Missing its most important ingredient, the televised Louisiana gubernatorial debate sponsored by media outlets and interest groups provided few useful glimpses into the contest.

Republican Atty. Gen. Jeff Landry, the inarguable front runner, didn’t participate over concerns the Urban League as a sponsor which has demonstrated outright hostility to some actions he has taken in his job. Five others lined up: Democrat former cabinet member Shawn Wilson who is the only candidate within shouting distance on Landry in the polls, independent lawyer Hunter Lundy, and Republicans state Sen. Sharon Hewitt, Treas. John Schroder, and former gubernatorial assistant Stephen Waguespack.

Without Landry, it’s pointless to compare and contrast candidate issue preferences uttered. Instead, winners and losers in certain aspects will be described.

Best performance: Waguespack. A former Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal adviser, he came off as a paler and slightly-slower speaking version of his old boss, meaning he packed a lot of information into making salient and convincing points.

Least impressive: Lundy. Maybe he’s good in court, but not so much on the political stage. He came off as, even for a politician, making overly simplistic and broad statements, unaware that viewers will catch that his promising so much stuff means quite a bit higher taxation levels than he’s willing to admit.

Most botched issue: teacher pay increases. All pledged this, which at the level would cost about $200 million annually, but the state faces starting in fiscal year 2025 the headwind of deficits approaching $500 million yearly. Where will the money come to pay for this, especially as the Republicans essentially argued for no net tax increases, including not renewing the 2016/18 sales tax hike of 0.45 percent?

Least credible answer: Wilson came off fairly polished, but anybody knowing his history knows he has no credibility in saying he wouldn’t back a gasoline tax hike after he stumped for one for the past few years.

Biggest mistake: Schroder, after over more than one answer touting the need for a better business climate, then torpedoed his credibility when he said a minimum wage hike that destroys jobs and impairs commerce was in order.

Best turnaround: Perhaps the most ridiculous question of the night (see below) asked the candidate’s response to the NAACP’s declaring a fatwa on Louisiana’s tourism industry, warning visitors away, after the Legislature – overriding Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards’ veto – enacted a law protecting children from irreversible and often harmful medical interventions to produce a sex change, often the product of transitory feelings of immature children bolstered by adult ideologues. The Republican candidates batted that away, Hewitt the most effectively, in emphasizing the law was to protect children and didn’t deal with adults who for whatever reason wanted to alter surgically or chemically their sex.

Most disappointing: Differing from all the others, Wilson, who appeared comfortable in placing blame for the fatwa on the Legislature rather than leftist ideologues, backed expanding legal abortion in describing it as a choice to be decided among the unborn’s mother, her family, and medical confidants. Conspicuously absent from that was consideration of the life that an abortion would kill, which says much about his lack of character.

Biggest tool: That wasn’t earned by any participant, but generally by the organizers who paraded several loaded, if not stupid, questions such as about the fatwa, and specifically WWL-TV New Orleans reporter Eric Paulsen, who not only shilled for these but also at times felt compelled to add his own commentary that in one instance lasted longer than any candidate was given to answer it.

This week another debate, which Landry will attend, will occur. It’s unlikely to be as meaningless as this one, yet also not likely to be too much more informative.