Politico claims that former General Russel Honore is seriously considering a primary challenge to Louisiana Senator David Vitter.
“The Louisiana Weekly and Bayoubuzz.com have learned that the hero of Hurricane recovery, General Russell Honore is seriously considering entering the Republican Primary for the U.S. Senate seat against incumbent David Vitter. Honore, a Republican since the Reagan Administration and a registered Louisiana voter from his Zachary home, has spoken to friends and supporters in the last two weeks signaling that he is, according to one, “more than 50% sure that he will run.”
He’s best known for his response to the Hurricane Katrina storm.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVBY_SqzJtI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ace.mu.nu%2F&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
I’d be happy to see Vitter go, but the seat has drawn a strong Democratic opponent in Blue Dog Charlie Melancon. Not to impugn Louisianans, but I wonder how a black Republican would fare against a Blue Dog, white, good ole boy Democrat. At any rate, I’m willing to give Honore a serious look if he enters. I think the Republican establishment should do the same thing. A Vitter/Honore primary could leave the Republican elites in the untenable position of stopping two prominent minority candidates in their Senate bids (Rubio and Honore), while keeping the Republican caucus lily white.
-
Matthew E. Miller can be contacted at Obilisk18@yahoo.com
August 29th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I like him. Seems like a straight shooter. Vitter needs to go anyway. Race probably doesn’t matter much anymore, e.g. Jindal. Also, Honore is probably going to get a greater percentage of the AA vote to offset the racists.
August 29th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I’m guessing the good General will mount a more credible challenge than the porn star. Is Cao considering a run or no?
August 29th, 2009 at 8:41 am
I think is very sad that some so called conservative are so outrage that a MAN had sex with a WOMAN who happen wasn’t his wife but a prostitute. Ok Vitter couldn’t live up to his principle and moral values, I understand some people feels mad about it. But the same party who let a murderer get away and be reelected 7 times to the US Senate almost unopposed and don’t even have the courage to say nothing about it and at the same time it force his own people out their political life because some meaningless sin is in my opinion a hipocrite party.
August 29th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Matthew,
As I’m sure you are aware, back in the day Louisiana instituted the combined primary/run-off format that is unique to them to keep blacks (and Republicans) from winning statewide office with a plurality (but not a majority) of the vote. By forcing a 2-way runoff, they ensured the white vote wouldn’t be split against a black candidate, or that the Democrat vote wouldn’t be split against a Republican. This guaranteed white Democrats got elected for decades.
August 29th, 2009 at 8:53 am
…..it would be sweet irony if this system produced a black Republican Senator,
August 29th, 2009 at 9:08 am
5- the system is different now. LA has normal primaries now.
August 29th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Falz,
Have you suffered brain damage recently? I remember you being much more coherent in the past. And which Senator murderer are you talking about? Ted Kennedy was a Democrat…so?
August 29th, 2009 at 9:41 am
AC1,
No, I’m pretty sure LA has the same system, unless it changed within the past year or so. Pubs and Dems run in the same open primary, and if no one gets an absolute majority, the top two go to a runoff.
August 29th, 2009 at 9:49 am
You know, if you dropped the final ‘e’ on “General Honore,” you’d have a great GI Joe name.
August 29th, 2009 at 10:06 am
Matthew, the fact tha Kennedy was a democrat is enough for republicans never say anything about it?….What i want to say is that is reprehensible how republicans always want to eat alive his own people but don’t have the courage to fight the real enemy, the ones who make real harm to the country.
Is Vitter a bad Senator?…why not challenge John McCain too? after all he was (one time) an adulterous and is a much less conservative than Vitter. But you are about to elect a liberal flower in Florida. Come on.
August 29th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Iam a fan of the General at least he would flight back with the liberal news media!! when would this election be !!!!!!?????
August 29th, 2009 at 10:41 am
#8 The primary system changed last year.
In Louisiana Creole identity and African American identity are still a bit distinct although not as much as in the past. I suspect Honoré would prefer better than average for Republicans in the Southern half of Louisiana.
August 29th, 2009 at 11:21 am
This is just stupid. Vitter can actually win and is a solid vote for Republican interests.
August 29th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Falz: I tend to agree with you on sexual matters, in that I don’t think it should in most cases matter much in choosing a candidate.
But the fact is that it does matter to a lot of people, and therefore it should be considered when assessing a candidate’s strength. Vitter is damaged goods politically, and it’s not unreasonable to look for alternatives — whether Honore is a good alternative is yet to be determined.
