[jjsheridan5]

Which is worse in your mind? Supporting Cochran who stole the primary and insulted all constitutional conservatives along the way or support McConnell who won that primary fairly? I have to make that distinction, or there’d only be about five Republicans left in the US Senate. Any change will be much more gradual than in the HOR or in Governorships.

I am not looking at this as a case of punishing bad behavior, or rewarding good behavior. It is clear that both Cochran and McConnell despise conservatives, and will use their power to prevent the Republicans from becoming a conservative party (and will use little or none of that power to effectively oppose liberalism). Who committed the greater sin is irrelevant to me. You are asking the wrong question, in "Which is worse?" You should be asking the following question(s): who is going to do more damage to conservatism? Who, by virtue of their power within the Republican party, is able to more effectively influence state parties? Exert more influence on the national party? Exert more influence on incoming freshmen? Exert more influence on the house? Exert more influence on the party's national strategy and message? Put heavier leverage on (and provide more enticing carrots to) corporate donors? Etc.

I would much rather see Cochran win, and McConnell lose, than the other way round (although, strategically, we would be better off if both lost). Republicans of lesser stature, but equally hostile to conservatism, are of less importance.

[grania]

I can't disagree with that, if you're willing to give up most ways to get a majority. If they lost and Ernst and a few others supported by conservatives (and not just the Chamber of Commerce crowd) won, it would make it pretty clear that a strong constitutional conservative message is what people are looking for.