Jackson Jambalaya

I vote for the person...sometimes its a democrat and sometimes a republican.

This is ridiculous and a complete joke.

well, now that we have that all cleared up. . .

I rest my case. Kid needs bone marrow donors. Post gets less than 100 hits. In five minutes, this already doubled it.

In a press conference, Mr Tyner further stated that "the McDaniel legal team now has evidence that Mr. Cochran was, in fact, the second gunman on the grassy knoll, is hiding Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in his garage, was the last person seen with Jimmy Hoffa, and was spotted last year wearing white after Labor Day." Mr Tyner said the evidence will be released at "the appropriate time." Mr. Tyner ended the press conference with a robust "Nanny Nanny Boo Boo!"

So, "No...state law shall be observed....". Good luck with that McD. Also, the people who reached out to the black voters were Cochran Republicans--and McD is going to complain about reaching out to black Mississippi citizens to expand the Republican Party base? For being inclusive instead of exclusive? For being in dialogue with black citizens and taking them seriously instead of ignoring them like McD? Let McD try; and let him be damned for it.

It's only a matter of time before McDaniel demands to see Cochran's birth certificate

You just have to love the hypocrisy of the McDaniel campaign. He claims open primaries in Mississippi are illegal, but everyone knows he would not have this viewpoint if he won. This argument about Democrats voting in the primary is just as hypocritical. If Democrats had voted in the primary for McDaniel and was the sole cause of him winning the primary, he would just claim it was further proof that he is not an extremist and that all of Mississippi wants a change. At some point he has to just say I concede.

I am not able to give bone marrow. What do you want me to do/say?

Who did the Democrat voters actually vote for, Chris? And how do you know? Quit moving the goalposts.

I voted for you, but I'm fortunate to be able to get a mulligan. I wasn't so fortunate in 2000 and since to recognize my mistakes before they bit me in the ass.

Just stop, man. There's no damn way you could buy my vote now. At this moment, our immediate problem in the GOP isn't getting rid of the incumbent. Right now, first priority is getting rid of you. This problem will now have to wait six years, and you're making it worse, not better.

Get off the stage. You're not very good playing a statesman with real solid convictions. You're just a narcissist hogging the limelight.

Go home to your family.

From today's story in Yahoo about Republican Rand Paul:
"Paul's latest gambit, as you may have seen, involves an appeal to black voters.... ...Despite all the extremist rhetoric of the tea party crowd, there will be a hunger among Republican voters in 2016 to somehow recalibrate and mainstream the party...."
So is McD going to make the same challenge before the RNC as to Rand Paul? The party is moving away from exclusivity as a white male club to get ready for 2016. McD is seriously out of touch with what is going on in the national Republican Party.

so says Mitch Tyner, "Outstanding Trial Lawyer of the Year" http://www.tynerlawfirm.com/News/Tyneralta.html

Mitch Tyner is a complete idiot. Thad didn't lose GOP votes between 6/3 and 6/24 by at least 25,000 and possibly more. Pretty easy to validate. Look at precincts carried by Bryant in 11 and Romney in 12. In Madison and Rankin alone there was a 5200 vote increase in GOP boxes. This guy should be disbarred based on sheer stupidity.

Is the subtext of the press release, "we've got nothing on a legal challenge to the election, so here's our hail mary"?

Chris someone needs to tell you we don't have party registration
in Mississippi. When I vote on election day I am whatever I want tobe. It is none of your business what I decide to be. GOT That?

If Mississippi doesn't require party registration, how do they conclusively know how many Dems voted? Or Republicans, for that matter? Since election night, McDaniel has claimed he got more Republican votes than Cochran. There's no way his camp can prove either, and now his lawyer is making that claim. Has anybody been able to prove this??

Leave it to this well-oiled machine to make a press release that you can't find on his campaign website nor his Facebook page, nor the CL. If a press release falls in the woods and nobody is there to read it, is it a press release?

while I would have much rather Chris won it outright, I do have to say this constant grasping at straws has gotten old quickly.

Is this their long-awaited legal challenge?

