MO: Akin could really blow this

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

They should have nominated Steelman. Almost to much like Colorado, even down to Palin picking a better candidate, only to have the primary pick a far less solid choice.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I find his comment repulsive, but do not believe one slip of the tongue should spell the end for a candidate....the 24 hour news media will ensure it gets air time over any of his policy speeches I am sure

This is like the fifth time he has said something of this caliber of stupidity since January.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There would have to be a serious amount of pressure exerted from within the GOP to do that, and I don't see him doing so even if there were such pressure.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

WTF is it with these people and rape. It is basically the exact same kind of sh**t Buck said in that 1999 phone call. Only his was worse because he basically said that directly to a victim and over the phone to boot. Not the mention why hell would you want to discuss that over a phone and not in person, more or less come up with an "alternative scenario" that involved her "asking for it".

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So this will be the ... fourth? Senate race the Tea Party has cost the Republicans?  Thanks, guys...

It is very difficult to call him the Tea Party candidate and thus attribute his nomination to him. If anything he is a far-right, establishment, socially conservative Congressmen of 12 years. Brunner got the backing of most of the TP groups, while Steelman got Sarah Palin's endorsement. Brunner was a businessman and Steelman had previously challenged the establishment choice in the 2008 GOP Gubernatorial primary to see who would lose to Jay Nixon.

Also, he followed the Fischer, Thompson, "He who throws the least mud near the election wins" model. He was third in the polls for months and down in the teens until just two weeks prior to the election. This is one case where the TP would have saved us a seat.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So this will be the ... fourth? Senate race the Tea Party has cost the Republicans?  Thanks, guys...

It is very difficult to call him the Tea Party candidate and thus attribute his nomination to him. If anything he is a far-right, establishment, socially conservative Congressmen of 12 years. Brunner got the backing of most of the TP groups, while Steelman got Sarah Palin's endorsement. Brunner was a businessman and Steelman had previously challenged the establishment choice in the 2008 GOP Gubernatorial primary to see who would lose to Jay Nixon.

Also, he followed the Fischer, Thompson, "He who throws the least mud near the election wins" model. He was third in the polls for months and down in the teens until just two weeks prior to the election. This is one case where the TP would have saved us a seat.

Akin is a member of the Tea Party Caucus, FWIW.

Of course, he is obviously a far right conservative and engratiating himself with the latest movement of the base suits his interests. But my point wasn't that he is not far right, he most certainly is. My point was this was a primary of three TP candidates, two of which had better claim to the title then he did. Thus the one difference to Colorado, is that it isn't possible to blame the TP for scuddling this seat like could be said of Indiana if things go badly there.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ann Wagner is not that much of a winner either to tell you the truth. Does anyone remember her bid for RNC chair her comments during that?

Talent would be my choice, followed by Steelman or Graves. The best choice would probably be a women in the aftermath of what has happened so with Talent out, my pick is once again Steelman.

All this matters not, unless Akin gets out. I am still very skeptical of him doing so. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, this has been rather fun to watch. Though honestly there are a number of similar comments that have been made over the years by GOP (and democrat) congressmen that I find to be similarly offensive and yet have not resulted in the same sort of backlash.

They don't want a repeat of Colorado. Especially after Reid's tax accusations, which makes them hunger for the Senate majority even more.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So this will be the ... fourth? Senate race the Tea Party has cost the Republicans?  Thanks, guys...

It is very difficult to call him the Tea Party candidate and thus attribute his nomination to him. If anything he is a far-right, establishment, socially conservative Congressmen of 12 years. Brunner got the backing of most of the TP groups, while Steelman got Sarah Palin's endorsement. Brunner was a businessman and Steelman had previously challenged the establishment choice in the 2008 GOP Gubernatorial primary to see who would lose to Jay Nixon.

Also, he followed the Fischer, Thompson, "He who throws the least mud near the election wins" model. He was third in the polls for months and down in the teens until just two weeks prior to the election. This is one case where the TP would have saved us a seat.

Akin is a member of the Tea Party Caucus, FWIW.

Of course, he is obviously a far right conservative and engratiating himself with the latest movement of the base suits his interests. But my point wasn't that he is not far right, he most certainly is. My point was this was a primary of three TP candidates, two of which had better claim to the title then he did. Thus the one difference to Colorado, is that it isn't possible to blame the TP for scuddling this seat like could be said of Indiana if things go badly there.

Regardless of semantics, the point I was trying to make was that if the Tea Party had never formally organized, and instead just been reflected in the mood of the electorate, Republicans would probably have the seats in Delaware, Nevada, and Colorado, and be a clear favorite in Missouri this year rather than a clear underdog.

I won't complain though.

How so? Wouldn't Akin have just been the establishment candidate and frontrunner in the primary from the start? He has the So-Cons, he has been in Congress for more then a decade, and establishment most certainly wouldn't have backed Steelman or even Brunner.

All the groups, organization and people associated with the TP supported either Steelman or Brunner. So I don't see how "The organizing of the TP" had an impact on this primary. There is no link as all those organizations backed Akin's opponents. And more to the point, he didn't follow the TP insurgent path to victory as much as the Fischer/Thompson path whereby the guy throwing the least mud right before the election wins, rather than the most conservative candidate (Thompson hardly could be called such). Such a trend is more than likely a reaction to the hard edged politics and negativity that defined the TP era of 2009-2011.

Your point seems to boil down to the old argument that all the GOP duds originated with the TP, which is completely ridiculous. Even the "blame the TP" meme only really works with one of the three 2010 defeats you mentioned and that is Delaware. In Nevada, another candidate collapsed and another didn't get off the ground, leaving Angle, unknown (espeically her negative qualities) to most of state, as pretty much the last candidate standing as much as a TP insurgent. There is no guarrantee that any of the others could have even stood up to Reid any better then she did as they all had issues.  In Colorado, Norton was vulnerable because she was uninspiring and many viewed her as a puppet of higher powers in the state. She may have lost the general as well but for different reasons then Buck did.

Unless you can show me where the TP enabled Akin to beat a more establishment candidate in the MO primary, your point doesn't work. There were no "more establishment" type candidates in the race then himself. And while he was a TP candidate by self affiliation, he had the least claim to that title of the three candidates.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is another deadline for the same thing to be done, but by court order. I don't know when that deadline is. Some have mentioned Sept 25th, so that may be the absolute final deadline to get rid of him.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

According to Mason Dixon, a majority of those who still support Akin against McCaskill want him to withdraw. Amongst those undecided, 67% want him to withdraw.

It is time for a thread title change "Akin really has blown this!"

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

According to Mason Dixon, a majority of those who still support Akin against McCaskill want him to withdraw. Amongst those undecided, 67% want him to withdraw.

It is time for a thread title change "Akin really has blown this!"

I was going to change it, but after Rand Paul won, I refuse to believe McCaskill has better than 60% odds of winning.

I just don't see how her chances are less then 90%. You have to look at this man's history and he is a walking gaffe-bomb thrower. He alone will serve to remind people, more or less what McCaskill will be doing with all the windfall of donations she will likely be receiving. The only way for Akin to come back is to keep his head down and hope people forgive/forget about him. His history tells me he doesn't possess the ability to do that at all.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just because the polling is close doesn't mean it is winnable. Especially if you think the particular canidate has a ceiling that will ensure he loses as result of some controversy. In New Jersey you don't even need a controversy for that to happen.

The guy can be leading 44-38 and still lose, because no one will vote for him beyond 45%.

Now on the flip side of that is the potential for an unpolling. Supporting AKin is likely to be seen as embarrasing. So there may be a number of people who aren't selecting Akin in these polls but do so on election day. Of course there is also the people who are overcome with the seriousness of their vote and can't bring themselves to vote for him when it is also said and done. Those two probably cancel each other out for the most part.

Akins only possibility is a net marginal underpolling (The first scenario above outweighs the later) and a decision by some based on the decline in GOP chances nationwide to rally around the flag and reduce the damage by holding their noses and voting for Akin. Still I don't see either getting him to 50%.

I think he can legitimately claim that throwing money in here is washing it down the drain. You can disagree, but such a claim isn't baseless.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If he does manage to get reelected, it will likely be because Romney somehow pulled 8 to 9 point victory out of his ass in Missouri. Huffpo has an article along these lines. Not at all impossible if the rural areas surge out of fear of a Democrat sweep, and a bunch of voters polling as Romney/McCaskil in the surburbs secretly vote for Akin with no one watching. Missouri suburbs are still highly conservative compared to the rest of the country, and the most suburban district is Akin's! However such a pro-Romney result can only happen if Romney is winning or just falling short nationwide. The only difference between this possibility and the one I talked abotu before regarding the, "poll one way vote another" people, is that the group wouldn't have to be as big in this situation, as the rural turnout would make up more of the difference.

Besides, I am not concerned at all about this, "We should have nominated a more conservative candiate". Hell that is the very argument many Romney supporters used for their candidate in a so different world of 2008 and still use when comparing him to McCain. And the funny thing is that it will still serve my purposes regarding the strategic direction of the GOP, considering who the most likely candidates are and their traits and skills.
 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

At this point the NRSC would benefit more by blowing $2 to $3 million on the Libertarian candidate then on Akin.