What the GOP and conservatives mad dogs aren't seeing about the Missouri Senatorial race.
Let me just start out in saying that some conservative bloggers and local and national talk radio hosts just don't get it about the Missouri Senatorial race. For over a freaking week I had to listen to talk show host after talk show host rip into Todd Akins like a school of Parana feeding on an animal that feel into the Amazon river. I got so sick of listening to the bell aching attacks, I turned off the radio and did other things. What they were saying wasn't impacting my thoughts on the Akin and the race, because I already had a scene of the "small picture", they didn't want to look at. They are all correct in how important Missouri is to overturning Obamcare. What nobody on our side has said once since this whole Akins thing hit the fan and the torches were lit to get him is the fact that Missourians do not like Obamacare!! Missourians do not like Claire McCaskill, because she voted for Obamacare.
Besides the presidency, all elections are said to be local. The Missouri Senatorial race is no exception. Since most voters in Missouri do not like Obamacare, that is another reason why I am suspect of the Scott Rasmussen poll. Logic would dictate that if the voters don't like Obamacare, why would they vote for Claire McCaskill who not only voted for it thus helping to pass it in the Senate but also would vote to uphold it if she is reelected? It doesn't make any sense. That is what our side isn't getting. Conservatives didn't like John McCain and for good reason. He was the symbol of the GOP establishment. He tried to push through Bush and Rove's amnesty bill in 2005. He called conservatives "nativists", because they opposed the bill. That didn't stop tens of million of conservatives from voting for McCain. It wasn't because they liked him. It was because, they saw the bigger picture that Obama was going to be more of a problem to this country then him. They held their nose and voted for him. To a certain extent, some conservatives are doing to do the same with Romney, even though Romney is more palatable since he chose Paul Ryan as his running mate. The point is this. Todd Akins still represents the vote to possibly kill Obamacare and McCaskill is the vote to uphold it. It's that simple. If I was a Missourian who didn't support Obamacare but I also didn't like what Akins said. What would impact my life the most? Obviously it would be Obamacare. I wouldn't be dumb enough to jeopardize my healthcare just because a politician said something stupid. That is what a certain percentage of conservatives need to understand. I Akins simply get back on message and hammer Claire McCaskill repeatedly that she voted for Obamacare and still supports it, her numbers will start to drop again. He needs to remind voters that he is still the crucial vote to repeal it. If he does that, he can make up ground and still win. It still comes down to the issues. That is something Claire McCaskill nor liberals can ever run on. The Missouri Post Dispatch released their poll yesterday showing that Romney is up on Obama 50 to 43 in Missouri. In the Missourii Senate race McCaskill leads Atkins 50 to 41. If Akins was down by 15 points or more, I would believe he would be in deep trouble. Nine points may seem like a lot but it's not.
Hillary Clinton had a double digit lead over Obama a few months before the Iowa Caucus
With all the sky is falling drama coming from the pundits and commentators on the right over Atkins, they need to pipe down and look at some of the results from the dispatch poll before wanting to continue to run a monster truck over him. Look at the geographic state breakdown of the State of Missouri.
Except for the cities of Missouri (St Louis and Kansas City) which always go Democrat anyways, Akins still leads in most of the state. That is why he's only down by 9 points. If Akins gains lets say 3.5 points and McCaskill loses 3.5 points. Then the election is a 2 point race within the margin of error of 3 points. I would love to get my hands on the Akin's campaign internal poll. With over two months to go, Todd Akins still has a chance to win this race if he gets back to the message of the race, and conservatives and the GOP just bite the bullet, stop foaming at the mouth and start sending money back into Missouri to help him.