1:36 I think you are right. This is a way of diverting attention for Tyner, who made exaggerated promises of what he would do in his press conference he can not keep, from his inability to file a challenge that will not get him sanctioned. Instead of climbing out of his hole, he is digging it so deep he, down at the bottom with the Cat, the Rat and Watson their dog, will never be able to climb out. Can't wait for them to start scratching and clawing each other. Coming soon as one tries to crawl out, and the other pulls the one trying to escape back down.

You All can be Assured , there will not be another Legal election in MS.
Why ? If it is Legal to cheat , cheaters will take over.
This election ain't about any party, but about Principles. You liberal repubs may have won for a while, but this will bite you NEXT. God's Word says "as you reap" Not as you want to.
Laugh the short time you have , just be ready when it's done to you!
Wayne

If the Tea Party is a non-partisan movement [not a political party] made up of Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and Independents, and the Tea Party endorsed, supported, funded and voted for McDaniel, then can we say that McDaniel couldn't truly be the nominee based on Republican votes either?

without party registration, how is it cheating to ask for votes from anybody?

NMC: they're going to sue the RNC next.

Wayne, an FYI for you, McDaniel, Tyner, Sojourner, et. al.:

Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness called a "psychosis" in which a person cannot tell what is real from what is imagined. The main feature of this disorder is the presence of delusions, which are unshakable beliefs in something untrue. People with delusional disorder experience non-bizarre delusions, which involve situations that could occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, deceived, conspired against, or loved from a distance. These delusions usually involve the misinterpretation of perceptions or experiences. In reality, however, the situations are either not true at all or highly exaggerated.

Sure, it's from WebMD, but you get the gist.

I think McDaniel should be commended. He has fine something no one in Mississippi has archived, his campaign has caused voters of all parties, ages, races and social classes, to untite in a single cause: making sure Chris McDaniel isn't elected. Thanks for bringing us all together Chris, now it's tome for you to fade into obscurity

12:13, I believe this version should be named McDaniel Derangement Syndrome or #MCD for short.

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but does the word "primary" mean anything in the rule quoted? If so,the whole thing is moot since the McDaniel camp is complaining about Dem votes in the RUNOFF.
And in the last paragraph, Cochran might have lost votes in the primary, it was the runoff that included any Dem votes. There was no way Cochran could have known ahead of time that he'd lose Republican votes in the runoff.

Touchstones: You say, "If it is Legal to cheat , cheaters will take over." If Cochran cheated, where is the McD challenge? It is not legal to cheat, but unfortunately for you Teabaggers, it is not cheating or unlawful to appeal to your black fellow citizens to vote in a Republican election, or to broaden the party and vote against narrow minded extremists from a bygone era in Mississippi's past that is GONE FOR GOOD, and GOOD RIDDANCE TO THAT. You self-righteously quote the bible, but the same could be quoted back to you, and says a lot about what McD's supporters are really like.

Maybe McDaniel misunderstood God during God's exclusive pre-election one-on-one interview. Maybe God didn't say Chris would win the election, maybe God said he would make election history.

I, personally, can't wait for the day that my child comes home from a Mississippi history or polysci class says "dad, do you remember where you were the day everyone realized what a douche bag Chris McDaniel was?"

How long can you tread water?

For the sake of argument, let's assume McD-bag is correct. How do we prove who is a republican and who is a democrat? In Mississippi, we don't register with party affiliation. And because we don't, we cannot say that any republicans voted for McD.

Wayne @12:03,

You're making yourself look like an immature bigot by throwing your self-selected scripture at everybody who doesn't share your opinion on this very secular matter.

The only person who would agree with your methodology of preaching hate to your opposition is someone as deluded as you appear to be.

Biblical threats of God's vengeance are not yours to make, little man, and your efforts to demean others are a mockery of the principles you profess to abide by and support. If there is any judgement due for others, need I remind you that it's not yours to make?

Do you need me to find 5 or 6 passages to remind you how inappropriate your behavior is, considering the high esteem you hold for yourself as Jesus' favorite "christian"? I'd only need ten minutes, if it will help tweak your attitude.

With your own personal zealotry in support without reservation of this crazed demagogue, McDaniel, you do boundless harm to the reputation of your own personal witness, not to mention further harming your political allies with your scorched-earth mentality.

