Jackson Free Press

As the dust settles on last night's primaries, one huge issue looms as the big statewide races begin in earnest: the Katrina effect. Get ready for a populist debate on insurance reform—not to mention health care, tobacco taxes and education—like this state has never seen as attorney John Eaves challenges Haley Barbour for governor; Rep. Jaimie Franks takes on Phil Bryant for lieutenant governor (and control of the Senate); and Gary Anderson battles Mike Chaney for insurance commissioner.

All bets are off, with people still living in FEMA trailers on the Coast, with many battling their insurance companies, which are in turn supported by some of the biggest Republicans in the state. There are no guarantees; even stalwart Republican Andy Taggart is today predicting a tight race between Barbour and Eaves at the top of the ticket, predicting that Barbour will win with 54 percent of the vote. And if that one can go either way, who knows what will happen in the other races? Will the anti-Big Republican revolution reach Mississippi? Can the state's Democrats get a progressive populist message across? Only time will tell.

Previous Comments

ID

94451

Comment

Word is that radical-righters were shocked and angry about the results this morning on talk radio. Sounds like last night made them go, "Hmmmm." Katrina has spoken, and her words are strong.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T10:04:29-06:00

ID

94452

Comment

Now would be a nice time for the Progressive Republicans to tell the more-shrill National Republicans to buzz off. You want our support? Treat us like a state and not a resource to be exploited and ignored. I swear third-world countries get better treatment than we do.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-08-08T11:58:21-06:00

ID

94453

Comment

Taggart is being realistic. Any credible Democratic candidate is locked in for at least 43-44% of the vote in a General Election for state office. In reality, races in Mississippi come down to a few swing voters whether polling in April or late October. Before being too exuberant, realize that Ronnie Musgrove nearly maxed out the vote a Democrat can get against a good Republican candidate. Eaves is no Musgrove. Franks may be. Chaney will ride Barbour's train like Reeves did 4 years ago.

Author

Droite

Date

2007-08-08T12:59:33-06:00

ID

94454

Comment

In reality, races in Mississippi come down to a few swing voters whether polling in April or late October. Right, and the biggest problems non-Repubs have in this state is forgetting that and fighting for the same voters they're unlikely to capture from radical-righters. It's not about exuberance; it's about believing that both Barbour and Bryant can be beaten. They can be. But not if the Dems don't try to get young and untypical voters to the polls. Your Ronnie Musgrove example is very poor. Musgrove did as much to turn off potential voters as he did to get people out. In fact, he's a good example of what not to do.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T13:03:37-06:00

ID

94455

Comment

BTW, Mississippi is changing, folks. And it's moving faster than its political parties know what to do with. The GOP's strategy is to limit the number of people—especially younger, progressive and people of color—who bother to turn out to vote against them. The Dems are chickensh!t and try to scrap for the same pool of voters and turn off as many voters as they draw. This year could be different, and Republicans know it. Do Democrats?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T13:06:02-06:00

ID

94456

Comment

Sometimes, I wonder if the MS Democratic Party even exists.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2007-08-08T13:28:53-06:00

ID

94457

Comment

"The GOP's strategy is to limit the number of people—especially younger, progressive and people of color—who bother to turn out to vote against them." ladd. What tactics does the GOP use in this strategy? Just curious...

Author

colby

Date

2007-08-08T13:29:31-06:00

ID

94458

Comment

Colby: Donna is in a meeting, but I imagine she means something along these lines. WASHINGTON -- For six years, the Bush administration, aided by Justice Department political appointees, has pursued an aggressive legal effort to restrict voter turnout in key battleground states in ways that favor Republican political candidates. The administration intensified its efforts last year as President Bush's popularity and Republican support eroded heading into a mid-term battle for control of Congress, which the Democrats won.

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2007-08-08T13:35:40-06:00

ID

94459

Comment

Your Ronnie Musgrove example is very poor. Musgrove did as much to turn off potential voters as he did to get people out. In fact, he's a good example of what not to do. I stand by that example. Compare his two races for Governor: 2003: Haley Barbour 470,404 (52.9%) Ronnie Musgrove 409,787 (45.81%) OVERALL 894,487 1999: Musgrove 379,034 (49.62%) Parker 370,691 (48.52%) OVERALL 749,725 In 2003, Musgrove got more votes than in 1999 and had the most of any Democratic nominee in the general election in the two-party era (and maybe ever). The GOP's strategy is to limit the number of people—especially younger, progressive and people of color—who bother to turn out to vote against them. Is that why in elections with larger turnouts Republicans win? See the 2003 example above and the 1995 example below. At the time, each was record turnout. Meanwhile, in 1999 when turnout was significantly lower, a Democrat won...against the worst campaigner either party has nominated in three decades. The federal races support this, as well; but we're talking state office. 1995:Fordice 56% (unable to easily locate cumulative totals) Molpus 44% OVERALL 819,000 When you run a generic poll in Mississippi asking respondents to self-identify as either Democrat or Republican, Democrats barely win with a substantial number of "Independents". If you ask them to identify as conservative or liberal, conservatives win by nearly 2 to 1. That is why candidates like Musgrove are the Democrats best shot. Mike Moore is the best living choice for the Democrats. Jamie Franks would probably tie Musgrove for second. All 3 are socially very conservative.

