Rasmussen’s MO poll: McCaskill 48, Akin … 38

posted at 11:21 am on August 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

You knew this was coming, right? Oh, our Akin electoral hopes for Republican control of the Senate:

What a difference one TV interview can make. Embattled Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill has now jumped to a 10-point lead over her Republican challenger, Congressman Todd Akin, in Missouri’s U.S. Senate race. Most Missouri Republicans want Akin to quit the race while most Missouri Democrats want him to stay.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the Show Me State finds McCaskill earning 48% support to Akin’s 38%. Nine percent (9%) like some other candidate in the race, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

Don’t forget that Rasmussen had Akin edging McCaskill by three before the primary — the weakest of the three Republican candidates, but still a formidable challenger to the Democratic incumbent.  Another pollster had Akin up by ten before the Republican nominee offered up his disastrous analysis of rape-repelling uteri and questioning whether a pregnant woman could legitimately claim she’d been raped.  Not surprisingly, more than a few Missouri voters found this nonsense to be disqualifying.

However, let’s not be too rash.  A number of Missouri voters want Akin to stay in the race.  Hey, they’re mostly Democrats, but at this point, Akin can’t afford to be choosy:

Forty-one percent (41%) say Akin should withdraw from the campaign and have Republicans select another candidate to run against McCaskill. But just as many (42%) disagree and say Akin should not quit the race. The partisan divide reveals voter understanding of the underlying dynamics. Most Republicans (53%) think he should quit; most Democrats (56%) do not, and unaffiliated voters are evenly divided.

Amazingly, the internals actually look a little better for Akin than one might expect.  Independents split between Akin and McCaskill, 39/39, despite Akin’s faux pas.  Akin has a one-point lead among men (45/44), but unsurprisingly gets buried among women, 32/52.  There is some support for the argument that this is as bad as it gets, with 93% having followed the Akin controversy either very or somewhat closely.  On the other hand, Akin’s favorability has cratered to 35/63, which makes it difficult to argue that he’s going to pick up much more than 38% of the vote, at least where the race stands now.

Claire McCaskill is undoubtedly doing a happy dance with this poll, but this isn’t good news for her, either.  Despite being the other binary choice in a race against someone who questioned the legitimacy of rape victims, McCaskill only gets 48% — not even a majority.  Her favorability rating is a zero, 48/48, with almost twice as many people rating her very unfavorable as very favorable (19/36).  While she has solidified Democratic support (96%) against Akin, drawing only 39% of independents in a two-way race with Akin on the ticket is a stunningly bad performance.  This shows just how much Republicans might gain if Akin can get out of the way and allow a better candidate to square off against a clearly unimpressive incumbent.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Based on things said and not said, I believe Rep. Ryan may be a no exceptions guy who has bowed to the top of the ticket. I could be wrong.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

I think you’re right. Is there a moral here about a very human susceptibility to the seductive lure of career ambition? Have we seen it before in politicians whose church dogma goes against their political personna and voting record? Things are never just black and white, are they? Humans are a frail bunch.

a capella on August 23, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Last Thursday (8/16), Romney was behind Obama in the Rasmussen poll.

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 1:15 PM

That was statistical noise, Rasmussen had mentioned that. And there was a divergence between Rasmussen and Gallup for a number of days. Like I said , I do not know if today’s blue wave on RCP is statistical noise as well. But the GOP’s momentum may well be blunted by the moron Akin. He has already sucked (Akin sucks) a lot of attention from the upcoming convention and the Romney messages.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Can you imagine having a convention like the Dems are going to have celebrating abortion and baby killing day after day. Sickening. What terrible imagery comes to mind.

gracie on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Are we supposed to be impressed you have stupid friends?

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

She just isnt’ interested in politics. And even not being interested, she isn’t stupid enough to believe this is no big thing. Like someone who, in the day this erupted, claimed it was a minor gaffe everybody would forget in 24 hours and that Akin would cruise to victory. Hard to believe anyone could reach those levels of idiocy, but as we both know, it happened.

Anyone who thinks the negative effects of this story are already factored in with the majority of the voters that count, the less ideologically committed, low information, swingy ones, is being delusional.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

beatcanvas on August 23, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I had to look it up but I think Proverbs 16:18 works here. I just have to pray that the “destruction” or the fall is limited to Mr. Akin’s political career.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

You think our SoCon breathren will get an Fing clue from this debacle?

Of Course not, because it’s about preening in front of a mirror getting off on their self absorbed moral superiority rather than shutting up, going under ground and doing the heavy political lifting over the long term.

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

You think our SoCon breathren will get an Fing clue from this debacle?

Of Course not, because it’s about preening in front of a mirror getting off on their self absorbed moral superiority rather than shutting up, going under ground and doing the heavy political lifting over the long term.

