[TomGuy]

Had GOPe conspired to take Akin out

Have you NOT been reading the threads of those from Missouri to Washington telling Akin to drop out?

==

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.

[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.

[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.

[pistolpackinpapa]

I don’t care if they replace him with a cross-eyed, yellow dog. Just get him the hell outa there.