Image 01 Image 03

If McDaniel camp finds enough “illegal” votes, then what? (#MSsen)

If McDaniel camp finds enough “illegal” votes, then what? (#MSsen)

What is the end game?

Yesterday, Mitch Tyner — the attorney for the Chris McDaniel for U.S. Senate campaign — briefly updated reporters on the status of their challenge in the Mississippi GOP runoff election. Tyner responded to a question about the 6,700 vote margin between McDaniel and incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran and was confident of there would be a new election based on MS state law.

 (ineligible voters). However, I would be surprised if we don’t find 6,700. It’s very easy to see the Mississippi law holds that if there’s the difference between the Cochran camp and our camp — that vote difference — if there’s that many ineligible voters, then there’s automatically a new election.

Catherine Englebrecht, from True the Vote, also seems to be positive that McDaniel will prevail.

But is the state’s voting law on McDaniel’s side in such a cut and dried manner as his attorney states? Not so fast says a Mississippi law professor who spoke to the Washington Post.

We spoke with Matt Steffey, professor of law at the Mississippi College School of Law, to see if he agreed with Tyner’s assessment of what will happen next and, in case we didn’t already give it away, he didn’t. “He uses the word automatically, and I think that’s a very optimistic and self-serving reading of the law,” Steffey told us by phone. “I don’t think the cases can be fairly interpreted to say that if they come up with 6,700 illegal votes and can demonstrate that they’re illegal — it’s an overstatement of the law to say that it automatically demands a recount.”

“There’s simply no statute or case that holds that if the number of ineligible voters exceed the margin of victory then there’s automatically a recount,” Steffey said. “In fact, in 1983, the Mississippi Supreme Court held — and cited a number of cases — that a special election was not required even though the margin of victory [in the primary] was exceeded by the number of illegal votes.” That case was Noxubee County Democratic Executive Committee v. Russell. “The Court has expressly said that the rule does not mean that one must show that the number of illegal exceed the margin. They have held exactly the opposite of Mitch Tyner’s statement.”

Meanwhile a new figure inserted himself into the Mississippi GOP election mess: U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz from Texas.

On Monday’s Mark Levin Show, Ted Cruz weighed in on the contentious (and ongoing) runoff election for the Mississippi Republican Senate nomination. “What happened in Mississippi was appalling,” Cruz told Levin. He said the conduct of the “Washington, D.C. Machine” was “incredibly disappointing” in the race between incumbent Senator Thad Cochran and Tea Party favorite Chris McDaniel, who lost the runoff by around 6700 votes.

Noting that McDaniel won a sizeable majority of Republicans in the runoff election, Cruz, who is Vice Chairman for Grassroots Outreach of the National Republican Senatorial Committee said, “The D.C. Machine spent hundreds of thousands of dollars urging some 30,000-40,000 partisan Democrats to vote in the runoff, which changed the outcome.” Acknowledging that all Republicans want to grow the party, the Texas senator said the actions of the “D.C. Machine” did nothing to further that goal.

“Instead, the ads they ran were racially-charged false attacks and there were explicit promises to continue and expand the welfare state,” Cruz said. “And nobody has suggested that the Democrats who voted in the primary will actually vote Republican in the general election,” he added. ”Instead, they were just recruited to decide who the Republican nominee was and that’s unprincipled and it’s wrong.”

– The Missouri State Republican Chairman — Ed Martin — has now weighed in with a formal request for Republican National Chairman Reince Preibus to investigate the MS Senate campaign. Television and flyers targeting McDaniel featured racially-charged messages and those ads were reported to have been organized by an RNC Committeemember. Chairman Martin is requesting the RNC member’s involvement be investigated.

The entire letter from Martin to Preibus can be read below.

Martin Letter


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Then nothing, either way. Except more BS, more spent that could have been spent more wisely, etc.

The only thing that in fact matters (if it matters at all), is displacing Harry Reid as Majority Leader( and thus, Senate Agenda setter, as the bully pulpit it is going into 2016).

MS will be a Republican Senate seat regardless.

And Brobama will veto anything he doesn’t like (regardless of Senate makeup), and Brobama will continue ‘ruling by executive order’, until 2016.