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Yeps, fully agreed.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:24 PM

a capella on August 23, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Yes we are. I try to keep that in mind, having been wrong a time or two myself. Unfortunately it is read as being non-committal.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM

I was partly being glib. But the issue for me was, at first, his total maladroitness, which subsequently revealed a delusion and deeper inability to cope with reality. I would have been behind him if he’d found his footing after his disastrous interview and reconstructed his argument and made his case with some kind of savvy and grace, identified the big issues and the real enemies. But he didn’t, because he can’t. He’s a particularly destructive combination of stupidity and ego. He’s unequal to the challenge of that position and to the larger effort. He’s got to go.

rrpjr on August 23, 2012 at 1:27 PM

That was statistical noise, Rasmussen had mentioned that. And there was a divergence between Rasmussen and Gallup for a number of days. Like I said , I do not know if today’s blue wave on RCP is statistical noise as well. But the GOP’s momentum may well be blunted by the moron Akin. He has already sucked (Akin sucks) a lot of attention from the upcoming convention and the Romney messages.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:21 PM

So, lots of ‘mays’ in your post. The thing is that we’re still in the summer and where many people are on vacation.

The conventions will soak up this news…and then the next labor report. 9/11, debates, etc.

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

No but I’ll get a clue from you. No matter that the vast majority of people here agree on what should be the outcome of Mr. Akin’s career, all you are interested in is derision and division. Why is that?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Based on things said and not said, I believe Rep. Ryan may be a no exceptions guy who has bowed to the top of the ticket. I could be wrong.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

That’s exactly right. Paul Ryan has never been someone big on the socon stuff, though he is one, so it’s not surprising to see him take his cue from Romney on that score. Biden certainly did from Obama.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Yes we are. I try to keep that in mind, having been wrong a time or two myself. Unfortunately it is read as being non-committal.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Very workable plan. Just don’t run for political office and you’ll be fine.

a capella on August 23, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Depressing.

Terrye on August 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

There are a lot of social conservatives who can prioritize and adjust to the major issues currently troubling the country. It is unfortunate that a few can’t recognize them as partners in the fiscally conservative side of the argument.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

a capella on August 23, 2012 at 1:29 PM

No problem there!

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Like someone who, in the day this erupted, claimed it was a minor gaffe everybody would forget in 24 hours and that Akin would cruise to victory. Hard to believe anyone could reach those levels of idiocy, but as we both know, it happened.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Who was that someone? Links please. Why must every argument you make be dishonest?

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Terrye on August 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Buck up, Kiddo, we will get through this together.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

No but I’ll get a clue from you. No matter that the vast majority of people here agree on what should be the outcome of Mr. Akin’s career, all you are interested in is derision and division. Why is that?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Because Akin didn’t just arrive from the outter space. Because the same people who keep excusing him will vote for the next Akin when they have the opportunity.

As long as we have a wing of the party who’ll vote for whatever primary candidate who speaks more about God because in their forma mentis conservatism is basically a political arm of their religion, the rest of us, social conservatives or not, will need to deal with messes like this.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

After listening carefully to the knucklehead’s interviews of late; this guy is living in a bubble. I fear that a lot of well-intentioned pro-lifers are unjustifiably giving the guy just enough positive feedback to feed his ego. My problem is that I don’t believe Akin is pro-life. The insane arguments and language he used are not part of the pro-life world. The guy is a pretender. Heck, worse than that, with the support the dems gave him in the primary, this could have been the plan all along.

kpguru on August 23, 2012 at 1:35 PM

We are witnessing the Mark Foleying of the Republican PArty which led to the Pelosi takeover in 2006.

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:19 PM

That, my friend, has got to be one of the most idiotic assessments I have ever seen in my life. They don’t call you rickyretardo for nothing.

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 1:37 PM

“Dang it! The guy is good on fiscal policy and small government but, dang it, he said ‘legitimate rape’ so screw the country, I’m voting for the other guy.”

DethMetalCookieMonst on August 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Yes, he said that, but what puts him on the same level as that Congressman who said sending more troops to an island could tip the island over was that the woman’s body can’t be impregnated by rape. And then he characterized it as “one” word and that it was “insensitive”. It was a lot of words and they were way past insensitive and into slack-jaw stupid.

Portia46 on August 23, 2012 at 1:39 PM

After being up more than 10 less than a week ago. And this number is only going to get worse. Believe it or not, there are a lot of non-political junkies that have not fully absorbed the news, so these things usually take at least a few weeks to fully play out. Add the easy McCasket attacks…. McCaskill is ahead by 30 or more I predict. Get a 3rd candidate, Akin is toast, and kryptonite for everyone else. And never again include in the Repub plank that we are against abortion even in cases of rape and incest. That’s barbaric. How could the establishment Repub plank writers (walkers) speak for such a small extreme minority of the party?

anotherJoe on August 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Shove it. You either respect and want to save innocent life, or you don’t.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 1:41 PM

. The insane arguments and language he used are not part of the pro-life world.
kpguru on August 23, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Go look at the comments here in the immediate aftermath of Akin’s interview and you’ll see plenty of people coming up with quotes from pro-life sites to claim Akin was actually right. They’ve shut down or changed their tune, but they were here.

