she feared retaliation, and it just seemed like a misreading to me. I believe Louisiana will support populist yet socially conservative Democrats, and I think Landrieu complicates her status in the state by behaving like more of a DLC Democrat (not populist or "liberal" enough on economic issues yet while being perhaps the most socially liberal Democrat Louisiana has ever had- I could be wrong about the latter but I have heard her described as such a handful of times) when Louisiana isn't quite typical of a "DLC" state.

However, Louisiana did support Clinton twice, and elected Landrieu for the first time the same year that they re-elected Clinton. Perhaps this is where Landrieu is taking her cues from. The thing is, I think turning out the Democrats to support her in 2008 is crucial to her being re-elected, and I don't think she is doing enough at this point to inspire Democrats and independents who don't often vote, especially African-Americans to support her. Lack of enthusiasm from African-Americans was what forced her into a run-off in '02; the one in which she narrowly prevailed against Suzanne "Olive Oyl" Terrell. Conventional wisdom may be that it would be suicide for Landrieu to play up any of her more Democratic stances due to the Louisiana's red shift and population losses in blue areaes, but I think this may be the only way that she will survive. I don't mean that she should become ultra-liberal on issues that wouldn't begin to play in Louisiana, but I happen to believe that coming out against an unpopular (even in Louisiana) President's unpopular war is not a suicidal stance to take. In fact, I think it could only help. Louisiana has enough of a populist streak that I believe an anti-war stance (if framed in the right manner) would only work in her favor. I don't think she will win by being a slightly less right-wing right-winger, but by being a moderate Democrat with enough of a populist streak to inspire the Democratic base without turning off too many of the conservative Democrats.

Sure, I could be totally off, but I just think it's the best chance Landrieu has. Think of some of the recent races in the south where the Dems ran conservative candidates (OK in '04, TN in '06 come to mind) who in some instances tried to out-Republican the Republicans and still didn't manage to make much of a difference. (Actually, Harold Ford did quite well and I'm not really trying to sell him short; I just wondered at times if he was running further to the right than he needed to- the same thing I often wonder about Landrieu. The difference is, I think Louisiana has a bit more of a built-in Democratic base than either of those states (especially Oklahoma) that simply needs to be encouraged to turn out.

Another thing that could work to Landrieu's advantage is that, despite gains in recent years, I'm not sure just who the prominent Republicans are who will have such a great shot at knocking her off. There's the obnoxious Bobby Jindal, but he will likely be running against Blanco (and, from the looks of things at this point, prevailing) but otherwise, just who do the Repugs have who is likely to move up? Landrieu might be helped by the lack of any strong competitors, even with so many other things working against her. Then again, David Vitter was (and still is) a pretty worthless dude and he managed to win his Senate seat without even a run-off; so perhaps the whole "trending red" aspect is a bigger deal than I'm making it out to be. (Vitter did, however, have that (at that time) popular "Decider" at the top of the ticket to work in his favor, and it was an open seat; who the Repugs and Dems run for President will obviously have a substantial effect on Landrieu's prospects.)

Anyway, I guess I just got rambling on here... The thing is, I guess I give Landrieu more credit than a lot of people because I think it's very important to take into consideration just what state she's representing. Yes, I'm often disappointed in her because I'm personally much more liberal than the way she votes (I get the feeling she herself is substantially more liberal than the way she votes sometimes!) I do think she makes some tactical errors at times, and errs on the side of supporting Shrub and the 'pugs more than she necessarily needs to. Then again, she may know her state better than I do. It just puzzles me if Louisiana really has gone from being the swing state it was in the late '90's to being a new dark-red clone of Mississippi. But you never can tell...

"But Louisiana politics are pretty weird. There are strong strains of both reactionary social conservatism and economic populism. There have been times when I think Landrieu has missed opportunities to vote in the interests of the state on economic issues because she feared retaliation, and it just seemed like a misreading to me. I believe Louisiana will support populist yet socially conservative Democrats, and I think Landrieu complicates her status in the state by behaving like more of a DLC Democrat (not populist or "liberal" enough on economic issues yet while being perhaps the most socially liberal Democrat Louisiana has ever had- I could be wrong about the latter but I have heard her described as such a handful of times) when Louisiana isn't quite typical of a "DLC" state."



You hit the nail on the head here. I agree with you completely. Populism is a better fit for Southern Democrats, and the message of it has a chance to reach across the aisle in the South on social issues. Landrieu is a member of the DLC...not "like" DLC, and that is the problem. Her ideology actually runs counter to her constituency, and this divergence only makes Democrats look out of touch.

I see no advantage to DLC politics in southern states that have suffered from free trade policies. If Landrieu's popularity wanes, the Democrats can still retain that seat if they play to the voters there. Third Way will not do it....Populism will.

