06.26.2014 21

Democrats deliver Cochran Senate primary victory in Mississippi

Establishment_Strikes_BackBy Robert Romano

It is often said that politics makes for strange bedfellows. But it can also make for messy divorces.

Case in point, the closely contested Mississippi Senate Republican primary, where 36-year incumbent Thad Cochran narrowly defeated conservative challenger Chris McDaniel.

Doing some quick back of the envelope math, of the 30 Mississippi counties won by Barack Obama in 2012, Thad Cochran won 25 of them by 21,731 votes in the primary. On June 3, Cochran had won 26 of those same counties by 11,163 votes.

Meanwhile, in the 52 Republican counties won by Romney in 2012, McDaniel was the clear favorite. On June 3, he won those counties by 12,549 votes. And on June 24, he won them by 15,038.

So, to win, Cochran boosted his lead by 10,568 in Democrat counties, compared to McDaniel who increased his lead by 2,489 votes in Republican counties.

Turnout tells the tale entirely.

In Democrat counties, turnout disproportionately increased by 21,439 additional voters to 81,464, a 35.7 percent increase. That compares with a 41,401 additional voters in Republican counties to 294,859, just a 16.3 percent increase from June 3.

That clearly made all the difference in the outcome of the race, which Cochran won by just 6,693 votes.

In the first round of voting on June 3, Cochran was behind by 1,386. The extra 11,000 votes in Obama counties got Cochran across the finish line.

In Hinds County, where Democrat stronghold Jackson, Miss. is located, Cochran won by 10,985 votes, nearly doubling his original 5,307-vote margin of victory there from June 3.

There, turnout disproportionately increased by 8,273 to 24,913, or by 49.7 percent. Democrat counties excluding Hinds county grew by 13,166, or 30.3 percent.

So, what happened in Hinds County?

Democrats voted.

That is where Cochran ran campaign literature in black neighborhoods touting his record voting in favor of food stamps, according to the Jackson Free Press: “In a stepped-up ad campaign in Jackson publications, such as the Jackson Advocate and — in the interest of full disclosure — the Jackson Free Press, as well in mailings to majority-black Jackson neighborhoods, Cochran touts his support for historically black colleges and universities, the Jackson Medical Mall and Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps.”

Jackson also happens to be where CNN’s Dana Bash reports there was strong Democrat turnout on behalf of Cochran who had never voted in a Republican primary before.

All of the above adds a lot of substance challenger McDaniel’s post-election claim on Facebook that “Literally thousands of liberal Democrats were asked by Thad Cochran to cross over into a Republican primary.”

He later posted that “Cochran camp [is] now conceding that 35,000 Dems crossed over to support him.”

McDaniel supporters are urging him to fight on, and run a write-in campaign for November. Others still are contending that Democrats who voted in the June 3 Democrat primary illegally participated in the June 24 Cochran-McDaniel runoff, and are urging him to challenge the outcome in court.

On Facebook, McDaniel thanked his supporters, refused to concede, and vowed to campaign on: “The fight is not over. Stand with us!”

And, who could blame him? Cochran appears to owe his victory entirely to campaigning on liberal causes in Democrat counties, and pulling Democrat voters into the Republican primary.

If nothing else, this might advise Republicans parties nationwide to close their primaries so that liberal Democrats don’t end up choosing the 2016 GOP nominee for president, or any other nominees.

As for Cochran, representing establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C., he has apparently abandoned his base in favor of a win-no-matter-what attitude just to keep control of his seat. It does nothing to advance the cause of the American people or the Republican Party, only his hold on power.

Such a mindless, corrupt mentality forever divorces any pretense that Cochran and the Republican establishment care about representing the conservative base of the Republican Party.

And after Lisa Murkowski’s successful write-in campaign in Alaska when she lost the Republican primary to tea party challenger Joe Miller in 2010, and Charlie Crist’s unsuccessful independent bid for Florida’s Senate seat in 2010 after losing to Marco Rubio in the primary, politicos will have a harder time convincing McDaniel that the results of primaries must be respected.

After all, establishment candidates have had no trouble attempting to play the spoiler in those races. McDaniel may well fight on, and if the end result is that former Rep. Travis Childers (D-Miss.) is the next senator from Mississippi, nobody should have any illusions as to why it happened.

Then, we may all find out just how messy of a divorce the Republican breakup really is.

Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.

  • we don’t need rinos

    well the curtain has opened behind the scum Washington establishment ruling class…
    the establishment used race baiting ads saying Daniel was going away Miss benefits from blacks .. that the teaparty was going to deny blacks to vote in November
    Conservatives should not vote for rinos in November

  • believe

    People in Mississippi aren’t the brightest , there crime rate IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST IN THE NATION.


  • Herbert Baird

    I think you can say the same about California, Illinois, Michigan and Eastern New York. Unfortunately, it’s a deliberate trend to dumb down our society. The polls show a percentage of complicity on the economy. If you are a government worker or receiving entitlement checks, you are not hurting as the private sector. I wish this was explained every time poll ratings are shown.

  • Stilbelieve

    McDaniel should sue to have those Democrat votes thrown out.

  • jwatersphd

    You think McDaniel is going to have more of a chance in the whole state than in the Republican primary? It appears that the problem for McDaniel is that there are a lot of people who are not in the Tea Party (and, if other info we’ve seen is correct, a lot of people in it – don’t touch my social security or medicare, I’m a small government type) who actually need, and others who like, the things government brings. They’re not opposed to the jobs government brings, and one can imagine the African Americans are not happy about voter disenfranchisement (oh-sorry! “vote sanctification”) efforts linked to the far right. To me that suggests that the candidate sanctified by the Tea Party (McDaniel, here) would have less appeal statewide than Cochran. Presumably, wider appeal is what elections are about.

