More thoughts on Mississippi, the flyer, Cochran, and politics
I want to clarify something about my reaction to the Mississippi primary campaign, and about my reaction to people’s reactions to it.
I agree with those of you who say that the Cochran campaign acted badly, whether it put that flyer out or not. But I definitely care who put out the flyer, because I like to base my opinions on facts, not suppositions, as much as possible.
I realize I’ll probably never know who put out the flyer. But I emphasized the question in earlier posts because most people I’ve seen who are angry about Cochran and the campaign seem most incensed about that flyer, the one directly trashing the Tea Party.
And more importantly, most people seem to have assumed they knew who put it out and who made the robocalls even though it is possible that they are being manipulated by the left to think even worse of Cochran and company than they already did. If you’re not aware that the left could be purposely widening the rifts on the right in order to help engineer their own victory, then I think you should start looking out for it. Whether it happened in Mississippi or not, it definitely happens.
The primary rules in Mississippi allow crossover votes. Sometimes in a situation like that the opposing party tells its voters to vote in the other party’s primary in order to manipulate the election to override the wishes of that other party. In the case of this particular campaign, something different seems to have happened: Cochran used the open primary rules as a way to appeal directly to the interests of Democratic voters in getting benefits from the federal government, not just what you’d call “pork” but also things such as federal aid to education. Whether this was right or wrong, I submit that it was inevitable that it would happen some day, given the open primary rules. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened before (and maybe it has happened before; I certainly haven’t followed every open primary closely enough to say).
The Cochran campaign in Mississippi directly courted the support of the Democratic Party in the state. But the Democrats in Mississippi had their own independent reasons for wanting to give Cochran an assist, even without his asking. In Mississippi, the Republican ordinarily wins. In this race, Cochran was unquestionably the Republican most likely to support continuing services the Democrats wanted continued. Tea Party candidate McDaniel, if elected, would be more likely to try to stop those services. And since one of them, Cochran or McDaniel, was almost certainly going to win in the general, Democrats quite naturally wanted it to be Cochran. So some of these things—the robocalls, the flyers, and the rest—could easily have been put out by Democrats on their own. And even if Cochran had wanted to stop them (and I’m not saying that he did want to stop them), he probably couldn’t have done so, because they had their own agenda.
Cochran should have condemned them, of course. I’m going to assume he didn’t do so, because I haven’t read anything about it. If he had condemned them, though, he would have alienated the very people he needed in order to win. That’s the ugly reality of the situation.
I have never understood the rationale for open primaries. It has long seemed to me that they are simply invitations for various kinds of manipulations and shenanigans of a devious nature (perhaps that’s the reason both parties seem to like them so much). I expect that politicians, being politicians, will take advantage of those opportunities. I would love to see each state close its primaries, although that wouldn’t eliminate all the problems; politicians are creative about finding their way around things, and where there’s a will there’s a way. But although Cochran and McDaniel should have had to duke it out about issues that would appeal to their Republican constituents only, the primary rules in Mississippi are unlikely to be changed in the foreseeable future.
That’s the source of my frustration, and has been for many years. Politicians are never going to be angels or anything like it. Most of them are going to be conniving, power-hungry narcissists, and if they don’t start out that way they will end up that way. So I’m for changing the rules to make it harder for them to screw around with things.
None of this would make me want to run out and vote for Cochran in the general if I lived in Mississippi, to say the least. But I would probably do it rather than allow his Democratic opponent to go to the Senate. The stakes are just too high right now, and the danger of letting the Democrats keep the Senate too great. It is counterproductive to reward Democrats for what Cochran did.
I don’t pretend that it’s an easy decision. Those who would like smaller government (and I count myself among them) are in a bind. We don’t want to be enablers of the likes of Cochran. I say to fight them tooth and nail for the nomination. But fighting them too hard once they are nominated opens the door to something even worse.
My understanding of the Mississippi primary rules is that Dems could vote in the run-off election only if they did not vote in the immediately preceding Dem primary.
If a McDaniel challenge is able to identify enough Dems who voted in both the Dem primary and again (illegally) in the Republican run-off that might make for a successful legal challenge but to what end? Would the state elections board invalidate the run-off and do it over? That would seem to be the only possible result of two. The other result would be to allow the faulty (illegal) results of the first run-off to stand. If so, then why bother with a challenge.
I would think McDaniel would want to get some clarification of this end before agitating for what might be a pyrrhic victory.