So, it’s typical – Republicans flushing money away to fight a meaningless battle they invented for themselves.

    Ragspierre in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 1:18 pm

    Well, you say some stupid stuff, but that one takes the cake.

    According to your “wisdom” the thinking of the Senator from Mississippi is irrelevant to anything concerning this country and its future.

    And you are confused as to whether it does, in fact, matter that Grandpa Simpson Reid is Senate Majority Leader.

    AND the battle between reformers and pork-meisters is “meaningless”.

    Wow. And woe.

      pjm in reply to Ragspierre. | July 8, 2014 at 6:00 pm

      As always, being the kind and gentle man I am, I turn to you the other cheek.

      So you can kiss them both, as usual. Try not to spend as much time between them as you usually do, it tickles.

      “According to your “wisdom” the thinking of the Senator from Mississippi is irrelevant to anything concerning this country and its future.”


      Anyone who thinks otherwise, like you, is clueless.

        Spiny Norman in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 7:41 pm

        If Mississippi will stay GOP regardless, why in hell did the national party spend so damn much precious funds to save a “fat-n-happy” RINO who was increasingly unpopular with Mississippi Republicans, so unpopular they had to recruit (pay?) Democrats to vote for him in the run-off, one he was going to lose badly?

        Besides, what is the point of a GOP Senate majority that is made of the likes of Thad Cochran and Mitch McConnell, because they’d never pass anything Obama would likely veto. They’re “deal-makers”. They’re called the “lose more slowly” Republicans for a reason. Judicial appointments? Do you really believe the Cochrans of the party would oppose him?

        inspectorudy in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 9:39 pm

        Rags didn’t call you any names and you didn’t have to turn your cheek. He was simply pointing out the fact that you have no morals. To win is the only game to you and your ilk and no matter how you ain is of no importance. Do you not see that McDaniel is a Republican? Do you not understand that had he won the seat would still be in Republican hands? So what does that tell you about the RNC’s effort? There is something else going on here and it is not about the American people.

          “Rags didn’t call you any names and you didn’t have to turn your cheek. ”

          Oh, I guess when he said “Well, you say some stupid stuff, but that one takes the cake.”, that was a compliment ?

          “He was simply pointing out the fact that you have no morals.”

          Again you demonstrate your reading comprehension problem.

          You ascribe to me the reality that I pointed out about politics as if it were my own belief system, or as if I had expressed approval of it.

          Reality – In the next 24 hours, xx horrible nasty things will happen all over this world, done to very good people by very bad people. Do you take it from this statement that I approve of any of them ? I guess in your vocabulary ‘recognition of reality’ equates to approval of same ?

          As to what the RNC thinks, I do not pretend to understand. or care. Or agree. I am not a member of the R’s or any other political group.

          I do believe that they are all a bunch of self-serving, self-aggrandizing bastards. Do not read approval into that statement.

    This a fight worth having, even if I think Chris McDaniel has a very uphill fight with not a lot of time to prevail in. That said, the GOP Establishment needs to be called on this BS. And I do not see the GOP losing this senate seat, but if they do, the GOP Establishment will be to blame.

      pjm in reply to EBL. | July 8, 2014 at 6:03 pm

      No, the voters will. The ones who put them in before, and put whichever one in now.

        ConradCA in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 2:01 pm

        When you act like a Progressive Fascist and lie about the politician they support you can’t expect them to support you in general election. Cochran and the Republican party leaders are totally responsible for this situation. They foolishly sacrifice the party and their country to their desire to help out their buddies.

      Matt_SE in reply to EBL. | July 8, 2014 at 8:25 pm

      Mississippi could go Democrat easier than some imagine. If the establishment thwarts McDaniel and are a$$hats while doing it, it may sour the base so much that they refuse to vote for Cochran…or may actually vote for the Dem.

      If that happens, it will be the establishment’s fault. To say that vote-buying corruption may “unexpectedly” sour the electorate is insulting. It’s the natural, and predictable response.

PersonFromPorlock | July 8, 2014 at 1:18 pm

MS may not be a Republican seat if the Republican base is sufficiently pissed off to vote for the Democrat. It may be that the most important thing here is for the GOPe to be reminded that actions have consequences.