Heck, go to sites like the AFA, a large and very influential “Christian Right” organization and you’ll see them still defending Akin’s views, citing stuff about stress and infertility.

As a pro-lifer, I’ve seen plenty of people, in and out the political world, parroting the same nonsense. Heck, Akin wasn’t even the first politician doing it. He wasn’t even the first Republican candidate for Senate. Google Fay Boozman, Arkansas 1998. He was running against Blanche Lincoln.

If anything, Akin forced himself to shave the religious tones from his languages. If he was talking in an Evangelical service or to his supporters, he’d probably mention “God’s Little Shield”.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Instead of working to reduce the number of abortions that are taking place, something a large number of Americans support, the fringe socons and pro-lifers have to go into the minefield to ban abortion even when the pregnancies were the resulting from rape or incest. ( I assume they will not ban termination of a pregnancy when the woman’s life is in danger.) Abortions involving those circumstances are very small among the abortions performed each year. By overreaching, and demanding an unyielding and absolute stance in a complex moral problem, they can lose in the larger war to save many unborn.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Stupid people.

rrpjr on August 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Oh. I didn’t realize they are so numerous they comprise an actual “wing” of the republican party. Gee, if that’s the case, maybe the republican party isn’t such a “smart” party to be a member of.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM

They comprise a very large wing of the democratic party. Wouldn’t be a great stretch to think we have a few of our own. ;)

kim roy on August 23, 2012 at 1:44 PM

That was statistical noise, Rasmussen had mentioned that. And there was a divergence between Rasmussen and Gallup for a number of days. Like I said , I do not know if today’s blue wave on RCP is statistical noise as well. But the GOP’s momentum may well be blunted by the moron Akin. He has already sucked (Akin sucks) a lot of attention from the upcoming convention and the Romney messages.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:21 PM

So, lots of ‘mays’ in your post. The thing is that we’re still in the summer and where many people are on vacation.

The conventions will soak up this news…and then the next labor report. 9/11, debates, etc.

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

I only counted one.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Another broad paint brush you are working with.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

This man represents on district in Missouri and they are the only ones who voted for him. Generalize much?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM

I heard talk of him being swapped with Ann Wagner, him retaining his House Seat. He should not even be allowed to do that after his profound idiocy, bordering on fanaticism. Let a third party republican backed candidate emerge to challenge, and lump McC and Akin as two bad apples wrong for Missouri. Would not be hard since he is getting so much Dem support.

runner on August 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Screw that. If that’s what it takes to get him off the State ballot, do it. If he won’t do the right thing and quit, we need to cut a deal. A bad deal is better than allowing the house to burn down.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 1:49 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Another broad paint brush you are working with.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

That is an argument?

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM

There are a lot of social conservatives who can prioritize and adjust to the major issues currently troubling the country. It is unfortunate that a few can’t recognize them as partners in the fiscally conservative side of the argument.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

I agree.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Are they even trying to run a third party candidate in MO or doing anything about it all currently? Have they found somebody willing to run? how long does it take to court-order him to get off the ballot? and if he stays in, what are the chances that Romney loses Mo?? I mean how toxic is this nutjob….

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

This morning, one of my friends, who doesn’t pay much attention to politics but tends to vote straight ticket republican, said Romney needs to get rid of his running mate. She was talking about Akin.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Sounds like she’s not very politically astute. Why are these people allowed to cancel out my vote. (Yes I know she voted Republican, but you get my point.)

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

This man represents on district in Missouri and they are the only ones who voted for him. Generalize much?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM

The Dems are doing it already…

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Are we supposed to be impressed you have stupid friends?

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

She just isnt’ interested in politics. And even not being interested, she isn’t stupid enough to believe this is no big thing. Like someone who, in the day this erupted, claimed it was a minor gaffe everybody would forget in 24 hours and that Akin would cruise to victory. Hard to believe anyone could reach those levels of idiocy, but as we both know, it happened.

Anyone who thinks the negative effects of this story are already factored in with the majority of the voters that count, the less ideologically committed, low information, swingy ones, is being delusional.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Bless her heart. You must run your arguments by her a lot before coming here.

AllahsNippleHair on August 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Rush said about half hour ago that gallup still have 47-45 romney so no Akin effect….he said. Wake up Rush. Nope for the first time in a very long time Romney and the prez tied at 46 and the prez unfavorable down. and Rasmussen down for Romney. Yep its happening. Wow. And I was hoping it would be a lead for RR going into convention. Never helps coming from behind. My God. With this economy RR should be up 10 points.

Robb on August 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Because Akin didn’t just arrive from the outter space. Because the same people who keep excusing him will vote for the next Akin when they have the opportunity.

As long as we have a wing of the party who’ll vote for whatever primary candidate who speaks more about God because in their forma mentis conservatism is basically a political arm of their religion, the rest of us, social conservatives or not, will need to deal with messes like this.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Do we know if that was the case with Akin, if he actually ran on God, so to speak?

