Poll: More bad news for McCaskill
Yael T. AbouhalkahNow a new poll shows Democrat Claire McCaskill trailing Republican Todd Akin in their U.S. Senate race.
Here’s why that should be a concern for the incumbent, McCaskill.
The poll - commissioned by the conservative group Citizens United - shows Akin’s lead has actually grown from 3 percentage points in late August to 5 percentage points this week. Both polls were done by Wenzel Strategies.
Akin’s margin is 47.5 percent to 42.6 percent for McCaskill.
Thus, Akin is getting stronger, as measured by the same poll group.
Granted, as McCaskill boosters accurately note, the senator has always said this is likely to be a close race all the way to November.
But look at this fact, too: This is the second straight day that Akin has received some positive news from a poll.
On Wednesday, I noted that a Rasmussen Reports survey showed McCaskill led Akin by 6 percentage points. And that was down from a healthier 10-point margin of late August.
Of course, the latest polls are opposites of each other, so no one knows exactly what’s going to happen on Election Day.
But for McCaskill’s supporters, both polls indicate that Akin is gaining strength, despite his abysmal stance on abortion.
That has to be a concern, especially if - as expected - some GOP backers flood money into the race in October to help Akin defeat McCaskill in an effort to put the Senate in Republican hands.
Michael Johnson
9 months, 1 week agoYael, McCaskil’s problem is her political stance and image. She touts herself as 50th on the list of 1 - 100, Liberal to Conservative. While she might vote with Republicans occasionally, those votes are on moderate issues, while her votes on Democrat issues are extremely liberal, the deciding vote for ObamaCare in particular. On that subject, Claire also appears greatly disingenuous. She claims she supports Medicare, even putting her elderly mother in her campaign ads to show how much she cares, but her vote for ObamaCare cuts $716 BILLION from Medicare from 2013 to 2022. And while I realize her mother qualifies for Medicare, Claire has been reported recently to be worth $16 Million. Claire could easily write a check for any of her mother’s medical needs. So to say to Missourians, many of whom rely on Medicare as their sole medical financial tool and who often have to decide on medical care over other necessities that she supports Medicare is insulting.
Lastly Yael, your generalization of Pro-Life as abysmal is disingenuous. The position of Pro-Life is simply to stop the killing of unborn babies for convenience’s sake. Extremely few people would oppose an abortion in the case of rape or incest or when the pregnancy isn’t medically viable. The idea that you seem to think killing an unborn child as an acceptable means of birth control, I find abysmal.
Phil Cardarella
9 months, 1 week agoDarn! I did not answer when my caller ID said Citizens United. But, the fact that polling was being done in my zip code — the only place in south KC where you are likely to find Republicans — tells a bit about the POLL! I suspect I might not have been the demographic they were seeking.
And:
Characterizing the reduction of excessive payments to hospitals and insurance carriers as “cuts” in Medicare is a Ryanesque lie. Obamacare cuts NO Medicare benefits, only costs.
And a policy that is so extreme that it would ban morning after pills and most widely-used contraceptives is an abysmal stance. A policy that holds that NO woman has ANY rightes not subservient to those of a single-celled fertilized egg is an abysman stance.
I will credit the good faith of guys like Akin and Ryan — who claim to be “pro-life”— when they spend as much energy (and are willing to spend money) on the “post-born”. Until then, “abysmal hypocrite” seems the proper designation.
George Hunsucker
Northland
9 months, 1 week agoPorkulus=YES, ZERO’Care=YES, Debt Ceiling Expansion=YES.
All MO people need to know about Air Claire…
Dan Wood
9 months, 1 week agoHmmmmm…Akin voted to raise the debt ceiling several times as well. So does that mean you’re not voting for him either?
George Hunsucker
Northland
9 months, 1 week agodid he vote for zero care Dan????
did he vote for the porkulus bill Dan????