A bit of perspective and self-awareness are needed in your toolbox, sir. I'd suggest you find both immediately. You might also pick up a couple of Dale Carnegie books also, keep reading until you get it. Then read your Bible scripture. It'll take on a whole new meaning when you're not trying to bludgeon others with your sanctimonious drivel.

No, I'm not a Thad supporter; neither am I on team McDaniel anymore. He's shown what he stands for--- himself, only. You've shown your own colors as well, Wayne.

Maybe an appeal to the UN is next?

1:06 is right. Without party registration, both candidates just got a bunch of votes from people not officially affiliated with any policital party. Heck, of the few that are "officially" offiliated with the Republican party, I'd bet Thad won by a landslide, as Thad clearly had the support of the establishment.

So who hasn't McDaniel/Tyner sued. I think I/we have been looking at this all wrong. We, myself included, have been criticizing Tyner for filing frivolous suits over a lost election campaign. However, I'm begining to think that Tyner is a genius. I have no idea how much Tyner is billing McDaniel for all this, but whatever it is, in the lazy month, Chris McDaniel has singlehandedly financed the Tyner children's future college education.

So where I thought Tyner was just as deluded as McDaniel, maybe Tyner is just cashing in on an overly litigious delusional cash cow.

Has anyone else noticed that McDaniel's law firm, Hortman, Harlow, Bassi, Robinson, and McDaniel, has been absent from all this? What does it say about the merits of your "challenge" when you are paying Tyner a ton of money, rather than giving the business to your own firm. Personally, my guess is that Hortman Hollow decided early on to distance the from McDaniel's antics.

So... wouldn't a strict reading of this rule mean that no-one who has voted in a Democratic Primary would be eligible to vote for an official RNC candidate, including #McDissapointment himself?

That's the most bizarre rule ever.

This only applies to State laws that allow a person to vote in multiparty primaries. Mississippi has no such law (in fact it has an unenforceable law that says much the same thing).

So 11(b) doesn't apply to Mississippi.

Hmmm...I wonder how many of these Anonymous commenters are on the Capital Resources payroll....
wake up people.

Fidel Idithun

2:16 pm
I agree with you there. 11(b) applies to states like Louisiana where you can literally vote in any primary, regardless of whether they are held on the same day.

2:30 pm.
We all understood your point the first 50 times you posted the exact comment. You're convinced that every pro Cochran comment is generated by the lobbying group capital resources, we get it. You're wrong, this anti-McDaniel commenter didn't even know what the capital resources group was until your same comment last week. Thanks, maybe I will send them a check.

Freaking unbelievable, but it's nothing more than McDaniel loving attention, and I am sure another beg for money email will follow shortly.

McDaniel, YOU LOST. You aren't moving to DC. Please go away.

2:31 your legal analysis appears to be right on point and dispositive. Once again, Tyner is operating more out of wishful grasping at straws rather than objective legal analysis. If he brings that challenge for McD to the RNC, he will once again provide for an opportunity for one and all to make mirth.

Rule 11(b) states:
“No state Republican Party rule or state law shall be observed that allows persons who have participated or are participating in the selection of any nominee of a party other than the Republican Party, including, but not limited to, through the use of a multiparty primary or similar type ballot, to participate in the selection of a nominee of the Republican Party for that general election. No person nominated in violation of this rule shall be recognized by the Republican National Committee as the nominee of the Republican Party from that state.”

*************

Looks like Tyner just proved why Cochran can not run as a Republican in November by the rule stated above!

And commentators on this site do not know how to read AND comprehend English also.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...!!!!!

3:48
If your interpretation of the rule was correct, then no GOP nominated out of Louisiana would ever be recognized.

If this is all based on principle and not winning or losing, can we assume that the McDaniel camp would be fighting for the voter rolls to prove their point of injustice had they won? They wouldn't need the lawsuit, but would they still be "combing the desert" of the voter rolls to make sure they had an accurate number of crossover voters?

3:48 Reading this generously to you, the rule would at most prohibit crossover voting, right? Well, that did not happen significantly as we all now know, and very few the cited 30 to 40G votes McD cites were crossovers, so what's your point. If you are reading the rule to mean if one ever participated in a Democratic nomination, then Crissy is disqualified for sure since he voted in Democratic races earlier! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...!!!!!