If the law professor they consulted just teaches, then I view his opinion with a large grain of salt. Practicing attorneys know way more than a teacher. Obama taught a Constitution course on a part-time basis and look how much he knows. The Supreme court shot him down 20 times – unanimously.

    Estragon in reply to McAllister. | July 8, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    The professor refers to cases and history. Check them if you want. Consult all the lawyers you wish.

    You are discounting what he says because you don’t like it. Either show how he is wrong, or admit you cannot.

    ConradCA in reply to McAllister. | July 9, 2014 at 2:52 pm

    Obama knows what the constitution says. He just finds a way to interpret it to support his ideology. The only thing that matters to Tyrant Obama the Liar is his ideology.

It would occur to me that if there were enough illegal votes, and they were disqualified… then the matter would be settled.
Will they disqualify an illegal vote? Surely….

    Milhouse in reply to snowshooze. | July 8, 2014 at 4:07 pm

    You can disqualify a voter, but how can you disqualify a vote? You have no way of knowing how that person voted. Except common sense, of course, but what has that got to do with the law? As this professor pointed out, the precedent in Mississippi is exactly the opposite. And so’s the precedent from Washington, where the Democrats stole the governorship in 2004.

      Lady Penguin in reply to Milhouse. | July 8, 2014 at 6:19 pm

      Actually, there is a way to disqualify the vote if the voter is disqualified. A sample of a Mississippi ballot showed a barcode with the vote encoded on the ballot, so throw out the ballot the vote registered goes away.

        Are saying the ballot contains an identifier to the voter ?

        So much for ‘secret ballot’, eh ?

          snopercod in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 9:04 pm

          I believe that’s correct in the case of a challenge. The bar code on the ballot can be linked to an individual voter. I could be wrong, but that’s what I think.

          pjm in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 8:15 am

          If you are right, that’s pretty scary.

          Of course, a challenge would have nothing to do with the bar code being present at the earlier time of casting a vote, and it being traceable to a voter.

          tom swift in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 11:08 am

          The concept of a “secret ballot” does not mean that who votes is secret. It means that we don’t know how any particular voter voted.

          Owego in reply to pjm. | July 10, 2014 at 5:14 am

          l believe Snopercod has it correct. Computer and electronic voting (and early voting, never mind absentee ballots) are going to be a monstrous disaster in the next general election. It is going to be terrible.

          The R DC machine is the biggest collection of bunglers on the planet. Just like everyone else there, they believe they know best and what all like-minded folks should want, say, and do. Years ago I stopped even taking their calls and returning their silly surveys, which are nothing moe than a phoney fund raising game anyway.

        Milhouse in reply to Lady Penguin. | July 9, 2014 at 1:59 am

        That’s absolutely ridiculous and only an idiot could believe it. We have a secret ballot in the USA, which means there can be no way to trace a ballot to the voter who cast it. Any such mechanism would be illegal. How can you not see that?

    Estragon in reply to snowshooze. | July 8, 2014 at 5:29 pm

    You can challenge a voter at the polls, and his ballot would not be counted until a ruling was made on eligibility. McDaniels’ people did not do this, despite the loud proclamations that “poll watchers” were streaming into the state for the runoff. There is no way to disqualify votes after they are cast, of course.

    But READ the WaPo article. It mentions that in a couple of precincts where the McDaniels forces are claiming 200+ ineligible votes, there were only 25 and 35 votes in the Democratic Primary. Those are the only registered voters “ineligible.”

    To expect a judge to overturn a party primary based on allegations only shows that maybe your money will be wasted on “True the Vote” if this is how they spend it. It is not going to happen.

      I trust True The Vote. I trust McDaniel. I do not trust rhinos and the GOPe.

      Furthermore, if it causes the GOP pain, good. They are despicable men.

The end game here should be making the GOPe pay as big a price as possible for their actions in Mississippi. If allowed to stand uncontested these tactics will become the SOP to be used against any reformer. Principles of integrity are at stake here and it disappoints me that so many folks find it difficult to associate with principled behavior.

    pjm in reply to Merlin. | July 8, 2014 at 6:11 pm

    And you think this will accomplish what ? Clean politics or clean politicians ?

