Patterico's Pontifications


Yes, There Were Flyers and Robocalls That Accused the Tea Party of Racism

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:00 am

John Fund asked if this was the flyer that got Thad Cochran elected:

Screen Shot 2014-06-29 at 11.48.43 AM

That flyer is just some of the evidence of disgusting tactics revealed by Charles C. Johnson on his Twitter account in recent days. [Charles C. Johnson is the good guy, not the Little Green Footballs nutcase.] In addition to the racial appeals in this flyer, Charles has also published YouTubes of robocalls appealing to racism, evidence of school districts sending out pro-Cochran emails to teachers, and a host of other evidence of distasteful tactics by pro-Cochran forces.

But it turns out that there are some folks on Twitter who are demonstrating skepticism, not just about where these race-based appeals came from, but about whether the race-based appeals even happened. For example:

The purpose of this post is to provide corroboration that the race-based smears actually happened.

Let’s start with the flyer. Contrary to popular belief, the image reproduced by John Fund wasn’t published first by Charles C. Johnson. It was published on the Facebook page of a Mississippi voter named Pam Pittman Davis:

Screen Shot 2014-06-29 at 11.59.22 AM

[UPDATE 6-20-14 6:38 am: Upon further review, it looks like Charles got the image on Twitter before Ms. Davis put it on her Facebook. But Ms. Davis is the one who originally took the photo.]

I spoke to Ms. Davis this weekend. She told me that she was in the parking lot outside her workplace, which is located in a small shopping center, and she saw a young black girl putting the flyers on car windshields. The woman distributing them said: “Don’t forget to vote!” Ms. Davis looked at the flyer and crumpled it up and threw it on the ground in disgust. Then she decided to retrieve the flyer, and took another uncrumpled flyer from the windshield of her friend’s car. (Ms. Davis told me she had voted for Cochran in the past as the lesser of two evils, but is a McDaniel supporter because she believes he would actually stand up for the principles the Republican party claims to support.) She took a picture of the uncrumpled flyer and posted it on Facebook. She took pictures of both sides of the flyer and gave the original to a friend of hers, who gave that to yet another friend, who sent it to Charles. But the image has been on Ms. Davis’s Facebook page since June 25, the day after the runoff election.

I asked Ms. Davis to send me the image of the other side of the flyer. It contains a newspaper article included to show the Tea Party’s attempt to influence the election, as claimed on the reverse side of the flyer:

Screen Shot 2014-06-29 at 1.54.02 PM

If you look closely, you can see the ghost of the reverse of the original image.

Another person who saw the flyer was Adrienne Hamby. She has a hard copy, but the newspaper article on the reverse side was missing. She got it from her husband David. I spoke to David and he said that he had received it second-hand and could not remember who he got it from.

ROBOCALL: The following robocall was sent to Charles by a woman who refused to be identified because “they’ll come get my husband’s business.” However, Ms. Hamby told me that she had heard this robocall:

Hello, neighbors. The time has come to make a stand and say “no” to the Tea Party. “No” to their obstruction. “No” to their disrespectful treatment of the first African American president. Next Tuesday, June 24, Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel is in a runoff against Senator Thad Cochran. If we do nothing, Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel wins, and causes even more problems for President Obama, and pushes the damaging cuts in funding to our public education system. With your help, we can stop this. Please commit to voting against Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel next Tuesday. Say “no” to the Tea Party.

Ms. Hamby could not specifically remember where she first heard the call. She did say that she and her husband had received a number of similar robocalls, but had deleted them.

I spoke with another lady who wishes to remain anonymous, but who gave me her name. This lady lives in Hinds County and heard several robocalls that warned voters that if McDaniel were elected, they would lose food stamps and the like. She could not confirm that she had heard this particular robocall, but the content of it is very similar to other calls she had heard. Like most of the people I talked to, she was a McDaniel supporter. She said that she had never been very involved with politics before this race. But she met McDaniel, and liked him. She saw him as an “honest Christian” who believed in “common sense, Jesus, and the Constitution.” This lady is the one who sent the image of the flyer to Charles C. Johnson. She had received it from a friend.

Look: I’m a hobbyist who has a ton of day-job work to do this weekend, and who is located thousands of miles away from these people. But a truly interested reporter who is on the scene could clearly find a lot more. I don’t think it’s possible to credibly doubt that this stuff occurred.