Yeah, and I seem to remember hearing that one of the issues that was said to have helped her prevail in the '02 elections was a stance regarding Louisiana's sugar industry. I believe it was for a tariff of some sort on foreign sugar, which went against Landrieu's traditional "free" trade stance but was a popular stance to take within the state. I think this also offers proof that LA isn't as clearly "red" a state as it is being made out to be.

I am not trying to be mean to you, but Landrieu did not narrowly beat Terrell. As I recall Landrieu beat Terrell by 20,000-40,000 votes. I understand that is not a blockbuster margin, but that was a farely decisive victory, especially considering the weather on the day of the election and the tricks the Republicans played around and on election day. Republicans tried to suppress the black vote by making out like Cleo Fields, at the time a popular black Louisiana politician, was not supporting Landrieu. Beyond that Republicans sent out messages to black neighbors which gave out the wrong voting date. I think if New Orleans could get its black community back by 2008 Landrieu could easily win a third term. The Democrats are just going to have to make sure the black community is informed about all aspects of the election.

would have been a better word choice than "narrow" but I don't think it's totally implausible to call a 52 to 48 margin "narrow." The polls were too close for comfort throughout November and early December, and I remember staying up late watching the returns come in and not knowing 'til after midnight who had prevailed, and it was looking like Terrell might pull it off until some votes towards the very end made it safe for Landrieu. It will definitely be important to keep black Democrats and other members of the Democratic base informed on Repug lies about Landrieu and their attempts to keep voters away from the polls.

from in LA too....

Louisiana is going to get rid of her, and her replacement is going to be whatever subhuman emerges from the Republican primary.

The fact that people like Brownback can criticize the President but she can't I find very peculiar. Isn't the Iraq war not popular in Louisiana? And if it is so certain she is going to lose anyway (Which seems likely) she should do whatever the hell she wants. And also the fact that she isn't criticizing Lieberman for giving Bush a pass on Katrina is also very strange considering it's HER state that suffered the most.

unfortunately, you'll get your wish. With many Democratic voters in New Orleans gone, she won't be able to win again.

Landrieu is far from my favorite senator, but Jindal's going to be a whole lot worse.

Can't he run? From what I've seen, he's better than Mary.

It may be some other Neanderthal that replaces her

But Jindal is running for Governor againist Blanco and has a real good chance of winning, I leard Louisiana's Secretary of State may throw his hat in the ring againist Landrieu.

No matter how you put it Mary will be gone and DU will be happy.

that when it comes down to the actual election with Landrieu (and a dem sen. majority) vs a rwing repub - Duers will coalesce to support her. Perhaps begrudgingly, but support nonetheless. Just as a lot of us Hoosiers don't like Bayh - and were relieved when he stepped out of the presidential ring - we still supported his reelection to the senate - cuz in the end he was a far cry better than the other guy. Granted Bayh's reelection was a cake walk, while Landrieu's will not be so breezy.

I believed she truly had the potential to be "star" in the party. She's very articulate. But she plays it too safe and votes with the Republicans on issues that I think go directly against the interests of her constituents.

I understand she is from a conservative state. But there is no reason to give Bush the benefit of the doubt on anything at this point. It's sad when the Republican sitting next her makes more sense than she does.

due to the state's altered demographics, post Katrina.

Unfortunately, it will be a republican that replaces her if she's gone. Polls show this race to be a tough one to win. She barely won last time. And I think the support she has among Dems is quite soft due to both sucking up to this administration, but also because as I mentioned so many have been displaced (most African Americans making up the Dem base).

It's beyond time to end another LA political dynasty. :(

can find a stronger and more popular Dem politician capable of winning the senate, then I'd love to see them replace her.

But I definitely don't view the chance of her losing the seat to be good in any way. Remember, Dems barely control the senate, and at the moment it's tenuous due to Joe Lieberman. We need a Lieberman-proof majority to really call our majority a majority.

Ultimately meaning, we still need DINOs like Landreiu...

Landrieu has disappointed me with many of her positions, but her seat needs to be defended to ensure a Democratic Senate Majority in 2009.

You can't bank on Al Franken and Tom Allen to swoop in and save the day. Wishful thinking.

watching it you took the words out of my mouth. This wench does this all of the time she is an undercover republicon...

I agree with the DU'ers from red states that understand that it takes a certain type of Democrat in some areas to garner enough votes to WIN.

So we have a choice.. continually having Republicans win, or having moderate to DINO Democrats win.

There really is no third choice..

Senator Landreau for example is just like Alaska Democrats when it comes to drilling.. If she (or they) took any other stance in an oil wealthy state, they'd never get elected.

What's the alternative? Moderate/DINO Democrats ... or rTHUGS?

Seriously --- in super red states, there is no other choice.

Are you in a blue state where lefty Democrats easily win?