    You think the GOP well and truly gives a shit about anything other than ‘The Seat is Red’ ? You think the will change their thinking during the next 4 months, or 2 years from now ?

    You think ANY politician puts ANYTHING above their own personal gain ?

      Some do.
      Your abandonment of basic moral principles is your downfall.
      You call it “realist” or whatever.
      When your world falls down around you, know that you brought it upon yourself with your abandonment of what is good, what is true, what is honorable.

        pjm in reply to gettimothy. | July 8, 2014 at 7:43 pm

        Your personal attacks are pathetic. This makes me believe you are, too.

          Matt_SE in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 8:30 pm

          If the establishment only cared that the seat was red, why are they so involved in the Republican primary?
          Last time I checked, McDaniel is a Republican.

          So they obviously care what *kind* of Republican holds the seat.

          inspectorudy in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 9:46 pm

          Where are the “Personal” attacks? The person pointed out the problems with your viewpoint and did not resort to ad hominem attacks. It looks like you and obama are the same thinned skin onions who cannot tolerate any disagreement. Look up the word “Principles” and you will understand the reason so many of us are outraged at the RNC. Maybe when you see the definition you will understand that there is more to life than a short term victory.

          pjm in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 8:19 am

          “Where are the “Personal” attacks?”

          “Your abandonment of basic moral principles is your downfall.” woud be a start.

          “The person pointed out the problems with your viewpoint and did not resort to ad hominem attacks.”

          The only viewpoint I have expressed is that I think ALL politicians suck.

          What else you read into it, you imagine.

          I really do not give a damn what you think of me. You lay down with dogs and are offended when others notice you have fleas. pffft.

          pjm in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 9:08 am

          And when YOU lay down with them, you get a ….. well, you know. Do they have shots for that now ?

      ConradCA in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 2:04 pm

      I think that we have reached the point where the Tea Party should form a third party.

        ConradCA in reply to ConradCA. | July 9, 2014 at 2:05 pm

        Not much difference between RHINO republicans and the Dems.

        randian in reply to ConradCA. | July 9, 2014 at 2:10 pm

        The problem is the only stable party base is 2 parties in our voting system. That is, mathematically speaking our voting system always degenerates into 2 viable parties. A third party is useless, you have to take over the GOP or go home.

    snopercod in reply to Merlin. | July 8, 2014 at 9:06 pm

    The GOPe is already planning to use the same tactics against Milton Wolf in Iowa.

If the court finds it cannot go McDaniel’s way, then McDaniel should run as a write in.

In the name of UNITY it is the responsibility of the GOP to get behind the man who got the most votes in the primary.

If the GOP insists on this sort of business, the Tea Party patriots have no business dealing with these low-lifes.

Principles, integrity and truth matter. The GOP leadership has abandoned those for political power. Having lost their souls, they will lose their power.

Or they can repent–I use that word intentionally–admit their wrong-doing and back the good guy.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to gettimothy. | July 8, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    The rules prevent any write-in votes for McDaniel from being counted. In order for them to count, McDaniel had to register by some long past deadline.

    That does not however prevent a campaign where people writein McDaniel or even Not Thad Cochran. Then when the votes are tallied, they can look at the results and see the Dem won because people didn’t want Cochran. Even better if McDaniel recieves more writeins then Thad Cochran.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | July 8, 2014 at 2:38 pm

      I forgot to say that I do not approve this path. Normally I would be all for it, but in this case there is a very good reason that we will be forced to support both McConnell and McDaniels.

    pjm in reply to gettimothy. | July 8, 2014 at 6:17 pm

    “If the court finds it cannot go McDaniel’s way, then McDaniel should run as a write in.”

    Oh, yeh, let’s give the seat to the Dem’s ‘on principal’.

    “In the name of UNITY it is the responsibility of the GOP to get behind the man who got the most votes in the primary.”

    Bull. In the name of following their own rules (unless perhaps you think they should change them mid-stream), they MUST support the guy who wins the run-off.

    “Principles, integrity and truth matter.”

    Not in politics today.