Neo, as to your disdain for open primaries, I offer that they permit independents to have a say in nominees. The reality of the electoral situation in this country is that there are only two viable candidates in any election; Dems and Republican.
In closed primaries independent voters are shut out from any preliminary influence, and an “Independent” party would be somewhat of a contradiction in terms. I offer that it’s not the open primary itself that is the problem, but poorly thought out legislation and oversight which causes moral (if not legal) fraud as in Mississippi.
T:
I believe that in most states Independents can get around that problem by registering as a member of a certain party before the primary. It can’t be done right beforehand, but there’s usually a period when they can do it. Then they can change it next time.
So in some ways, it’s not possible to completely close a primary. It can be made more difficult, though, to appeal to the opposite party for impulsive crossovers, as Cochran did.
And least that’s my understanding of the situation.
Just read this post over at Ace of Spades HQ:
Erick Erickson: Cut the Strings of All the GOP’s Puppets –Ace (posted at 12:06, 6/26/14)
It’s a well-deserved screed against the Republican establishment based upon the Eric Hoffer quote: “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
The link: ace.mu.nu
T:
I already had read it.
I agree with it—for primaries. NOT for the general. Doing it in the general is self-destructive. I’ve explained many times before why I think that, so I won’t go into it again here.
Neo,
You are correct about the registration (or change thereof). I have changed my party registration numerous times usually depending on the downticket (and especially local) races I want my vote to influence.
NEWSFLASH:
Just heard on Rush Limbaugh that the flyer, robo calls, etc., were put out by Democrat agit-prop people, and Neo, You Were Right: it WAS a false-flag operation.
The Leftwing nutjobs are crowing over this. They’ve known all along.
Rush got this from the Huffington Post.
Nothing new, IOW: a bunch of Leftwing nutjobs smearing conservatives with charges of racism.
Well, this is interesting. If you are a SMART establishment Republican, you would denounce this slimy tactic and defend your fellow Republicans. It wouldn’t be hard; after all, they won the primary.
Very bad move by Rush Limbaugh calling blacks who voted for Cochran “Uncle Toms”.
I agree with Neo, above, about fighting the E’s in the primaries but getting behind the R’s in the general election.
My face likes my nose.
That doesn’t mean we can’t use other means to haul these guys to the right, and we’re going to need them. More importantly, though, we need to win the hearts and minds of our fellow Americans who’ve been absorbed by the leftist Borg.
Beverly:
Fascinating.
I assume Rush is right, although I also assume we’ll never really know. There are layers within layers here.
But my gut immediately felt that those fliers were put out by the left.
Don’t get played by the left, folks. They are very VERY good at it. In some ways, conservatives are somewhat naive, I think.
A false-flag operation probably doesn’t make much difference to the eventual outcome in Mississippi, but it serves to rile up conservatives across the country, which could make a difference in close races this fall.
Ann, please try not to accept what liberals say Rush said rather than what Rush actually said. If you are a conservative you should know better by now:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/06/26/uncle_toms_for_thad_sends_libs_into_orbit
oops, I meant won’t make a difference for Missiissippi in terms of whether the seat goes R or D.
Harry the “Extremist”,
Oh, I’m aware of the context in which the “Uncle Toms” was used, but it doesn’t seem Limbaugh is aware that we’re in a sound-bite war, in which context counts for nothing. It’s enough that the Dems now have him down as having used the term.
Harry the “Extremist”:
Skimming that transcript just now, it seems to me that Rush certainly didn’t say that Democrats put it out but he didn’t say they didn’t. He was ambiguous. As best I can figure out what he’s saying, it seems to me that Democrats put it out but it was paid for with Republican money—and he’s just guessing at that.
So we’re back to: no one has a clue.
But that certainly sounds possible. There’s no question the Republicans wanted Democrats’ help here.
neo-neocon Says:
June 26th, 2014 at 3:40 pm
Very interesting. I left the following comment this morning at Ace of Spades:
Ann: “Oh, I’m aware of the context in which the “Uncle Toms” was used, but it doesn’t seem Limbaugh is aware that we’re in a sound-bite war…”
FAIL. Real conservative refuse to walk on pins and needles worrying about how liberals will twist things. Real conservatives refuse to have to be the only ones forced to modify even the slightest word or expression likey to upset or to be used by liberals to slander us (a loosing battle no matter what).
Ann … yes, we conservatives seem to take unseemly pride in falling on our own swords these days. It’s self-harm all the way down.
