MO: Mason-Dixon: McCaskill-Akin dead heat.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

lol McCaskill fail!!!


A week away from election day and all you can manage is 45% AGAINST TODD FING AKIN?!!!!


If he wins though, it will be because of Romney's margin in MO and whatever that ends up being. Though because of the pulled money, he will probably be a renegade all six years, who won't be controlled by anyone.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why, when a poll which looks really like a republican outlier still puts McCaskill ahead, everybody suddenly thinks she's toast?

I mean, OK, it's not a good poll for McCaskill, but the reactions sound kinda like  to me.

1) I still think she wins, in the most likely scenario. But she is very lame regardless.

2) Because this is Mason Dixon and if they say something, it is usually taken more seriously then many others out there.

3) The key here is Obama's unpopularity in the state. It makes sense as a possible driving force behind all these results, even reducing Nixon's margins some.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

2) Because this is Mason Dixon and if they say something, it is usually taken more seriously then many others out there.

Fair enough. But in the past 24 days, there have been 6 polls released and none has McCaskill leading by less than 5. 6 polls is a fairly solid consensus even when the polls are of mediocre quality. So it's impossible to assume that the race is that close unless something has changed. So is Obama getting more unpopular in Missouri right now? Or is Akin somehow gaining ground on his own? I don't think that's very likely.

See, I feel like I'm spinning polls and I hate doing that. I think this poll provides some useful information and should absolutely not be dismissed. But I also don't think it erases the amount of information accumulated in the past 3 weeks.

Things have changed:
1) Time - His comments were over two months ago and election day is 10 days away. People are starting to seriously consider the choices and many Republicans are coming home.

2) Priorities - With Republicans looking shakier elsewhere, shear embarrasment pales in comparison to getting as many seats as possible. Bottom line, people are coming home. I said there was a strong possibility that Akin was underpolling because people were too embarrased to admit to supporting him to other people, but in the secrecy of the voting booth, that goes away. Now some don't even care enough to wait for the secrecy to come out for him.

3) Akin is now getting through his message that McCaskill=Obama=Bad. Obama's numbers go down further and more Republicans and even some Republican leaners come home.

4) If Akin Surging becomes the mantra in the local media, that will drive still more people who were too embarrased to acknowledge their support and give some others trully undecided a nudge to the guy who voted no on Obamacare rather than the woman that provided the key vote for it passing.

And then some things that have not changed:
1) Take a look at all those polls and how many of them actually have had McCaskill at or above 50%? I think maybe 1 or 2 have. Most of thme have had her in the mid to high 40's, with bad favorables and bad approvals. She is a too tied to Obama in a state where Obama is not popular to begin with.

2) MO has a history of close races and in a era where there will be fewer of those as MO gets redder, they will take it where they can get it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't recall rooting for anyone in this thread. In fact I believe I stated that McCaskill will probably narrowly win. Unlike some hacks on this forum, I don't let my analysis be clouded by my personal views on a particular election. Last I checked, I was supporting the Libertarian in this race as a protest vote, and stated aggressively that Akin should have withdrawn when he had the chance to do so. But I guess you know my own personal opinions better then I do myself.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Good to know you blame the unborn child for the crime.


Do you support the death penalty, Becca?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It seems to be since neither candidate defended rape.

I don't recall either of them saying Rape was part of god's plan. I am pretty sure Mourdock even said "God doesn't want rape, Got hates rape" or something similar to that just prior to the line about the pregancy being God's will.

Akin is an idiot who distorted science to defend his view, however I doubt he defends or supports rape.

Now once again, do you support the death penalty?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It seems to be since neither candidate defended rape.

I don't recall either of them saying Rape was part of god's plan. I am pretty sure Mourdock even said "God doesn't want rape, Got hates rape" or something similar to that just prior to the line about the pregancy being God's will.

Akin is an idiot who distorted science to defend his view, however I doubt he defends or supports rape.

Now once again, do you support the death penalty?

I don't know why you're bringing up an irrelevant issue, but yes I do actually. I also support assisted suicide and death panels.

Your contention is basically that these people endorse/condone/justify rape. Both of these are typical "tough on crime" Republicans and I know that Mourdock does in fact support the death penalty (Akin probably does as well) and that would likely include murderors who rape their victims before hand. Basically my point is, you can hit Akin for being stupid and hit Mourdock on being insensitive, and criticize the position of opposing an excemption for rape, but I don't get why you need to fabricate another charge that is baseless when what they actually did is bad enough. In fact by doing so, you provide both of them an opening.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm a poster on a message board. I'm not providing them anything!

So I can go ahead and state the obvious - they're both disgusting bigots who have no place in the Senate. They're just lucky they live in states where there are a lot of other disgusting bigots to vote for them, but it may not be enough.

I was speaking in hypothetical terms, that argument does provide them a strategic opening were it to be used against them in some form.

You are of course free to state your opinion and use whatever style you want to. However, I am not one for excessive rhetoric, especially when the person in question has made mistakes greivous enough as it is. I find the style you display here in this thread to be just as problematic as the extreme positions taken by these two candidates, in terms of politics being so inept and incapable of solving our problems. Do they lose the right to exist because you disagree with them on an issue?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

When it comes to rape, is Akin correct when he says it is impossible or is Mourdock correct when he says it's God's gift?

Is this aimed at someone in particular? For your sake I hope that is just a rhetorical question.

Akin never said rape was impossible and Mourdock never said rape was a gift from god.