How does McD know that no democrat voted for him? Since McD voted in Democrat Primaries it follows that some of "those democrats" may have voted for him. Why one would is beyond my understanding.

A McDaniel press release that didn't include a plea for donations to protect voter integrity. Must be out of prayer cloths.

How many tribunals have to deny McDaniel before he gives up. I am honestly surprised he hasn't appealed the Miss. Sup. Ct. denial to the 5th Cir. citing those "constitutional considerations" he was rambling on about in his petition. Now he wants the national GOP to get involved. The natuonal GOP, the same group his tea party people are crusading against because they think the have lost touch? Not likely, Chris, the national GOP doesn't like you either.

Oh Good Lord!

So...independents need not bother with the GOP primary but Democrats will accept us?

Are you f'ing kidding me?

So how does McDaniel prove for whom the alleged 30,000 to 40,000 "Democrats" voted? How do you prove who is a Democrat? (I vote Republican, but how does anyone prove that I am a Republican because there is no registration by party. One can go by which primary I most recently voted in, but what prevents me from deciding I want to change parties in the meantime. Without party registration, there is no way to prove party affiliation, except by self declaration. The rules on cross over voting don't apply to party affiliation. They merely state, arguably, that one can not participate in more than one party's primary in a single election cycle.

Even if the RNC rule applies to the RNC' s recognition or nonrecognition, would that prevent the state party from recognizing Cochran as it's nominee? The rule certainly does not say that, so I see no reason why Cochran would not be the duly nominated candidate of the Mississippi Republican Party, regardless of what the RNC does.

If the rule applies as McDaniel's legal team argues, since Mississippi law does not prevent participation in the Republican primary, at the very least, voters who previously voted in a Democratic primary in a prior election cycle, I suppose that Mississippi Republicans cannot nominate any candidate. "Democrats," if you can prove that specific voters are in fact Democrats, are allowed to and do participate in Republican primaries, therefore McDaniel is not eligible to be the Republican nominee either, since it isn't a specific candidate who is disqualified, but any candidate who participated in such a "tainted" election.

If the law does require the state party follow the RNC rules in order to nominate a candidate in a state election, I hope someone will tell is about that statute. I would be surprised if such a law exists, but I am not an election law specialist.

4:41

there is no appeal process from the MS Supreme Court to the Fifth Circuit. Did you take any basic civics in school? There are state courts and federal courts. different systems.

although the bizarre chrissie cult would probably try such a stunt.

I loved seeing the Mcnuts at Neshoba with their mouths taped and holding betrayed signs. Wow that was extremely effective.

5:49
No but I did go to law school. You can appeal from a state Supreme Court to SCOTUS when there is a preserved federal question involved in the state supreme court's decision. Not saying McDaniel's constitutional claims have merit.

Tape over the mouth was the best decision ever. Why couldn't we put tape over there moths from the begining?

At the end of the (another) day, what I take away from it all continues to be this: It's a hollow, bizarre and insincere claim that continues to be trumpeted about 'Cochran's' attempt to bring blacks under the tent.

Anybody, black or white, repub or dem, liberal or conservative, knows with absolute certainty that none of this was about opening ones arms and welcoming blacks/democrats to join in the process and break bread with republicans.

The only democrats the Barbour extended family have any degree of affection for are the ones cleaning their parlors, cooking their dinner and manicuring their bushes.

The only democrats Cochran and his handlers have any affection for are the ones who let Thad know he's at the wrong meeting.

If this were not true, the Cochran/Barbourites would have laid out the welcome mat years ago and at least before the first primary vote was cast.

Please stop with the incessant trumpeting of this bullshit.

The McNuts always ask about Thad speaking but I havent seen ole Chris speak in a long time. Wonder what he and Melanie are doing?

These guys are supposedly on the side of the states making their own laws but here is the RNC thinking it has a veto over state election law and True the Vote is asking a federal court to overturn state law in favor of a very broad interpretation of federal voter registration law that Republicans opposed and refused to enforce.

7:06- blacks have supported Cochran long before now... They, as well as other voters assumed that he would beat a zealot like McAsshat, and came out in numbers for the runoff.

As for your inferencece that all blacks are servants.... There is a substantial middle and upper middle class black population in Mississippi.... Lawyers, doctors, executives..... They don't have to be told how to vote. McDaniel gave them all the energy they needed by his own words and actions.