Dan Wood
9 months, 1 week agoYea, he voted yes for the Stimulus bill.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoMore importantly, Akin is ignorant beyond reason. Anyone who so completely lacks education that they believe women’s bodies can fend off rape by magic should not hold a job, let alone hold office. More over, it represents his and many social conservatives hidden beliefs; they don’t think there is such a thing as a legitimate rape, that’s why they keep trying to specify “forceful” and such in their legislation. All as they pretend they believe in “small government”, just not in your sex life, health care plan, or medical decisions.
Next to the religious extremists and the ignorant such as Akin (who would well fit in in a madrassa in Yemen if he traded the cross out for a turban), I willingly accept Claire, who (gasp) supported her president instead of sacrificing the entirety of the US economy and politic for the sake of “making Obama a one term president our number one priority”.
George Hunsucker
Northland
9 months, 1 week agoHe apologized JOhnathon, which to you libs is usually enough, but not in the case of a R..
Air Claire has numerous failings and you libs see nothing wrong in her “performance”. I do!!!
0’care=Yes, PORKULUS=YES, DEBT CEILING=YES… All thinking Missourians need to know….
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoGeorge: He apologized only for maybe offending people, not for his utter ignorance (which I care about far more), nor his factual inaccuracy. He continues to believe the lie he spouted.
David M. Krueger
9 months, 1 week agoActually he apologized for what he said without qualifying the apology with the typical “If I offended you.” Listen to it again.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoI still haven’t heard him state the medical facts of the situation; thus, one must conclude he’s still clinging to his misconceptions.
But you have a point, George; I cannot deny Akin represents Missouri in a lot of ways. I’m deeply ashamed of it.
Luna Paydon
9 months, 1 week agothis poll is obviously not trustworthy! it was commissioned by a conservative group. am I the only one who thinks this is a conflict of interest?
Kent Mueller
9 months, 1 week agoJohnathon…I’m not a supporter of Akin, but I can’t allow you to misstate the facts so egregiously. You said Akin believes that a woman’s body can fend off rape. He never said that.
It is very hard to have discussions when people so misrepresent what others have said.
Joshua David Zambrano
9 months, 1 week agoWhat I dislike is the claim at the end of this article suggesting GOP backers will flood money into the campaign for Akin. Liberals are always blind, perhaps intentionally, to the fact that their own side does this too. A 1-minute search on OpenSecrets.org for Claire McCaskill and Todd Akin shows just what’s happening as far as flooding money.
McCaskill has raised $12.545 million to Todd Akin’s $2.229 million. Her largest donating industry is Lawyers/Law Firms ($1.533 million) while Akin’s are the Retired ($0.210 million).
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2012&cid=n00027694&type=I http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2012&cid=n00009677&type=I
Right now, McCaskill is the one being flooded by big money, with 8 groups donating over $40,000 each (Emily’s List - $178k, Express Scripts - $81k, Bryan Cave LLP - $70k, Husch Blackwell LLP - $65k, Boeing Co. - $46k, Simmons Cooper LLC - $45k, Crawford Group - $45k, and Hallmark Cards - $42k). Akin has nobody donating over $40,000, and just 3 donating over $20,000 (Emerson - $36k, Crawford Group - $33k, Jones Financial Companies - $23k).
It’s very disingenuous of Mueller to accuse the side NOT flooding the race with millions of law firm money of being the one likely to flood the race. “Oh, they’re ‘likely’ to do it even though the other side IS doing it.” Talk about a hypocritical double standard. If Mueller were fair, he’d have pointed out McCaskill is the one with over 5 times the political money Akin has, much of it coming from pro-abortion and law firm groups.
Joshua David Zambrano
9 months, 1 week agoThe difference is Akin made an honest mistake based on poor research. Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters on the other hand are undeniably corrupt, and Rangel should’ve resigned. But liberals turn a blind eye to such blatant dishonest corruption, preferring instead to criticize a man who made a careless mistake in researching the finer points of a political issue - abortion. They want to overlook the corruption of Rangel and Waters while attacking someone who made an honest mistake.
Obviously this is not about Akin being a bad candidate, but about them attacking any Pro-Life candidates. Opponents of Akin should at least be honest that this is their agenda, and admit they don’t care about holding evil, corrupt politicians like Rangel and Water to the same standard of demanding their resignations. At least be honest about your double standards and stop trying to fool the American people you are lying to.
