Mitch McConnell's greatest political miscalculation cost him his leadership job

Friends and political foes alike of U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, Kentucky's longest-serving senator who is -- for now, anyway -- the majority leader of the upper chamber have long noted and praised his political acumen and wily ways.

From the time he first burst upon the statewide political scene in 1984, unleashing bloodhounds in his television advertisements in his successful effort to unseat incumbent Walter "Dee" Huddleston, the native of Alabama who became a Louisvillian has been regarded as a political genius. He was always able to predict the changing tides and adapt to them, picking campaign themes and using various aspects of Senate rules and procedures to win elections and move into a leadership position.

In fact, last year, McConnell campaigned for re-election by emphasizing his leadership position and the benefits of that clout to the people of Kentucky. He won by a wider than expected margin over his challenger, Amy McGrath, due in no small part to the coattails of President Trump (and McGrath's own unlikeability, along with voter fatigue from her 2018 congressional run against Andy Barr.) McConnell frequently could be heard saying how much he enjoyed being Senate majority leader; that it was his lifelong dream to hold that position. He seemed to relish the job and the power it conveyed.

But McConnell's political prowess failed him when it came time to hold on to the Republicans' razor-thin majority in the Senate. The so-called political genius cut his own throat when he opposed increased direct stimulus payments to Americans while at the same time supporting outlandish sums of money going to foreign countries for dubious purposes. "$10 million for gender studies in Pakistan" became the source of information for memes aplenty. A review of the spending included in the omnibus funding bill, passed in tandem with the Wuhan Chinese virus relief legislation, led to outrage over the spending allocated to foreign aid while giving Americans crumbs.

As a direct result of McConnell's stance against $2,000 stimulus checks, the Republicans lost both runoff Georgia Senate races earlier this week. While there were other factors, including Republicans staying home because they were suspicious of the same types of vote fraud they saw in the November election in which Joe Biden won over Trump, it's been noted that the stimulus checks were the main reason independent and undecided voters went for the Democrats over the incumbent Republicans in what were very close races.

The increased stimulus payments had bipartisan support from voters and senators, including Georgia Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. President Trump was an enthusiastic backer of the plan. Yet as Senate majority leader, McConnell steadfastly opposed the higher amounts and the foreign aid cuts Trump wanted. He refused to allow a direct vote on the $2,000 stimulus, instead tying the matter to two unrelated subjects favored by Trump but stridently opposed by Democrats. He shut down efforts by members of his own party to get a standalone vote on the higher payments.

McConnell singlehandedly killed the upgraded stimulus payments. Democrats campaigning in Georgia seized on that act. And it cost McConnell his leadership position. All McConnell had to do was go along with his party's president and a bipartisan coalition of legislators from both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and the Senate would have remained in Republican hands. The GOP would most likely have won at least one of the races, if not both of them. Even a split in the runoffs would have given Republicans a 51-49 advantage -- not enough to withstand any defections from RINOs like Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and others, on specific votes; but definitely enough to keep McConnell as leader.

Instead, the Senate is now at 50-50. Kamala Harris, as vice president, will break any ties. A Democrat from California has already been tabbed as her replacement when she resigns her Senate seat to assume the vice presidency. So if the leadership vote is 50 apiece for McConnell and the utterly disgusting Chuck Schumer, there's no question how Harris will vote. Schumer will gain control of the Senate's reins and McConnell will have his political power neutered and he'll be rendered impotent.

There's little doubt the Senate majority will work to reduce the outsized power the minority has in that body. Unlike the House, where a simple majority is all that's required for most decisions, the Senate's rules grant the minority much more ability to block or influence legislation. Cloture rules require 60 votes to end debate on a measure and bring it up for a vote. Since rules changes can be determined by a simple minority, it's conceivable that the Democrats will eliminate the filibuster. Under current rules, McConnell could potentially still throw blocks, but if the new leadership wants, it can cut his legs out from under him.

It didn't have to be this way. But for all his talk about how he relished being the Senate's leader, he took that position away from himself. He hasn't really said why, and no one has really asked him. Surely he knows that the simple act of moving spending away from wasteful, laughable foreign destinations to the bank accounts of Americans who have suffered from government decisions made in response to the virus, would have preserved his majority.

Could it be that he didn't want to provide Trump with a policy victory? Even though McConnell's popularity in Kentucky is nowhere near that of Trump's, and the president's presence at the top of the ticket benefitted McConnell's re-election, it's widely thought that McConnell has never been as supportive of Trump as Kentucky Republicans would prefer. McConnell used Trump to get elected to what will likely be his last term in the Senate, but after that achievement, he cast Trump aside.

There's a reason McConnell isn't a Republican favorite in his home state. Many regard him as too liberal and not in touch with the party's base. His hostility to conservatives and tea party principles is evident. That's why many conservatives, although they fear the country's direction under a Biden presidency and with the liberals in control of both chambers of Congress, will enjoy seeing McConnell's fall from power. Especially since it was of his own doing.

The American people will likely get those $2,000 stimulus payments after all, although they may have to wait a few weeks for the additional $1,400 to drop into their accounts or mailboxes on top of the $600 they got this week. But McConnell lost his leadership position, and for no good purpose. The act he opposed, and the opposition to which cost him his job, is going to happen anyway.

Mitch McConnell could have remained Senate majority leader, and Americans' bank accounts could have been made a little healthier. That would be a win-win for everyone. Instead, McConnell lost, Americans will still probably get the increased payments, but the country will suffer long-term damage at the hands of the new majority.

Forgive some of us if we take delight in watching McConnell's fall from power.