This race brings to mind a quote by Richard Nixon. In the fall of 1963, South Vietnam's president Ngo Dinh Diem was under fire in the Western press as his government faced an impending coup. Nixon remarked that the issue was not Diem and someone better but Diem and someone worse--and he was right.
At this point, the issue for Republicans is not Akin and someone better but Akin and someone worse. I don't follow Missouri politics, but I can't think of a candidate better than Akin who can ride in on his white horse and save the day for the GOP.
The problem with your analogy, and the problem with your premise is the notion that conservatives can decide this race. They can't. Akin will have the conservative vote, but he must have some portion of the independent vote, and he must capture the women's vote. This he cannot do, so the conservative zealotry on his quest will mean nothing.
This is not personal, Akin is a decent guy and would be a far better Senator than is McCaskill. But, no matter because he cannot win. Akin has handed McCaskill the race and he will have to pay the consequences of his blunder and his pig headed refusal to do something about it.