"
Tea Party insurgent Chris McDaniel came tantalizingly close to knocking off Senator Thad Cochran in Mississippi’s Republican primary runoff last week, but a surge in black voter turnout saved the six-term incumbent’s bacon. Cochran’s election to a seventh term in November now seems a foregone conclusion, and boy, are a lot of conservatives mad."
“There is something a bit unusual about a Republican primary that’s decided by liberal Democrats,” McDaniel fumed on election night, slamming Cochran and the GOP establishment for “once again reaching across the aisle [and] abandoning the conservative movement.”
But whatever else the election outcome meant, Cochran’s “reaching across the aisle” made his victory a noteworthy instance of something that supposedly doesn’t and can’t happen in Mississippi even today: A white GOP politician sought support among Democrats, and particularly black Democrats. And far from being politically powerless, they tipped the election. (read more)
59 comments:
So Mississippi's general election just became a Democrat primary.
And here I'd been wondering if no longer answering phone calls from the GOP at home was a good idea.
Shit, I might as well just donate to Organizing For America and leave out the middle man.
I was thinking more along the lines of a silver lining... ie the recent Supreme court decision 'curtailing' the voting rights act.
Maybe Roberts was right?
Seriously, does the GOP really think that by making racist KKK associations to a GOP opponent they will gain any actual GOP voters?
Sounds to me like a huge swath, the more than 50% of actual Republican voters who voted against Cochrane will just stay home in November.
Does Thad think he can beat the (other) Democrat without those votes?
That's why I'm no longer voting.
Judges delete our votes.
Fraud deletes our votes.
Noncitizen voting deletes our votes.
Unelected bureaucrats delete our votes.
The tyrannical king President deletes Congress.
Fucking banana republic.
Pogo's a bitch.
Speaking of female doggies, I think this is real.
http://denver.craigslist.org/tlg/4538237049.html
WARNING: Not Safe For Home
Another thread killed. Bravo.
Meade knows in his little heart that McDaniel and all of the GOP are out to stop blacks from voting.
Stopping blacks from voting = lie
Cheating in a primary = karma is a bitch.
Vote Hillary!
The GOP Establishment is nailing its own coffin shut. Do the RINOs think Tea Party conservatives will vote for Cochran after having been smeared as racists by his campaign managers? The schvartzes sure as heck won't vote for him in November.
But Mississippi has national consequences for the GOP as well. By openly siding with the Left in Mississippi the GOP Establishment has made plain its hostility to Tea Party conservatives. And in so doing the GOP is FORCING the creation of a third party.
Schmucks like Meade may gloat but a huge open revolt against his death to America buddies is now guaranteed.
And being a friend to Lem = killing threads on Lem's blog.
Bravo!
Meade said...
Karma's a bitch.
I hope that Meade was referring to Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos." Otherwise, if there is a "racist" angle, we can refer to Meade's encouragement and financial backing of Crack, the textbook racebaiter.
TILT!
Chickelit - Great reminder re: Rush. Rush is so out of it, I doubt he has a clue that his stupid 'operation chaos' was a huge gift to the left.
When Thad cochran runs in Nov - does he think the power-mad corruptocrat establishment won't call HIM a racist?
McDaniel says he can find enough invalid votes (you can't vote in more than one primary in MS in the same election cycle) to throw out the election.
The fact 9 counties won't let him review their rolls would tend to bear that out.
Crack knows you're a racist too, Meade. You're skin in white - so - guilty as charged.
Cochran’s election to a seventh term in November now seems a foregone conclusion, and boy, are a lot of conservatives mad.
Really? Many of those who normally would vote for the Republican candidate are not just mad, but steaming pissed off mad, and will either not vote at all or vote for the Democrat. In addition all those black voters will just continue to vote Democrat come November anyway.....hardly a foregone conclusion.
I didn't vote in our latest Primary and probably will never vote again, with the exception of voting on occasional local issues and for local positions, like county supervisor or sheriff.
Okay, people, let's avoid the hairy palms. Cold showers, folks, cold showers.
The Boston Glob misread that story.
They won't vote for him during the ELECTION.
So all it is is a spoiler.
Who decided that primaries should be open to all voters anyway? It's the *party* voting for who will represent them. It ought to be necessary to at least *declare* for a party before voting for who the party is going to have run in their name.
