Should be assume that the voting was bigoted or that the answers to the pollsters were bigoted?

Who is the biggest voting bigot (defined as voting purely based on a superficial attribute such as skin, party affiliation, etc)?

Whites who gave a non-white "only" 60% of ther support or
Blacks who gave a non-white Republican a record high 9%

I guess the first is worth writing about as it is seen as potentially "curable"; the second is baked in the cake for ever.

Can you say voter fraud. Happened in the senatorial election and happened here. Late afternoon turnabout. When the Dems see how many votes they need, they just go to the inner cities and drag people to the polls.

The presidential election will pivot on just this type of thing and with the new electronic voting machines, they won't even need to get warm bodies to the polls.

No. Jindal did well, until the last week, and then the Dems when on attack and he couldn't handle it. Even his rescuing the health care systme was turned against him. He was hammered and he did not hammer back.

Doing poorly in the last few debates didn't help either.

No. Jindal did well, until the last week, and then the Dems when on attack and he couldn't handle it. Even his rescuing the health care systme was turned against him. He was hammered and he did not hammer back.

Doing poorly in the last few debates didn't help either.

I think there is something in what the article says. Jindal doesn't have a -eaux name, which counts in LA.

But don't forget that this state is about the biggest health care junkie around and the Dems just had to threaten that electing Jindal would cut the supply.

As I said in another thread, Louisiana Republicans have to overcome 75 years worth of history here, dating back to the Huey Long soak-the-rich policies of the late 1920s. Just because the state is in the south doesn't mean it can't have a population of people who are as hooked on social spending as any state north of Washington, D.C., just as New Hampshire manages to remain mainly Republican despite straddling both Vermont and Massachusetts.

Not suprising that Jindall did better in Jefferson Parish than elsewhere in the state. Jefferson is after all the home of Sheriff Harry Lee. http://www.asianweek.com/010898/newsmaker.html

I would suspect that the "foreigner" aspect hurt Jindall as much as the color in the north of the state.

Jorge, I remember Harry Lee. When I was in college (Loyola of NO) my faternity campaigned against him. We didn't do this out of civic pride, we were paid for it. I remember at his opponent's HQ, there was a big poster of that ARVN General during the Tet Offensive who summarily executed the VC guerilla in the streets of Saigon. It was pretty offensive.

Fascinating, and ironic, that this time a Republican candidate is seen to have suffered at the polls due to a voter trend that Republican candidates have heavily exploited throughout the South since the time of the civil rights movement. After all, Haley Barbour was photographed hobnobbing with white supremacists in Mississippi last month and it didn't harm his gubernatorial campaign a bit.

"erp": how far off can you be? I'll leave for the moment the possibility that "dragging voters to the polls" on election day counts as some sort of fraud (did they vote twice? Were they not registered? Give us something to work with here!) More important, in terms of electronic voting (and the lack of a paper trail for all such machines to date): the companies that make those machines, notably Diebold, are all big Republican party donors. If voter fraud is to be perpetrated by digital means, there can be little doubt which party will benefit.

M. Bulger;

Yes, there's little doubt that it would be Democratic Party that would benefit. The fact that Diebold is a big Republican contributor is irrelevant. More important is to note that it's the Democratic Party that's pushing the technology (e.g., Florida 2000 and California 2003).