Replies

Well, if the Kos / some libs can’t think on more than one level, that’s not my fault. More likely they are pretty weakly attempting to cover the tracks. (You take them at their word?) Having seen McCaskill in action for many years now, I think it is quite clear she is a skilled politician / tactician.

The ads (against all three Pub candidates) WERE aimed at moderates, to sow the seeds for the upcoming general. But moderates were not the portion of the electorate that would or would not likely put Akin, Brunner, or Steelman over the top. The “anti-Akin” ads had a second effect / purpose, directed at conservatives. My wife and I experienced it, to at least a small degree, and I doubt we are all that different from at least SOME other conservatives who watched those ads. Maybe it “goes by” some people. But I’m sure that’s ok from McCaskill’s standpoint. As you say, the race was close. So, only a small effect was needed. Anyway, to me it’s no conspiracy, it’s a simple form of multiple targets and reverse psychology on the 2nd. No one told me this, it was my own conclusion prior to the election.

Alternately, if you wish, here’s another way to look at it: Given the circumstances, McCaskill’s campaign would be foolish if they did not try to drive votes to what they saw as the candidate they could best run against. How could they accomplish that, without easily being tagged as interfering in the Republican primary?

Of COURSE the statement “Todd Akin is a true conservative, too conservative for Missouri” is not considered a compliment by liberals! But, while being far having a majority “Bible Belt” voting population, perhaps 20% of the MO populace is quite conservative, and a lot of them vote in primaries. That statement about Akin would be considered a positive by them, especially coming from McCaskill. At the same time, I can pretty well guarantee you that at least half of that 20% group would not analyze it further.

Claire McCaskill could tell the “truth” (as she sees it)about Akin and work toward setting up her opponent to be the one she wants to run against in the general, all at the same time. One goal does not preclude the other.

Fast forward to the present: We have the spectacle of Akin running his apology ad, while McCaskill’s ads are dumping on him for opposing student loans. (Her ads are a clear follow up to her earlier ads.) Now, I’m sure as heck not GOP-e, but I’d prefer to see Akin step aside and as part of his price for stepping aside, behind the scenes have some say in the selection of his replacement. That would have the positive effect of blowing up McCaskill’s ad campaign for at least a short while, and derail the MSM somewhat, too. The media at present is having orgasms over the thought of having a hot social topic on the burner instead of the economy. Even our local news stations are making me ill. Jobs numbers? What jobs numbers?

If Akin stays in, he’d better start swinging back, effectively, or he’s toast.

Anyway, thanks for a civil discussion. After tonight I may not be able to post much for a few days. (Work!!!) But I’ll try to check back at some point.