Cochran wins MS GOP primary over Tea Party

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,647
5,220
136
Called for Cochran. Longtime GOP senator that looks like was pushed over the top in the run off election with the help of black democrats.

Tea party heads should be exploding...

Another swing and a miss for the tea party. McDaniels proved a strong challenge to the establishment senator, and had been seen as leading comfortably heading into today's election. However, Cochran's strategy change of courting liberals, as well as McDaniels strange and constant missteps left the challenger short.
 
Last edited:

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,674
482
126
As a former resident of the state of Mississippi, I'm glad to see there's at least some pragmatism left in the state. You don't vote out the senior party member on the effin appropriations committee, particularly since Republicans might regain the Senate.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,475
6,896
136
I was flipping channels between FOX and MSNBC just to see how both reacted to Cochran's win.

I LOL'd when for quite some time MSNBC was calling Cochran the winner while FOX kept insisting that the race was still too close to call, which IMO, was done in the hopes that it would somehow aid McDaniel's chances for a late rallying win.
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
Democrats voters keeping old establishment players in office for decades. Just like they did with Rangel. How nice.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
As a former resident of the state of Mississippi, I'm glad to see there's at least some pragmatism left in the state. You don't vote out the senior party member on the effin appropriations committee, particularly since Republicans might regain the Senate.

Are you saying they should have done that because they will want more handouts or because if the republicans gain the senate they will cut the pork Mississippi will receive?

I'm guessing politics trumps principals.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
Democrats voters keeping old establishment players in office for decades. Just like they did with Rangel. How nice.

Yep it was all them democrats!


I'm guessing that you still don't like wearing helmets even since your last accident.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,159
136
Crossover voting is ALWAYS overplayed.
People just do not buy into doing that.
The percentage of those actually crossing over is nearly undetectable. Its that low.
Just maybe the tea party guy lost because he was that tea party guy?
And just maybe electing yet another do nothing anti everything tea party guy is getting a bit pointless. People want elected officials that actually do stuff and not some knee jerk tea bagger that stands for nothing except obstruction.
And these tea baggers do not respect anything, not even the voter.
Look at how they blame the process and the voter if they lose.
They are anti American.
They campaign not to earn support but only to have their 15 minutes of fame.
People should wise up to them.
Anyone running for public office with that attitude against everything including the election process and the people that cast the votes is nothing more than a loony.
We usually lock up loonies in padded room.

And oh man was this loser a very sore loser.
An indication that Cochran was indeed the best man for the job.
.
.
 
Last edited:

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,647
5,220
136
Democrats voters keeping old establishment players in office for decades. Just like they did with Rangel. How nice.

The irony is that Democrats made it more difficult for themselves to win in Nov.

They basically said "we would rather have a conservative Washington insider than the potential of ending up with a right wing extremist."

Also illustrates just how unelectable Tea Party candidates really are. If stars are not perfectly aligned, they have no chance even in the deepest of red states
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
As a former resident of the state of Mississippi, I'm glad to see there's at least some pragmatism left in the state. You don't vote out the senior party member on the effin appropriations committee, particularly since Republicans might regain the Senate.

Yes, especially when half of your state's income comes from the federal government.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Crossover voting is ALWAYS overplayed.
People just do not buy into doing that.
The percentage of those actually crossing over is nearly undetectable. Its that low.
Just maybe the tea party guy lost because he was that tea party guy?
And just maybe electing yet another do nothing anti everything tea party guy is getting a bit pointless. People want elected officials that actually do stuff and not some knee jerk tea bagger that stands for nothing except obstruction.
And these tea baggers do not respect anything, not even the voter.
Look at how they blame the process and the voter if they lose.
They are anti American.
They campaign not to earn support but only to have their 15 minutes of fame.
People should wise up to them.
Anyone running for public office with that attitude against everything including the election process and the people that cast the votes is nothing more than a loony.
We usually lock up loonies in padded room.

And oh man was this loser a very sore loser.
An indication that Cochran was indeed the best man for the job.
.
.

now your a Cochran fan?

your just a fan of the good old boy network of government.

