A Walking Republican Moonbat – Ann Coulter Pontificates The Most Ridiculous Argument Against Chris McDaniel Supporters…

In the fall of 2011 we quit thinking of Ann Coulter in any terms other than a sporadically useful, but generally inconsistent, establishment GOP talking head.  In short, a “Romneybot”.

A recent article reminds us not only why it was so easy to come to that conclusion, but also why this ex-girlfriend of Bill Maher is actually a raving Moonbat.

muggedBefore reading what she actually wrote in a recent article entitled “Eyes On The Prize – Chris McDaniel Supporters Should Work To Take Back The Senate“, it should be absolutely necessary to remind ourselves of her book topic:

“Mugged – Racial Demagoguery From The Seventies To Obama”.

Why is this book so profoundly relevant to the article she has penned?   Because the entire premise of her McDaniel article is, well, filled with racial demagoguery.

Here’s an excerpt (emphasis mine):

[…] “It also doesn’t look great having alleged Republican activists claiming that any votes from blacks in a GOP primary were fraudulent. It so happens that Cochran has always won a fair portion of the black vote–and the Democrat vote”.

Setting aside the elitist framing of the words “alleged Republican activists“, because we all know that only people of her high brow approved caliber are real Republican activists right?   How does she make the leap from fraudulent democrat votes, the actual substance of the issue at hand, to “blacks in a GOP primary”?

The jump there is filled with racial projection, no?   We have not witnessed any of the McDaniel supporters question the skin color of any fraudulent voter, only the registered party affiliation.

The only issue they have raised is the political affiliation of the fraudulent voter; because it’s the affiliation that renders the voter fraudulent, not the color of the voter’s skin.

Yet somehow that seems to escape Ms. Coulter.   Somewhat strange considering her self-proclaimed skillset around “racial demagoguery”.

She continues:

[…]  In Cochran’s last election without Barack Obama on the ticket, he won 85 percent of the vote–and Mississippi is half-Democrat and nearly 40 percent black. Even in his most recent election in 2008, when Obama was on the ticket, Cochran won 40,000 more votes than John McCain–a pretty good estimate of how many blacks voted for Cochran.

But it’s really fantastic to have McDaniel supporters out there denouncing Cochran for getting blacks to vote for him.

Again, with the non sequitur.    Who is denouncing Cochran for “getting blacks to vote for him”?    No-one.

From the outset, the McDaniel campaign has been, and continues to be, concerned about “fraudulent ballots”, or “fraudulent votes” cast against state law by Democrats, who voted in the Democrat Primary, and then voted again in a GOP runoff.

Nowhere in this challenge, of which there is much at stake, is there a remote mention of race by the McDaniel team, with the sole exception of rebutting charges of racism levied falsely -and paid for- by the Ann Coulter establishment GOP toward Chris McDaniel.

She polishes off the diatribe with even more evidence of her commitment to the type of demagoguery she rails against:

Why shouldn’t Cochran ask black people for their votes in a primary? The Republican Party was once, and for some still is, the natural political home for black Mississippians.

Again, who said Cochran shouldn’t “ask black people for their votes in a primary”?

No-one.   The issue was Cochran shouldn’t ask Democrat primary voters to support his primary run off if they had already voted in the Democrat primary….. and he certainly shouldn’t hire people to pay registered Democrat voters $15 each to violate the law on his behalf.

It’s a matter of voter fraud, the Republican party was once, and for some still is, against.

Will the last conservative inside the beltway please grab the flag on your way out?

We need to bleach a couple more for a few days while we scout another venue….

American Patriot


This entry was posted in Decepticons, Election 2014, Mitch McConnell, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Tea Party, True The Vote, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, Voter Fraud. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to A Walking Republican Moonbat – Ann Coulter Pontificates The Most Ridiculous Argument Against Chris McDaniel Supporters…

  1. Shayn Roby says:

    Shayn Roby’s Take: Considering that Ann Coulter didn’t seem to think that Barack Obama should be concerned with the Gaza Strip Flotilla named the “Audacity of Hope” when the editor of ShaynRoby.com asked her personally at her “Demonic” book signing at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, California, the writer of this article will have to side with Sundance, and say that Ms. Coulter can not really be considered to be in the corner of true conservatives anymore. She must be seen as firmly in the RINO camp.