There’s nothing wrong with candidates like Akin as long as they can explain their views and positions in a way that appeals to voters, not alienate them. He did the latter, but that doesn’t put a pox on all their houses. And frankly, I like the fact that the socially conservative have a place in the GOP, versus the Democrat Party where that sort of thing, and faith itself, is something to be shunned or ridiculed.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

It’s a shame that the Libertarian candidate, Jonathan Dine, doesn’t have more material out. Being part of the NORML crew to legalize marijuana is a turn-off to conservatives, but without knowing a lot more about him one cannot apply the Reagan Rule of the 80% friend.

Can you vote for someone you agree with on the majority of topics and yet clearly disagree with on 20% of them? Dine is by no way a well known player but he has a major plus of already BEING ON THE BALLOT. That is a huge part of the problem right there: ease of voting for the guy.

In this case voting for him isn’t ‘throwing your vote away’ because it isn’t going to McCaskill and it isn’t going to a candidate you deeply disagree with on principle and for being a general lackluster moron. Dine may not be any better but by voting for him you are: 1) not voting for McCaskill, 2) not ‘splitting’ conservative votes, 3) not rewarding the GOP for protecting such an idiot for so long, and, 4) have someone you can have no qualms voting against in 6 years as a non-D placeholder until MO gets its act together.

Is the legalization of marijuana issue up to the standards of what Akin has already said and his inability to deal with it? Dine may be all sorts of stupid as well, but as the days tick down and no one steps forward to be a write-in, the voters in MO may just have to look and see who actually wants the job that isn’t McCaskill and who isn’t further to the Left of her.

If you are an espouser of the Reagan Rule, can you live by that and honestly look at someone who isn’t a Republican but who isn’t going to be a Democrat-lite, and openly have disagreements with on a minority of issues that aren’t all that critical to the nation at present? Which do you want more: repeal of Obamacare or worrying that one Senator might be able to get marijuana legalization going over 6 years? And if you live in MO, don’t like the choices, can’t hold your nose and vote for Dine then how about YOU? You can always step up to the plate… because this isn’t about PARTY but about the size, scope and power of the US federal government. McCaskill wants more government, Akin has made himself a liability, so it is time to stand up or get behind someone you may not care about on a few issues, but agree with on critical ones.

Anyone interested in getting more output from Dine? Or are you wedded to party, not principle? It shouldn’t take too long to figure out if he is half-way decent or just another bozo with a few things you like and a lot you don’t.

ajacksonian on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

This election is going to be won by converting Independents into Republican votes. Most Independents believe abortions are fine when conditions exists that may harm the mothers life, cases of incest and rape. This will not change. The extremes from both sides turns them off, unfortunately for our side Mr. Akin has stuck his neck out and put the whole parties head on the chopping block. The Democrats would like nothing better than to talk about victims of incest being forced to carry a baby to term or rape victims having the same fate. Lets just hope the conversation gets changed and quick. And pray for short term memories.

DDay on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

He is not playing with the party’s elite at this point.He is playing with the SoCon elite in hopes of getting enough financial support to stay in the race.

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

So you’re inferring that Social Conservatives aren’t part of the party elite. What are we? Just some backwater inbred fools that you expect to vote for your side every 2-4 years?

Just because you’re a social leftist that is ruled by one aspect of that leftism over all others, Chick-Fil-A comes to mind, doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Plenty of us social conservatives want him to be replaced by a more competent candidate. Hate to break it to you, but all the people running on the Republican side for the Missouri Senate seat are social conservatives.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM

No, observing.

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Sorry, I expect “our side” to know better.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Oh at work. Had not heard anyone at all talk about the presidential race. At all. Now the water cooler talk is “did you hear about that stupid republican who said that some rape is legitimate or something”. These people will vote…

Robb on August 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

This man represents on district in Missouri and they are the only ones who voted for him. Generalize much?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM

False. He won the primary for a reason and it wasn’t because he got all the votes from his district.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:00 PM

McCaskill initially stated that she didn’t think Akin should get out of the race. Does that mean that she supports his views? Just saying.

COgirl on August 23, 2012 at 2:00 PM

ajacksonian on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

You do know that Dine had two previous criminal convictions, one for having a marijuana operation, the other was for stealing and ID theft, don’t you? He is a convicted felon who cannot run for state office, but paradoxically, the federal election laws do not bar a person with a felony conviction from running for a federal office.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

The Party is the vehicle and the only thing Mr. Akin and the “elites” that continue to support him will accomplish is to diminish Mr. Akin and those who continue to support him.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I only counted one.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

May be blunted by Akin. Could be statistical noise.

How about, a lot of hypotheticals?

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:00 PM

A three way tie with the majority being 33% in an open primary.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

There’s nothing wrong with candidates like Akin as long as they can explain their views and positions in a way that appeals to voters, not alienate them. He did the latter, but that doesn’t put a pox on all their houses. And frankly, I like the fact that the socially conservative have a place in the GOP, versus the Democrat Party where that sort of thing, and faith itself, is something to be shunned or ridiculed.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

there’s everyting wrong with candidates like Akin and the Dems are right to shun this ‘sort of thing’ or rather crazy talk…..he’s no socon, he’s plain crazy….what’s not to ridicule about this man? And btw, look a who devended him on this site, other loons like stevenagell & comp….

