Republican Source: Akin Moving To Withdraw

BuzzFeed Politics ^ | 8/20/12 | Ben Smith

[Evil Slayer]

Missouri Republican Todd Akin has begun moving toward ending his candidacy after his remarks on rape and abortion provoked a firestorm, a top Republican said.

"Akin is taking concrete steps to withdraw by tomorrow at 5:00 p.m.," a senior Republican told BuzzFeed, adding that Akin could still change his mind.

But a Republican close to Akin said his position hasn't changed: He's still in the race.

Tomorrow afternoon is an important deadline: If he files papers to end his candidacy in Jefferson City tomorrow he can end his candidacy unilaterally; after that, he would have to file an application in court.

Possible Republican replacements, the Republican source said, include three former senators: John Ashcroft, Jim Talent, and Kit Bond. Other names being mentioned include former Ambassador Ann Wagner, who is running for Akin's now-vacant seat; and Auditor Tom Schweich.

UPDATE: Former Missouri Sen. Jim Talent tells BuzzFeed that he is not running for Senate to replace Akin. He also declined to explicitly call for Akin to step aside, but backed NRSC Chair John Cornyn's cool statement that Akin make his decision quickly.

“He’s got a decision to make and he’s got to make it quickly,” Talent added. “He’s got to know the situation and he needs to sit down and make a personal decision.”

[Charles Henrickson]

True, but if the party wants him to resign and dangles the possibility that he can run for his current seat then he may go for that. And in order to do that they would need to move Ann Wagner to the senate race. By all indications she's a solid conservative, at least according to her congressional website. She's a woman, which would make it hard for McCaskill to user the DNC 'war on women' arguments. She's been head of the GOP in Missouri. And she's someone McCaskill isn't prepared to take on. We could do a lot worse.

You're right. I've thought about Ann Wagner, and agree that she would make a good replacement. And Akin's district--my district--is a relatively safe GOP seat, and could be so even for Akin after this. Or Jim Talent could run for this seat again.

[x]

Todd Akin ...

Sheriff Lobo? Didn't he die years ago?

[tanknetter]

So, would you really want to have a national debate ( which is what this now is ) using information from Nazi death camps as supporting evidence? “Well, according to Dr. Mengele ... “

Yup, that’s a real winning position right there. So you not only have the feminists screaming bloody murder at you ( and keeping the discussion away from the economy) you now have the Jewish anti-defamation/holocost remembrance going after you.

[Delhi Rebels]

Or Jim Talent could run for this seat again.

He's mildly tarred because he lost to McCaskill 6 years ago. And Ashcroft lost to a dead man. Hauling Talent or Ashcroft or Bond out of mothballs smacks of the old boy network, too. Better to go with a fresh face I think. Ann Wagner just might be the answer.

[Charles Henrickson]

I meant that Talent could run for his old HOUSE seat again (now held by Akin), should Wagner run for the Senate.

[rwfromkansas]

This prick better step down, but the asshole sounds like he will stay until he’s dragged out.

This is leading the news instead of the economy on every news channel.

I want him gone now, and he needs to feel the wrath of the party bigtime.

[rwfromkansas]

The little shit needs to quit or be forced to do so, even by some made up lawsuit if necessary. I have rarely been so mad at a candidate. He’s a disgusting person if he stays in the race he KNOWS he will lose.

NONE OF THIS “PEOPLE ARE FORGIVING BS” HE HAS SPOUTED TODAY. He knows he will lose.

[peyton randolph]

Have you NOT been reading the threads of those from Missouri to Washington telling Akin to drop out?
Yes. AFTER he shot himself in the foot. That's damage control rather than a conspiracy against him. I suspect it has less to do with defending Akin against the GOPe than mistakenly believing the pro-life movement will be harmed by his withdrawal. Perhaps the only thing dumber he could have said on the issue would to have come out in favor of bombing abortion clinics.
Also likely that Akin's staunchest defenders on FR would throw him to the wolves if he had made certain other terminally stupid comments on other issues. For example, if he came out in support of gay marriage, there would be many here currently defending him that would call for his immediate withdrawal. What's key to note is that just because a particular dumb statement by a politician doesn't offend you because of your personal beliefs doesn't mean the statement isn't poison when it comes to the ballot box. Akin is toast when conservatives are split, moderates are running for the hills, and "independents" won't vote for him either after this.
I maintain my contention -- Brunner and Steelman ran. The others didn't! Those others [Tenet, Bond, et al] don't deserve being selected to the position, regardless of the reason.
The others have run repeatedly with pretty good track records of winning. In fact, I don't recall them losing primaries. As for being selected for the position, note that our republic worked just fine from ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788 until the adoption of the 17th Amendment in 1913. Prior to that, state legislatures selected U.S. Senators rather than the popular vote of the masses.
In this case, it's your opinion as to WHO should be selected rather than whether selection of a replacement occurs. All things being equal, at this point in the damage control game (with the Senate majority at stake and possibly Missouri's electoral votes in presidential race), I'll take proven winners of prior elections as the quick fix rather than current primary losers. We can replace them later.