Vote for whoever the fuck you want to, but don't act like you represent the Republican Party in Mississippi.

7:06 : At the end of "another day", why has your guy still been unable to file a challenge?

McDaniel was right about one thing... The party does need purging, just not the kind he was thinking of.

Wingnuts, fruitcakes, teabaggers..... Go start your own party. Leave the GOP alone.

I consider myself a moderate democrat and I did not vote in the primary. I did vote in the runoff because the thought of a nut job, tea person like McDaniel representing me was nauseating. Thankfully, he has proven me right.

8:24. Welcome to the Republican Party. Please stay. We need moderates like you.

I am really worried about this because McDaniels also had democrats that supported him and that also make him ineligible for the position also.

HOLD EVERTHING!!!
We haven't heard Michael Watson's
opinion on the RNC rules. None of us will know the truth until HE speaks.

how is mc daniel a nut (8:24)? The only representative from Mississippi that would make noise and stand up about the invasion coming from our southern border would be McDaniel. Why are we so worried about the southern invasion? Cause one, its important to our security. You knew that right? And there are other factors involved as well. But Mcdaniel is a nut though.

@824 there is no such thing as a moderate democrat. You are a democrat or your not. you guys vote faithfully for the democrats. If you are moderate then you and your other moderates would come up with an alternative to the establishment like the tea party broke from the establishment repubs. But we are the crazy ones right?

July 31, 2014 at 7:31 PM
"Wonder what he and Melanie are doing?"

Pillow talk re unicorns & trannies?

9:36 pm.

Yes. McDaniel is crazy. Because one, he won't concede. It's not bravery, it's denial. Two, he thinks that he can get the office by publicly accusing Cochran of appealing to African-American voters. That's not illegal, it's called broadening one's base. And McDaniel ends up looking like a bigot; regardless of where he stood a month ago, he is now unelectable in Mississippi, his die-hard supporters notwithstanding.

Finally here is a tip. You wrote:

"Why are we so worried about the southern invasion? Cause one, its important to our security."

In order to make a cogent argument, usually "one" is followed by a "two" otherwise, it appears that you only have one good reason. See example above. And please name one bill McDaniel has authored or sponsored in Mississippi dealing with immigration, preferably one of the few things he passed. You write as though no one is talking about it in Washington, but is about all anyone has talked about this month.

And no, I am not a sock puppet, and I'm not on any capital resources payroll.

@9:39

The difference is that the Democrats don't let crazy left wingers run the party like the right wing crazies in Tea Party runs the GOP.

The Democratic Party doesn't support Dennis Kucinich or Cynthia McKinney for statewide or national office. Democrats marginalize them because, well, because they are crazy.

The teahadists opted for tape and signs over pacifiers at the fair yesterday. Guess after all the screeds online, they were tuckered out.

http://hortmanharlow.com/

So...does this mean Democrats could keep Republicans from holding any elected office in open primary states simply by voting in the GOP primary and then confessing afterwards?

I saw former Republican Chairman at the Neshoba County Fair wearing a "I've had enought tea, Thank you" sticker. Where can a can I get one - or more!

Well, what Chris McDaniel failed to peruse is rule #1(a.)" under Ni circumstances shall any of these rules be construed to apply to any go along to get along country club republican candidate" What's funny is the Barbour crowd pushed for this rule now suddenly it can only be interpreted in such a fashion as to basically never apply...the rule doesn't state "registered" voters and doesn't state solely multi-party ballots. The real damning thing here is that all of these Barbour, NRSC, Pete Perry geniuses have bragged about reaching out to the democrat voters to put Thad over the top...clearly these rules were aimed at preventing such an occurrence, however, the Republican party doesn't stand for much of anything anymore so hats off to you smart sons of bitches for figuring out that $15 was the optimal threshold payout to squeak out a win

The tape over the mouth thing makes me laugh each time I see it. It's so high school.

I love that McDaniel and the tea part has pretty much written Cochran's platform for him. All this talk of Thad appealing to African-American voters has made Thad the people's candatite.

Rule 11(b) is crucial in all this mess and it should be enforced. But not that Rule 11(b), I mean MRCP 11(b).

