Coulter is Just Wrong About McDaniel

Coulter is wronglegally and politically – about McDaniel because she supports the establishment candidate over him.[1]


The almost two-decades long legal correspondent for Human Events should know better.

Coulter’s Claim: McDaniel can’t win!

“Cochran won the runoff by 7,667 votes, according to the certified vote count announced this week. McDaniel’s partisans don’t just have to prove that more than seven-thousand ineligible voters went to the polls, but also that they all voted for Cochran, not McDaniel. Good luck with that.”

Reality: The election results should be invalidated

The validity of that election is in dispute for a variety of legal and ethical reasons. There are ample reasons for invalidating this run-off and redoing it. Among them, credible accusations of fraud, bribery, destruction of records, illegal crossover votes, and absentee ballot fraud.

The GOP establishment engaged in a multitude of shenanigans to prevent a McDaniel victory. Coulter is part of the establishment.

According to the law, it must be shown that legal votes have been rejected, or illegal votes have been received, and that because of the one or the other, or both, the result does not conform to the will of the voters, or uncertainty has been case upon the result …”

Or consider the decision in NOXUBEE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC E. COM. v. RUSSELL, 443 So.2d 1191 (1983): “We have employed a two pronged test which though it has been stated in different ways, essentially provides that special elections will be required only when (1) enough illegal votes were cast for the contestee to change the result of the election, or (2) so many votes are disqualified that the will of the voters is impossible to discern.”

True the Vote and other organizations are seeking to prove – credibly – that this is the case.

Coulter’s Claim: Republicans wanted Cochran

“There’s no reason to think that a majority of Mississippi Republicans didn’t want Cochran as their nominee.”

Reality: More Republicans voted for McDaniel than Cochran

If Republicans were flocking to Cochran why was Cochran so desperate to reach out to Democrats?

“Coulter falsely argues that Cochran actually won the majority of Republican votes. … McDaniel won the Republican primary and Cochran won the Democratic run-off.”

Coulter’s Claim: McDaniel could be next in line

“…McDaniel’s crew is going to prevent him from having any political career, ever again.”

“They don’t care that they’re gambling with a Republican majority in the Senate – or destroying McDaniel’s future prospects. (Which could come soon – Cochran isn’t getting any younger.)”

Reality: McDaniel is anathema to GOP establishment

Say what? A compliant McDaniel toeing the party line could be Cochran’s successor? On what planet! The GOP establishment has vilified McDaniel who is opposed to them. The Tea Party wants to replace the establishment.

Coulter’s Claim: Al Gore destroyed his career by contesting election results

“Observe that no one is asking Al Gore to run again, except maybe his cardiologist. Even in cases of actual vote fraud, history shows that the contesting politicians get branded as sore losers and destroy their political careers. Better to be magnanimous and live to fight another day.”

Reality: Somehow “sore losers” become winners

Gore remained a significant force within the Democratic Party during the Bush ’43 presidency and he remains a hero to the green movement.

As for destroyed political careers, Al Franken contested his defeat (an eight-month battle) and is now a senator from Minnesota. Also consider Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski, who lost her primary but was elected to the Senate by write-in votes.

Ann Coulter – an Establishment Flack

Coulter has been an establishment RINO for many, many years. In the last election cycle, she attacked every Republican who threatened the candidacy of her political savior, Mitt Romney. Indeed, she still regards his as an exemplary candidate who should run for president in 2016.[2]

As a consequence of her factually-challenged polemics, the reputations of good people have been tarnished and the conservative brand has been damaged.

Ann Coulter lost her conservative credentials and her credibility a long, long time ago.[3]


Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age at


[1]       Ann Coulter, “Tea Party: Learn From Al Gore,” 7/9/14.

[2]       See “Case Study # 7: Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at

[3]       See Chapter 11: “The Beauty of Conservatism,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at

1 thought on “Coulter is Just Wrong About McDaniel

  1. (Note: I don’t have a particular dog in this hunt, but I just happened to see your link at Bradblog, which is why I’m here).

    The author says:
    “Reality: Somehow “sore losers” become winners”

    1) Wrong (on Ann Coulter’s part). Al Gore won the election. The state of Florida stopped the recount that would have made it official, then the SCOTUS chose his opponent because most of them favored Bush. It’s only history, that’s all.
    Minor quibble: It is my understanding that as of now, Al Gore’s star has fallen among many of his “green” followers, and seems to serve mainly as a distraction, or “red herring” among his detractors.

    2) Wrong. Al Franken won the election through the state mandated recount process. Al Franken’s win was contested for 8 months (while the seat was held vacant) by Norm Coleman, the serial frivolous litigator who simply could not conduct himself unless it was with help from the courts.

    Fun fact:
    (former) Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman was a staunch advocate for tort reform:
    ‘[On eliminating frivolous lawsuits] Coleman said he supported what he called a common sense approach. Coleman made the point that unnecessary lawsuits are a major expense for business. “The cost of litigation I think doubles the price of a football helmets, it adds about $500 to the price of a car and about $3,000 for a pacemaker, ” said Coleman.
    Source: Minnesota Public Radio, Senatorial debates Oct 21, 2002’

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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