[ari-freedom]

“That’s what I thought too. Why isn’t the voters represented rather than the GOP-e? “

Because they were the ones who picked Akin. :/

[fatima]

We need that seat.Wonder if he gets to pick the replacement?

[Kazan]

Akin's replacement -- a establishment type that will work with instead of against Romney's coming "bipartisan" agenda and who will turn a blind eye to another David Souter or John Roberts-type nominee to SCOTUS.

Of course, since the powers that be have unchained the Romneybots, Romney's minions are out in force working here to achieve that goal.

[Kazan]

PLEASE for the good of the conservative movement and for the good of the people of MO, STEP DOWN Mr. Atkins.

Yes, the Republican establishment must have a chance to handpick a candidate that would never have had a chance in the primary.

The GOP-e must be laughing its collective asses off at how easy it is to control conservatives.

[Kazan]

Who needs this establishment picks? What about John Brunner and Sarah Steelman?

Do you really think after the establishment has helped destroyed Akin, they are going to put up a conservative?

[Kazan]

Allowing the party chair to select someone who didn’t even run for the position this year smacks of GOPe-liteism.

That is the plan. Look how many here have piled on Akin and helped the establishment achieve the goal.

[Kazan]

He’ll run a broke campaign with no national funding.

And, we'll end up with another establishment RINO after he is forced out. Happy now?

[Kazan]

The bottom line of the interview was that he agreed with Hannity that he could lose the Senate seat and maybe even pull Missouri out of the Romney column

So, the solution to the "problem" (Akin being too conservative is the real problem for GOP-e) is a more moderate, establishment type to be put up in his place, who in turn will sign on to whatever agenda, no matter how liberal, Romney decides to propose.

[Col Frank Slade]

Why a RINO ? Were’nt there other conservatives that lost to Aikin in the primary ?

[Blackyce]

If they select Ann Wagner to replace him then they'll need somoeone to fill the nomination for Akin's congressional seat. And since Akin won't be doing anything...and they need someone to run...could this be the deal being offered him? Keep your old job or wind up with nothing? That's a great idea actually. Wagner is a solid pro-lifer herself, so it won't be seen as backing down on that issue, and if AKin can recover anywhere, it'll be his home district. If I were king of Missouri Republicans, that's what I'd do.

[Fishtalk]

Oh my goodness Humidston, why don’t YOU come to his defense with that silly piece of fiction.

Akin did three things very wrong, just to clarify it and as I see it. First, he’d heard that if a female is “legitimately” raped she will likely not conceive, that the body is too traumatized to conceive.

Now I don’t care about no studies way back during the Nazi era, take a deep breath here, that was some sixty plus years ago. Who knows what kind of data they had and how it was kept, how they knew who was “legitimately” raped? I suppose that it’s biologically possible but the proof is not so much. The odds of conceiving when raped are slim, however, in that the rape victim would have to be a female of age to conceive and be ovulating at the time of the rape, said ovulation being only two/three days a month. what are the odds?

But the argument that woman don’t get pregnant when raped is ignorant beyond comprehension and a bit dismissive of the rape victim.

I too kind of understand his term “legitimate” rape in that there is “date rape”, which is very bad but it’s not a back alley rape. There is also statutory rape and again, it’s not a back alley rape. still and so, if ever there were an unfortunate phraseology, “legitimate” rape has got to be it. Even Whoopi Goldberg’s almost as stupid term of “rape rape” is not quite as dumb.

Akin went on, not content with having done enough damage, to walk a very difficult path by asserting that the rapist should be punished, not the innocent baby.

Which means he does NOT think the baby conceived via rape should be aborted and right there is a difficult road.

Any woman who can imagine the humiliation and pain of being raped will cringe at the thought of having to bear the child for nine months of the rapist, of all that having to deal with a birth under those conditions....

....lookit, it’s not where the pubs want to go.

Sad. I’m tending to agree with some broader broad point Akin is trying to make.

You make abortion illegal for all but rape and incest, trust that the libs will get some 11 year old who’s miserable and pregnant with her own father’s baby.

This is the sort of thing left undebated....Akin not only engaged in awkward wording, he put the political party in an odd position.

Because if any yon reader thinks that abortion will EVER be outlawed even in the case of incest and rape, well I got a bridge to sell cheap.

And if abortion is legal in the case of incest and rape only, trust that every woman who wants to have an abortion will assert that the baby is the result of....duh, incest or rape.

And so we are back to square one.

We don’t need to go there and this is not the year.

[Blackyce]

“I maintain my contention — Brunner and Steelman ran. The others didn’t! Those others [Tenet, Bond, et al] don’t deserve being selected to the position, regardless of the reason.”

I’m not really in favor of automatically promoting a losing candidate just because the winner resigns. We don’t do that after general elections, I’m not sure why party nominations should be any different. IMO, it has to be the local party making the choice if there’s no time for another election.