10:19
Quite right. If Tyner files a suit that has no hope of success, Rule 11 MRCP as well as the MS Liability Accountability Act should yield sanctions. Maybe Tyner is trying to get up the courage now to tell McD to stand down. Why put your hard work and long developed legal career on the line for that bozo who is so little respected except in the lowest order of society?

9:39: There are no "moderate" Democrats, but there are certainly "liberal" Democrat, according to McDaniel- which is it? Are there levels or are there not- because you are claiming there aren't when your leader says there is.

Give it up. My goodness McDaniel's making the clingers look like complete fools by the hour almost. If I voted for him, I'd be pissed as hell at the amount of lying he does, especially towards his own base to rip them off of their hard earned money. If he had a challenge as he said, he wouldn't be scrounging for these silly rules; it'd be full speed ahead preparing that thing.

At some point, you'll have to face the fact that he's a liar. Or maybe you won't; maybe you'll continue to follow the sheep and have some twisted view of politics and how it relates to us and continue to perpetuate hysteria when there is none.

What alarms me the most is many of these people have kids they're exposing to this mess. Terrible. You're training them to be sheep and blindly follow someone that espouses what you want to hear and never question this.

To July 31, @3:14 p.m.:

Rule 11(b) states:
“No state Republican Party rule or state law shall be observed that allows persons who have participated or are participating in the selection of any nominee of a party other than the Republican Party, including, but not limited to, through the use of a multiparty primary or similar type ballot, to participate in the selection of a nominee of the Republican Party for that general election. No person nominated in violation of this rule shall be recognized by the Republican National Committee as the nominee of the Republican Party from that state.”

*************

Looks like Tyner just proved why Cochran can not run as a Republican in November by the rule stated above!

And commentators on this site do not know how to read AND comprehend English also.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...!!!!!

Please follow your own suggestion about reading and writing the English language. "Cannot" is one word.

"person or persons who have participated in the selection of any nominee of a party other than the Republican party"

That would only exclude those who voted in the Democratic primary or Democratic party officials.

Reading comprehension matters.

It's over folks. We have received the definitive word from our resident legal scholar at 11:24am.

I'd like to wish Chris McDaniel the best of luck in his campaign for election to the US Senate in November. As a fellow Republican, I intend to support him 100%, just as any TRUE Conservative Republican should support their party against the liberal Democrat Party, whose members openly support Blacks, Communists, Marxists, Fascists, welfare, Satan, MSNBC, Hollywood Libruls, hippies, Black Panther members, teh gays, terrorists, and Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream.

Again, congratulations to Chris McDaniel on running such a fine, professional WINNING GOP Primary campaign!

We look forward to seeing you in Washington, DC in January!

GrungyGrittyGimp AKA Jones County Bagger!!

Grungy: So do you think the major breakthrough that McD is supposed to announce to the World Monday at 2:30 via Mr. Tyner is that they have proof positive that 40,000 plus voters, in violation of Rule 11(b)RNC, ate Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream on June 3 before voting for Thad on June 24? Or does that announcement have something to do with McD and "teh gays"? Like you, just hanging around for the announcement.

Were can I get the "We've had enough tea, thank you" stickers? McDaniel and Whojourner need to resign from the State Senate or they can come in and collect their pay and just sit there - doing nothing! Dearing for Senate!

11:24 said "Looks like Tyner just proved why Cochran can not run as a Republican in November by the rule stated above!

And commentators on this site do not know how to read AND comprehend English also."

Sorry, but your conclusion is wrong, unless there is a state law that makes state party nominations subject to RNC rules. The RNC may choose not to recognize the nominee, but that does not prevent the state party from certifying its nominee under applicable state law.

And if the RNC rule, as interpreted by Tyner, did somehow bind the state party, McDaniel also could not qualify as the party nominee since the rule applies to the election process, not a specific candidate. No Mississippi Republican nominee could be recognized by the RNC.

I would do anything to take back my vote for Chris McDaniel. All of my family voted for him and they all wish they could take their vote back. Does Chris realize what a fool he is making himself out to be with his own supporters? GIVE IT UP DUDE!!!

Actually, I've had a craving for Ben & Jerry's since someone compared McDaniel's Beating a Dead Horse Lying & Grifting Tour™ to The Grateful Dead and then KF mentioned "Truckin".