  2. Pamela says:

    She’s nutz! In love with Christie and then in love with Romney, the only man/men who could win. I think when your “winner” is voting with the wrong side, you haven’t won anything. The only thing you can count on is you can’t count on them to do what’s right for the America we want to restore.

    The only issue I absolutely agree with her on is NO AMNESTY and NEVER vote for anyone who supports AMNESTY. She’s got that one right.


    • Sentient says:

      Watch Cochran vote for amnesty.


      • Linda Sandoval says:

        Ann has no moral compass. She’s another rino after money and power.


      • MouseTheLuckyDog says:

        I think if a Republican wins the presidency and the Senate is 50/50 Cochran will pull a Jeffers/Spector. Won’t that look bad for the RINOS who support him.


        • John Galt says:

          In view of his progressive dementia, it is likely that Cochran won’t even be able to find the Senate, let alone vote. If elected, he will remain ensconced in his office, drooling on himself and dreaming of the good old days and indecent acts on animals.


  3. radiopatriot says:

    I wonder who paid her to write this. Oh wait… writing stuff like this is how she gets attention = sells books = is paid by Fox to be a shill for the GOP establishment. This is just one more way the darling of the Northeast blueblood GOP self-promotes. Got it.


  4. daveburton says:

    You write, “it’s the affiliation that renders the voter fraudulent.” But that’s not true. It is perfectly legal in Mississippi for Republicans to vote in Democrat primaries, and Democrats to vote in Republican primaries. Political affiliation does not render a vote fraudulent.

    Other than obvious cases, like non-citizens or dead people registering and voting, the only thing which could have rendered votes fraudulent in Mississippi’s primary runoff was first voting in the Democratic primary and then also voting in the Republican primary runoff.

    The problem is that McDaniel supporters haven’t been identifying fraudulent votes. They’ve been identifying votes which they suspect of being fraudulent. They’re identifying cases of Democrats voting in the June 24th Republican primary runoff, who also voted in the June 3rd regular primary. The McDaniel supporters suspect that such voters voted in the Democrat primary on June 3rd, which would make their votes on June 24th illegal.

    But it is clear that those suspicions are ill-founded in some cases. All the Democrat primary candidates, combined, got just 85,866 votes on June 3rd. The Republican primary candidates got 318,902 votes, or 78.8% of all votes cast, despite the fact that, as Coulter pointed out, “Mississippi is half-Democrat and nearly 40 percent black.” So it is obvious that a great many registered Democrats, black and white, voted in the June 3rd Republican primary.

    Those Democrats were legally entitled to vote in the June 24th Republican primary runoff. Their votes were not fraudulent — which means the McDaniel supporters’ claim that we wuz robbed are obviously wrong, and McDaniel’s chances of overturning the June 24th runoff result are zero.

    McDaniel supporters are also wrong to repeat that outrageous and entirely unsupported “$15/vote” bribery charge, which was made by a Democrat with a history of fraud, who was paid to make the accusation, and who obviously wants to weaken the Republican ticket.

    Efforts to sabotage Cochran now (after he has already won the Republican nomination), with bogus claims that his 7667-vote primary runoff victory was fraudulent, are just helping to keep Democrat Harry Reid in charge of the Senate.


