Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Jindal: Never Vetted for VP

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. Photo by Pat Semansky/Getty Images

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who has emerged as one of the hottest names in national Republican circles since John McCain's defeat last week, was never vetted as a vice presidential pick, according to sources close to the Pelican State chief executive.

Jindal was approached by McCain forces to gauge his interest in the vice presidency and told them he was not interested in being vetted due to his desire to continue on with his current job, to which he was elected just one year ago.

While the official reason that Jindal took his name out of contention was his lack of a desire to leave the Louisiana governorship, there was also real trepidation within his political inner circle that Jindal might wind up as the pick -- McCain was attracted to his comprehensive health-care knowledge -- and be caught up in what they believed to be a less-than-stellar campaign that could pin a loss on Jindal without much ability to change or control the direction of the contest.

Some McCain insiders fretted privately that Jindal was too young -- 37 -- and too inexperienced (he had been a congressman since 2004 and was elected governor in 2007) to provide a stark enough contrast with Barack Obama. Of course, experience wound up being a less important factor than many people thought as McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

The end result -- intentional or not -- is that Jindal, should he run in 2012, will be free of any taint of President George W. Bush or McCain.

Jindal's future as a possible presidential candidate will be on display Nov. 22 when he visits Iowa to speak at a dinner for the Iowa Family Policy Center. He is also expected to stop in Cedar Rapids to view flooding damage.

Will he run? That remains to be seen. But in an interview with the David Broder of the Washington Post for the Dean's Sunday column, Jindal certainly sounded like a candidate.

"To succeed," Jindal told Broder, "we have to be the party of change, we have to root out corruption in our own ranks and we have to be the party of solutions."

That sounds suspiciously like the foundation of a national platform centered around reform, no? We have said for months -- keep an eye on Jindal. He is a comer.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 10, 2008; 11:18 AM ET
Categories:  Republican Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: FixCam Week in Preview: The Cabinet Parlor Game
Next: Dean To Step Down as DNC Chair


If this is accurate, Jindal is a shrewd politician. Any Republican would be wise to wait until after the party realigns itself. With Faux News and hate radio doing their thing, any realignment towards the middle won't take place in time for 2012, either but it won't hurt him to get his name out there.

Posted by: veeve | November 12, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Because Jindal wasn't vetted doesn't mean he wasn't considered. Sarah Palin wasn't vetted either.

Posted by: pmyesmar | November 11, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

ARMPEG said...jasperjava 04:30 PM falsely injects the race card when he/she makes the rediculous [sic] claim that when conservatives use the alleged code words 'terrorist' and 'socialist', that it's just used for the 'n' word...
Barack Obama stayed in [a] vile racist "church?" because he was, and probably still is, a racist white and America--hater"


Boy, Armpeg, talk about falsely playing the race card!

I dare you to show evidence, outside of Obama's attendance at this church, that Obama is a racist white- and America-hater.

I'll wait.

Then you are making as huge a ridiculous assumption as anyone else.

I know you WISH it were true that Obama hates whites and hates America, because that would validate your narrow-minded beliefs (based on slander, lies and hype spread by the McCain campaign and GOP, I might add) and you would then be able to say 'told you so' but unfortunately for you, that's not the case.

Now - why don't we all sit back and shut up and let the man prove his mettle by governing this country. Until then, you're making asinine assumptions.

Posted by: JMGinPDX | November 11, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Jindal is lucky , he could have been on the receiving end of the McCain campaign managers rage.

Posted by: savage24 | November 11, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

"The end result -- intentional or not -- is that Jindal, should he run in 2012, will be free of any taint of President George W. Bush or McCain."

Really? So he opposed invading Iraq, did he?

No? Then I'll be the judge of whether he's free of Bush/McCain taint.

Every time Chris Cillizza lets his opinion creep in, he ends up sounding like a Republican operative.

Posted by: kenonwenu | November 11, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

In a Primary they will go after Jindal's race and elitism etc. It will take him 2-3 attempts in a Republican Primary to win and even that is bit of a stretch. it will take time before people are comfortable with him.