It seems my snark has tapped out. After a pint of Cherry Garcia this weekend, I'll be back in the saddle on Monday, just in time to see the tears of Jimmy Swaggart, er, Chris McDaniel.

A Friday announcement to make a Monday announcement. Had I ever been a supporter of his, I would've punted on his delusional ass a month ago.

6:09 It appears my work here is done. I'm off to Orange Beach to sell T-shirts in the parking lot at the Phish show. Maybe I'll drift back up here to sell some off the "No thanks - I've had enough tea" stickers once the buzz wears off :-)

August 1, 2014 at 4:27 PM
Thank you for stating that do clearly and concisely.

4:27 does have it correct, but does not give the complete picture methinks. Recognition of a nominee by the RNC, is not the same thing as saying that the MSGOP cannot tell the sec-state of MS who the certified nominee is, true.

Everybody here seems to be missing the point of RNC 11(b), which is about spending national-party money! First of all, as I read the exact rule, it specifically applies to illegal-double-voting, which is to say, somewhere in the neighborhood of 909 to 9999 votes during the 6/24 r-runoff, depending on which camp's estimates one believes. (The rule does not specify a count... reading it literally even one single illegal-crossover-vote in the 6/3 d-prime followed by a vote in the 6/24 r-runoff would 'disqualify' the repub from getting RNC money!) Under my interpretation of the English, therefore, team McDaniel mentioning the 35k figure, which is the estimate of the TOTAL amount of tactical-dems, technically-legal as well as prolly-illegal, who decided to vote (most of them *exclusively* on the r-side ... without voting in a d-primary at all in 2014) is very wrong-headed. They should have said, 909 to 9999 illegal-double-voters-who-crossed-over. But the english of the rule is a bit confusing, as various comments above prove. The exact meaning does not matter, in terms of MSGOP behavior, and ballot-printing, though; it only matters for the money-gusher.

4:27 makes the point that, no matter what 11(b) says, the MSGOP and the MS sec-state do NOT have to bow to what the RNC "recognizes", so as far as state-level funds are concerned, everything is go for Cochran-in-the-general-election.

The point that team McDaniel is making, regards funding from the national party, as funnelled via the RNC, and also I presume as funnelled via the NRSC and other PACs that are tied to the national party's recognition-of-a-nominee. Cochran has officially launched his general-election-campaign as of 7/31 at the county fair. However, in order for him to be given RNC funds for teevee and such, to produce adverts that will name Cochran as the repub who should beat Childers this November, the RNC has to officially designate Cochran as the nationally-recognized nominee for the Senate seat in MS this year. Rule 11(b) says they cannot do so.

Now, there is still an "out" for the pro-Cochran folks. RNC rules specify that, if a majority of the RNC members from the state in question take a vote amongst themselves, they can override the nominee-thing. RNC members from MS are Henry Barbour and Joe Nosef and the national committeewoman (name slips my mind at the moment) which means that 2 of the 3 votes will override rule 11(b).

So basically, what team McDaniel is looking for here, is to get a formal on-the-record vote, from Henry and Nosef and the third, whether they will officially make Cochran the nominee for MS by overriding the rule 11(b) provision. All three positions are up for re-election during the MS state-level GOP convention in 2016, and although Henry Barbour will almost certainly face a tea-challenger for his national committeeman slot (and quite likely for his SREC slot too), the other two may or may not be challenged.

Anyways, the mention of rule 11(b) by team McDaniel has absolutely nothing/nada/zero to do with the challenge-lawsuit. They are bringing up the rule 11(b) of the RNC, because they want to delay the money-gusher from DC into the pockets of team Cochran... and more importantly, because they want to get Nosef and the other two RNC members from MS on record, as to whether they are pro-Cochran enough to force the money-gusher open again by manually overriding said rule.