    “The GOP leadership has abandoned those for political power. Having lost their souls, they will lose their power.”

    Yes they did, long ago, and the result will vary.

    “Or they can repent–I use that word intentionally–admit their wrong-doing and back the good guy.”

    OH, OK – ‘just ignore all the rules they wrote and said they would follow’ – this is a ‘demonstration of principle’ to you ?

      inspectorudy in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 9:52 pm

      Your argument is hollow. It has no value to the average voter because you yourself say that principles do not matter. Is there one thing about Cochran that would make anyone vote for him other than to keep the power in the Barbour family? No! This is about power of a MS family and has nothing to do with the voters. Your view of winning the MS seat for a Republican has no meaning since McDaniel is a Republican. For the RNC and the other RINOs in DC decide to support Cochran tells us more about them than about our party. If we abandon our principles then we have no party.

        “because you yourself say that principles do not matter.”

        No, idiot, I said they don’t matter TO POLITICIANS. Of which I am not one.

      Ragspierre in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 10:31 am

      I think we have pjm self-identified as a peculiar species of troll.


      He has no common-cause with any political group, by his own admission. He is here, then, to serve what constructive purpose? How the eGOP or the TEA party people spend their money is none of his business.

      He has no faith in the electorate or in elections. All politicians are equally bad, again by his own declaration. No matter whether Ted Cruz or David Dewhurts serves in the Senate.

      He pretends moral standards, but has anyone here identified any from what he writes?

      He is the most nasty person here, commonly using foul language gratuitously.

      He displays a trollish pathology. Anything “not a compliment” respecting his blatherings is equal to “calling him names”. He pretends a uniqueness and superiority, both of which belie a very tender ego.

      But I expect Prof. Jacobson will be banning him soon.

        pjm in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2014 at 4:25 pm

        Kiss, kiss, Rags. You know where. You’re not even worth more reply than that.

          Ragspierre in reply to pjm. | July 9, 2014 at 4:39 pm

          No, sorry. I don’t read sick minds.

          Where would you like to kiss me? I mean, given your anal fixation…?

Exactly who is Professor Steffy and what qualifies him as an expert on the law in question?

According to his own web page he’s not even a member of the Mississippi Bar.

Were there no other available options, maybe someone from an actual State University?

Seems like WaPo went looking for the answer they wanted.

    Bruno Lesky in reply to ThomasD. | July 8, 2014 at 2:58 pm

    No surprise — Steffey has “liberal leanings” per student note on Rate My Professor.

    He got a few good reviews, but I prefer to showcase comments like “Terrible.” Arrogant.” … “MC should fire this guy!” … “One of the worst teachers I have ever taken.” … “An embarrassment to MC!”

    Estragon in reply to ThomasD. | July 8, 2014 at 5:33 pm

    Nobody is stopping you from find a law or poli-sci professor who says otherwise.

    It will be hard because the guy is just citing the law and the history.

    Courts very rarely overturn elections, and even more rarely party primaries, and almost never party primaries in states like Mississippi where the parties, and not the state, run and certify their own nominating primaries.

    You don’t have to like it, but that is the fact.

      inspectorudy in reply to Estragon. | July 8, 2014 at 9:55 pm

      For a modern day court to view thousands of illegal votes and do nothing is to ignore the power of the internet. This is the heart of the TEA party. The internet will not allow such behavior any longer. The people of MS will have their say after all of this is over and the judges will not be happy campers if they turn their backs on this issue.

        Milhouse in reply to inspectorudy. | July 9, 2014 at 2:04 am

        Oh yeah? “The internet will not allow it”?! What exactly is “the internet” going to do about it? The judges will do as they please, and “the internet” doesn’t get a say in the matter.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Estragon. | July 8, 2014 at 10:16 pm

      I have read a lot of briefs. The one thing that I am always impressed by is that almost always the brief you read ( Otherwise why sue ? ) sounds reasonable. Until you read the other sides brief.

      In this dag anjd age of slanted reporting, you get reporters putting their spin on “experts” who put their spin on the rulings.

      This BTW is why so many people were surprised by the Zimmerman verdict. They listened to the experts like Sonny Hosten ( a lawyer ) that said what they want to say, and don’t lok at what’s happening.

