To set the record straight-if victory came to the Cochran campaign wrapped in real fraud and corruption, McDaniel has both the legal and moral responsibility to continue fighting. In this case, he does not.
The only evidence put forth in his long running argument, is one of personal animosity towards the very laws he is charged with upholding. In front of any media willing to listen, he preaches that the way the election was won should be enough to void the election results. It is amazing he’s gone this far with that strategy.
For the sake of simplification, let’s used a sports analogy. If a game allowed both teams in overtime the right to choose a twelfth man from any group who volunteered, and if that decision resulted in victory, the loser has every right to challenge the rules be changed in the future, but not the present victory. That’s basically where we are in this circus side-show that’s quickly turning into an off Broadway disaster.
There’s something else that needs to be pointed out here, the real reason for the increase in votes from Democrats in a GOP Primary runoff.
To say a few well placed ads would marshal traditional Democrats to the aid of a longtime Republican is stretching credulity. The main reason for that increase rest solely on the shoulders of State Senator Chris McDaniel.
The feedback on the air and on social media from black Democrats challenged the narrative that the Cochran campaign needed to spend even one dollar in campaign ads soliciting voters, regardless of their Party affiliation.
This question should also be asked. If it were not Chris McDaniel and his past associations, his promise to use his US Senate vote to cut funding coming into our state as a fiscal example for Congress to follow, his toxic comments on past radio shows, his voting record that some say has been less than friendly to black Mississippians, etc.-if it were not McDaniel but say, Delbert Hoseman, Philip Gunn, Steven Palazzo , Gregg Harper or Alan Nunnelee, would we even be talking about crossover votes or irregularities or Party purity.
Would those same voters now in question be the least bit interested in participating in an election process, even though they had every right to do so?
Finally, the reasons and results of this election can be easily identified by the losing candidate himself. The truth is, to find out what happened, he doesn’t need to look into the polling books, he needs to look in to the mirror.