7:29 a.m. may be right as far as what is the intent of McDaniel's team in making an argument about Rule 11(b), but the rule is far from clear that it has any application to Mississippi. One could drive the proverbial Mack truck through it. The rule might prevent recognition by The RNC of the nominee of the state party if the state law or state party rules permitted persons to participate in the primaries of more than one party in the same election cycle. However, the general understanding, wrong perhaps, is that voters in Mississippi may not participate in the primary of more than one party in a single election cycle. At worst, the votes of those who voted in both the Democratic primary and the Republican run-off might be invalidated, but unless there are more of those votes than the margin of difference, it would affect the outcome of the election, nor implicate the Rule 11(b) since such votes are arguably not permitted by law or state party rule. I seriously doubt that there are in excess of 7,000 such votes.

It will be up to the RNC to make the determination of whether Cochran can be recognized by the RNC. Given the arguable ambiguity of the rule, there is not much doubt about the outcome on that score.
More hot air and waste if time and resources by the McDaniel team. It smacks of desperation with no serious chance of success.

11:10am, we agree that the rule is badly-written. Knowing the history of the Ginsberg rule (which Barbour voted for in August 2012), I can say with reasonable confidence that the rule is ambiguous on purpose. If you had to put it in a nutshell, the purpose of the new-in-2012-rules is this: "if the DC bigwigs do not like the nominee we can refuse to recognize them... and if we do like somebody we can recognize them if we want... state-level decisions be damned."

As to whether it is a waste of time for team McDaniel to bring this up, it depends on what you mean by success. If the goal is pointing out that Cochran is in violation of rule 11(b), and that the RNC is no longer just tacitly going along with the results of the r-runoff, but ACTIVELY now funding Cochran ... and that Henry Barbour is directly involved as an SREC member and as the RNC member and ditto for Nosef ... then the mission is accomplished.

If the goal was to actually get the RNC to *follow* the rule, or to *help* with the investigation actively, then yes, I would agree with you that there is little chance of it happening. McDaniel is filing a formal protest of sorts, to get on the record what is happening, methinks. Note that rule 11(b) was brought up by some national tea groups -- TPP and FW among others -- back around July 11th or something, who sent an open letter to the RNC about the violation. McDaniel did not sign the letter at the time, but now that the RNC money-gusher is about to fund team Cochran as the recognized nominee, he wants to make sure that rule 11(b) is contested by the challenger.

I will note that the particular reason to mention it now, specifically by team McDaniel, is that there is a quarterly RNC meeting on the 7th or 8th of August or something, at which Ed Martin of Missouri and other pro-full-investigation folks will likely put forth a motion, and which Henry Barbour and/or Joe Nosef will have to contest.

Since the RNC has been silent so far, I doubt they will suddenly change their minds... but it is important not to stay silent, if the RNC's tacit role is to come to light. Plenty of tea-party folks will not donate to the NRSC or the RNC or the sitting-senator-leadership PACs that gave money to team Cochran after 6/10, knowing what was being done with that cash; the stuff about rule 11(b) is not about "success" in the sense of getting the RNC to do something, it is about "success" in making the RNC actively state their position, rather than just tacitly supporting team Cochran.

Now, whether that counts as hot air, or not, is in the eye of the beholder. But it is not desperate; the hope of overturning the runoff results is unrelated to the RNC stuff, which is about money and MSGOP seats in 2016. That is important stuff, I would say.

As you point out, the easy way to overturn the runoff results is to file a legal challenge, and show that 7700+ votes were in fact illegal-double-voter-crossovers. That is not the whole story, though; evidence that team Cochran or affiliated PACs were actively encouraging such voters, in adverts or via instructions to pollworkers, would also hurt the integrity of the outcome. And of course, evidence of buying votes, with intent to violate the law, would REALLY be bad news, and the number of those need not be 7700+ to force a redo-runoff. Even if it is proven that there were, between 6/4 and 6/24, a thousand "workers" that were each paid a cash sum totaling less than $99 per person, would be suspicious, right?

So yes, in the end, the legal challenge is the main chance of success, assuming the SREC decides against a redo-runoff and demands the legal challenge is made... and of course, both Nosef and Barbour are on the SREC, not just reps to the RNC, so there is that. It is all a bit confusing, but it IS all tied together, too.

p.s. My calculations estimate that there will be somewhere between 5000 and 8500 illegal-double-voters, out of the ~10k irregularities (even team Cochran admits already to 900 of them) but I have no access to pollbook-info. If the number is below 7700, then hard evidence of inciting illegal votes and/or vote-buying is crucial.