Your problem is that you can’t distinguish between facts, smears & lies. You called the Willie Horton ad a “blasphemy”, when it was simply factual. As governor, Dukakis thought it was a good idea to let murderers out on weekend furloughs. While out, they raped & terrorized the community. Voters had an urgent need to know that this was the kind of insane, moonbat-liberal, moronically-stupid policy Dukakis implemented. Far from blasphemous, the ads were a patriotic service.
Cochran did not use facts in his negative attacks. He used lies and smears. Anyone who can’t tell the difference is mentally & morally challenged.
Cochran has 1st Amendment right to use anything in his Ads.
If the content is lies and smears as you claim, the he can be sued for libel by the McDaniel campaign. Is such a suit coming soon? If not you are just blowing hot air.
Let’s list the facts...
1. Cochran is a RINO
2. McDaniel is TEA party
3. Cochran had lot more campaign cash available
4. McDaniel had committed supporters but not enough cash.
5. Cochran used his superior money advantage for negative Ads
6. McDaniel could not run counter-attack Ads for lack of funds.
7. 30,000+ Democrats came out to vote for Cochran
8. If the democrats did not vote in primary, they were eligible voters in the runoff.
9. If more than 7000 of those democrats voted in democrat primary, then their votes in run off are illegal. But unless that can be proven, Cochran wins legally.
In summary, incumbents usually have more campaign funds than challengers. That is why they are re-elected 85-90% of the time. If Cochran wins legally, I do not want the democrat to win in general because then he becomes incumbent in 6 years.