« Clinton Camp Source: Richardson Said Obama Can't Win | Home | Ahead Of May Primary, GOP Registrations Declining In North Carolina »
Internal Poll Shows GOP At Risk Of Losing Once-Safe Seat In Louisiana
The GOP may be on the verge of losing what should have been a safe seat in Louisana. An internal Republican poll in advance of one of the upcoming special elections in the state reportedly shows that former state Rep. Woody Jenkins, who is expected to win the Republican primary runoff this Saturday, is losing by three points to expected Democratic nominee Don Cazayoux.
The district went to President Bush by a 19-point margin in 2004, so this would be a particularly juicy pickup for national Dems.
Advertisement
"The GOP may be on the verge of losing what should have been a safe seat in Louisana."
Without any intention of singling out the above instance of it unduly, I have to say that I've never understood that usage of "what should have been a safe seat." Where's the logic in such a remark? "Should have been"? What does that even mean? It almost sounds like a moral judgment, which I know can't be the intention.
April 3, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
DirkVA, "should have been" means simply that most voters in the district are conservatives or conservative-leaning and, as a result, vote Republican for most offices in most years. And that's a fair characterization of LA-06.
Most U.S. House districts around the country are gerrymandered to be safe for one party or the other, and LA-06 is no exception.
The only thing that's changed is that Katrina pushed a lot of black New Orleans residents into Baton Rouge which is included in LA-06, and that can have a positive impact for Democrats in Baton Rouge and surrounding areas.
April 3, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The only thing that's changed is that Katrina pushed a lot of black New Orleans residents into Baton Rouge which is included in LA-06, and that can have a positive impact for Democrats in Baton Rouge and surrounding areas."
Not exactly a minor change, is it? Wouldn't that be enough to alter what "should have been"?
April 3, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink