Posted on 09/01/2014 4:40:25 AM PDT by Kaslin
Sorry, but Todd Akin seemed like a fine man, and this article SMEARS him. The wench with the PIERCED NOSE is a DINGBAT!!! Montana....what has happened to your once great state??
Poor Amanda. Methinks the biker that drilled her proboscis for a stud, used a drill bit of an extended length...
The Dems could care less about this dingbat Stalinist. She’s cannon fodder for Steve Daines, they know she hasn’t a remote shot at winning. They’d have been better off keeping Walsh.
Todd Akin was not “Todd Akin” - the media made him “Todd Akin”. The media will never make any Democrat “Todd Akin”.
A Republican or a Libertarian could spit in the street and MSM would harp on it, grind on it, and obsess on it day after day week after week until the low info voters thought it was grand theft auto; with pretty much any Democrat, not even the “live boy/dead girl” standard matters any more.
The Democrats are nothing more than a form of organized crime with a patina a political legitimacy; the media are their facilitators and enablers, and so far as I’m concerned are even more culpable than the slime that get into office.
Yet, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Barb Mulkuski, Al Franken, Patty Murray, Chuck Shumer. She would fit right in.
Here's a hypothesis that could be tested statistically: that it's bad tactics to turn on your own party's candidate, since it supports the idea your party is fallible and weak. Turn-out for your entire ticket depends on maintaining team solidarity.
It could be argued that it was stupid to turn on Akin—that the cost to the entire GOP brand and all the candidates running that year was greater than any benefit from getting Akin out, once the campaign was in full swing. This is not a moral issue. It's not as if he's a bad man.
The hypothesis proposes that in this situation the GOP needs to think more like Democrats, who never apologize and never explain. It doesn't mean that "gaffes" are without cost, but that, once a bad quote gets out, among the possible outcomes for the party from that point forward, "moving on" with the campaign might statistically be shown to produce a better result.
It's true that press treatment of real or imagined missteps will never be similar between the Dims and the GOP, but that's the playing field. It seems to me this could be tested, and should be.
Todd Akin made one stupid statement in an ill-timed interview. Yeah, he was stupid for not stepping aside because it was easy to see that his entire campaign would be defined by that statement. His profound apologies only magnified it.
Meanwhile, Democrat Amanda Curtis does it again and all we hear from the media is crickets.
Why would the Democrat party want to repudiate this candidate when her views are becoming increasingly the views of the party as a whole?
By virtue of their posting on FreeRepublic, those YouTube takes have probably reached more audience in the last hour-and-a-half than they have totaled in Billings, MT.
It is quite conceivable, for example, that Karl Rove's very public reaction to Akin did more damage to the party's candidates than Todd Akin himself did.
Democrats learned, better than we did, from RWR not to speak ill of one of their own.
Todd Akin seemed like a fine man...
_____________________________________________________________
Well..... I don’t know. If he was a fine man, why in the hell did he not step down as the nominee when it became abundantly clear that he was going to be trounced because of his stupid statement? He could have kept Claire McCaskill in MO and out of Washington had he done so, but his pride and arrogance would not allow him to do so and we were stuck with Claire Broad-bottom for six more years. I DO NOT LIKE TODD AKIN!!!!
How much credit did the GOPe get for turning on Akin and handing the seat to the democrat.
What they did was model for me the proper way to act when you don’t like the Republican candidate - don’t vote for him.
It was not abundantly clear until the GOPe declared they were going to work to defeat him and hand the seat to the democrats.
Talent’s support for medical research
Could you expand on that? Stem cells?
Stem cell research.
Yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.