Author

Droite

Date

2007-08-08T13:45:11-06:00

ID

94460

Comment

You're right that people do not self-identify as Democrats. That *is* my point. Our readership, for instance, has audited more Republican than Democratic—but you ought to see the huge number of self-identifying Independents (such as myself). All that said, "conservative" isn't carrying the same cachet it did just a few years back among young people, and is becoming a dirty word even among many of the most faithful voters. And people just aren't self-identifying as Republicans the way they used to, especially young people. The big point is that the political climate nationally, and in the state, is changing dramatically, and it would serve both Repubs and Dems well to pay attention to those changes. In other words, Musgrove is a non-issue today. In a post-Katrina, post-Brownie-doing-a-great-job world, post-Mission-Accomplished world, people are much more prone to listen to true populist messages than they were before. And that is true among people who self-identify as Repubs, Dems or Independents.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T14:35:36-06:00

ID

94461

Comment

Colby, Todd answered you fine. Remember that because you personally are not aware of a fact, or wish it to be true, doesn't mean that it isn't. These repetitive arguments about whether the southern strategy (which includes limiting the number of new voters because the Republican dominance shrinks as demographics change) REALLy exists are quaint. But, frankly, they just make some of you guys look like you ought to get out more.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T14:39:38-06:00

ID

94462

Comment

Donna, People self-identify more as Democrats than as Republicans and have since time-imemorial in Mississippi. However, contrary to what you say, self-identification as a Republican has been trending upward and is at an all-time high in Mississippi. What has remained most constant is the liberal-conservative self-identification. You seem to be positing that "liberal" is beginning to trend upward in Mississippi. You say this is especially evident in young and religious voters. While no exit polling exists in the post-Katrina atmosphere (which I believe you are vastly overestimating) for a statewide or presidential election, the 2000 and 2004 numbers show Bush performed better with the 18-24 group than any recent Republican nominee (both nationally and in MS). The same can be said of his performance among "religious" voters. That goes for the 2003 General Election, as well. I think populism is no stronger in 2007 than at any other time in Mississippi. Vardaman was a populist. So was Barnett. Bilbo too. Finch was a big populist. Waller was arguably so. Fordice won on populism. So did Tuck. Musgrove in '99 was a populist. He and Barbour split the populism bent in 2003. Populism has been strong in Mississippi for more than a century. The beauty of populism is its ambiguity. What you are saying (since I surmise your populism is more akin to John Edwards') seems more like wish projection and the utilization of placative buzz words and less like credible prognostication. But, as you think things will be dramatically different than 4 years ago, we won't have any #s to look at until polls in October and vote tallies in November. Until then...

Author

Droite

Date

2007-08-08T15:26:43-06:00

ID

94463

Comment

I didn't say anything about "liberal" or John Edwards, Droite. And I didn't say all "populism" has been good. And I didn't say things would be "dramatically different" in November. In fact, maybe you're not even talking to me! (Especially being that *listening* is a vital part of talking.) You really are missing my point, especially with your comments about Bush. That's OK; I don't mind if you disagree with me. I'm sure you pay me the same respect. ;-) Of note.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T15:36:05-06:00

ID

94464

Comment

Barbour as a populist is the funniest thing I've heard in a long time, though. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T15:39:47-06:00

ID

94465

Comment

Can the state's Democrats get a progressive populist message across? So, Eaves saying he wants bible study and prayer in public schools is progressive? Come on!?! The guy is just running a large advertisement campaign for his law services. Winning the Insurance seat, and a few other minor races doesn't make MS any more progressive. The democrats running are not progressive in the ways other politicians are in other more progressive places.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-08-08T15:58:34-06:00

ID

94466

Comment

No, it's not, pike. It's pandering. I've said that before.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T16:22:02-06:00