      One thing I always notice, is that a brief very rarely contains only one copurt case to support it’s arguments.

      So instead of listening to one questionable professor, let’s see what the McDaniel briefs say and the Cochran briefs say.

Midwest Rhino | July 8, 2014 at 2:33 pm

No idea of the previous case, but Cochran invited Democrats to vote, and even incited them. So there is no reason to believe they are anything but Cochran votes.

These were not random illegal voters, as I would guess might have been assumed in that previous case.

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Midwest Rhino. | July 8, 2014 at 3:09 pm

    The matter of the votes is two-fold, and it is not a matter of “random illegal voters”. First, there is the issue of the Institutional Republicans actively joining with the Democrats, using Democrat tactics and lies, to specifically attack the TEA Party and conservatives who at that moment were Republicans. That particular Rubicon has not only been crossed, it has a one-way superhighway bridge over it.

    The other matter is the nature of a specific number of the Democrat votes for Cochran.

    While Mississippi has open primaries, it is illegal for a person to vote in BOTH party’s primaries. What McDaniel is doing is looking at the Party registration of those who voted in the REPUBLICAN primary run off. And comparing them with the voters in the DEMOCRAT primary. If someone voted in the Democrat primary, and then later voted in the Republican primary run off; that second vote was illegal no matter who they voted for. If the number of known and confirmed illegal votes exceeds Cochran’s margin of victory; the validity of the whole election is shot. And they have to have a do-over.

      Milhouse in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | July 8, 2014 at 4:11 pm

      If the number of known and confirmed illegal votes exceeds Cochran’s margin of victory; the validity of the whole election is shot. And they have to have a do-over. Except that that’s not what the court ruled in 1983.

        inspectorudy in reply to Milhouse. | July 8, 2014 at 9:58 pm

        Was there an internet then? The public will no longer allow such corrupt decisions because they will be informed immediately of such a terrible decision. To tell the average voter that their vote whether valid or not is the same will not fly.

      Estragon in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | July 8, 2014 at 5:34 pm

      What color is the sky in your world?

      And when he says he came up with 200 of them in a district that only had 35 D voters in the D primary, making it a physical impossibility, he just looks like another lying asshole. Which means he’d fit right in the Washington.

        unregistered voters voting? or are there only 35 people in the district?

        Here is the thing. The GOPe and its defenders deserve ZERO trust; you no longer get a smidgen of the benefit of the doubt.

        You are the enemy of liberty. You are enablers of tyranny. you are not constitutional conservatives. You are lovers of power and money.

          pjm in reply to gettimothy. | July 8, 2014 at 7:05 pm

          “unregistered voters voting? or are there only 35 people in the district?”

          What I read says ’35 voters in the D primary’.

          Please don’t say ‘you’ in a way that implies I’m a Republican. Never was, never will be.

          Nor a ‘D’, nor an ‘L’, a ‘C’, nor a member of any beverage parties, etc. My beliefs and opinions are mine alone, and not defined by nor contained within any social group like ‘a political party’.

        Matt_SE in reply to pjm. | July 8, 2014 at 8:35 pm

        Leave that up to a judge. If McDaniel is lying, I’m sure it will be pretty easy to show.
        If, on the other hand, you’re full of crap…that’s a different story.

MouseTheLuckyDog | July 8, 2014 at 2:48 pm

THe fundamental problem with this whole thing.
In the past I would have said that the IRS scandal is has exceeded by several magnitudes, the Niuxonian level of lawlessness, but not to do much after the examination. I didn’t much support major action against Obama.

Now though in the past few weeks, Obama has exceeded his authority tyo such a vast degree. In particular with the “sue me” remarks, and the way he is treating illegal immigration. It is almost like he is begging to bve impeached. In fact today Drudge reports that Sarah Palin is openly calling for his impeachment.

If the House actually impeaches, you can bet that Harry Reid will kill any action in the Senate. We need control of the Senate if impeachment is going to have any lasting effect.

For that we need to have McConnell and Cochran win. Much as I don’t like it, we will need to support these two smucks.