If it's going to be a free for all, then it should just BE a free for all and just run a multi-candidate general election and be done with it.
It is just an example of the establishment protecting itself. The Tea Party needs to divorce itself from the Republican party. When the interests of the people diverge so much from a political party then a new one should form. That was how the Whigs died and the Republicans were born.
As I understand it good old Thad is just going to be there for a couple of years and then be succeeded by Haley Barbour's nephew or something.
New boss. Same as the old boss.
Here's a good one:
Eleanor H. Norton had this to say --
"Returned this weekend to Miss for Feedom Summer the week that Black Msians used the vote we fought for to save the seat of a whte senator."
She doesn't seem to be able to spell very well. I wonder if she knows what karma means. LOL
It's not anything to do with skin color. It's about manipulation, cheating, ideology, and propaganda for the purpose of power.
AllenS - heh.
She knows what Karma means. It was the name of that Jones woman in the movie with Dorothy Dandridge.
I'm w icepick on this one.
So this guy McDaniel is better on the issues than Cochran, from a righty perspective. Fine. But he's also a guy who did a local talk radio show for a while, presumably saying a variety of provocative things, as talk-radio guys do to get ratings. Things that wouldn't be hard to use to paint him as, shall we say, racially insensitive at best. It's guaranteed that the national Dems would've talked endlessly about any conceivable ties bw him and the Sons of Confederate Veterans or whatever, w. insinuations of Klan ties always a possibility. It may or may not be fair, but it's highly predictable.
It seems very likely that the national party worried about this guy being used like Todd Akin to smear all Repub candidates just enough to make elections in swing states unwinnable.
Is it really worth taking that chance in order to replace a regular conservative (whose main offense is voting to keep SNAP intact) w. a purer one?
Maybe. But I think the national party's concerns were defensible.
Chip S. said:
"But I think the national party's concerns were defensible."
No, they weren't. There was no anti-black commentary anywhere in McDaniel's history, talk show or otherwise. This was all about holding power in the hands of the people currently in charge.
Synova said:
"Who decided that primaries should be open to all voters anyway?"
The DOJ and federal courts who have had near total control of Mississippi's voting laws since passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
DBQ said:
"Many of those who normally would vote for the Republican candidate are not just mad, but steaming pissed off mad..."
Absolutely. Playing the race card against a fellow Republican when there is no race card to play unless you fabricate one is breaking all the rules. Had the general electorate known in advance about the collusion between Cochran and the Democrats he would have lost decisively.
"Maybe. But I think the national party's concerns were defensible.
Their concerns are defensible.
Their methods were not. So instead of trying to win the debate, they cheated. Now they're going to have to win without a good chunk of the electorate.
Thad, meet Mitt Romney.
Mitt, Thad.
That Karma thing is like economics in that by answering you must discern what comes next.
An economics professor who became a friend would ask, say, "what happens if you decide to lower a tariff?" The easy answer is the immediate response. But that is too easy. And this is why I despised multiple choice questions. How do you get an A in the course? There will be a secondary response, and then a further responding to however that secondary response washes out. What happens depends on a lot of things beyond the simple matter of tariff. The answer must draw on things well beyond the original question. Things that are not known and cannot be known nor measured.
The GOP shot themselves in the foot. One commenter here says they will not vote.
Another person may say, "That does it. No more money to GOP, it all goes directly to the candidate."
Another responder may say, "Those son of a bitches just showed their true colors. For now on we'll be expecting such garbage from them and counter in advance."
Another commenter may seek to change the underlying laws that allow such things and actually succeed, or not.
I thought this post was going to about the recount being blocked in certain districts by the same malevolent actors. There is still a chance to overturn the results due to illegal voting. It's not just a matter of Democrat blacks voting in Republican primaries, many votes are found to be invalid no matter the color, and the recount is blocked in several districts. That is clearly illegal. And second amendment hasn't been entirely erased. Yet.
See Battle of Athens (Tennessee) Mississippi is in just such a mood presently. Voters are mad as hell at GOP. Karma indeed. GOP, one way or another you're fucked.
Some of us, Chip, really don't see much of a difference between Republicans or Democrats.
Do you understand how far in debt both parties have put this country into?
I can't think of one redeeming quality either of them has to offer.