His chance of being elected ironically based on Obama doing well, so all Republicans think they need another Obama. IF that is the case Jindal will have to wait another 12 years. If Obama fails why would the Republicans risk putting their own brown man.

In a Presidential Election, the Democrats are going to smear Jindal and call him an Uncle Tom and hypocrite. His immigration stances will drive Latino and other immigrant voters away. He will lose 8-9% of the white vote in the South if he was facing a white Democrat. That is the percentage that Obama lost in Southern White votes over Kerry. That means in race against a white Democrat he could lose by a landslide. In short he has the worst of both worlds.

Posted by: bismarck88 | November 11, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey reference to your question as to "[w]ho in their right mind will vote a candidate from a state that's so backward and pathetic?" ... um, some dummies voted for CLINTON TWICE!!! Have you ever been to arkansas? Pretty, yes; a bastion of sophistication & progressiveness: BIG FAT NO!

I think Jindal has a far better chance of running & succeeding in 2012 than most people are willing to give him credit for. The fact that he appears to be doing wonders for the state of Louisiana in comparison to Blanco speaks volumes.

I don't believe for a minute Republicans are weary of color. If one lives & breathes conservatism & promotes conservative values without distorting it, one has a chance to win over the party. Remember, it was the Republican Party that was founded upon the premise of liberty for all - it was the party of abolitionists, the party that was founded to fight the Southern Democrats who espoused slave ownership, segregation, Jim Crow laws, etc.
Personally, I'd like to see a Jindal/Palin ticket for 2012. I think that would bring in the conservative base in droves. It certainly would me. In Palin you have a star in the making. In Jindal, you have a back-to-basics conservative, no-nonsense. If BHO can have "color blind" but stupid Republicans vote for him, I don't see why Jindal couldn't get real conservatives excited about 2012.

Posted by: TXhubb | November 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

jasperjava 04:30 PM falsely injects the race card when he/she makes the rediculous claim that when conservatives use the alleged code words 'terrorist' and 'socialist', that it's just used for the 'n' word. The true and proven racists in this election where the black voters who supported and voted for a black candidate with zero experience over a white candidate with over 30 years of experience by a margin of 95% to 5%. They voted for their tribal member even though Barack Obama was a over 20 year member and supporter of a racist religious cult-- laughably called 'church'--that was teaching and preaching racial anti--white hatred and hatred for America in their vile racist sermons. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that anyone that supports and stays in a "church?" like that for over 20 years, is a true believer in what's being taught and what was being said. Barack Obama stayed in this vile racist "church?" because he was, and probably still is, a racist white and America--hater, and this is what the black voters helped elect by voting for him by a 95-5 percent margin. It's blacks who are the true and PROVEN racists, and not conservatives (or even liberal whites) who voted roughly by a 50-50 percent margin for a black candidate and a white candidate.

Posted by: armpeg | November 11, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

You say Jindal won in a decisively "red" state. The more accurate statement is Jindal won on a wave of anger over government corruption and incompetence related to the state's Hurricane Katrina "Road Home" recovery program and ICF International.

IFC, paid to manage the rebuilding grant program, proved so incompetent the state legislators unanimously passed a resolution calling for the removal of IFC in December 2006. The IFC scandal was huge: IFC so mismanage the grant application processes, by 2007, only 250 of more than 100,000 grant applications had been approved. Without grant money, homeowners could not rebuild.

Anger turned to outrage when IFC announced errors in their property appraisal processes, resulting in overpayment of millions in grant money to homeowners.

Subsequently, IFC demanded repayment of tens of thousands of dollars--money already paid to contractors for rebuilding--from homeowners. By this time, the wave of public anger over a multitude of blotched recovery efforts was so intense, then democrat Gov. Kathleen Blanco announced she would not to run for re-election.

Despite the IFC scandals, Blanco's administration and other state officials quietly raised ICF International compensation to more than $915 million dollars. Needless to say, when this little tidbit was reported, the voters went crazy. Cries of government corruption and incompetent consumed the news and campaigns.

During all of this, Jindal was busy campaigning for Governor. Jindal was already a familiar name as Blanco beat him 2003. When given the choice in 2003 between a white democrat woman and an Indian republican, conservatives voted for the democrat woman (52%). However, post Hurricane Katrina, the angry and desperate residents decided to go with Jindal (who campaigned on a strong government accountability and reform platform).