You know, there’s a part of me that finds Cochran’s outreach to the black community — especially that which was done through black churches — a good thing. Mostly because it’s probably not something a modern-day Republican has ever done before in Mississippi. Forget why he did it — isn’t such outreach what Republicans should be doing?
rickl:
One thing I don’t get, though—why wouldn’t Cochran condemn it whether he helped put it out or not? Is he so moral that he wouldn’t condemn it if his people had something to do with it (I doubt that would hold him back)? Or what? Seems to me that condemning it no matter what would be good politics. Why doesn’t he do it? Does he really think all those African American Democrats are going to vote for him over the Democrat in the primaries, and he doesn’t want to offend them?
I don’t know that much about Mississippi politics, but I can’t imagine that they will.
Ann:
Yes, that occurred to me too, and it is.
But not to call the Tea Party candidate a racist. And the reaching out to black voters would be more appropriate in the general rather than the primary. There’s an (unenforceable) law in Mississippi that people shouldn’t vote for a candidate in the primary if they don’t plan to vote for them in the general.
Since the conventional wisdom is that Cochran is all but a sure thing to win the general whereas McDaniels was questionable, I can’t help but wonder what advantage the Dems would have in running such an ad. That would seem to be opposite to their self interest.
Ann strikes again. Yeah, it’s great to call conservatives racist. Real winning strategy for Republicans. Genius!
Re Limbaugh, of course he was slamming the LIBERALS for calling every black Republican an “Uncle Tom.” But I guess some people don’t get sarcasm.
Also, the Leftists don’t need anything valid, any real evidence, to attack those who get in their way. It’s all blitzkrieg, all the time with them.
Beverly,
I never said it was great for Republicans to call tea-party conservatives racists; that is of course abhorrent. I was only saying outreach to African Americans can be a good thing, and I specifically emphasized when it was done through black churches.
There is one huge reason for voting for Repubs, even RINOs, in the general. That reason: Harry Reid. Say what you will about Mitch McConnell, he would not just bury every bill that comes over from the House. Harry Reid is the primary reason the House is helpless/hapless. He won’t bring their bills to the Senate floor. The man is a one man wrecking ball. I have as much animus toward him as I do Obama. I don’t care what the Senate looks like next January as long as Harry Reid will no longer be running the show. Vote Republican for Senate. Vote early and often. 🙂
I could never vote Democrat, not after the way Obamacare was enacted. When it comes down to it Dems will always fall in line with Reid and Pelosi.
What was so disheartening about the Cochran primary is that it was an in-your-face reminder that the GOP chooses the Democrats over conservatives. Literally. Not that this is the first time it’s happened (see: Peter King’s constant tirades against Cruz and co., & establishment GOP/conservative media joining the Palin pile-on in 2008).
They see *us* as bigger threat than the Democrats. Insanity.
I felt that the question of whether or not Cochran and his RINO supporters were behind the outrageous flyer was, while an interesting question, merely a distraction. If the big government GOP insiders were not behind the flyer, then they surely must have had a “nice, why didn’t I think of that” moment when they learned of the flyers.
I’ve voted for these fake conservatives for two decades now out of fear of what would happen if I didn’t. No more. These RINOs will never let us win playing within the system, but they seem to wish that conservatives would give up on trying to influence the party. Now we need to grant them their wish. We need to let them find out exactly what will happen when conservative let go of the hope we have invested in them.
I was only saying outreach to African Americans can be a good thing
The more people in 1860 America reached out to slaves, the more they were beat on the head by the Democrats that owned them.
Same is true now. There is no justice, without liberty. No justice, no peace.
Another source:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/06/democratic-pro-cochran-group-admits-funding-racist-tea-party-flier-in-mississippi/
More on the instigators of the racist “outreach” to black Democrats (this is what Rush was talking about):
“An unusual coalition of activists and organizations have united in the hopes of defending Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) in his June 24 runoff against state Sen. Chris McDaniel (R-Miss.).
“As the Clarion-Ledger reported Tuesday, James “Scooby Doo” Warren, a Democratic political operative, says he is working with the Mississippi Conservatives PAC on a statewide plan to turn out votes for Cochran.
“Meanwhile, Bishop Ronnie Crudup, Sr. of the New Horizon Church in Jackson is affiliated with a super PAC called “All Citizens For Mississippi” that has run advertisements and distributed pro-Cochran fliers. The newly-formed PAC shares an address and chief financial officer with the church, raising questions about whether the church is illegally participating in the campaign.