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM

No, observing.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Then you are very short-sighted.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

It’s still surprising to me that some on the conservative side think everything would have been ok if conservs had just circled the wagons for Akin like the libs and their devotees in the the media do. Some are still blaming the GOP for disavowing this guy, not sure how that works for them. Problem- we’re not libs, the media isn’t on our side and most conservs really don’t like the my side right or wrong thingie or think that it’s the right way to behave. I’m not advocating caving into media obsession, liberal bullying or suggesting not fiercely defending valid conservative positions and arguments. This wasn’t the media or libs making things up or overreacting to a gaffe. Akin jumped the shark when he changed the topic from abortion to rape by suggesting rape=birth control and by implying women’s claims of pregnancy from rape should be generally doubted. His apology never addressed those issues and only made things worse. It was all on him. The GOP did the right thing here. If it’s baddy, bad when when libs don’t throw out their trash, then what’s good for the goose should be for the gander.

limmo on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

There are a lot of social conservatives who can prioritize and adjust to the major issues currently troubling the country. It is unfortunate that a few can’t recognize them as partners in the fiscally conservative side of the argument.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

What about the social conservatives who can’t prioritize or adjust anything and don’t really care about anything but the advancement of their pet cause (which in some cases is their bank account)?

What do you do with those, like the “Christian” institutions like the AFA and the FRC that are supporting Akin and defending his “science”? Or tax’n'spend SoCons like Huckabee who have him on his show for fluff interviews?

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Another broad paint brush you are working with.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Yep, seeing it all over the place on this thread by several posters. Lots of undercurrents of religious intolerance.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Maybe, what do you accomplish by lumping people together who’s views you disagree with and tying them with Mr. Akin?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Why do you continue to try to make these people and organizations bigger than they are?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

And frankly, I like the fact that the socially conservative have a place in the GOP, versus the Democrat Party where that sort of thing, and faith itself, is something to be shunned or ridiculed.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

A very diplomatic and inclusive comment.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

There’s nothing wrong with candidates like Akin as long as they can explain their views and positions in a way that appeals to voters, not alienate them. He did the latter, but that doesn’t put a pox on all their houses. And frankly, I like the fact that the socially conservative have a place in the GOP, versus the Democrat Party where that sort of thing, and faith itself, is something to be shunned or ridiculed.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Sure, as long as they’re politically astute. Also, if they’re actually right-wing: I have no use for those big government economic populist types who call themselves conservatives only because they are very religious.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

It also doesn’t help the “civility” around here when several posters are taking this opportunity to get in their “religious” bashing comments. One poster compared Akin to the “Santorum” wing of the party. If the intent was to insult Catholics, it should be kept in mind that Ryan is himself a pro-life Catholic.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 12:27 PM

You’re right.

There’s a crazy wing in the party. That’s the wing people are attacking. It’s not an attack on Catholics, Evangelicals, Christians or Social Conservatives. It’s an attack on the crazy – for example, Todd Akin and the people who are enabling him to stay by supporting him.

How hard is this to understand?

Now, if you and others are part of the crazy, stop trying to hide yourself behind Evangelicals, Catholics and SoCons. That’s exactly what Akin is doing.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Sorry joana, you’re way off base. There is a small, but vocal contingent in our party and on Hot Air that wants to destroy the social conservative movement and banish our respect and cherishment of faith from within the Republican party. That you cannot see it after the past few days of threads shows me where you stand.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Yep, seeing it all over the place on this thread by several posters. Lots of undercurrents of religious intolerance.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

See? When I tell you paranoia defines their ethos?

Why do you continue to try to make these people and organizations bigger than they are?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Why don’t you talk to your friend bluefox about that?

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM

No, observing.

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Sorry, I expect “our side” to know better.

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Yeah, but our side is not enough to win the elections….besides, if our side knew better, a candidate like akin should have never won the primaries…or, better yet, if our side knew better, they should have made this guy go already after his monumental gaffe, as in his constituency being adamant and sending an unequivocal message that he should go….why aren’t they organizing more against this guy? instead he brags about raising 100,000 USd in one day…… Granted they can be from Dem donors too, and you can’t blame them…they saw a window there and they exploit it….

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

o you’re inferring that Social Conservatives aren’t part of the party elite. What are we? Just some backwater inbred fools that you expect to vote for your side every 2-4 years?

Just because you’re a social leftist that is ruled by one aspect of that leftism over all others, Chick-Fil-A comes to mind, doesn’t mean the rest of us are.

Plenty of us social conservatives want him to be replaced by a more competent candidate. Hate to break it to you, but all the people running on the Republican side for the Missouri Senate seat are social conservatives.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

You are reading way too much into what I said.

I was pointing out that Akin is working with the FRC, AFA, etc and not the GOP. My comment was in response to someone who suggested that he was working on some deal with the party’s elite which is clearly not happening.

