CenLamar

54% may secure an outright victory in a jungle primary, but it is certainly not what Jindal’s supporters both online and in the traditional media will characterize as a “mandate,” a word that not coincidentally rolled glibly off of Jindal’s tongue during the second gubernatorial debate. The term in question is one that circulates in today’s increasingly deceitful political discourse: it is the trope Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove and other national Republicans deployed in order to render Bush’s loss in 2000 into a clarion call for Republican hegemony, and it was reiterated by all the regular suspects in 2004, when Bush’s slim margin of victory over John Kerry was viewed as a “mandate” for something these people referred to as “morality.” David Vitter’s avoidance of a runoff in 2004 with 51% of the vote was also cited as evidence of this chimerical “moral mandate.” Readers of this and other Louisiana political blogs need not be reminded of the absurdity of this phrase, a phrase Vitter and his Republican Senate colleagues, particularly Larry Craig of Idaho, seemingly interpret as an enantioseme, or what those who prefer Greek call an enantiosis.

So Jindal will parrot Rove, Vitter and Limbaugh and claim he was elected with a mandate, even if 46% of the state cast their votes for someone else. And he will repeat this trope in order to beguile and hoodwink Louisianans into buying his policies and proposals wholesale. But unfortunately for Jindal, at least one legislative chamber will have a functioning Democratic majority, one with which Jindal is obligated to negotiate and cooperate if he intends to represent the people of Louisiana and not just the Republican base who catapulted him into office during an election with low voter turnout. Again, 54% is anything but a mandate.

The chamber in question is the state Senate, where Democrats are already guaranteed 22 of this body’s 39 seats. And the number of seats under Democratic control can only increase in the next month, as four Senate districts will hold runoff elections involving one Republican and one Democratic candidate. If Jindal was delivered a genuine and not a spurious mandate last night, he would not have to contend with so many Senators of the opposing political Party.

17 Democrats and 12 Republicans were elected to the Senate last night. Joining them next month are the 5 Democrats and 1 Republican who will emerge from the following six nonpartisan runoffs:

District 2
Ann Duplessis (D)
Jon D. Johnson (D)

District 5
Cheryl A. Gray (D)
Jalila Jefferson-Bullock (D)

District 14
Jason M. DeCuir (D)
Yvonne Dorsey (D)

District 28
Eric LaFleur (D)
Donald Newton (D)

District 30
Claude “Buddy” Leach, Jr. (D)
John Smith (D)

District 37
Billy Montgomery (R)
B. L. “Buddy” Shaw (R)

While these runoffs will be entertaining for all the typical reasons, attention should be focused on the following seven partisan runoffs, where PACs such as David Vitter’s LCRM will air scabrous advertisements in a cynical attempt to dupe voters and thereby lend financial and electoral ballast to Jindal’s bankrupt and baseless “mandate:”

District 7 – Jefferson, Orleans and Plaquemines Parishes
David Heitmeier (D)
Paul Richard (R)

District 22 – Iberia and St. Martin Parishes
Troy Hebert (D)
“Jeff” Landry (R)

District 25 – Acadia, Calcasieu, Cameron and Jefferson Davis Parishes
Dan “Blade” Morrish (R)
“Gil” Pinac (D)

District 32 – Avoyelles, Caldwell, Catahoula, Concordia, Franklin, LaSalle, Ouachita, Rapides, Richland and West Feliciana Parishes
Bryant O. Hammett, Jr. (D)
Neil Riser (R)

Because David Vitter’s LCRM and the Republican candidates who choose to affiliate themselves with David Vitter’s version of “morality” will invest lavish funds in these runoffs, Democratic victories in these districts will reveal where the mandate truly lies.