August 29th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Adam’s right that Vitter would win without a primary. Heaven knows that Louisianans have seen a lot worse from their elected officials than adultery and not batted a collective eyelash in response. Still, Honore is an intriguing figure who has every right to run, and I’d love to see him answer his first question from the clueless white MSM with a resounding “You’re stuck on stupid!” It would be worth the cost of admission.
August 29th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Question:
I don’t really know anything about Gen. Honore, other than he is good with the media. But let’s assume he is good on the issues, has a solid resume, and is a good campaigner. In a general election matchup with a white Democrat, does he pick up more black votes because of his race, or lose white votes because of his race? I think we should nominate the best candidate (and I wouldn’t mind losing Vitter for a good Republican) but you can’t have a race between a white guy and a black guy in Louisiana without the issue of race coming up- particularly when the Republican is black and the Democrat is white.
Does it help, hurt, or make little difference?
August 29th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
the big wigs should lean on vitter to retire. the GOP could potentially add to their senate ranks 2 african americans in honore and michael williams, a cuban marco rubio, and two women kelly ayotte and carly fiorina. women, blacks, hispanics, nuff said.
and i dont think race hurts honore, this is a new louisiana, a louisiana that elected piyush jindal with an outright majority and will again in 2011.
August 29th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
#17, do you want an afirmative action caucus in the GOP?….The only thing that should matter to choose a candidate should be his/her qualifications for the job not his/her race.
August 29th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
If you’re a collectivist you judge people on the basis of group identities that are largely figments of your imagination in the first place, such as income strata, religious affiliation, age, or race. But if you’re a collectivist, you’re a Democrat, or should be.
Individualists identify people by their belief systems, their qualifications, proven ability to do, or not do, the job in question and….THE CONTENT OF THEIR CHARACTER. The natural political home of individualists is the Republican Party. Let Honore run and let’s see what happens. May the best individual running in the primary prevail.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
falz,
We’ve got plenty of lousy white guys now. Even if the people tim mentioned turned out lousy, nothing would really change, except perhaps the GOP would be more appealing to women and minorities. So all else being equal- whether equally good or equally lousy- I’d rather have more minorities.
I mean, seriously, we can hardly say, “We can’t have minority candidate X because he’s not good enough”- when we already have Lindsay Graham and Charlie Crist- without sounding at least hypocritical.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Dave,
Nobody’s judging candidate’s based on “figments of the imagination”. We know perfectly well that Honore won’t be a better Senator because he happens to be black. But, politics is something like 70% PR. The actual names and faces are largely interchangable. Seriously, try to name even 20 Senators prior to 1950. Unless you’re a serious historian, you’re going to struggle mightily. They…don’t…matter. And I’ll be hanged if I think preserving a, at best, mediocrity like Vitter is better than improving a serious PR problem (a lack of diversity). If I thought Vitter was genuinely useful in the Senate, and that Honore would become a faceless nobody, I’d happily support Vitter, prostitution scandal and all. But, as long as it’s toe-mato or ta-mato, I’m pretty content to pick the one that looks nicer.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I agree that race/ethnicity/gender shouldn’t matter, just as I agreed above that sexual misconduct shouldn’t (in most cases) matter.
But they do matter, and the party is stronger if it appeals to, and is seen as open to, minorities and women.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Vitter is not the best face of the GOP. No question. But I am less than convinced that Honore can win against a “blue dog” Southern Democrat (The whole concept of the blue dog irritates me – because it is just a typical Democrat masquerading as center-right candidate. But they win. And it sucks).
If we had 55 senators like we did a few years ago, then by all means – get rid of the Vitters and take a chance on someone new. But the party has enough of a struggle next year. Wouldn’t it just be nice to be able to gain SOME power? Wouldn’t it be nice to get 43 or 44 senators so that at least the GOP can credibly threaten to filibuster?
We’re not going to do that if we have to pour millions into LA in a general election contest that could be better spent in OH, NH, KY, etc.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
As a “wise latino” man I don’t see any good in electing hispanic people only because their speak castilian but because they’re qualify for the job.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Adam: If your point that Vitter can win and Honore can’t is true, I would be with you. Let’s see some polls.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Falz,
But I think it is fair to say that all else being more or less equal minority and female candidates are more valuable to the conservative cause than white male candidates.
August 29th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
26,
Are they really though? Did JC Watts help the party branch out to gain black votes when he was a congressman? Did Sarah Palin help the party with women when she was a vice presidential candidate?
