Missouri Senate: McCaskill (D) 49%, Akin (R) 43%

Rasmussen Reports ^ | Wednesday, September 12, 2012 | Scott Rasmussen

[WILLIALAL]

The fallout appears to linger in the Missouri Senate race, with incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill still holding a six-point lead over Republican challenger Todd Akin. But the race is tightening.

[kabar]

I am simply stating the reality on the ground which is that politics is a blood sport, and candidates running for statewide office must refrain from making ANY statements which can then be exploited by the opposition. Akin has flunked that test in spades.

No, he did not commit a fatal gaffe. The problem was that less than 24 hours after making his gaffe and providing almost an immediate apology, the entire Rep establishment was calling for Akin to leave the race. The RNC said they were cutting off all funding to Akin and he was disinvited from the convention. Romney and Ryan needlessly got involved and called for his withdrawal. Now they will run on the same ticket with him and no doubt be asked by the MSM every time they campaign in MO to reiterate their non-support of Akin.

The Rep establishment used Akin's gaffe as the pretext to get rid of him and replace him with a moderate. This stinks of Karl Rove who also cut off all Super Pac funding. It didn't work because Akin refused to cave in to the pressure. The Reps could just as easily made a statement distancing themselves from Akin's gaffe, accepting his apology, and saying it was time to move on to address the real concerns of the voters like Obamacare, the debt and deficit, etc. Instead they bought into the MSM and Dem manufactured hysteria and treated Akin as a leper.

I agree with Mike Huckabee's evaluation:

"The Party’s leaders have for reasons that aren’t rational, left [Akin] behind on the political battlefield, wounded and bleeding, a casualty of his self-inflicted, but not intentional wound. In a Party that supposedly stands for life, it was tragic to see the carefully orchestrated and systematic attack on a fellow Republican. Not for a moral failure or corruption or a criminal act, but for a misstatement which he contritely and utterly repudiated. I was shocked by GOP leaders and elected officials who rushed so quickly to end the political life of a candidate over a mistaken comment in an interview. This was a serious mistake, but it was blown out of proportion not by the left, but by Akin’s own Republican Party. Is this what the party really thinks of principled pro-life advocates? Do we forgive and forget the verbal gaffes of Republicans who are “conveniently pro-life” for political advantage, but crucify one who truly believes that every life is sacred?"

[Yashcheritsiy]

Nope - the argument can be (and has been) made that Hayworth originally lost in his new district because the national party decided to ditch support for him.

[Yashcheritsiy]

I must admit, it’s amusing to see the GOPers tell us that supporting third party candidates is bad when it works against *their* interest, but that it’s good when it works against *our* interest.

[entropy12]

I agree with you on the speed with which prominent GOP leaders rushed to call for his dismissal. That enhanced the news of his statements and magnified damage to Akin’s candidacy. But now all that is water under the bridge.

My main point is every one makes dumb statements once in a while. The difference here is that Akin’s statement was profoundly stupid. Saying legitimate rape seldom causes pregnancy is beyond the pale. It is extremely difficult to recover from a statement like that which 90% of people find offensive and 100% of medical professionals find it incorrect. Apology will not erase the damage.

[arrogantsob]

That argument is stupid and made by stupid people. Any redistricting not only has to receive the blessing of the legislature but of the federal courts.

So the Arizona legislature is part of the GOP “establishment”? And the courts, too?

OoooK. How’s the weather on the planet Nutso?

[arrogantsob]

The last thing Sarah would suggest is to vote for her.

Any real fan of Sarah knows this with certainty.

We are dealing with phonies.

[itsahoot]

Don’t kid yourself.

I never kid about my vote. You should not either.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

-- John Quincy Adams

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual--or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country."

-- Samuel Adams

[itsahoot]

In your world, Romney/Ryan are Marxists? Please pass the Hukkah!

Project much?

I said no such thing.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Sigh. Like i said, you apparently can’t read.

Why should I waste any further time trying to explain to you relatively simple concepts?

[kabar]

Saying legitimate rape seldom causes pregnancy is beyond the pale.

"Huckabee's show was a friendly choice for the congressman: The former Arkansas governor supported and cut ads for him during his contentious three-way primary contest. "Rape is never legitimate," said the congressman. "I used the wrong words in the wrong way."

He emphasized that he is pro-life but cares equally for rape victims. Noting that he has two daughters, he said he wants "tough justice for sexual predators."

He also said he knows "that people do become pregnant from rape," and that he didn't mean to imply that it didn't happen -- but didn't specifically address whether pregnancy was less frequent in cases of rape.