Oh, and I am not a social leftist, and while I naturally care a lot about gay rights, it is just plain wrong to suggest that I am “ruled” by it. I wouldn’t be a Republican if that were the case. Like most intelligent people, I align myself with the party that overall best fits my views.

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Stupid people.

rrpjr on August 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Plenty of secular, stupid people.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Sorry joana, you’re way off base. There is a small, but vocal contingent in our party and on Hot Air that wants to destroy the social conservative movement and banish our respect and cherishment of faith from within the Republican party. That you cannot see it after the past few days of threads shows me where you stand.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Links?

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Sorry joana, you’re way off base. There is a small, but vocal contingent in our party and on Hot Air that wants to destroy the social conservative movement and banish our respect and cherishment of faith from within the Republican party. That you cannot see it after the past few days of threads shows me where you stand.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

You’re absolutely correct in your assessment IMO. I’ve seen the exact same thing over the last year on HotAir.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Maybe, what do you accomplish by lumping people together who’s views you disagree with and tying them with Mr. Akin?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM

If you read my comment closely, you will note that I was referring to the fringe elements of the socons and pro-lifer movements. Did I lump all the socon and people who are pro-life all in one homogenous and absolutist group? Many pro-lifers do acknowledge that there should be exceptions. An absolutist position will lose people who may otherwise agree with you.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I knew unhinged socons would end up getting in Romney’s way somehow.

Who knew it would be a Senate race in MO that was supposed to be a easy Repub pickup? Thanks, abortion obsessed types. Aiken was only parroting the nonsense I see all the time from you.

Moesart on August 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

This kind of stupid person, joana?

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Bwhahaha.

Abortion is always a winner for the GOP.

SoCons and their political ineptness continue to be the Dems best friend.

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Or how about this kind of stupid person, joana?

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Are they even trying to run a third party candidate in MO or doing anything about it all currently? Have they found somebody willing to run? how long does it take to court-order him to get off the ballot? and if he stays in, what are the chances that Romney loses Mo?? I mean how toxic is this nutjob….

jimver on August 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I think they’re still trying to reach to him.

I don’t know.

It should be quick if the SoS – who’s a democrat – doesn’t oppose. I actually don’t think they’ll try to prevent him from dropping off the ballot because it’d be bad optics: using the courts and the state government offices to play political games.

I think close to none. I don’t think the effect on the presidential race in Missouri is going to be much larger than in the rest of the country. It might depress our turnout by 1 or 2 points.

He’s toxic. Campaigns aren’t run by idiots. When both sides all over the country are treating an issue as toxic it’s because it is.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

May be blunted by Akin. Could be statistical noise.

How about, a lot of hypotheticals?

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

As opposed to blind believing, and not constantly looking, questioning and assessing the lay of the land and state of the battle?

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

You think our SoCon breathren will get an Fing clue from this debacle?

Of Course not, because it’s about preening in front of a mirror getting off on their self absorbed moral superiority rather than shutting up, going under ground and doing the heavy political lifting over the long term.

rickyricardo on August 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Yeps, fully agreed.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Well now I know where you stand joana. You just want social conservatives’ votes, but then want them to sit down and shut up. How interesting.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

See? When I tell you paranoia defines their ethos?

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

No, joana. Your over-the-top hyperventilating about Akin leads me to believe that it is you who are paranoid of the social conservatives in the republican party. You’ve been bashing them since the primaries started and, as I recall, had a field day bashing Santorum for his socially conservative views.

You also do not need to have any links for my comments–just reading skills and an ability to search the archives.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Akin has a one-point lead among men (45/44)

Missouri men should be ashamed of themselves.

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Maybe, what do you accomplish by lumping people together who’s views you disagree with and tying them with Mr. Akin?

Cindy Munford on August 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM

And in my post that you referred to, I did not even mention Akin.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

His response to the Ras Poll.

“The fact that Claire McCaskill is only polling at 48% after 72 hours of constant negative attacks on Todd Akin shows just how weak she is. If she can’t break fifty percent after a week like this, Democrats should ask Claire to step down. Todd is in this race to win; we will close this gap and win in November with the support of the grassroots in Missouri and across America.”

It’s Write-In time.

Bluray on August 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Instead of working to reduce the number of abortions that are taking place, something a large number of Americans support, the fringe socons and pro-lifers have to go into the minefield to ban abortion even when the pregnancies were the resulting from rape or incest. ( I assume they will not ban termination of a pregnancy when the woman’s life is in danger.) Abortions involving those circumstances are very small among the abortions performed each year. By overreaching, and demanding an unyielding and absolute stance in a complex moral problem, they can lose in the larger war to save many unborn.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Know what an Overton window is by any chance? You also ask for an extreme position so when you settle for a position that’s closer to your own the other side doesn’t realize the baseline has moved. The left has done that to us for years which is why the economy is in the state it is in and the government is an overbearing leviathan that oppresses its constituents.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

This kind of stupid person, joana?

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Blame CindyMundford, KickandSwimMom, bluefox, NotCoach et all for that.