I’m not convinced that minority and/or female candidates help us a whit. Our party’s message contradicts that image. If our party platform is such that the best and most qualified candidates (in business, or otherwise) should succeed most readily – and if our party opposed affirmative action – how are we going to claim that minority and female candidates are more valuable SIMPLY BY VIRTUE OF BEING minority or female candidates?
Having said that, Linda Lingle is great. And I’d vote for Marco Rubio given the chance, seeing as how I believe he can beat the candidate on the Democrat side. But why are Rubio and Lingle more valuable? What the party ought to try to do is make the case that it DOESN’T MATTER.
August 29th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
The sad thing about Vitter is that, policy-wise, he’s easily in the top 10 Senators we have. The guy’s just such an embarassment though.
I don’t suppose we know anything about Honore beyond his service and his ability to produce an awesome soundbite.
In the Senate, it’s also sometimes about some idiot jumping to the other side so they can feel all bipartisan and respectable. We know that Vitter’s a rock when it comes to conservative issues (often leading the charge). It’s doubtful that Honore would be an upgrade, and it’s more likely he’d be another Senatorial headache than a solid vote.
Speaking of figments of the imagination, has there ever been any indication that he’d run beyond speculation around here?
August 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Palin/Honore 2012
August 29th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Falz,
But I think it is fair to say that all else being more or less equal minority and female candidates are more valuable to the conservative cause than white male candidates.
************************
I don’t agree. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, JC Watts, Michael Steele and some others have fails to produce any gain among AA. Liddy Dole, Kate Baily H., The Maine’s Twin and Sarah Palin have the same results than those AA republicans.
When republicans campaign on the right issues they win. In 2004 Bush won the female vote, got 44% of the hispanic vote and the African American vote, well that’s a lost cause for republicans.
August 29th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Bush didn’t get close to 44% among blacks in 2004. It was closer to 10% if I remember right.
August 29th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Read again…44% of the hispanic vote….[b]and the African American vote, well that’s a lost cause for republicans.[/b]
August 29th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Found out that Vitter was a Rhodes Scholar.
August 29th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
32.
Ah. Sorry, you sentence was ambiguous.
August 29th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
watts was just a congressman, senators are a little different. and palin hurt herself, fell on her face answering basic questions. i doubt someone like meg whitman, graduate of princeton and harvard, would have as much trouble answering questions.
besides these are not affirmative action choices:
rubio is a smart, well spoken, successful house speaker who happens to be conservative and hispanic.
williams is a fantastic speaker, strongly conservative, and has a solid record who happens to be black.
honore is a hero general who has had a long and impressive military career and happens to be black.
fiorina is a very smart economic conservative who fits perfectly in california who happens to be a woman.
each is better then the alternative: rubio > crist, williams > hutchinson, honore > vitter, fiorina > devore/boxer
August 29th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
General Russell Honore To Run Vs David Vitter In Louisiana US Race?
http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/Louisiana/Politics/General_Russell_Honore_To_Run_Vs_David_Vitter_In_Louisiana_US_Race__9439.asp
August 29th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
The General would allegedly be the favorite according to the Bayou Buzz:
General Russell Honore To Run Vs David Vitter In Louisiana US Race?
http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/Louisiana/Politics/General_Russell_Honore_To_Run_Vs_David_Vitter_In_Louisiana_US_Race__9439.asp
August 29th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
It Gets Vitter and Vitter
By Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/08/it_gets_vitter_and_vitter.php?ref=fpblg
August 29th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
We need to rally behind Vitter. The guy made one mistake and acknowledged it, did nothing illegal and reconciled with his wife. He is still a favorite among Values Voters and the base and is a strong conservative voice in the Senate. I like the idea of General Honore, I just think that he should save his fire and take on Landreu. We cannot afford to lose Vitter, he is a leader in the Party with a bright future ahead of him as long as he doesn’t stray again.
August 29th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
“We need to rally behind Vitter. The guy made one mistake and acknowledged it, did nothing illegal and reconciled with his wife. He is still a favorite among Values Voters and the base and is a strong conservative voice in the Senate. I like the idea of General Honore, I just think that he should save his fire and take on Landreu. We cannot afford to lose Vitter, he is a leader in the Party with a bright future ahead of him as long as he doesn’t stray again.”
Prostitution is illegal in Louisiana. And DC. Most of the country in fact. Not sure if you’ve heard.
Vitter is a stuffed shirt with no future in the party. I’d like him out ASAP.
I like General Honore in any office we can get him in. We need more foreign policy Republicans. I like this guy.