Besides the presidency, all elections are said to be local. The Missouri Senatorial race is no exception. Since most voters in Missouri do not like Obamacare, that is another reason why I am suspect of the Scott Rasmussen poll. Logic would dictate that if the voters don't like Obamacare, why would they vote for Claire McCaskill who not only voted for it thus helping to pass it in the Senate but also would vote to uphold it if she is reelected? It doesn't make any sense. That is what our side isn't getting. Conservatives didn't like John McCain and for good reason. He was the symbol of the GOP establishment. He tried to push through Bush and Rove's amnesty bill in 2005. He called conservatives "nativists", because they opposed the bill. That didn't stop tens of million of conservatives from voting for McCain. It wasn't because they liked him. It was because, they saw the bigger picture that Obama was going to be more of a problem to this country then him. They held their nose and voted for him. To a certain extent, some conservatives are doing to do the same with Romney, even though Romney is more palatable since he chose Paul Ryan as his running mate. The point is this. Todd Akins still represents the vote to possibly kill Obamacare and McCaskill is the vote to uphold it. It's that simple. If I was a Missourian who didn't support Obamacare but I also didn't like what Akins said. What would impact my life the most? Obviously it would be Obamacare. I wouldn't be dumb enough to jeopardize my healthcare just because a politician said something stupid. That is what a certain percentage of conservatives need to understand. I Akins simply get back on message and hammer Claire McCaskill repeatedly that she voted for Obamacare and still supports it, her numbers will start to drop again. He needs to remind voters that he is still the crucial vote to repeal it. If he does that, he can make up ground and still win. It still comes down to the issues. That is something Claire McCaskill nor liberals can ever run on. The Missouri Post Dispatch released their poll yesterday showing that Romney is up on Obama 50 to 43 in Missouri. In the Missourii Senate race McCaskill leads Atkins 50 to 41. If Akins was down by 15 points or more, I would believe he would be in deep trouble. Nine points may seem like a lot but it's not.
Hillary Clinton had a double digit lead over Obama a few months before the Iowa Caucus
With all the sky is falling drama coming from the pundits and commentators on the right over Atkins, they need to pipe down and look at some of the results from the dispatch poll before wanting to continue to run a monster truck over him. Look at the geographic state breakdown of the State of Missouri.
Except for the cities of Missouri (St Louis and Kansas City) which always go Democrat anyways, Akins still leads in most of the state. That is why he's only down by 9 points. If Akins gains lets say 3.5 points and McCaskill loses 3.5 points. Then the election is a 2 point race within the margin of error of 3 points. I would love to get my hands on the Akin's campaign internal poll. With over two months to go, Todd Akins still has a chance to win this race if he gets back to the message of the race, and conservatives and the GOP just bite the bullet, stop foaming at the mouth and start sending money back into Missouri to help him.
posted by Alpha Conservative Male at 11:10 AM
4 Comments:
Politics aside, Todd Akins is an ignorant asshole.
Young man, I believe it would be best if you lose the delusional self appointed grandiose title. A true Alpha Male would have the courage to put aside his politics and condemn any man with such an oafish point of view. As with yourself, a sitting congressman should have known better.
You are right - I've been wrong. I think Republicans are scared to death that it would harm Romney's chance of being elected -- that they are failing to see this it is not enough to have the presidency, but also the Senate, in addition to the House.
Also, a question that's been bugging me: Dems say 94% of blacks support Obama, vs. 0% for Romney. First, I know it's not 0%. Second, what happened to the other 6%?? Can't find answers anywhere. Does this mean they are undecided? (Still - a good sign that they could be persuaded)
Thanks for this post - I've been wrong, and have lost sight of the need to own the Senate. Repubs are so afraid Akin will taint the Romney election, they have lost sight of the big picture. I think we need to remind him.
Also, a question that's been bugging me: Dems say94% of blacks support Obama, vs. 0% for Romney. First, I know 0% is wrong. But what about the other 6%? Are they undecided, or are these numbers even correct?
Thanks
Sally J "
Also, a question that's been bugging me: Dems say94% of blacks support Obama, vs. 0% for Romney. First, I know 0% is wrong. But what about the other 6%? Are they undecided, or are these numbers even correct?"
LOL, I seriously doubt that. That 6% they say is undecided is the amount that will vote for Romney. No GOP candidate has ever gotten 0% of the black vote in a presidential election, and this election will be no exception. I know the poll you are referring to. It's a joke. If 0% of blacks aren't going to vote for Romney, then how could there be 6% undecided? If they are undecided, that it can't be ruled out that they aren't going to vote for Romney. Media conducted polls are so funny to pick apart.
Post a Comment
<< Home