ID

94467

Comment

Statement from the Dems/verbatim, focusing on Tommy Robertson's resounding loss on the Coast, which apparently has state Repubs in a tailspin today: August 8, 2007—When a powerful state Senate ally of Republican Gov. Haley Barbour lost a bid for re-election, it became more clear than ever that the governor’s political coattails aren’t as long as he thought. Barbour endorsed state Sen. Tommy Robertson of Moss Point--the Senate Finance Committee chairman who singlehandedly killed a proposal in the Legislature this year to cut the state sales tax on groceries. Barbour even recorded a radio ad for Robertson. “But Haley’s staunch support did nothing,” said Wayne Dowdy, chairman of the Mississippi Democratic Party. “Voters chose someone completely different. Haley couldn’t even help an incumbent state senator win another term.” On Tuesday, Democrats made their choice for governor overwhelmingly clear by nominating John Eaves for the job. Unofficial and incomplete returns show that Eaves received 286,557 votes, or 70 percent, in the Democratic Party primary. Eaves, in fact, received 115,635 more votes than the 170,922 Barbour received in winning the GOP nomination. Eaves’ strong performance in the Tuesday primary shows that momentum has shifted to him and the Mississippi Democratic Party. It also sets up a distinct contrast of styles between Eaves and Barbour. Over the next three months, voters will learn more about Eaves’ support for such issues as better health care and consistent education funding every year. “It’s clear Haley’s coattails are worn, ragged and frayed,” Dowdy said. “It’s a new day in Mississippi. And with John Eaves, we have a candidate for governor who will offer this state the kind of dynamic leadership we have been sorely lacking.” It does seem like the Dems are just now figuring out that Barbour is beatable in a post-Katrina world. That doesn't mean they will beat him, of course. Time will tell.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T16:48:04-06:00

ID

94468

Comment

Robertson also shot down the tax swap, which probably escorted him out the door faster, in my opinion. Good riddance.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-08-08T17:50:13-06:00

ID

94469

Comment

The more I click around and listen to the news (even TV!), the more I realize how big the Katrina Effect really was in the election. The resounding defeat of Tommy Robertson sends a deafening message—one maybe even the Dems are hearing, if that press release is any indication. I've long believed that the people of Mississippi are ahead of both parties when it comes to realizing what matters. Remember all those Stennis polls about how the majority of both parties want taxes to be raised, especially tobacco, in order to pay for health care and other needs? I believe that Barbour's perceived popularity among the loud and the punditry of the state is as naive as all of us Jackson folks' predictions about the secretary of state and state auditor races. The people in FEMA trailers have faces, even if they are too often forgotten in Barbour's little disgusting word games about Mississippians not whining (like Louisiana bad ole Democrats). They may not be whining, Mr. Barbour, but they voted your guy out on the Coast and sent very powerful messages through Gary Anderson. I predict that we're going to see a less cocky Haley Barbour in upcoming weeks, if that's possible, with a little less talk of trophy wives and bit more sounding like he gives a damn about what is really going on down on the Coast. My two cents.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T17:50:13-06:00

ID

94470

Comment

Agreed, Iron. But let me ask you: Why wouldn't the same people who booted him vote to escort Barbour out as well?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T17:51:17-06:00

ID

94471

Comment

So I'm thinking it's about time we start our BarbourBlog, eh?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T17:54:15-06:00

ID

94472

Comment

The Dem's will have to (A) puncture the myth Barbour delivered the goods post-Katrina and (B) deliver said goods as good as he's alledged to. All the Republicans would have to is say "A vote for Eaves is a vote against relief for Hurrcane ravaged Mississippi". Let's face it, he's done better than Louisiana.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-08-08T17:54:34-06:00

ID

94473

Comment

The Dem's will have to (A) puncture the myth Barbour delivered the goods post-Katrina That can be done if anyone would bother. and (B) deliver said goods as good as he's alledged to. I think taking on the insurance companies may well get them into that space. Remember these words: Insurance Reform. Jamie Franks is going to bring those words into Mississippi's dictionary. I'll never forget covering the tort-reform debacle—which was one of the biggest lies ever foisted on the state of Mississippi—and watching Franks stand up and get all red faced over the need for insurance reform. Even most Dems were too afraid to broach such a subject against big, bad ole Haley-the-high-powered-lobbyist. I knew then that Franks was going to, somehow, start a new conversation here. All the Republicans would have to is say "A vote for Eaves is a vote against relief for Hurrcane ravaged Mississippi". And how in the world can they support such a thing? Have you noticed that Repubs are crawling around D.C. on their bellies these days? By next November, Haley will be lucky if anyone returns his calls. Remember that Rudy even had broken New Yorkers lulled for a while after 9/11. But it didn't last because he could not stand up under a hot spotlight. Now, in this state, the media are scared silly to challenge Barbour, but my guess is that vital information is going to start breaking through somehow. Let's face it, he's done better than Louisiana. Only because of his cronies in D.C., who are dropping like flies. And the disgusting treatment by the administration and Barbour's friends of that state because it's majority Democratic will go down in history as one of the most shameful episodes of this period of history. They played politics with Katrina victims, and pitted one state against the other. Barbour led the way on it, because he's ain't nothing if not a cold-hearted political operative. I mean, the man insulted his own wife in order to insult Eaves'. Karma is not on his side.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T18:04:08-06:00