Moreover, I think the question has been rendered moot by the work done at the Daily Mail — which leads us to the important question:

WHO DID IT? My independent research goes merely to the question of whether these robocalls really happened, and whether the flyer was actually distributed. Now that we have shown that all this really did happen, the natural question is: who is behind these flyers and robocalls? According to the Daily Mail, the answer is: Democrat operatives tied to the Haley Barbour super-PAC.

THE ROBOCALL: Let’s start with the robocall we just saw. The Daily Mail says:

MailOnline has learned that ‘Citizens for Progress’ is tied to a longtime Democratic political operative who was paid $44,000 to run racially explosive ‘robocalls’ in the same race.

A political action committee founded by former Republican National Committee chair and former Republican Gov. Haley Barbour made those payments.

. . . .

The political ‘super PAC’ that paid her to run the robocalls is called Mississippi Conservatives, according to National Review.

Haley Barbour, the former governor, founded the PAC, which is now run by Henry Barbour, his nephew.

. . . .

Barbour denied any knowledge of the three radio ads, but acknowledged to MailOnline that his organization had paid Bickers for the phone call campaign.

‘We hired Mitzi Bickers to do paid phones,’ he said Friday via email. ‘If she had something to do with radio ads, I am unaware of it and was not involved with radio ads in Canton.’

‘It’s time to take a stand and say no to the tea party, the call’s script read. ‘No to their obstruction, no to their disrespectful treatment of the first African-American president.’

Bickers did not respond to repeated phone calls seeking comment.

Please process what you just read. An establishment Republican super-PAC paid a Democrat operative to send out a robocall that complained about the Tea Party’s “disrespectful treatment of the first African American president.” This Republican-funded robocall also said that a victory by Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel “causes even more problems for President Obama, and pushes the damaging cuts in funding to our public education system.”

Once again: Republicans paid for those arguments to be made to voters.

THE FLYER: I recently presented circumstantial evidence of a possible connection to the Haley and Henry Barbour super-PAC. Since then, the Daily Mail has shown that this flyer was put out by a group working with another Democrat operative, who has said he was also working with the Barbour super-PAC:

James ‘Scooby Doo’ Warren, a longtime Democratic political operative, told the Jackson, Mississippi Clarion-Ledger on June 17 that he was directing a ‘get-out-the-vote’ plan that included the robocalls.

He was working, Warren said, with Mississippi Conservatives, the same Haley Barbour-related PAC that funded Mitzi Bickers to produce the racially explosive robocalls. It’s not clear whether he was involved with the radio ads.

Warren also said he was working closely with Bishop Ronnie Crudup Sr., a clergyman whose church created a separate political action committee called ‘All Citizens for Mississippi.’

That group paid to produce and distribute pro-Cochran fliers in African-American neighborhoods, including one that claimed ‘the tea party intends to prevent you from voting.’

Please note that Warren’s admission of working with the Barbour super-PAC was not uncovered by the Daily Mail but rather by the Clarion-Ledger, a newspaper in Jackson, Mississippi, back on June 17.

So while the flyer was not necessarily paid for by the super-PAC (although the possibility cannot be discounted), we do know that the producers of the flyer were working with Warren, a Democrat operative who was by his own admission working with the Barbour super-PAC.

I’ve seen enough. Establishment Republicans were working with Democrat operatives to get Democrats to the polls — using racial scare tactics, and attacking a Republican for not supporting huge expenditures of federal dollars.

There is a sickness in the establishment of the Republican party. I’m not entirely sure what the cure is, but it calls for some kind of strong medicine. Let the debate begin about what that medicine should be.

56 Responses to “Yes, There Were Flyers and Robocalls That Accused the Tea Party of Racism”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (93fb17)

  2. McDaniel filing legal challenge today. I like that remedy.

    Remedy for duplicitous consultants and sociopathic and megalomaniacal pols? Laughter. I wish I had more for ya.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  3. makes ya proud as hell to tell people you’re a Rethuglican, don’t it?

    they’re dead to me.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  4. i got a republican flyer right here

    in my pants

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  5. They need rat poison for medication.

    mg (31009b)

  6. i thought that was a burrito…


    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  7. They need rat poison for medication.

    you mean Coumadin, aka Warfarin?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  8. What happened here is that the Cocchran backers adapted (but not completely) some of the tactics used in northern cities to affect the way people vote and some of the arguments used to turn out the black vote.

    First, oversimplified flyers, whose arguments can, however, be defended. That’s why there was a newspaper article on the other side. The newspaper article sometimes somewhat undermines the argument being put forth.

    Even if there is one exaggerated argument they are counting on, the rule is put in other issues, so it looks like a pile-up. There may not be exactly a completely fair portrayal of those issues, either. Some of those issues were nothing – one or two were very real, particularly education funding..

    It mentioned the nursing home pictures without bothering to say what that was all about. Maybe because it is hard to tie in the McDaniel campaign to that..It’s a pile-up

    The flyers are intended for people of all levels of sophistication. A strong emotional but clearly fallacious appeal could turn off some voters if that was all there was.

    Second, the arguments:

    The main argument they were counting on was that the McDaniel campaign was trying to prevent bkacks from voting. Telling people that other people are trying to prevent them from voting is always a good device to increase turnout. This was, sort of, true. It wasn’t really true, because the McDaniel campaign wasn’t really trying to do anything – it was just complaining. And furthermore, the McDaniel campaign had an argument that they shouldn’t vote. There was nothing, except maybe what could be derived from the newspaper article, to indicate that there was a legitimate argument to be made that they shouldn’t vote.

    The argument that the McDaniel was trying to stop blacks from voting was a little bit strong, and there was a milder version – that they didn’t want their votes. The argument was made that Cochran wanted to represent all Mississippians. This is tied in to money, and to some symbolic things.

    The campaign for Cochran also included quotes out of context. McDaniel had said something about “Mississippi” values. What are “Mississippi values?” The values peculiar to Mississippi, or at least the deep south are what? Segregation?? Now maybe McDaniel meant the Bible, but of corse there were hangers on, about whom some other things could be imputed. And MCDaniel liked sons of Confederate veterans.

    Blacks were informed that when the McDaniel campaign said Democrats, they realy meant blacks. This was, sort of, true, because blacks were being targeted, with some very blatant race-based appeals, but the McDaniel campaign never said anything about that. Instead, saying only “liberal Democrats.” Which is not a good description of blacks in Mississippi.

    McDaniel may have been careful to say “liberal” Dempcrats as as means of attempting to imply that Cochran was someone a liberal should favor, and as a way of not discouraging any people who might consider themselves Democrats for historical reasons, and who might be inclined to vote for McDaniel, from voting for him – maybe only “liberal” Democrats shouldn’t participate.

    Remember, in Mississippi, there is no legally determinable category of “Democrat” or “Republican” except maybe for party officials.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  9. There was a story in the New York Times Saturday about the election (and the suicide) in whichit said that the McDaniel campaign said there was a partial review of tallies in Hinds County, and there were nearly 1,000 ballots cast by people who had voted in the June 3 Democratic primary.

    The Republican Chairman in Hinds County said these claims were wildly exaggerated. In one the McDaniel campaign had charged there were 192 illegal votes cast, he said, while in reality, there could only have been 37 at most, because there were only 37 votes cast in that precinct in the Democratic primary.

    The New York Times article does not describe at all what kind of election procedures existed in Mississippi in this primary.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  10. If you approve of the Republican establishment’s underhanded tactics in Mississippi, reward the GOP with your campaign contributions and your votes in November. The party elite will get your message loud clear, and in exchange you’ll get future elections full of the same sort of dirty tricks.

    Think of all the fun you’ll have seeing the GOP Congress play Washington Generals to the Democrats’ Globetrotters. Watch silently as conservatives and TEA Party candidates get stabbed in the back, smeared in the media, and branded as un-American, racists, and bigots. Stand-by in fascination as one government agency after another follows the example of Eric Holder’s so-called Department of Justice, and Lois Lerner’s IRS to target anyone who won’t knuckle under to their zero tolerance agenda.

    It’ll be a brave new world.

    ropelight (f44219)

  11. 12. …Eric Holder’s so-called Department of Justice, and Lois Lerner’s IRS…

    ropelight (f44219) — 6/30/2014 @ 4:06 am

    Team R in Congress may be flailing and failing, but the attorneys for Judicial Watch and True The Vote may be on the verge of landing some real haymakers on those two criminal conspiracies in Federal Court.

    Steve57 (874187)

  12. [UPDATE 6-20-14 6:38 am: Upon further review, it looks like Charles got the image on Twitter before Ms. Davis put it on her Facebook. But Ms. Davis is the one who originally took the photo.]

    Patterico (9c670f)

  13. Could it be that there were only a few of these fliers produced by some crank on his home printer?

    The establishment republicans didn’t support the better candidate. That’s enough for me to not support them, maybe ever. But I don’t know that they were breaking the law.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  14. Given that Chris McDaniel is a complete douchebag, this might actually be a good use of GOP funds. Maybe they are finally thinking outside of the box.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  15. Could it be that there were only a few of these fliers produced by some crank on his home printer?

    I don’t know how extensive the distribution was — some the “some crank” theory is pretty well refuted by the Daily Mail piece, I think.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  16. You’ve convinced me, ropelight. I’ll vote for Quinn and Durbin. I’ve always had a soft spot for Durbin, anyway. Quinn not so much, but if it means punishing Republicans ….

    nk (dbc370)

  17. I haven’t given money to the DC Party apparatus for a while now, and this does not increase the likelihood that will change. I would suggest that people find good candidates and support them directly. One candidate that whould flip a House seat is Martha McSally in the AZ 2nd. She narrowly lost in 2012 to Gabby Gifford’s handpicked successor, but should win this time. Among other things, Martha flew A-10s in Iraq.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  18. Wide of the mark as usual, nk. Prejudice betrays comprehension. Read my comment. There’s not one word about voting for Democrats.

    ropelight (f44219)

  19. No, of course you didn’t./sarc

    Staying home is not an option. The Combine flourishes on low turnout. Every vote not cast is a vote for the Machine. With a governor and Senator at stake, the precinct captains will be carrying the faithful to the polls in their arms. Oberweiss and Rauner will need a very big turnout to even have a chance.

    nk (dbc370)

  20. I’m not sure that the Daily Mail could effectively refute anything.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  21. Get a whip, ’cause hangin’s too good for ’em.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  22. How widely these particular fliers were distributed, or its press run, we really don’t know, but there can be very little doubt that a campaign of this nature was waged.

    And we also know a lot of it was “independent expenditures” which by law could not be co-ordinated with the official campaign, but they usually track what the campaign is saying.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  23. Steve57 (874187) — 6/30/2014 @ 5:45 am

    Ignoring Issa and Camp (and Boehner): There are no negative consequences.
    Ignoring a Federal Judge: “How dare he lock me up for contempt, doesn’t he know who I am?”

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  24. The epiphany I have had after reading all this and seeing the flyer “evidence” is that if you are sure that Haley Barbour, from a powerful Mississippi political family, and former governor of Mississippi and former NRC chair funded this out of his personal PAC to influence a Mississippi election, then by all means go after him and his nephew (the nephew who some have suggested is being positioned to replace Thad when he “retires” before his term is up). Fine. Go after Barbour. Find out who his contributors are and go after them. Teach them and perhaps others a lesson. Show him that their rock will be turned over to expose them when they overstep. Demonstrate that painting conservatives in Mississippi in racist terms will not be tolerated. (even though as nk has pointed out, a whole lot of people in the state of Mississippi are uh, race conscious.) If this is the “war”–go for it.

    It’s the tarring and going after the entire Republican “establishment” whoever the heck they are, (both nationally and in the other 49 states) for supposedly being evilly complicit in this Mississippi election and oh, also for probably being corrupt in every way every day of the week –along with the sliming of fellow Republicans, “RINOs” (whoever they are) that is raising hackles– and not just on this blog. The fact that some are actually espousing meddling in elections well beyond Mississippi to make a statement about what they believe happened in Mississippi, by voting more Democrats into congress through other races in other states is, in my opinion not only illogical but unconscionable. If this is your “War” I want no part of it.

    elissa (cbbaf1)

  25. Remember, in Mississippi, there is no legally determinable category of “Democrat” or “Republican” except maybe for party officials.
    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f) — 6/30/2014 @ 3:28 am

    Legally, perhaps not; but if you have historically voted in one party’s primary to the exclusion of the other, it’s a pretty safe bet – absent conclusive evidence to the contrary – that you are a member of that Party.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  26. Roh rah?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  27. Still, thousands of terminally stupid white “conservatives” voted for Cochran because of his incumbency.

    DN (fda50e)

  28. askeptic (8ecc78) — 6/30/2014 @ 8:10 am

    but if you have historically voted in one party’s primary to the exclusion of the other, it’s a pretty safe bet – absent conclusive evidence to the contrary – that you are a member of that Party.

    No, you’re not.

    In Michigan maybe there may be a relatively large number of members who paid dues, and there are members of political clubs, but by and large, there are no official membership rolls, except in states that have party registration.

    That’s why party affiliation seems to change so much from time to time in the polls.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  29. Sammy, we’re (or at least I am) talking about something that you demonstrate a clear and convincing case that you lack:
    Common Sense.
    But, that’s what makes you a reliable voice for Progressives.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  30. …and I thought we were talking about Mississippi (MS), not Michigan (MI).

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  31. elissa (cbbaf1) — 6/30/2014 @ 8:09 am

    You said what I was about to say. Still, I’m sorry for the tone, ropelight. Like elissa said, I cannot allow the shenanigans of some Mississippi jacklegs to influence how I vote in Illinois.

    nk (dbc370)

  32. 32. Michigan in 1988 (and maybe later) had Democratic presidential primaries limited to official members, and there were comparatively few of them. Michigan is also one of those states that doesn’t have voter registration by party.

    In most states that do you can change party registration relatively late.

    New York State I think has the toughest rules. You can’t vote in a party primary unless you were already a member of that party before the preceding November election, except if you were not registered to vote at all.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  33. Oh, look at this:

    Rick Santorum’s campaign on Monday night began urging Democrats to vote against Mitt Romney in the Michigan Republican primary, apparently counting on cross-party support to win a close contest in the state on Tuesday….Voting booths will be open only to Republicans, but party rules allow anyone to declare himself a Republican on the spot — temporarily — and then vote. The result is a primary that is effectively open to Democratic or independent game-playing…

    …Late Monday, Mr. Santorum’s campaign began encouraging Democrats to vote against Mr. Romney with an automated phone call decrying Mr. Romney’s opposition to the government’s bailout of the auto industry.

    The telephone call, which Mr. Santorum’s campaign confirmed, says that “Romney supported the bailouts for his Wall Street billionaire buddies but opposed the auto bailouts. That was a slap in the face to every Michigan worker and we’re not going to let Romney get away with it.”

    A spokesman for Mr. Romney called the effort to recruit Democratic support “unreal” and “outrageous” and said that Mr. Santorum is “now willing to wear the other team’s jersey if he thinks it will get him more votes. We believe that Republicans will decide who wins Michigan
    – and we are confident that will be Mitt Romney.”

    ….the state has a history of partisan meddling in the opposing primary, a fact that makes it more accepted among Michigan voters….In 2000, Democrats turned out in rather large numbers to vote for Senator John McCain of Arizona instead of George W. Bush. As The Detroit News notes, some Democrats were eager to poke their governor at the time, John Engler, who had endorsed Mr. Bush. Mr. McCain won the primary with the help of Democratic votes.

    The mischief-making is not limited to Democrats. Some Republicans may have jumped into the Democratic caucus in 1988, helping the Rev. Jesse Jackson win the primary in that year. (Michael Dukakis went on to win the nomination.) …

    I thought that in 1988, they were limiting themselves to dues paying members.

    And look at this:

    The chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, Mark Brewer, issued a press release last week reminding members of his party that they will still be able to participate in the Democratic caucus on May 5 if they vote as a Republican on Tuesday.

    “Democrats who accept this invitation will still be able to vote in our May 5th caucuses,” Mr. Brewer said. “If Democratic crossover votes affect the results on Feb. 28, Republicans will have no one but themselves to blame.”

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  34. And look at this:


    carlitos (c24ed5)

  35. Sammy, I think Motor Voter set nation-wide rules for registration, something about 15-days prior to an election IIRC….Why don’t you just look it up….and 1988?….Dude, that was so 26-yrs ago!

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  36. What, no?

    Here is the chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party in 2012, telling people that they will able to participate in BOTH the Republican Presidential primary, and the Democratic presidential caucuses in Michigan in 2012, because they take place on different dates (and party rules determine who can participate)

    Rick Santorum was making a very blatant appeal to UAW union members, which also possibly wasn’t a fair description of what Romney’s positon had been.

    I also found a diuscussion of the idea of crossover voting by Republicans in the Democratic presidential primary in Mississippi in 2008, which says that not of it is expected, but where there is no indication that anything about it might be illegal.

    Marty Wiseman, director of the Stennis Institute of Government at Mississippi State University, said he doesn’t expect much crossover voting. It would take an organized effort by Republicans and a lot of money, he said.

    “I just don’t see Republicans getting that stirred up about this,” he said. “It’s almost impossible, with an even tie, to see who would be most advantageous to the Republicans.”

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  37. It would be easier to establish who in the party establishment, did not particioate in this travisham,

    narciso (3fec35)

  38. 37. askeptic (8ecc78) — 6/30/2014 @ 9:07 am

    Sammy, I think Motor Voter set nation-wide rules for registration, something about 15-days prior to an election IIRC….

    I don’t anyone can register to vote 15 days before. A Supreme Court case around 1972 said you couldn’t require registration more than 30 days in advance, I think.

    The only thing Motor Voter does is require (in exchange for money I guess) states to offer to hand people a voter registration form at the DMV. It doesn’t affect theior registration rules. states can register voters by party, or not, and most do not now.

    Why don’t you just look it up….and 1988?….Dude, that was so 26-yrs ago!

    I remember that as a situation where very few people could vote. Maybe that was the intention, and it changed. Jesse Jackson winning that caucus or primary did not reflect majority opinion in the state of Michigan.

    More recently, we have Rick Santorum appealing to Democrats, on a very “Democratic” issue, to vote for him (and against Romney) in the 2012 Republican presidential primary.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  39. Being a resident of the oppresive, Fascist State of Kali, where voting is highly suspect, I found this on the website of Kali’s SecState:

    “…You can also pick up a paper voter registration application at your county elections office, library, Department of Motor Vehicles offices, or U.S. post office. It is important that your voter registration application be filled out completely and be postmarked or hand-delivered to your county elections office at least 15 days before the election…”

    Call me Crazy, but don’t call me late for dinner.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  40. An example of narrative beating the truth, and a poor understanding of the law to boot;,0,1401290.story

    narciso (3fec35)

  41. I think that it would be a strong bet that this will be reversed.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  42. Well, at least here in CA we are progressive enough and restrained enough to employ an open primary. Due to Californians’ honesty and ethics we don’t worry about voters crossing political party lines to interfere with an opposing party’s process.

    in_awe (7c859a)

  43. in_awe, do you kiss your Mother with that snarky mouth?

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  44. I’ve always wanted to meet that guy in a dark alley.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  45. As you said, vote for the Democrat in the general. If I were a MS resident and it came to that, I certainly would.

    Blacque Jacques Shellacque (b14ea2)

  46. 41. In California, therefore, it is 15 days. I don’t believe there is the same deadline nationwide.

    The latest date to register before a general election in New York I think is something more than 15 days. They used to hold 3 registration days in a polling place.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  47. Like I said who isn’t involved:

    narciso (3fec35)

  48. I’m going to wait until there is a definitive understanding of all of the messaging, counter-messaging, counter-counter messaging, and like wise with the information and disinformation, flags and false flags, before I trouble my mind with this.

    It is crazy that a primary election has the complexity of a cold-war spy novel.

    Put them all on the stand and let Pat question, cross-exam, and interrogate them.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  49. It’s just a little dirty politics until someone puts an eye out.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  50. So, we have a “pastor” who agrees to get people to vote for cash then blows the whistle when he doesn’t get paid…

    Not sure what to believe.
    “They” need to realize they the Repubs can seek the vote of two kinds of people, and they need to make a choice:
    1) those that believe in certain principles and want to live by them
    2) those who want a handout, and will sell you out in a moment once they see bigger pay dirt somewhere else.

    Call it the McCain phenomenon, some people act friendly who are not your friend just to take advantage of you to get what they want.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  51. Saleem Baird, current legislative aide to U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, and staffer on the Cochran campaign, who is black, and Cochran campaign manager Kirk Sims apparently offered $15 per person – not to vote for Cochran, but to go to the polling place.

    But this is still illegal, so they never delivered the money. Or maybe they never had the money anyway. Or maybe they grew uncertain of his committment when he questioned them about some charges against McDaniel, so decided not to pay him. (Baird and Sims were apparently describing McDaniel as an out-and-out racist. The Reverend Stevie Fielder questioned Sims about that before the election, or tried to. Sims now claims there was a bad connection when Fielder called, so he simply hung up, and didn’t address the question.)

    Fielder is now either out some money, or the people promised the money are disappointed, or maybe he didn’t do it.

    Paying for gas, or to rent a bus, wouldn’t be illegal.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7774f)

  52. 1. Many in Mississippi believe in McDaniel’s platform.
    2. He won the primary, just not by a large enough majority.
    3. Non-primary voters were recruited using blatant lies and possibly brides to vote for Cochran, a senator that has had 41 years to change Mississippi’s last place ranking (except in voting ethics).
    4. The big hullabaloo about the photos of Cochran’s wife being taken in the nursing home was used by one campaign, Cochran’s.
    5. There was and is a tremendous amount of dirty politics to “win” this election. It isn’t settled.

    Commonsense (561420)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1516 secs.