re: Jeremy Alford: (Louisiana) Democrats rally around new personalities

quote:

---

Sentrius

---

quote:

---

That strategy is how Clay Schexnayder got the Speakership over the conservative candidate backed by a majority of the GOP caucus.

---

The Strategy that won Clay Schexnayder the Speakership was when both candidates were asked in negotiations whether they'd name 3 replacement/compromise candidates from the Republican side, Clay did. Sherman Mack said he'd refuse to drop out, wouldn't name replacements and then said he'd go find votes on the other side of the aisle in order to get to 53.

Schexnayder voted 100% of the time with LABI. He offered to support others for Speaker on his own side of the aisle. Mack refused, said he'd go find Democratic votes, and that ultimately cost him in the grand scheme of things.

Would he have prevailed if he gave names of compromise candidates? Perhaps not. But when he said he'd cross the aisle, the events that transpired from there proved his bid's downfall.

But because Schexnayder wasn't Jeff Landry's boy toy you obviously hate him. It's ironic that you act like the guy that lost the Speakership didn't admit to the caucus that he'd go across the aisle to find the votes to run the House. You want hyperpartisanship. You're using an example that completely refutes what you want in the House and at the Legislature. You're literally using the example that proves-yet again-you don't know what you're talking about.

Schexnayder didn't win the Speakership. He just refused to lose it the way that Mack did.

Don't let the truth about how the Speakership shook out get in the way of your narrative.