Huckabee asked him about the use of the word "legitimate" in talking about rape.

"I was talking about forcible rape, and that was absolutely the wrong word," Akin responded."

I guess apology and explanation not accepted. The word forcible is an FBI classification to differentiate it from statutory and other kinds of rape. The term "forcible rape" is the term used in the bill Akin sponsored with Ryan to limit federal funding to just forcible rape.

The idea that an apology for a verbal gaffe cannot be accepted is ludicrous. It only applies to Reps. You can kill a girl by leaving her to drown in a car; you can lie under oath, commit rape; molest women in the Oval Office and have sex with an intern; you can run a homosexual prostitution ring from your basement; you can be a grand wizard in the KKK; etc. How heinous is what Akin said compared to this list, which I could expand ad infinitum. FYI: Bill Clinton has a current favorability rating of 65% today.

Let's be honest. The Rep establishment was not happy with Akin's victory in the primary. They saw Akin's verbal gaffe as a pretext to get rid of him. It happened on a Sunday and they were calling for him to withdraw on Monday so that they could meet the Tuesday deadline. The hammers of Hell were directed at him from everyone (except supporters like Huckabee, Steve King, and Michele Bachmann) to withdraw. George "Macaca" Allen had the chutzpah to call on Akin to withdraw because of a verbal gaffe. LOL

[itsahoot]

How drunk do you have to get to believe Romney is a “Marxist”?

I don't drink, period. I don't believe Romney is a Marxist, but I believe his style of liberalism leads to the same place eventually, but probably without all the killing. That would come much later.

First it was I will repeal ObamaCare on day one. A lot of our own so called Conservative in congress began to extol the virtues of no pre-existing conditions clause, and keeping dead beat kids on their policy until the are forty or so, then it became, Repeal and Replace.

If you think what has already been established under Obama will disappear under Romney then you have let yourself be decieved.

I was one of the few on this forum that warned the the court would never overturn ObamaCare, I also said that no matter if Romney was elected there would be some name changes and maybe some budget tricks, but this program would advance.

Look up what Pam Bondi let slip on FOX, about her responsibiliy in a Romney administraion.

Sincerity is everything,
if you can fake that, you got it made.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Saying legitimate rape seldom causes pregnancy is beyond the pale

Why? IIRC, studies have shown that rape doesn't result in pregnancy as often as consensual sex, for any number of reasons not having to do with magic uteruses.

[itsahoot]

Bunch of hypocrites.

Yoiks, I think you are on to something. :)

[Faith]

Trust me. My vote will be for Romney/Ryan, and I will not kid myself about any principle except the survival of this nation. By the way, I think John Q Adams would never even have considered voting for someone who wasn’t running for office. That’s where the idea of “principle” and responsible voting begins.

[arrogantsob]

I read very well and pointed out your own post which leads to the exact conclusion I drew.

Perhaps if you could write better you would get your point across without misunderstanding.

[macdougal]

Why aren’t there laws to deter demos from voting for the weaker rep candidate? Wake up Mo folks

[arrogantsob]

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

— John Quincy Adams

Adams would never support the course you propose so don’t believe you can make those who know ANYTHING about him.

“Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual—or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country.”

— Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams did not support the Constitution so I really don’t care what he thinks.

It is generally those on the losing side of an argument who start floundering around for quotes they believe support them. Normally when they are put into context and within their historical era they do not.

[Yashcheritsiy]

No, I’m talking about the fact that you seem possessed with discussing things that you don’t know anything about.

Hayworth was essentially districted out of his seat by a state legislature that was controlled by Republicans, and whose leadership at the time was known to be both “moderate” and hostile to him. A federal court isn’t likely to give a rip one way or another, unless the redistricting proposal was cutting down on minority-majority seats, which it wasn’t. Therefore, your argument 9as usual) falls flat on its face.

So once again, the problem lies with you, not me.

Frankly, I still can’t see why this is so important to you anywise.

[JediJones]

It’s not about his “mind control,” it’s about Rove’s SuperPAC’s and the RNC’s money which they took away from Akin. If you think money doesn’t influence the outcome of a race, would you be willing to take away all of Romney’s money and see how he does?

[Yasmar]

“So people are supporting someone who GOT support from their main adversary?? Ok now that makes perfect sense... sarc.”

I assume you are talking about Romney, who got most of his support in early primaries in New Hampshire and Iowa from Democrats, just as McCain did last time. Brilliant move. . . . . sarc.