  • jwatersphd

    On what basis? They were legal, weren’t they?

  • jwatersphd

    So, he’s an advocate for Blacks’ voting rights? The Tea Party is no longer interested in voter ID? He advocates government assistance?

  • Lucambrian

    That depends. Miss. law stipulates that if someone votes cross-party in the primary, that individual MUST vote for the same candidate during the general election. Does anyone really think Democrats will vote for a Republican in the fall? Of course, in 2008, a federal appeals court determined that this law is “unenforceable”—which means the powers-that-be don’t want to enforce it.

  • jwatersphd

    Interesting law, then, isn’t it? How do you mean “the powers that be don’t want to enforce it”? Presumably they have secret ballots even down there, so, how DO you suggest they enforce it? Or maybe they didn’t think it through all that well.

    Another semi-stupid interpretation is that you couldn’t possibly change your mind between the primary and the election? You only get one opinion? And, who says?

    So what kind of court challenge is he supposed to make? Round up the cross over voters and put them under oath so they have to vote for Cochran again? What if they crossed over to vote for McDaniel? Maybe sounds stupid, but the Tea Party is full of people who benefit from government in all kinds of ways . . . yet claim to want less of it.

  • jwatersphd

    What should they do with that pole? It is a red state . . . still dumb?

  • gwinf

    For this disgrace, the Republicans WILL lose that Mississippi seat. Hope they enjoy their victory. It will be short lived. It is worth electing a democrat to teach these arses a valuable lesson!

  • ten

    I guess many fell for Cochran’s pitch….lets see what they get in return…probably business as usual in Washington. You reap what you sow. The majority of the people really don’t want change in Washington…they just want anything that will benefit themselves and they don’t care what happens to the country. The politicians want to hang on to power because power brings huge monetary gains to line their greedy pockets. Does anyone really care about where this country is going? Apparently the majority does not.

  • Lucambrian

    Presumably, the law was enacted to prevent just the sort of cross-party mischief that got Cochran his primary win. How Mississippi’s A.G. wishes to enforce it (or not) in this case is up to him.

  • jwatersphd

    C’mon, L, I know you can do better than that. It’s plainly unenforceable, if they are going to have secret ballots. Name one way the AG could enforce it. Whether he “wants” to or not is irrelevant. You don’t have to give up your cynical belief that the system is always crooked because of mal-intent or lack of manhood or corruption to see that. The law is broken. Hey – this fits a paranoid stance: They designed the law knowing it was broken so they could pretend to be trying to prevent cross party mischief, but they really wanted it all along. Who wrote, and who passed the idiot law in the first place? Probably a RINO or liberal . . . See? That’s easy, and we don’t need Staples.

  • jwatersphd

    I think the proper term is Polak.

  • Demorats or repukelicans, they are all greedy power hungry corrupt politicians, with hardly any worth a plug nickel. If this isn’t a perfect example why term limits need to be implemented, nothing is. That was the one mistake the founders made in the Constitution, back then no one could imagine there would be anyone who ran for office would want to make a career out of serving your country, so term limits outside of the office of president were overlooked. Now look at what we ended up with, corrupt asswipes like cochroach Cochran who used the tried and true liberal liars tactic of baiting the low education welfare foodstamp masses of asses which are clueless about the real issues. WAKE UP AMERICA…. we are all getting screwed. PERIOD

  • Robert J. Romano

    If there is any case, as is stated in the article, it would be that “Democrats who voted in the June 3 Democrat primary illegally participated in the June 24 Cochran-McDaniel runoff.” That’s illegal, and provable one way or another. And, is precisely what McDaniel’s legal team is looking at right now. McDaniel says they have already found more than 1,000 ineligible voters in one county alone: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/06/27/Chris-McDaniel-Weve-Found-1000-Examples-of-Ineligible-Voters-in-One-County

  • jwatersphd

    I agree, but that’s not what I’m responding to Lucambrian about. Obviously, the offense you describe is easy to prove and prosecute. As a matter of fact, isn’t it the case that anyone who voted in the June 3 Democratic primary would be ineligible to vote in the June 24 runoff, even if they were Republicans? The larger issue is whether people have a right to vote on an issue affecting them regardless of party membership. Had I been an African American I would have felt it was in my interest to vote for Cochran because McDaniel seems to have animus against such people. In one part of your article you laud people for ignoring the results of party primaries. One can hardly applaud that as acting on principle only if the results of the primary are not in line with one’s beliefs. I think generally the effects of party loyalties have been negative, at least of late, and I would be surprised if you, as a “small government” advocate, would not agree. And presumably you also agree that the part of the law Lucambrian is touting is unenforceable given the primacy of a secret ballot. Finally, that McDaniel et al have “found” over a thousand “ineligible” voters is a mere assertion, whose validity and pertinence will be tested in court.

  • zephaerie

    It’s incredibly simple. If you don’t want democrats voting in republican primaries, then demand the laws are changed. We don’t put up with that tom foolery in TX.

  • john1gun

    Childers has a more conservative voting record than Cochran. Childers voted against the TARP, the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and Obamacare in his time in the Congress. He is also pro-life and was endorsed by the NRA.

Back to top

Copyright © 2008-2016 Americans for Limited Government