Ex-Klan Leader in Louisiana Runoff : Primary: David Duke will face former Gov. Edwin Edwards, who led in balloting. Incumbent Buddy Roemer finishes third in the close gubernatorial election.

With a strong showing in Saturday’s Louisiana gubernatorial primary, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke gained a chance to compete in a runoff against former Democratic Gov. Edwin W. Edwards. Incumbent Republican Gov. Buddy Roemer finished third.

Edwards led the field of 12, including U.S. Rep. Clyde C. Holloway, the endorsed choice of the state Republican Party. Since none of the candidates got 50% of the vote Saturday, the top two voter-getters--Edwards and Duke, a Republican--will compete in a Nov. 16 runoff.

With 90% of precincts reporting, Edwards led with 462,549 votes, or 33%, Duke had 438,382 votes, or 32%, and Roemer trailed with 372,526 votes, or 27%.

“It appears that Duke and I will be in the runoff,” Edwards told his campaign workers about 11 p.m. in New Orleans, three hours after the polls closed.

“I feel wonderful,” Duke declared. “I feel very blessed by Christ, and I’m looking forward to making some real changes in Louisiana.”

“The people spoke,” Roemer told his supporters. “They said: ‘Buddy, thanks, but you didn’t do enough.’ And that’s fair.”

Duke’s success Saturday represented dramatic progress for the former klan leader, who first gained elective office only two years ago when he shook up Louisiana politics and embarrassed the state and national GOP by winning a legislative seat as a Republican. Then last year, he made a surprisingly strong bid against J. Bennett Johnston’s U.S. Senate seat, winning 44% of the total vote and 60% of the white vote against the Democrat.

Outrageous behavior has long been common to Louisiana politics. But Duke’s candidacy for the state’s highest office interjected an ominous new note to the local scene. His background as a klan wizard and American Nazi Party sympathizer alarmed his foes and disturbed even some of his supporters.

But his strong finish Saturday is likely to make it easier for him to gain acceptance in the future, not only in this state but elsewhere in the country. Politicians and analysts here point out that Duke made an abortive third party bid for the White House in 1988 and predict he intends to take advantage of his success by renewing his presidential candidacy, perhaps challenging President Bush in next spring’s Southern GOP primaries.

Bush had campaigned in the state for Roemer.

In the gubernatorial campaign, the 41-year-old Duke’s attacks on welfare cheating and bureaucratic excesses appeared to find a receptive audience because of the state’s stagnant economy. The prolonged slump, which drained the state treasury, also soured voters on Duke’s chief rivals.

Edwards, 64, a three-term governor, was defeated in a bid for a fourth term in 1987 by Roemer, in part, because of the sudden end of the boom in energy prices, which had kept this state’s gas and oil industries thriving for years. But Roemer, 48, failed to bring about the full-blown return to prosperity for which many voters had hoped.

Though the economic slowdown created a state fiscal crisis that all the candidates lamented, critics claimed that none of them offered a specific plan for solving the budget dilemma.

During a televised debate earlier this month, Edwards entertained the audience by making faces while Roemer sought to answer a question on tax policy.

“It’s not funny, governor; you left us in a mess in this state,” snapped Roemer. He pointed with pride to his own success in balancing the budget during his tenure. But Edwards claimed that Roemer had achieved fiscal equilibrium by relying on accounting tricks. For his part he promised to deal with the deficit by calling a constitutional convention to consider new taxes.

Duke vowed not to raise taxes, pledging instead to lick the budget problem by cutting the state work force through attrition. He contended that state revenues would increase if only the government eased the regulations and lowered the fees it imposed on business.

In the absence of substantive debate on the issues, the campaign focused on the efforts of candidates to get voters to forgive and forget the misbehavior and misjudgments that marred their past.

Duke argued during the campaign that his racist views have moderated with the years.

“I suggest to you that because of my past, that shows you can trust what I’m saying today,” he contended in a stump speech last month. “I’ve always stood up and said what I believed whether it was popular or not.”

Edwards also has something to live down--the stain on his reputation as a result of the federal racketeering charges brought against him during his third term as governor. Even though he was acquitted of the charges, he still resents Roemer’s use of the corruption issue in the 1987 campaign in which Roemer defeated Edwards.

Asked by a reporter before Saturday’s vote which of his two chief rivals he would prefer to face in a runoff election, Edwards said: “Duke would be easier, but I’d rather beat Roemer.”

As for Roemer, he also seeks personal vindication after a four-year term during which his constant battles with the Legislature, and his midterm decision to leave the Democratic Party for the GOP, often appeared to overshadow all else. As the campaign ended, he seemed embittered; “My greatest nightmare,” he said on the eve of the primary, “would be for us to have an election in which we would have to choose between David Duke and Edwin Edwards.”