“Crudup, who is African-American, told the Associated Press earlier this month that he voted for Cochran in the primary and that he felt his group “couldn’t sit on the sideline” in the runoff. ”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/black-democrats-thad-cochran-_n_5504751.html
We have a winner!
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381365/meet-mitzi-bickers-eliana-johnson
Paid for by a nephew of Haley Barbour
Over at Richard Fernandez’s blog “The Belmont Club” one of the most astute and knowledgeable commenters is ‘Subotai Bahadur’, he’s a member of the Minn. Tea Party and here’s his take on the issue;
The graft to which Bahadur refers is as follows;
Clear confirmation of Hoffer’s observation that, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Sadly ironic but I think the GOP has probably lost the Senate seat from Mississippi and likely control of the Senate as well. My family is telling me that McConnell is in some trouble in KY.
What complete stupidity. What utter arrogance. After 2010 they could have reached out to the Tea Party and conservatives. They could have appointed them to some significant positions in the Senate and House. They could have solicited their input on legislation. They could have defended them from the slanderous attacks from the left. But they listened to K Street rather than Main Street and have done just the opposite.
Geoffrey Britain:
Subotai Bahadur has no idea who funded or distributed the flyers and funded and made the robocalls. As I’ve pointed out several times, the Democrats had plenty of reason to do it all on their own. What’s more, a Democratic group has said they themselves did it.
I don’t like what Cochran did in the primary, and I prefer McDaniel as a candidate, but what Cochran did is allowed by the rules and he wanted to win. But I’d like people to stick to the facts. I see the right falling for a technique the left is using to divide it even further than the right already is.
kaba:
On what do you base your assertion that Republicans will lose the senate seat? Have you seen a poll? I have no doubt Cochran will lose support from this. But he had a strong lead before.
Also, McDaniel is mounting a challenge, and it might even end up being successful.
kaba:
No, we don’t have a winner. Did you actually read the article you linked?
It says that the PAC run by Barbour’s nephew did pay Bickers’ group to make robocalls. But everyone says these were not the offensive robocalls in question, which they deny having anything to do with or any knowledge of.
All robocalls are not those robocalls, and we still have no idea who funded or made them.
I’ll tell you something: I am very discouraged by the eagerness of conservatives to hop on the bandwagon of hating Cochran and Barbour for these calls and flyers. I continue to think you are playing right into the hands of the left, a left that is chuckling at all of you.
Believe me, Cochran and Barbour did enough to be angry at without attributing these particular things to them without knowledge of whether it’s true or not. Why not stick to what you actually know Cochran and Barbour did? You can still be pissed at them.
neo,
I am just taking a guess based on my personal experience and contact with local activist. I live in the Florida Panhandle not all that far from the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I have been involved with local political committees for years. I can tell you the anger, bitterness, frustration, and sense of betrayal here is palpable. And that isn’t based just on events in Mississippi but an ongoing sense that those basic values we believe in have been abandoned by the GOP.
kaba:
Activists are going to be most upset by this. I’m not at all sure the bulk of the rank-and-file care that much.
Very true neo. But it is also the activist that do the GOTV, distribute campaign literature, host campaign events, and do the door-to-door solicitation. No small factor in a close election.
I’m not convinced that the GOP controlling the House and Senate for the next two years is in their own interest. We both know that they will be blamed by this administration and the sycophant MSM for every failure in the next two years. We should also be convinced by now that Obama isn’t inclined to to be restrained by any of those old fashioned Constitutional restraints. And that makes H. Clinton more viable in ’16.
Let the Dems wholly own this failure. I anticipate much of that to come.
kaba:
I think having the Democrats “own the failure” is a big, big mistake. The reason is that what you or I see as failure will not be failure, it will be success. They will put in place things that are death to the republic and will be impossible to reverse. They must be stopped.
To me, it’s as simple as that. I don’t think anyone should think they can play games with this, as you suggest. I’m sorry if that sounds harsh, but I’m sick and tired of that argument, and I’ve written about why before. It is playing with fire, and we will probably all get burned.
I believe that conservatives who espouse that view will be paving the way for the triumph of the thing they most hate.
OK….as I’ve said before we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this. Having Boehner and McConnell as the face of the GOP is a disaster in the making. Both are compromised by being too long in DC. Neither can make a coherent and articulate argument for conservative principles. Both are at least marginally in favor of immigration reform with amnesty that would guarantee a Dem majority for at least the next two decades. And both appear to me to be more dedicated to preserving their perks and privileges than in protecting the next generation.