Jindal won handily, but he does not enjoy overwhelming or unconditional support in Louisiana. Indeed, a year into his term, voters initiated a recall effort against Jindal and five legislators over pay raises.

Jindal made a campaign promise to stop legislator pay raises; however, when legislators passed a bill to increase their wages, Jindal announced his intention to sign the bill. Within days of the announcement, voters initiated a recall. Three days later, Jindal said he was wrong, apologized to the voters, and promised to vetoed the pay raises. The voters then dropped the recall effort.

Bottom line: Jindal's win is directly related to a regional disaster; GOP support is tentative and conditional at best.

As a former Texan, with family and friends still in Texas, I can tell you Jindal won't play in Texas.

Posted by: jandcgall1 | November 11, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Regarding Gov. Jindal and the "third-world" Louisiana, to Walter49, thank you so much for your critique of my "third-world" state. How very nice to be appreciated by my fellow countrymen, espeically when we contribute so much to their being able to drive their cars and heat their homes. My state has been under Democrat leadership for the past 70 years, other than 8 years from Gov. Foster, who was a Democrat turned Republican so he could run for office. We have had such stellar leadership such as past Gov. Edwin Edwards, Democrat, now in a Federal Peniteniary along with his son for bribing people for thousands of dollars in order for them to win gambling licenses.

It was a Democrat governor, Saint Kathleen Blanco, who demonstrated a dear caught in the headlights type leadership for Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, a Democrat Mayor, Ray "Chocolate City" Nagin who could not make decisions for beans. The Democrat party was able to organize buses galore in New Orleans to bus people to vote for Mary Landrieu for Senator, but somehow couldn't organize diddly to bus people out of harm's way before Hurricane Katrina. Thousands of school buses just floated around and are now scrap metal. Blanco and Nagin had ample warning to evacuate the city and both of them were so afraid that Pres. Bush was going to steal something away from them that they thumbed their noses at his offer of help before the Hurricane. The Governor and the Mayor ultimately were responsible for evacuation of our state, not FEMA. FEMA was backup, always has been backup.

Gov. Jindal has done more for Louisiana in less than a year than cheating, thieving Edwards ever did and more than Blanco did in her pitiful 4 years.

Out Democrat politicians have sold Louisiana down the river for over a half century, and now we have a governor who, along with the people, have said enough is enough. Gov. Jindal won the election in the first primary by 53 percent of the vote--there was no run-off. He has a clear mandate, and people like Walter49 can have their intolerant opinions and go to blazes. Just stay out of Louisiana, please because we have enough Democrats here to combat.


Posted by: turnerj2 | November 11, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

The GOP better not plan on running any more fundamentalist knucklewalkers.

Brains are back. Stupidity done gone outa fashion.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | November 10, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Bobby Jindal was a leading proponent of the recent legislation opening the door to the teaching of creation science in Louisiana public school science classrooms. He used the cynical and false rationale of "As a parent, I want [children] to be presented with the best thinking. I don't want any facts or theories or explanations to be withheld from them because of political correctness. The way we are going to have smart and intelligent kids is exposing them to the very best science." (Science magazine, 20 June 2008). This is a deep distortion of all of modern biology -- the most fundamental discovery in the history of the science is not "political correctness," and the equating of poor with solid interpretations of objective data does not produce smart and intelligent kids.

Any supporter of creationism as a scientifically valid theory to be taught in science classes (as opposed to a religious teaching, which of course is every parent's right to pass on to their children) will be willing to distort any other scientific data for ideological or political reasons. If Bobby Jindal holds national office, the Republican war on science will be renewed and redoubled.

This man is unfit to hold any office in which he has responsibility for scientific research or K-12 education, including the one he holds now.

Posted by: CharlesHoogstraten | November 10, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

"There is no hope that a non-white person could win the GOP primary. Has anyone not seen and heard the type of people who inhabit the Republican Party?"

