I Think your conspiracy theory falls flat on its face if only because of the primary.
The most Conservative candidate would have won if Akin had not run BTW, and she'd be the candidate facing the evil McCaskill person.
Clarification — I wasn't talking about the primary, and I don't think there's a conspiracy. On the contrary, Scott Brown's agenda is open and public. I have never believed Mitt Romney's views on abortion are driven by much more than polls, and what he said when running for governor is consistent with Brown's views today.
Todd Akin’s badly-stated comments about abortion in cases of rape created a major problem for Republicans nationwide in places far less conservative than Missouri. I don't have a problem with Republican candidates in left-of-center states distancing themselves from Akin or from the national Republican platform on abortion. In a place like Massachusetts, I'd rather get a senator who votes with us some of the time or maybe even most of the time rather than a senator like Teddy Kennedy who almost always voted wrong.
I believe in federalism and voters have every right to elect who they feel represents their own state's interests. No problems there. But I don't want national GOP leaders pushing a Massachusetts agenda on us down in Missouri.
Also, it's no secret that the GOP-e faction of the Republican Party in Missouri was unhappy with all three candidates, believing they were a weak field to put up against McCaskill. Efforts were made to recruit other candidates, but Akin, Brunner and Steelman ended up being the only three serious candidates to run.
Akin is now the nominee whether we like it or not. We're stuck with him, for better or for worse. He's our baby as social issues conservatives, he's been largely abandoned by the national Republican establishment, so if we want to win this thing, it's now up to us as social conservatives to clean up the mess and try to do the best we can with the cards we've been dealt.