They’re the ones who keep equating attacks on “the fringe elements of the socons and pro-lifer movements”, to quote another poster, to attacks on every SoCon and even on Christianity.

At some point, people start believing in them.

Maybe if sane SoCons were more willing to attack the nuts within them you wouldn’t have to read that. But when you have Mike Huckabee, Tony Perkins, Pat Robertson, Bryan Fisher, Kirk Cameron and plenty of Evangelical leaders and institutions coming to Akin’s defense reflexively, you know there’s a problem.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

ajacksonian on August 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

That NORML is a part of his actual campaign disqualifies him. Shows he is not a serious candidate just like the one we have running. Remove them both.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Sure, as long as they’re politically astute. Also, if they’re actually right-wing: I have no use for those big government economic populist types who call themselves conservatives only because they are very religious.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Well, a lot of economic conservatives aren’t necessarily politically astute.

The bottom line is, the MO race is on Akin and Akin alone, not on socons as a whole. If they don’t have a place in the GOP, then we don’t win the races we do. Gay marriage probably won the ’04 election for Bush. Do I think, especially now, that fiscal matters ought to be at the forefront? Absolutely. But we should have a big tent, too.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Is criticizing groups like the FRC and AFA bashing religion? Is pointing out that some social conservatives are harming the party by their actions bashing religion?

NO. And it is unfair to suggest that those of us who are socially moderate want to drive faith out of the party. That isn’t true at all.

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

You’ve been bashing them since the primaries started and, as I recall, had a field day bashing Santorum for his socially conservative views.
pro-union, pro-big government, anti free trade, economic populist, economically illiterate voting record.

KickandSwimMom on August 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

FIFY.

Akin also says that attacks on him are attacks on all social conservatives, Evangelicals and Christians.

Just like you and the rest of the crazy here.

I think this time you’ve overplayed your hand.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Is criticizing groups like the FRC and AFA bashing religion? Is pointing out that some social conservatives are harming the party by their actions bashing religion?

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Of course. Just read the crazy here.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Oh at work. Had not heard anyone at all talk about the presidential race. At all. Now the water cooler talk is “did you hear about that stupid republican who said that some rape is legitimate or something”. These people will vote…

Robb on August 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Bring up Biden’s “in chains” remark. Bring up the Minny state congressman that had sexual activity with a 17 year old boy. Stupid people in all parties.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

That’s exactly right. Paul Ryan has never been someone big on the socon stuff, though he is one, so it’s not surprising to see him take his cue from Romney on that score. Biden certainly did from Obama.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Well except for when he co-sponsored Akin’s “personhood” law that would’ve made the morning after pill murder. And when he co-sponsored Akin’s “forcible rape” law to restrict medicaid for women seeking abortiions for “forcible rape” pregnancies. And his support for a same-sex marriage amendment. And his vote against the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Yeah except for all of that he’s a total moderate on social issues? What counts as conservative these days, opposing Lawrence v. Texas?

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Well, a lot of economic conservatives aren’t necessarily politically astute.

The bottom line is, the MO race is on Akin and Akin alone, not on socons as a whole.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

He didn’t nominate himself.

He didn’t donate his campaign $100 K.

He isn’t the one paying for the phone banks and all the stuff the FRC and their ilk is organizing.

No, it’s not on Akin alone.

That’s exactly my point.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Look at joana go.

While I feel many on our side have demonstrated bad form in their attack on Akin, I am sympathetic to the argument that Akin is sticking his head in the sand. Yet the number one attack dog around here against Akin seems to be the one the least self aware individuals at Hot Gas as well. Not a clue how her obnoxiousness totally turns just about everyone off. Why, she’s acting a lot like Akin has been for the last couple of days!

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

What about the social conservatives who can’t prioritize or adjust anything and don’t really care about anything but the advancement of their pet cause (which in some cases is their bank account)?

What do you do with those, like the “Christian” institutions like the AFA and the FRC that are supporting Akin and defending his “science”? Or tax’n’spend SoCons like Huckabee who have him on his show for fluff interviews?

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

How’s that any different from the leftist woman who says, “it’s my body and I’ll do what I want with it.” At least AFA and FRC want to save innocent lives.

They are wrong to jump in to support Akin in this instance.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Is criticizing groups like the FRC and AFA bashing religion? Is pointing out that some social conservatives are harming the party by their actions bashing religion?

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Oh didn’t you know? Its wrong to call the Family Reserarch Council a hate group even though:

Tony Perkins went on national television and said that gay kids are committing suicide because they know they’re going to hell.

They accused the gay rights movement of trying to “normalize” pedophilia.

They argued that the gay rights movement had “blood on its hands” now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was repealed.

The new conservative thing is to support groups who accuse gays of murdering soldiers, sexually abusing kids and telling suicidal teens “yup, you’re probably right to feel that way.”