    • ...a... says:

      Dave Burton, this is a complex topic, but we can cover the cases quickly. First of all, MS does not register voters by affiliation. Therefore, you can only tell if they are a “dem” or a “repub” voter, based on who they vote for, when given the choice. Second, MS has semi-open primaries, which is to say, just about anybody can vote in the repub primary, be they a “repub” last November, a “dem” last November, or an independent/swing type. Of course, votes in November are secret, but we can cover both major cases; it does not change the argument about categories. Here are the 8 types of voters in June 2014:

      1D. Obama’12, d-prime, _____, Childers’14 == normal-dem voter (liberal)
      2R. Romney’12, d-prime, _____, r-nom’14 == tactical-repub (‘legal’ crossover)
      3W. Obama’12, r-prime, r-runoff, r-nom’14 == newly-repub voter (fresh convert)
      4D. Obama’12, d-prime, r-runoff, Childers’14 == illegal-dem (double-voter)
      4R. Romney’12, d-prime, r-runoff, r-nom’14 == illegal-repub (double-voter)
      3N. Romney’12, r-prime, r-runoff, writeIn’14 == disgusted-repub voter (temporary)
      2D. Obama’12, r-prime, r-runoff, Childers’14 == tactical-dem voter (‘legal’ crossover)
      1R. Romney’12, r-prime, r-runoff, r-nom’14 == normal-repub voter (base)

      There is also the type_5 voter, not covered above, who was bribed in cash for their vote… those types are obviously illegal, I hope we agree.

      People who are type_4 voters, and voted in both the dem-primary and the repub-runoff, are illegal double-voters. Tactical-dems cannot vote in their own primary, and then also meddle in the repub-runoff; tactical-repubs cannot go meddle in the dem-primary, and then also double-vote in their own repub-runoff. (See explanation of state law below.)

      As you point out, in MS it is “technically” legal to be a tactical voter, aka type_2 voter, which is where you meddle in the other party’s primary, but then vote for your party’s candidate in November. Sometimes, tactical voters are trying to weaken the opposition, such as a tactical-repub who voted for somebody besides Childers in the d-prime. Other times, tactical voters are trying to have a say in picking the lesser of two weevils, such as dems participating in the repub-primary in a strongly-repub state like MS, where the repub nominess usually wins a statewide race.

      MS only has semi-open primary laws, though: the law says, that if you vote in the party-primary, you must INTEND to support that party-nominee come November. To be a tactical-dem, therefore, you have to be willing to say that you “intended” to vote for the repub-nom, but changed your mind after the summer, or somesuch.

      But this same law is where double-voting becomes illegal: you cannot intend to support Childers when you vote in the d-prime, and also simultaneously intend to support the repub-nominee when you vote in the r-runoff. (Same logic applies to the case where you double-voted in both the 6/3 d-prime and also the 6/3 r-prime.) Hence, type_4 double-voting is illegal, and PROVABLY so: the pollbooks record which people voted in which primaries, so any names in the d-prime and the r-runoff are illegal double-voters. Type_3 tactical voting is technically “legal” because intent is hard to prove, the ballots in November are secret, and people are never required to state their intent.

      Anyways, most of what you say is correct. “Affiliation” is a meaningless concept, in MS law anyways. Tactical crossover-voting CAN be considered technically legal… I would not call it “perfectly legal” however, but rather unenforceably illegal. You are correct that a fairly-large-number of tactical-dems probably voted in both the 6/3 r-prime, and then again in the 6/24 r-runoff, and that this is ‘okay’ aka no reason to overturn the results, although your assumption that a higher percentage of voters in the r-prime proves this is true does not hold water (exit polls do hold water … and those indicate that many tactical-dems typically exist … so the conclusion is the same either way).

      Where you go wrong, is in your claim that, since there were some technically-not-illegal votes cast by type_2D tactical-dems, that therefore EVERY SINGLE vote in the runoff election was legal, not fraudulent, et cetera. It is dead simple to find the illegal votes: you find the name/dob/id of a voter in the 6/3 d-prime pollbook (book#1), and then you find the matching name/dob/id of that same voter in the 6/24 r-runoff pollbook (book#2). Barring a “clerical error” that is an illegal vote. There are other kinds of illegal votes, as you mentioned, such as dead people or non-citizens voting — in MS there is a voter-ID law for in-person votes, but absentee ballots were not subject to voter-ID, and therefore inherently more fraud-prone. Looking at the absentee envelopes/handwriting/etc will find most of this sort of fraudulent illegal votes.

      Of course, to be able to actually PERFORM these simple check, you have to get access to the election-materials. Currently, there are about 9 counties (TrueTheVote) or 17 counties (writ of mandamus) which are not providing full access, or are charging $1/page for redaction, or otherwise causing delays. But there are 58 counties which did not cause such delays, and in those counties there were plenty of illegal-double-voters to be found. Some of those became “clerical errors” during certification, and the review of absentee-materials after certification led to the number of irregularities going up again. According to both McDaniel and also his lawyers, they have plenty of evidence. Once the final counties are examined, a challenge-lawsuit will be filed. (You cannot examine the election-materials after you file the challenge… they become sealed evidence for the court or somesuch.)

      When that happens, we shall see what the final numbers are. Until then, you saying that McDaniel has “zero chance” is just misinformation. Not all the evidence has been posted, but I’ve seen plenty of evidence in plenty of counties, uploaded to personal websites. These are only indicative, not proof, but all the indications I have seen are Bad News… the only question is whether there is enough provable-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt Bad News, and time will tell us that answer.

      As for the allegations of bribery, I agree that those have NOT been proven… yet. The allegations of “screwed up” FEC filings, which hide the number and amount of “campaign walkers”, however, have been admitted by team Cochran. Furthermore, they also admitted to hiring Fielder, and to paying workers in cash. (State electee Snowden also hired Fielder in 2011/2012 … Snowden endorsed Cochran.) None of this proves anything, but as with the indicators of illegal-double-voting, all indicators distinctly point to Bad News.

      While I agree that it would be nice if we could concentrate on beating Childers in November, I’m not willing to pretend the indicators aren’t there, or that the evidence of unethical behavior on the part of team Cochran is “okay” now (hiring Mitzi Bickers and Stevie Fielder and Bishop Crudup and so on … plus knowingly funding adverts which say “the tea party intends to prevents blacks from voting” as Henry Barbour recently came clean about). Just because you are about to lose your senate seat, does not mean falsely calling another republican a racist, and putting out racial attack-adverts, is “okay”. That is how the dems work, and we need to get that our of the repub party. If it delays our focus on November, that is tough.

      The entire blame for the “delay” while corruption is investigated, is 100% on team Cochran: they should never have done the unethical things they did, if they cared about “November”. PPP says that Cochran’s favorability rating among repubs is now 39%, with 53% unfavorable, because of the slimeball tactics his people used. (He may have been unaware at the time… but he sure cannot be unaware now, and he has not apologized nor disassociated himself from Henry, so I’m starting to think Cochran is not clean in this mess personally.) This is not just about one contest; this is about every single repub primary, going forwards: do we want race-baiting as a normal tactic, like dems? The answer is obvious: we do not. The corruption and unethical behavior must be nipped in the bud, right now, no excuses, no moving on, no unity — until and unless illegal behavior is off the table, forevermore.


      • Sentient says:
        • one quadrillion! Excellent synopsis. The runoff results probably can’t and shouldn’t be set aside solely because of disgusting race baiting, but figuring out the number of illegal votes should be fairly easy and accurate if McDaniel’s team could gain access to the records. If the illegal votes exceed Cochran’s margin of victory, the runoff should be set aside.


        • Dixie Darling says:

          Aside from all that and all that, Mr. Burton seems to purposely misrepresent what was said in the article above and that is simply:

          From the outset, the McDaniel campaign has been, and continues to be, concerned about “fraudulent ballots”, or “fraudulent votes” cast against state law by Democrats, who voted in the Democrat Primary, and then voted again in a GOP runoff.

          (Emphasis on “who voted in the Democrat Primary, and then voted again in the GOP runoff.)

          He chose instead to take one phrase and use it out of context:

          it’s the affiliation that renders the voter fraudulent.