    Milhouse in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | July 8, 2014 at 4:14 pm

    If the House actually impeaches, you can bet that Harry Reid will kill any action in the Senate. We need control of the Senate if impeachment is going to have any lasting effect.

    There is no way in the world 2/3 of the senate will vote to impeach 0bama. Not even if he’s caught on tape conspiring to violate the constitution. It’s just not going to happen. If he is impeached he will be acquitted in the senate.

Subotai Bahadur | July 8, 2014 at 2:48 pm

It is my understanding that Mississippi law does not allow McDaniel to run as a write in candidate; unless the official candidate dies. Which may happen but cannot be depended on. Not being a nice person, I have no problem with hoping for it.

That said, this is the United State in year 6 of Anno Obama. The rule of law no longer applies in this country. And the Institutional Republican party is no longer even pretending to be different from the Democrats.

So, even if enough illegal votes are found; the combination of the Haley Barbour’s Institutional Republicans, and the Democrats will likely mean that McDaniel will be disqualified.

So it breaks down as:

If McDaniel overturns Cochran’s illegal victory, then we need to support him in the new election. Money, volunteers, poll watchers. Lots and lots of poll watchers.

If McDaniel fails to overturn Cochran’s illegal victory; at the very least Conservatives need to not vote for Cochran in the General, and if they can bring themselves to do it — vote for Childers, the Democrat. If the Republicans act like the Democrats, what is the difference?

And either way, if you are not in Mississippi send money once this is decided. To McDaniel if he is the TEA Party Republican candidate, and to Childers if Cochran is the Democrat-Republican candidate.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | July 8, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    First and foremost I disagree with you about supporting Cochran. I don’t like it much but at this point Obama has elevated a republican Senate majority to one of major importance. So I think this election it would be important to support Cochran.

    However, if you oppose Cochran, do not vote for Childers . If Childers wins because a lot of people voted for him then the media will paint it as a mandate for Childers and Obama. Better to vote for McDaniels or Not Thad Cochran.

      Matt_SE in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | July 8, 2014 at 8:40 pm

      Democrats are petulant children. They will spin it no matter what happens…I’m not worried about what they think.
      Law-breaking and corruption must not be rewarded, or we will get more of it.
      If the Dem gets the seat, they will hold it for 6 years before we kick them out, too.

As everyone him-haws around the political ramifications in the context of their own desired end game, I have to ask-


No matter the candidates, or the office?

Gees, I swear. This is like reading the comments on Politico. “Who cares about right and wrong, I just wanna know how it effects the political landscape.”

    I was thinking the same thing.
    I am also thinking about those advocating voting for cochran no matter what, nothing like enabling a wife beater in that scenario…

    Ragspierre in reply to Browndog. | July 8, 2014 at 4:39 pm

    But, Brown, isn’t that the whole crux of the Mississippi confluvium…???

    What IS “fair” in a GOP primary? What laws…if any…were violated here?

    Assuming NO laws were violated, is this the way we want to select candidates in a “free and fair” way that reflects the preferences of the voting population selecting THEIR candidate?

    I care. I am heartbroken. I am pissed. I am Tea Party.

Facing allegations of vote buying and a challenge to a GOP primary runoff win, the Thad Cochran campaign on Tuesday said it made a mistake with its accounting of nearly $53,000 in get-out-the-vote cash and will have to amend its reporting to the Federal Election Commission.

The site Monday night reported that the Cochran campaign reimbursed staffer Amanda Shook for large sums of cash listed as “Reimbursed Expense – Campaign Walkers.” FEC regulations allow reimbursement to staff only for travel and food expenses, and any other outlay of money by a staffer would be considered a contribution, and subject to a $2,600 limit.

A spokesman for six-term incumbent Cochran called the filing “a screw up,” and the campaign has denied vote buying and other allegations.

Hmmm…. Well, I guess we will see, won’t me?

I don’t think Prof Steffey is correct. From the decision he says supports that there is no automatic special election:

“We have employed a two pronged test which though it has been stated in different ways, essentially provides that special elections will be required only when (1) enough illegal votes were cast for the contestee to change the result of the election, or (2) so many votes are disqualified that the will of the voters is impossible to discern”

That pretty much says that if McDaniel invalidates enough to be the winner, a special election will be required. This case talks about the 2nd option mostly. Basically after recount the declared winner was still the winner and the court reasoned why it shouldn’t order a special election.