That is not good.
instead of trying to win the debate, they cheated.
You know that crossover voting is legal in MS, as long as someone doesn't vote in both parties' primaries. And I know about the estimates of the number of voters who violated that law. But that's cheating by individual voters, not the national Repubs.
Now they're going to have to win without a good chunk of the electorate.
I don't pretend to be an expert in MS politics, so I don't know how important the pissed-off Tea Partier Effect is likely to be. But Larry Sabato's reputation is based on his expertise at this sort of thing, and he just moved MS from "likely" to "safe" for Repubs.
So, despite Rabel's assertion, I think there's ample reason to think that the national party worried about McD being Akinized.
Nancy is looking for "opportunities" at the border…
As for Cochran and McDaniel, either one would have won the general. There are not enough Democrats in Mississippi to swing a Senate seat in the general. I suspect many Tea Partiers will stay home, but I would be shocked if so many did to jeopardize the outcome of the election.
Chip S., actually most of the crossover voting that occurred in the runoff is illegal even for voters who did not vote in the initial primary.
However, the section of the law which makes it illegal is based on the voter's intent to continue to support the candidate of the party they voted for in the runoff in the general election and is effectively unenforceable.
I'm all for a little civil disobedience when called for, but let's call an illegal scheme what it was. Unless you feel that the Black voters who crossed over and voted for Cochran intend to vote for him in the general.
I'd say that Cochran's chances of winning the general are about 60-40 and won't be shocked if he loses.
and won't be shocked if he loses
Incumbents losing is a good thing. It doesn't matter which party it is.
We need new blood on a continuing basis.
"You know that crossover voting is legal in MS"
The cheating was by doing the KKK fliers and getting non-GOPers who will never vote for the GOP to vote.
I didn't say it was illegal, but cheating. And lying. Totally legal.
And so the MS seat is safe for a RINO. Big deal.
Funny thing -- both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are okay with the Cochran victory.
Maybe because they're keeping their eyes on the prize of winning back the Senate in November?
Things that are not known and cannot be known nor measured.
Maybe because they're keeping their eyes on the prize of winning back the Senate in November?
Maybe the voters don't see it as such a "prize" when the Republicans are just as bad....NO they are WORSE.... than the Democrats in the way that they just kicked their conservative base in the teeth. You expect your opposition to pull out all the stops and play dirty. You sort of expect that when you are on the same team that there would be a level of respect for each other. Not in this case.
I don't know about the rest of you people, but when someone does me wrong, plays dirty tricks on me, calls me names and implies wrongly that I am a racist or other derogatory term.....I do not forgive and I do not forget. I will get even eventually.
When you can't tell the difference in actions between the two parties....what is the point of voting for any of them when they are all the same.
§ 23-15-575. Participation in primary election.
No person shall be eligible to participate in any primary election unless he intends to support the nominations made in the primary in which he participates.
Sounds unenforceable, Rabel. How are they going to prove that the person won't change their mind?
And that law sounds like total crap, anyway. If I vote in a primary in which the guy I support loses, who's to say that I can't prefer the opponent to the primary winner in the general? After all, it's not the guy I voted for. I might very well hate him more than someone from the opposite party.
See? It's this insistence on adherence to party politics that's screwing you guys up. Instead just go to multi-party, alternative voting systems. Ranked voting, even. For God's sake! Whatever it takes to get you unstuck out of the damn binary. It's screwing with your minds.
R&B --
If I remember correctly, you can't vote in MS in two primaries, in the same election cycle.
I think that's where the illegal stuff comes into play.
I'd think the way to prevent that would be to restrict the primaries to primary-eligible voters, which would be voters with a card identifying them with the party they registered with. Since the state's privy to that information, they make sure the registration is only to one party in that cycle.
I'd think the way to prevent that would be to restrict the primaries to primary-eligible voters, which would be voters with a card identifying them with the party they registered with. Since the state's privy to that information, they make sure the registration is only to one party in that cycle.
California had "closed" primaries until 1996 when Prop 198 established an "open" primary system. SCOTUS overturned this in 2000 or so, and a "modified open" primary system was enforced. Registered "non-affiliated" voters may vote for either or any party, but registered Dems can't vote for Republicans and vice versa.