      • IntoTheFray says:

        “This is not just about one contest; this is about every single repub primary, going forwards: do we want race-baiting as a normal tactic, like dems? The answer is obvious: we do not. The corruption and unethical behavior must be nipped in the bud, right now, no excuses, no moving on, no unity — until and unless illegal behavior is off the table, forevermore.”

        Bullseye! Nobody but a Lib should sanction the behavior displayed by the Cochran camp during this campaign. If Republicans are going to trash Republicans with lies, false accusations of racism and other liberal tactics, just for the “win at any cost”, than the Republican party is no better than the Democratic party. If the Cochran “victory” is allowed to stand and sanctioned by the GOP, Than I will no longer be able to remain a registered Republican.
        It would appear that the moral decay that long ago took over the Democratic party and brought us the likes of Harry Reid, Pelosi, DWS, Obama and the most corrupt administration in my lifetime, has now infected the Republican party. Where we go from here, I don’t know, but I, as a voter, am NOT going to sanction this kind of behavior, nor a party that allows it.


    • ytz4mee says:

      Who let this PITA back in da house? He isn’t housebroken. 👿


  5. Lucille says:

    As I recall, one of the major points in her MUGGED was to say that moving the O.J. Simpson criminal trial from Brentwood where the crime happened to downtown Los Angeles was so that there would be more people to draw from who would be sympathetic to Simpson (I think she meant blacks). She mentions this several times showing she knows NOTHING about L.A. and did no research on the point. The main courthouse and the largest IS IN downtown. Brentwood doesn’t even have a major courthouse. Residents can be on juries but they can’t be made to serve any further from their homes than 25 miles. Even the trial for the civil suit brought by the parents of the two deceased was held in Santa Monica, a seaside city (not a “beach town”) plumb full of white people. Made me wonder how many other things she got wrong. Dang, get your facts straight, will ya, Annie!


    • canadacan says:

      Specious reasoning.She is a walking talking non sequitur.
      Coulter is indeed a shill for Fox News.
      Specious, shill and shrill she never shuts up.
      Thank you so much for all the exact information on the election in Mississippi.
      McDaniels would make an awesome senator.


  6. Sentient says:

    There’s no excuse for ignoring illegal voting and there’s no excuse for Coulter’s column.


  7. Attorney says:

    I used to enjoy Coulter’s stuff. Then she got with the Romney bandwagon, and Christie – she is like so many RINOs, a phony when push comes to shove.


  8. Denver says:

    Seems to me it is the author that is barking mad


  9. dsb steve says:

    Ann sounds pretty sensible to me. Does McDaniel intend to appeal to black voters at all? On a practical level doing so makes sense. As Ann says they are 40% of the population of the state.


    • sundance says:

      Why? Why would you intentionally target people based on skin color ? Is that not, by itself racist?

      Here is where liberals like YOU and Dave Burton don’t get it.

      No candidate should appeal to voters based on their skin color. All candidates should espouse their beliefs and positions on issues and then share them with all audiences. If white, black, green, purple or brown people align with those principles and positions then great – if not, that’s ok too.

      When you appeal to an audience based on the color of their skin you are inherently being a racist. Progressives and liberals just don’t get that and probably never will. Then again, that’s what makes Democrats the most racist of all political entities.


    • Josh says:

      dsb steve, you WILL be called out for your racism on this site. I’m going to speak for (I believe) most of us here: We don’t cotton to racism. (It’s just one of several reasons that I thank G-d for The Last Refuge.)


    • Josh says:

      Also, the “black” folks are aching for a conservative message as much as folks of all other colors.


      • Jake1 says:

        Josh, I blelieve you are 100% correct. Most of my black friends are finally starting to believe the current government is not doing anything for them and are looking to get back to totally “equality” and endforcing the constitution. They believe in making the black family “whole” again as it was before. They are good Christians and know what needs to be done. Of course they are also older and realize exactly what the free handouts have done to them, they have seen it and want to repair it for future generations. .


  10. sundance says:

    This is the second part of that radio discussion:


  11. joshua says:

    Ann needs a replay on the pie in the face deal with someone that actually pitches better than Obama.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s