He won very decisively in Louisiana, a pretty red state. Don't make the mistake of thinking all racism is equal. Blacks and Indians don't come across as the same thing.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 10, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Jindal started his career in LA politics as the head of our state health department, and saved it. We have socialized medicine available here, and it would have been bankrupt if Gov. Jindal hadn't fixed it. The only thing he could have done better is end it, but that's another story. He did such a good job here that Pres. Bush brought him to Washington in his first term to help with some of the federal stuff before he ran for Gov. the first time.
That's his greatest strength; he's a policy wank with some personality. He is definately not fluff-he is a scholar and a problem sovler. He is a boy genius; we are waiting here to see if he fulfills his potential and promise.

Posted by: jimwilljr | November 10, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

ROMNEY/HUCKABEE would have won this year.

The Repubs lost it when they nominated McCain.

Romney and Huckabee, both Governors, executives, outside the damage done by Repubs in Washington, both great on TV and in debates, both married to their HS sweethearts.

I'm over the moon happy with Barack Obama, but it is not true that no Repub would have been able to win this time.

Posted by: katalina911 | November 10, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Jindal is a rising star in the Republican party. But whether he runs in 2012 probably depends on Obama's approval rating in 2012. If obama is still popular I believe he will wait for 2016.. remember he will only be 41 in 2012 so waiting 8 years no big deal. If he waits I think Romney is best hope for Repubs in 2012 especally if economy still in trouble.

Posted by: sovine08 | November 10, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Have any of you been to Louisiana? I went there a couple of weeks ago ad frankly, I was totally shocked. It looks like a third world country, maybe worse. Who in their right mind will vote a candidate from a state that's so backward and pathetic?

Posted by: walton49 | November 10, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

There is no hope that a non-white person could win the GOP primary. Has anyone not seen and heard the type of people who inhabit the Republican Party? Those who attended the McCain/Palin rallies? Of course, they disguise their racism by throwing out code words like "terrorist" and "socialist", but that's just because they know they can't use the "n" word in polite company anymore.

On the other hand, the GOP really DOES need an exorcist, to cast out the racist demons in their midst.

Posted by: jasperjava | November 10, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Piyush Jindal is a religious fundamentalist wing-nut, a NEO-CON apologist, believes in, participated in, and wrote about his experience CONDUCTING AN EXORCISM!

What next? Is Linda Blair gonna be his VP choice?

...And why is Piyush ashamed of his Indian name?

Barack Obama has the brains, and confidence to use HIS REAL name.

I actually hope Mr. Jindal runs... An ashamed, wingnut, fundamentalist-exorcist is EXACTLY the kind of nut-job the republicans love to put out there...and will lose in another landslide election.

Posted by: onestring | November 10, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

First things first.
Will Bobby Jindal change his views to win over the GOP primary? Remember the pre-primary independent, centrist, maverick, reformist, fiscally conservative McCain? The primary fight forced him in to a Bush-light. I don't see how Jindal can win primary without sacrificing all his good qualities. The problem is the nature of GOP - not the candidates.

Posted by: jaque | November 10, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

AB68 writes
"Jindal converted to Christianity from Hinduism... so don't expect many Indian-Amercians to back him."

Gee, without that voting bloc, he surely doesn't have a chance...

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 10, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Jindal wasn't vetted? Well, neither was Sarah Palin! What's your point. And as for Jindal being a "comer," I think you have clearly missed how damaged the GOP brand is and how loony this particular member is. Exorcisisms anyone? Plus, Chris, let's be honest your last GOP crush was on Michael Steele and how well did that work out for you?

Posted by: havok26 | November 10, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Jindal converted to Christianity from Hinduism... so don't expect many Indian-Amercians to back him. That being said, can you imagine how the Palin camp will come hard with innuendo and invoke the "exotic" label to Jindal in the Republican primaries?!! That'll be just great! And watch out for Jindal, Romney, Huckabee et al., come hard on Palin and her associations with AIP (Alaska Independence Party).... the Republic Primaries are gonna be great!!! Get your popcorn started early.