Liberal democratic for hand outs for the takers of America, and big biz republicans willing to supply slave labor to their backers.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
McDaniel refused to concede in his speech and man did he show what a poor loser he is. He is accusing Democrats of voting for Cochran..lol Well, I think McDaniel's former talks about the opposite sex, blacks, and a lot of other crazy things just scared the piss out of a lot of folks and that's the real reason he lost to Cochran.
 

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
Crossover voting is ALWAYS overplayed.
People just do not buy into doing that.
The percentage of those actually crossing over is nearly undetectable. Its that low.
Just maybe the tea party guy lost because he was that tea party guy?
And just maybe electing yet another do nothing anti everything tea party guy is getting a bit pointless. People want elected officials that actually do stuff and not some knee jerk tea bagger that stands for nothing except obstruction.
And these tea baggers do not respect anything, not even the voter.
Look at how they blame the process and the voter if they lose.
They are anti American.
They campaign not to earn support but only to have their 15 minutes of fame.
People should wise up to them.
Anyone running for public office with that attitude against everything including the election process and the people that cast the votes is nothing more than a loony.
We usually lock up loonies in padded room.

And oh man was this loser a very sore loser.
An indication that Cochran was indeed the best man for the job.
.
.


Generally I would agree but in this case Cochran's camp was actively telling Dems they could vote in the primary. This was not a outside group or a internet posting but something they were doing.

I'm curious if someone will look at the rolls to see how many Dems voted. Should be easy to tell.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,378
7,443
136
Democrats working with Republicans where it counts, now back to our regularly scheduled government shutdown.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
Yes, especially when half of your state's income comes from the federal government.
i am not racist, but i think mississippi gets so much from the u.s.g. because it has a higher percentage of blacks and old people than any other State. maybe they have a lot of military bases and VA hospitals there, but i think a lot of it is because of the welfare like medicaid, schip, wic, social insecurity, food stamps, and medicare.

it's fucked up that physician assisted suicide is illegal yet it isnt legal to keep all of your own money. i bet at least half the people on welfare would commit suicide if they had a safe painless way to do so but the State makes that it illegal so it can stay in power. spending on welfare and warfare is the health of the State. the State is trying to keep me alive so that they can one day put me on welfare. that makes me wish our rulers become homeless. i mean, it is none of that piece of shit obama's business or any business of the pieces of shit in congress whether i am (or anyone else is) on welfare or not or whether a physician assists suicide to intellectually disabled leeches like me.
 
Last edited:

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,647
5,220
136
i am not racist, but i think mississippi gets so much from the u.s.g. because it has a higher percentage of blacks and old people than any other State. maybe they have a lot of military bases and VA hospitals there, but i think a lot of it is because of the welfare like medicaid, schip, wic, social insecurity, food stamps, and medicare.

it's fucked up that physician assisted suicide is illegal yet it isnt legal to keep all of your own money. i bet at least half the people on welfare would commit suicide if they had a safe painless way to do so but the State makes that it illegal so it can stay in power. spending on welfare and warfare is the health of the State. the State is trying to keep me alive so that they can one day put me on welfare. that makes me wish our rulers become homeless. i mean, it is none of that piece of shit obama's business or any business of the pieces of shit in congress whether i am (or anyone else is) on welfare or not or whether a physician assists suicide to intellectually disabled leeches like me.

Wut? Obama is a piece of shit BC he's not pushing public policies to encourage poor people to kill themselves?
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,326
10,230
136
Generally I would agree but in this case Cochran's camp was actively telling Dems they could vote in the primary. This was not a outside group or a internet posting but something they were doing.

I'm curious if someone will look at the rolls to see how many Dems voted. Should be easy to tell.

I bet you dollars to doughnuts that in a race this close that Cochrans appeal to the blacks and what Romney called the 47%ters made the difference. Wish the teahdist had won. Better chance for the Dem.