You don't even have to do that, R@B. When you vote in a primary, like what happened in MS, your vote and name is recorded. It's very easy to check who voted in two primaries.
You're making shit up.
How about this? And would you be ok with this situation --
BJ Clinton is running for Gov of Ar. Running against him is Mr Black Opponent.
Then, the Democratic primary happens and all of the Republicans vote for Mr Black Opponent, and he wins the primary.
Would you, or anyone else on the thread be comfortable with the fact that those Republicans who voted for Mr Black Opponent, now vote for the Republican?
Read what chickelit says. No need to have open ballot recorded votes. Most states have the brains to do it that way anyway with or without primaries open to registered independents.
The problem, as usual, is with Mississippi and not with some unresolvable flaw in the way primaries are necessarily conducted.
You may now resume racial politicking by other means.
Rhythm and Balls said...
You may now resume racial politicking by other means.
So, you mean that black voters that are voting for a Republican that they'll never be able to beat, is racial politicking?
I actually like the California Primary system. I was a registered Independent voter for many years and was unable to vote at all in the primary. When they went to the modified method, independents and other unaffiliated (not Repub or Dem) voters could also vote. In addition the system prevents just such cross over has happened in Mississippi where Democrats maliciously vote to pick the opponent for their own candidate in the General Election.
I'd think the way to prevent that would be to restrict the primaries to primary-eligible voters, which would be voters with a card identifying them with the party they registered with. Since the state's privy to that information, they make sure the registration is only to one party in that cycle.
There isn't any need to carry a card either, The Registrar "knows" your affiliation before you arrive at the poll and you are handed a ballot accordingly. A "Republican ballot" lacks the names of Dems as choices.
So in my district for example, all the Democrat Issa h8ers don't get a chance to blow him out in the primary. :)
I don't have any numbers to prove it, but I suspect that in California, one effect to move more voters away from traditional R vs. D registration to more un-affiliated or Independent status like myself.
Ritmo said:
"Sounds unenforceable, Rabel. How are they going to prove that the person won't change their mind?"
Right. That's what I said earlier.
The constitutional law on open/closed primaries is complicated. But the Supreme Court has recognized a party's right to have a say in who votes in their nominating primaries and their right to freedom from interference from other parties in that process.
But also as I said earlier Mississippi's voting laws are written in a way that will gain the mandatory federal approval (previously) required by the Voting Rights Act.
I haven't run it down yet, but I'd be willing to bet that that odd little unenforceable provision I cited was added for the explicit purpose of gaining that approval. It's there to, in some way, protect the voting rights of Black Mississippians while also protecting the free association rights of political parties.
If it won't hurt too much, I encourage you to use your powerful imagination to envision the Holy Hell that would have been raised by the media if the Republicans had conspired, in violation of that law, to deprive Black Mississippi Democrats of their right to choose their party's nominee.
I'll speculate further that that silly little clause would have opened the door for the DOJ to intervene with conspiracy charges if the shoes (blue suede or otherwise) had been on the other feet. It could be that that is its purpose.
Rabel said...
If it won't hurt too much, I encourage you to use your powerful imagination to envision the Holy Hell that would have been raised by the media if the Republicans had conspired, in violation of that law, to deprive Black Mississippi Democrats of their right to choose their party's nominee.
Good points, but good luck with that dealing with ritmo.
Sorry I killed the thread.
It's okay Meade, you can totally make it up to everyone by killing yourself instead.
Think how happy you will make Ann's children, who will no longer have some puissant garden monkey leeching away their inheritance.
Do it.
If they legally registered with a party running two candidates that they'd want to have an impact on, what the hell say would I be able to have about that? I mean, it would be egregious if they crossed over simply because they didn't want a black Democrat (and nice give away on that bit of racism; it kind of says something that it came to your mind, doesn't it?) and I'd have no problem calling them out on it, but democracies are always prone to their works being gummed up by the mischief-makers. Luckily, Republicans are sufficiently meek and social-approval seeking that when you call them out for being racists (or other sorts of miscreants) they will tend to respond to the pressure of being called out for that, as should any decent person.
The moral of the story is that egregious idiots (i.e. racists seeking to deprive Democrats of a black candidate) are usually self-defeatingly bad in the social organizing department, as they are in so many other things.
Post a Comment