ID

94474

Comment

On the progressive thing. I just think all of MS has a long way to go before we get a truly progressive mindset. Because it can come form both sides. In Atlanta, former (convicted) Mayor Bill Campbell would speak at Gay Pride and even rode in the parade one year. That is progressive. That is accepting. I just wish MS could become a place "to busy to hate." :-( Or look at Alabama's retirement system. I don't know the whole story; but they are in another league. Check this out! They own a freaking waterfront building in NYC!!!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-08-08T18:55:13-06:00

ID

94475

Comment

Agreed in part. Right now, many people don't know what "progressive" means. And the bar has been so far to the right that a candidate is "progressive" if he doesn't go around loudly defending the rebel flag and talking about piano benches in whorehouses. But we have to get started. And I do think that the electorate is more progressive than the candidates give them credit for being. I mean, look at the polling on the tobacco tax. We will be "too busy to hate" when the electorate gets more educated about the facts and the issues (that's why we hound the media), and enough people talk back to the ugly rhetoric.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-08T19:08:36-06:00

ID

94476

Comment

Look at the outrage over the sex shop raids! LOL! It's a start....

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-08-08T19:21:20-06:00

ID

94477

Comment

The Clarion-Ledger edit-boyz commented on the resounding defeat of Tommy Robertson and Charlie Ross today (and by extension their ties with Haley Barbour), but the Ledger is still trying to protect Barbour: The fact both men may have missed is that as popular as Barbour may be, voters still judge candidates on their own. Average Mississippians want tax cuts, especially on necessities like food, and don't feel any need to protect Big Tobacco. In addition, when Ross tried to link Bryant with Moore, he may have boosted Bryant's numbers among women. GOP soccer moms don't want their kids smoking any more than Democrat soccer moms, and Moore has been a popular spokesperson for protecting kids. Barbour can be a huge booster for any candidate, but the lesson should be clear: Candidates must fight their own fights; Don't take on the tax swap, unless you want to lose. Two things here: That "huge booster" sentence isn't logical under the circumstances; obviously he's doesn't help "any candidate." Tuesday showed that. The question is: Will he hurt them? He clearly hurt Robertson and probably Ross. Their editorial just showed that. The other thing: It is clear that Barbour has weaknesses to exploit politically, and not only the Katrina Effect. His protect-the-tobacco-companies-at-any-cost stance is his real Achilles heel. Of course, he has media protecting him on it and swathing the facts in baby clothing. Of course, the Ledger is downright terrified to question Barbour in any meanintful way. That we can just stipulate. But his weaknesses are very clear this week.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-09T07:45:03-06:00

ID

94478

Comment

What bothered me most about this editorial was how they claimed Bryant is independent from Barbour. "State Auditor Phil Bryant, who some Republicans likened to outgoing Republican Lt. Gov. Amy Tuck for her independence from Barbour in creating the "tax swap" idea, trounced Ross 57 percent to 43 percent." Where did they get this from? Bryant didn't use the term "wingman" but he has always claimed he will pretty much push whatever Barbour wants as Lt. Gov. And how can they use the tax swap as an example when Bryant isn't even in favor of it.

Author

jd

Date

2007-08-09T08:41:04-06:00

ID

94479

Comment

Good points, Jay. You're right. It sounds like they're now trying to help Barbour distance himself from Ross and Robertson. And that is absurd. But the Ledger has longed provided cover for Barbour—from the "jackpot justice" mythology to downplaying his ongoing lobbying influence in Washington (through the firm of his name). This is a good example of how media can do these things while pretending not to. Excellent catch.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-09T08:58:11-06:00

ID

94480

Comment

Where is frank melton?

Author

justjess

Date

2007-08-09T10:49:30-06:00

ID

94481

Comment

Is he missing?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-08-09T10:50:54-06:00

ID

94482

Comment

Justjess, I'm told he's handwriting his crime plan. He's still on page one. He's having trouble with the idea that it can't involve himself and the police rv. Shirlene has been making him start over, but he keeps saying "I saw Charles Bronson, Clint Eastwood, Bufford Pusser, and John Wayne stop crime just like this." To cajole him into finishing the project, she promised to take him to Universal Studios or Warner Brothers after so he could act out his crime plan on the big screen like his heroes have.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-08-09T13:36:06-06:00

ID

94483

Comment

Ray, That was hilarious. Thanks for my afternoon laugh.

Author

katbird

Date

2007-08-09T13:45:22-06:00

ID

94484

Comment

Thanks, Katbird.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-08-09T15:46:30-06:00