Posted by: AB68 | November 10, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Jindal is the anti-Palin in that he's smart, highly educated at the best schools, experience in health care, etc, etc. If Louisiana conservatives voted for him, then his race and ethnicity shouldn't be that much of a barrier to conservatives elsewhere in the country. However, he has some rather controversial Catholic views and experiences. Seances and exorcisms(and not of the incorrectly attributed Nancy Reagan and Hillary Clinton type) aren't going to go down well with your average American voter.

Posted by: jaysit | November 10, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

So what you're saying is that Jindal was too smart to book passage on the Titanic? Unlike Palin, Jindal didn't need a run at the VP to raise his profile and become nationally known. He is known to the party and can get invitations to the party events he wants. Something Palin can do now, but probably not before.

The question is will he be smart enough to run and lose the Republican nomination in 2012? Unlike running for and losing the Democratic nomination, there is an upside to running for and losing the Republican nomination. That then sets him up for running and winning a 2016 nomination when there will be no incumbent Democrat. While it is possible the Obama administration will crash and burn, historically you have to assume the country will be coming out of recession just in time for a year or two of growth before the 2012 elections. Also, how likely is it the Republicans will have their house in order in only four years? Any Republican serious about the Presidency needs to watch the next two years closely, but really plan for a 2016 run.

Posted by: caribis | November 10, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

I am sure Obama's friends are keeping a close eye on this guy as well they should.
Oxford grad, state senator, a popular governor who showed strong leadership with the last hurricane, and a strong conservative (obviously the country still leans towards the right with the gay rights defeats this election.)

I just hope the media will be more fair and balanced.

Posted by: ca67klein | November 10, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Did McCain vet anybody for VP? Or did he just play eanie, meanie, minie, moe?

Posted by: QuietFire | November 10, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Bobby Jindal, I'm sure would not have run with John McCain under any circumstances because Bobby Jindal is not a John McCain Republican loose-canon maverick. When the Democratic Party--controlled MSM loves any Republican (as they once loved McCain before he ran against their guy Obama) then you know that he's no Ronald Reagan. Jindal aligning himself with McCain would have tarred him with the same brush politically in any future run for higher office. McCain lost because he wasn't a true conservative or a true Republican, having a history of working with both sides even against his own party and president. Conservative Republicans didn't lose this election because McCain wasn't a conservative Republican exept on a few issues. McCain lost because of voters like me who only voted for him while holding our noses because he was the lesser of the two evils. With a Socialist Barack Obama in office implementing his big-government Marxist ideas--which basically are the old USSR's "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs"--conservative candidates like Bobby Jindel will be looking real good to the American people in a few years from now.

Posted by: armpeg | November 10, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

One way of looking at the 2008 campaign was that the Evangelical's had a hammer-lock on the Republican party - evidence the whole Sarah Palin phenomena.

You think a Jindal/Palin ticket would fare any better than the McCain/Palin ticket?

Given the picture above, compared to pictures of the Republican convention, Jindal is looking more like a RINO (Republican in name only) one of those 'anti-American' people that 'hate America' than a 'real America' kinda guy.

With any luck the 2008 election will end the 9/11 confusion of 'Republican' for 'American', but I'm not convinced. White people don't give up power that easily.

Posted by: DonJasper | November 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"No way for Jindal in 2012. If Obama is doing well, then Jindal would be tilting a windmills. If he's in trouble, expect heavy-hitters like Romney to suck up all the $$$. Maybe he would get a VP nod."

Jindal might easily be seen as a heavy hitter in 2012. The guy is near the top of pretty much every single Presidential list for 2012. He doesn't have great name recognition, but he isn't an unknown either. Obama has really lowered the bar in terms of expectations for experience. Four years as governor could really carry some political clout.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland writes
"If he has any interest in actually winning the presidency, he would wait until 2016."

I tend to agree. Though given bondosan's post immediately prior to yours, I reserve the right to reassess his prospects following the 2010 midterms.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 10, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

No way for Jindal in 2012. If Obama is doing well, then Jindal would be tilting a windmills. If he's in trouble, expect heavy-hitters like Romney to suck up all the $$$. Maybe he would get a VP nod.