The only thing this opinion says about a loser becoming a winner from a disputed recount is what I posted above.

    Estragon in reply to Gunstar1. | July 8, 2014 at 5:47 pm

    Do you understand plain English?

    Read the whole decision. It depends on the number of votes actually disqualified, not alleged to have been improperly cast.

    McDaniels could have had his poll watchers at every precinct challenge ballots, but they found very few worthy. After the fact, you can’t go back and challenge them without some evidence of actual fraud.

      Do you understand the larger issue?

      We don’t give a damn what the law says. We don’t give a damn what your GOPe says.

      Your party is a bunch of dirty scumbags. Take your law and your party and shove it.

      because, “unity”

      Gunstar1 in reply to Estragon. | July 8, 2014 at 7:18 pm

      I am only responding to what the professor is quoted as saying. He says:

      “that a special election was not required even though the margin of victory [in the primary] was exceeded by the number of illegal votes.”

      That is only the case in scenario #2. If the winner of the election is still the winner after the illegal votes are discarded, that is when the total number discarded versus total number cast matters.

      That is NOT the case if the winner changes after the illegal votes are discarded, which is scenario #1.

      The court held that Russell was the winner in vote count before the illegal votes were discarded and after the 4 boxes were discarded (this is footnote 3). The winner is still the winner so the court used scenario 2.

      McDaniel is going after scenario #1. To say that McDaniel is wrong based on scenario #2 is incorrect. Scenario #1 does exactly what McDaniel claims it does.

      If you would like to post a link to a case that shows otherwise, please do.

Henry Hawkins | July 8, 2014 at 5:52 pm

All I know is that the national and Mississippi GOP together slimed a fellow GOP member with accusations of nonexistent racism, behaving precisely like the hated liberals do.

Several top GOP leaders have already declared war on Tea Party members of their own party, and now we see they will also lie while they smear Tea Party candidates.

GOP Dinosaur Thad Cochran, King Of Pork, will keep his seat. A big, big victory for the GOP establishment. A big, big pyrrhic victory, that is. The Cochran/McDaniel race proves in disturbinbg, ugly detail just how far afield – far a-left-field – the GOP establishment has dragged the party. Tricking black voters to vote for your man with the lie that the other guy, the Tea Party guy, is a racist who wants to take away your rights to vote? Really, GOP? Really?

Having failed to learn from 2012, the GOP continues to believe it can keep sliding leftward and capture more independents than the conservative base it attacks and abandons. Some of them are even talking about running Mitt Romney again.

In Mississippi the GOP elite showed themselves to be as vile, unprincipled, and unamerican as any Alinsky-ite radical.

@ali (Ali Akbar) is all over the crimes the GOP/NRSC committed in the race.

RedState is on it too.

Lady Penguin | July 8, 2014 at 6:26 pm

The Establishment GOP is going to get burned, if not in Mississippi, elsewhere, only a matter of time. No longer is the base just going to go along because someone has an “R” after their name. The GOP/Cochran campaign used not just sleazy tactics, but dishonest ones and they allowed, enabled and encouraged corruption of the MS senate primary runoff.

I’ve said it before, and will say it again – why would I vote for a Republican without principles when I won’t vote for an unprincipled Democrat? The GOP does not deserve to win if this is how they’re operating. Just Democrats in Republican sheep skins.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Lady Penguin. | July 9, 2014 at 12:52 pm

    The GOP – and many political pundits – grossly underestimate how many people place principles before party.

key words dropped by lawyer was “chain of custody” that means the Mississippi GOP did NOT maintain it, that’s voter fraud.

there was no point in having a primary/election if someone could change the results from the voter booth to certification (counted).


Estragon hardest hit.

Eastwood Ravine | July 10, 2014 at 12:35 am

I honestly think it is to late to save the Mississippi Senate seat. The RINO establishment poisoned the well, which is likely what they wanted all along. They would rather the seat go to a Democrat than go to a Tea party movement conservative.