By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry has indicated his intention to suspend the state’s upcoming primary elections. This move is reportedly to allow legislative time for the passage of a new congressional map. This decision was communicated to Republican House candidates during recent calls.
Read the original article here
Louisiana’s governor is reportedly preparing to suspend the state’s House primaries following a recent court ruling, a move that has sparked considerable concern and commentary. This decision seems to stem from a legal challenge to the state’s congressional district maps, which have been accused of diluting the voting power of minority populations. The idea of suspending primaries, especially with early voting on the horizon, is seen by many as a drastic departure from democratic norms and a worrying precedent.
There’s a strong sentiment that this action by Louisiana, and potentially other Republican-led states, demonstrates a disregard for democratic processes. Some commentators express a belief that this is indicative of a broader Republican agenda to undermine democratic elections, with fears that if this can happen at the state level, it could eventually be mirrored at the federal level, perhaps even by former President Trump. The current political climate in Louisiana is painted as one of deep-seated issues, with mentions of concerning social and economic statistics, and a historical narrative of voter disenfranchisement.
The court’s ruling, and the subsequent preparation to suspend primaries, is interpreted by some as a signal that it’s permissible to discriminate against certain racial groups, as long as it’s done in a way that isn’t overtly obvious. The argument is that if district maps consistently disadvantage Black voters, it can be dismissed as a mere “coincidence,” whereas actively designing maps to ensure racial equity, even if it benefits historically discriminated groups, is deemed problematic by the courts. This is being contrasted with the historical context of Louisiana’s past attempts to suppress Black political power, suggesting a continuity of tactics, albeit presented with a veneer of plausible deniability.
The implications of this situation are viewed as far-reaching, with some going as far as to label the Republican party as fascist and a threat to democracy itself. The notion that “democracy is cancelled” and that the last free and fair election might have already occurred is a recurring theme. There’s a palpable sense of disillusionment and a warning that once fascism takes root, it is exceptionally difficult to dislodge. The very act of suspending an election to create a less fair electoral landscape is seen as fundamentally undemocratic.
Furthermore, there’s speculation about the specific goals behind suspending the primaries. Questions are being raised about whether this is an attempt to eliminate one or both of the existing Democratic-held districts, or if there’s a strategic calculation to leave one as a “vote sink.” The absence of Louisiana elections is even being linked to potentially preventing future confirmations of election results, such as those related to January 6th, by a Democratic majority.
Despite the current circumstances, some hold out hope that this maneuver could backfire. There’s a suggestion that Republican supporters might experience a lack of enthusiasm to vote in the midterms, especially if polling shows Democrats with a significant lead. The appearance of key political figures is also being scrutinized, with descriptions of them as smug and out of touch. The phrase “ratfuck the election” captures a sentiment of deliberate manipulation and sabotage of the electoral process.
The responsibility for the current political timeline is being placed not only on those who voted but also on eligible voters who chose not to participate, with a particularly strong condemnation for those who abstained from voting in the 2024 elections. The core issue, as perceived by many, is that voting is no longer about reflecting the will of the people but has devolved into a contest of “winning” and manipulating numbers, diminishing the value of individual voters.
There’s a deep concern about the potential for a domino effect, with Louisiana serving as a precursor to similar actions at the federal level. The idea of a “full-blown single party” system, where minority rule is prevalent, is a recurring fear. This leads to discussions about how history will judge the fall of the United States, with some believing the end has already arrived but hasn’t been fully recognized or accepted by the majority.
The sentiment that these events are unprecedented in their severity, yet eerily familiar to historical accounts leading up to civil unrest or war, is strong. The efficacy of traditional forms of protest, like picket signs, is being questioned in the face of what’s perceived as a systemic dismantling of democracy. The pushback against ranked-choice voting is also being seen as part of this larger strategy to control electoral outcomes. Calls for significant action, such as a general strike, are emerging from this frustration.
Ultimately, the message is one of profound disappointment and anger towards those who have voted for policies and leaders perceived as destructive to the democratic fabric of the nation. There’s a strong belief that if conservatives become convinced they cannot win democratically, they will abandon democracy itself. The fundamental question being posed is how suspending an election to make it less fair can possibly be considered democratic. The fear is that elections are no longer a measure of popular will but are being decided by judges and political maneuvering, leading to the conclusion that democracy in the USA is effectively dead.