If he has any interest in actually winning the presidency, he would wait until 2016. Jindal announce while still a Governor, BHO would be on the way out, and Jindal could be looking like a center-right version of Obama. And in 2016, he would STILL be younger than Obama is now.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | November 10, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, Chris, but I had to pull this from the archive:

"Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (D) -- Obama will run for president, just not in 2008. With a bevy of his new Senate colleagues likely to run, he will take a pass on the next race with an eye toward a national bid in 2012 or 2016. Remember people, he is only 44 years old."

--The Fix, Nov. 11, 2005, posted at 5:00pm

Wow. What a difference three years can make!

Posted by: Bondosan | November 10, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

bradcpa writes
"This is all very interesting but did you do something like this on Barrack in 2004? I would love to review the outlook for 2008 back in 2004."

Good questions. According to the archives (see menu on your left) The Fix started in fall 2005. While your question is not answered, there are some amusing posts from his first couple weeks blogging. For instance: "Reynolds: 2006 is not 1994." Whoops.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 10, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Jindal really looks like a comer to me and boy he should be glad he was not the VP pick. I think Jindal may not want to make a run in 2004 depending on

1. The success the Obama administration has (and I expect a repeat of 1984),
2. The not so civil war in the Republican Party (I would not run if the Limbaugh party of true believers is running things)
3. How things go in Louisiana (We have all seen things go south before)

I do wish Jindal well and hope he will lead the GOP from the wilderness of extremism and failed ideas,

Posted by: bradcpa | November 10, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

This is all very interesting but did you do something like this on Barrack in 2004? I would love to review the outlook for 2008 back in 2004.

Posted by: bradcpa | November 10, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

What part of Hail-Mary do you guys not understand? McCain had to go long, and no one even came close. Gov. Jindal, bless his heart, would have been anything but.

Posted by: smartexp | November 10, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

McCain's laughable campaign needed a doctor not an exorcist....

Posted by: AlexP1 | November 10, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Neither was Palin. :-)

Posted by: nrudy | November 10, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I notice that Al Franken has cut Sen. Coleman's lead to 204 votes now. Anyone have any information on whether he'll pass Coleman in the vote total before the official recount?

Posted by: jdunph1 | November 10, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

2012 will be quite a year for the Republicans: Romney, Palin, Huckabee, Jindal...and maybe Gingrich (according to Bob Novak).

Something tells me Obama will be racking up even better numbers than he did this time around.

Posted by: Bondosan | November 10, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Neither was Palin...

Posted by: sjxylib | November 10, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

I think a snowball has a better chance in hell..... (although I would like to hope otherwise.) What's left of the Republican party after two disastrous election cycles would no sooner vote for Jindal than Obama. The GOP remains primarily a party of white old men who would not consider voting for Jindal when they have Huckabee, Romney, etc to choose from. Or Palin for that matter (who they would probably support over Jindal.)

Jindal is certainly a rising star but the whispering campaigns that Republicans are so fond of may trip him up for any near-term presidential run

Posted by: RickJ | November 10, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I keep telling people he'd better first worry about his own re-election here before testing the waters for national office. He is popular, and this is a conservative state. But, if he's going to overtly lie to Louisianans by telling them he's going to run for governor in 2011 and fulfill his term, then there will be a backlash.
Who ever thought George Allen could lose his race when running for president? Of course with the dynamics of the presidential race in this era he's going to have to start running long before his re-election campaign. Indeed he already is as he'll already be in Iowa in a few weeks.

Posted by: jdunph1 | November 10, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

KansasDem wins the one-liner award.

Jindal does bear watching; he has his work cut out for him in LA. Given that its entirely unclear how the GOP will react to the election results as a party, it seems far too soon to guess as to whom might be viable candidates in four years. Will the religious right retrain more control than their relative size among the electorate? Will moderates take over & focus on practical results rather than divisive social issues? Jindal might try to play both sides of that coin - as does Gov Pawlenty, of MN.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 10, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Jindal's the real deal -- light years better than Palin, but with all the right conservative credentials. You better believe the Democrats will be watching him.

Posted by: WaitingForGodot | November 10, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Smart move by Gov. Jindal.

The real question is was anyone actually vetted?

Posted by: KansasDem | November 10, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

What has Jindal written or said about health care? Any links would be appreciated.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | November 10, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company