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Oh at work. Had not heard anyone at all talk about the presidential race. At all. Now the water cooler talk is “did you hear about that stupid republican who said that some rape is legitimate or something”. These people will vote…

Robb on August 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

I hope you educated them politely to the contrary – that this was one lone man who has been disavowed by the Rs and if they were responsive to that go on to explain what he was trying to say and that he said it extremely poorly.

kim roy on August 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Oh at work. Had not heard anyone at all talk about the presidential race. At all. Now the water cooler talk is “did you hear about that stupid republican who said that some rape is legitimate or something”. These people will vote…

Robb on August 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Yeps. And they decide national and statewide elections.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Put intense pressure on that jerk and get him out of there so we at least have an outside chance of taking that seat.

rplat on August 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Missouri men should be ashamed of themselves.

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Why should any sane individual vote for McCaskill?

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

You are reading way too much into what I said.

I was pointing out that Akin is working with the FRC, AFA, etc and not the GOP. My comment was in response to someone who suggested that he was working on some deal with the party’s elite which is clearly not happening.

Oh, and I am not a social leftist, and while I naturally care a lot about gay rights, it is just plain wrong to suggest that I am “ruled” by it. I wouldn’t be a Republican if that were the case. Like most intelligent people, I align myself with the party that overall best fits my views.

McDuck on August 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Then I apologize for reading too deeply into your remarks.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

His response to the Ras Poll.

“The fact that Claire McCaskill is only polling at 48% after 72 hours of constant negative attacks on Todd Akin shows just how weak she is. If she can’t break fifty percent after a week like this, Democrats should ask Claire to step down. Todd is in this race to win; we will close this gap and win in November with the support of the grassroots in Missouri and across America.”

It’s Write-In time.

Bluray on August 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

bayview on August 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Why should any sane individual vote for McCaskill?

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Poll respondents could have said “I don’t know” or “someone else.” Anyone who voices support for Akin at this point has no one to blame but themselves.

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Missouri men should be ashamed of themselves.

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

What about the Massachusetts women that voted for Ted Kennedy?

sentinelrules on August 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

How’s that any different from the leftist woman who says, “it’s my body and I’ll do what I want with it.” At least AFA and FRC want to save innocent lives.

They are wrong to jump in to support Akin in this instance.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I have no idea what you’re trying to say. What has the leftist woman has to do with anything?

They want to play politics and get rich. Why are they doing this that objectively hurts their cause in the short and long run? Because it excites and engages their donors.

A serious pro-life organization is the the NRLC. The Susan B. Anthony List. Those guys are con men who make a living of being as extreme and radical as possible to gain notoriety.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Poll respondents could have said “I don’t know” or “someone else.” Anyone who voices support for Akin at this point has no one to blame but themselves.

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

No one to blame for themselves for what?

If I were a Missourian I would be voting for Akin when the only two real choices on the ballot are Akin or McCaskill. It’s really quite irrelevant if you don;t like that fact.

NotCoach on August 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Well except for when he co-sponsored Akin’s “personhood” law that would’ve made the morning after pill murder. And when he co-sponsored Akin’s “forcible rape” law to restrict medicaid for women seeking abortiions for “forcible rape” pregnancies. And his support for a same-sex marriage amendment. And his vote against the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Yeah except for all of that he’s a total moderate on social issues? What counts as conservative these days, opposing Lawrence v. Texas?

libfreeordie on August 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I didn’t say he was a total moderate on those issues, I said he focuses more on fiscal matters. (And the fact he’s OK with Romney’s abortion stance bears that out.) Also, let us know when you’re roundly condemning the Democrats who also latched on to the bill in question, the one that actually dropped the provision you’re lying about (forcible rape is the legal term, to differentiate from statutory which was still covered under Medicaid despite the Hyde amendment).

You can tell yourself all you like that Paul Ryan is some fire-breathing socon warrior, but the fact is that just isn’t so.

changer1701 on August 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Blame CindyMundford, KickandSwimMom, bluefox, NotCoach et all for that.

They’re the ones who keep equating attacks on “the fringe elements of the socons and pro-lifer movements”, to quote another poster, to attacks on every SoCon and even on Christianity.

At some point, people start believing in them.

Maybe if sane SoCons were more willing to attack the nuts within them you wouldn’t have to read that. But when you have Mike Huckabee, Tony Perkins, Pat Robertson, Bryan Fisher, Kirk Cameron and plenty of Evangelical leaders and institutions coming to Akin’s defense reflexively, you know there’s a problem.

joana on August 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Sorry joana, no way can you make excuses for them. They’ve been this way for ages. There are people on here, especially on the religiously charged topics, that go out of there way to bash people of faith for their beliefs and claim that Republicans would be just fine if it wasn’t for the dumb Social Conservatives.

Fortunately, they do not dominate here otherwise I wouldn’t bother reading the comments anymore. But I’ve read every singe comment on 4 of the Akin posts (over 2000 comments) and there are several that are downright hostile to anyone who dares express their faith. They’ve bought into the garbage that faith is supposed to be private. As if believers should be ashamed of their beliefs and need to hide or something. Never going to happen.

The Republican party would not exist without social conservatives. After all, there’s the Libertarian party and we see how well they do.

njrob on August 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4