Cochran will be a shoe in.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Sweet more money ,tax breaks, immunity from prosecution and loopholes for fortune 500s. Good job crossover dems.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Crossover voting is ALWAYS overplayed.
People just do not buy into doing that.
The percentage of those actually crossing over is nearly undetectable. Its that low.
Just maybe the tea party guy lost because he was that tea party guy?
And just maybe electing yet another do nothing anti everything tea party guy is getting a bit pointless. People want elected officials that actually do stuff and not some knee jerk tea bagger that stands for nothing except obstruction.
And these tea baggers do not respect anything, not even the voter.
Look at how they blame the process and the voter if they lose.
They are anti American.
They campaign not to earn support but only to have their 15 minutes of fame.
People should wise up to them.
Anyone running for public office with that attitude against everything including the election process and the people that cast the votes is nothing more than a loony.
We usually lock up loonies in padded room.

And oh man was this loser a very sore loser.
An indication that Cochran was indeed the best man for the job.
.
.

You're such a partisan fool. There is wide divergence in tea Party - read McDaniel then read Dave Brats platform. I think dems would find their positions much closer to Brats than even Hilary. McDanial not so much.
 

BUnit1701

Senior member
May 1, 2013
853
1
0
Can we just abolish primaries already?

So, rather than give the people a voice in selecting candidates, you would prefer that party establishment bosses always pick the biggest cronys to run?

Wait, why am I asking, of course you love anything that involves highly centralized control.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
So, rather than give the people a voice in selecting candidates, you would prefer that party establishment bosses always pick the biggest cronys to run?

Wait, why am I asking, of course you love anything that involves highly centralized control.

I have to admit, this made me chuckle. You think the primary system gives the people MORE voice? Their express purpose is to give the people LESS voice. I like how you're trying to endorse a process that gives the parties more highly centralized control while complaining that people who want to abolish it are for more highly centralized control.

If you didn't have primaries you could have three, four, five, or more Republican (or Democratic) candidates run. Then the people could actually choose which one they want the best. Instead you have the primary system, where institutional powers and small groups of ideologically extreme but motivated voters decide on what candidates everyone else gets to vote for.

When people complain that their candidates don't represent ordinary people, the primary system is a big reason why. I imagine you prefer it because you are a part of one of those small groups of ideologically extreme voters, so the primary system gives you outsized power.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,378
7,443
136
Can we just abolish primaries already?

I like this idea, but voting has to change if we do.

Run-off "elections" need to be institutionalized. Instead of voting for one person, voters assign a priory to the entire field of candidates. It keeps cycling through, eliminating one candidate at a time. Your vote counts towards your highest priority, who is not eliminated. This process runs until only two candidates remain and the guy with more than 50% wins.

No more wasted votes on third party candidates. Vote for who you WANT, not who you think others will vote for.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
I like this idea, but voting has to change if we do.

Run-off "elections" need to be institutionalized. Instead of voting for one person, voters assign a priory to the entire field of candidates. It keeps cycling through, eliminating one candidate at a time. Your vote counts towards your highest priority, who is not eliminated. This process runs until only two candidates remain and the guy with more than 50% wins.

No more wasted votes on third party candidates. Vote for who you WANT, not who you think others will vote for.

I'm a big fan of instant runoff voting, it's basically my #1 voter reform that I would implement if I could.
 

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,674
482
126
McDaniel still hasn't conceded. It looks like he's hoping to contest the outcome. It doesn't look like he's got much of a chance of winning his challenge, however. I guess it won't stop him from going to the ole 'voter fraud' handbook.

Mr. McDaniel and his supporters are exploring legal options to contest Mr. Cochran’s victory, zeroing in on the Cochran campaign’s efforts to bring blacks and other Democratic voters to the polls on Tuesday.

The McDaniel camp charged that a partial review of the tallies in Hinds County had turned up nearly 1,000 ballots that were cast by voters who participated in the Democratic primary on June 3 and were ineligible under state law to vote in the Republican runoff. McDaniel aides said supporters were reviewing ballots across the state, although they have met resistance in about half of the counties they have approached.

Pete Perry, the Hinds County Republican Party chairman, said the McDaniel campaign’s claims were “wildly exaggerated.” In the Jackson precinct at Fondren Presbyterian Church, he said, the McDaniel campaign charged that 192 illegal votes had been cast by people who voted in the Democratic primary. But, he said, only 37 Democrats voted there on June 3.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/28/u...html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0