Joshua David Zambrano
9 months, 1 week agoThat last paragraph of my first post should be referring to the article’s author Yael T. Abouhalkah, not Mueller. Not sure why I mixed up the names for some reason, but I apologize about that.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week ago“You said Akin believes that a woman’s body can fend off rape. He never said that.” -Kent
Why, yes, yes he did. Here it is.
http://lybio.net/tag/todd-akin-victims-rarely-get-pregnant-quotes/
Which is the opposite of science. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/20/study-rape-victims-have-a-higher-pregnancy-rates-than-other-women/
And that’s my issue; social conservatives are anti-science, anti-truth, and anti-reality.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoGeorge: a scientifically accurate representation of reality isn’t politic; it’s science. I shouldn’t have to move anywhere to live around people who know the sky is blue, rocks are hard, and rape isn’t the woman’s fault.
George Hunsucker
Northland
9 months, 1 week agoLuckily Johnathon, you do not have to live here. You are perfectly FREE in America to live anywhere you want.
I would suspect you most likely would be happier on either left-coast….
Enjoy the higher taxes and not being able to have a Big Gulp under the lib fascists…..
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoI do not have to move, George; that’s the point. Reality exists even here, no matter how hard you put your head in the sand. Science doesn’t cease to be in the mid west merely because you desperately wish it did not exist.
But why don’t YOU move George; perhaps you’d fit in with the Coptics in Egypt. They seem to dislike science and truth as much as you do…
David Fruits
9 months, 1 week agoI love how his solution is not to elect someone with knowledge or character. Nor for a policy change, or for open debate, but for everyone else to just go away. Just leave him alone. Let Akin raise spending without paying for it, where have I seen that play before?
Nixon balanced the budget, Brownback did not.
JR Beillenhouser
9 months, 1 week agoReally Johnathon - Ezra Klein as a reference? That is like using Yael as some legitimate source.
As noted in a comment to the article
“This is a poor explanation of the research, which itself may be flawed. First of all, the originally data probably included cases of non-violent rape. Second, the authors artificially inflated the rape-pregancy figures by removing from the tally an estimated number of women who didn’t get pregnant because they were on the pill or had an IUD. Third, the authors considered all pregnancies in the same year after the rape. Clearly, some pregancies were not related to the rapes. (I presume the authors tried to adjust for this as well, but how successfully?). Finally, the authors ignored studies that clearly show that stress does impinge on the likelihood of pregnancy, e.g. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20688324
The truth is that Akin should not have raised the issue not because of any scientific issues, but simply because the likelihood of pregnancy is irrelevant to the moral issue of forcing rape victims to bear the rapist’s baby vs. ending the life of an embryo or fetus. I think Akin is wrong in his stance, but he does not deserve to be excoriated for his rather minor faux pas of calling “non-statutory” “legitimate”. This is a non-story AFAIC.”
If you are going to argue about intelligence of conservatives (“And that’s my issue; social conservatives are anti-science, anti-truth, and anti-reality.”) then I’d suggest that you actually do some “learning”. Cherry picking some research that MAY support your claim while disregarding others that may not does not make you the intelligent one, just as it wouldn’t for the other side either. It just makes you a political hack on the other side of the spectrum.
Kent Mueller
9 months, 1 week agoJohnathon…you said that Akin said a woman body can ward off rape. He never said that. Just like your link says, he said that the woman’s body can ward off pregnancy if she is raped. That’s not the same thing.
I am NOT supporting Akin. In fact I have called for his stepping aside many times.
But Johnathon, as I said, get the facts straight.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoJr: My link is to a video, I believe. Also, like I tell the libs when I quote Fox News, so long as the info is accurate you can stomach the source. You prove my point better than I could; that for the socially conservative, Akin’s lie is embraced as truth because it further justifies their government regulation of people’s choices. From your suggestion that the number of reported rapes is inflated to your suggestion that rape victims be forced to carry to term, your every word speaks to a religious agenda of control. Thanks.
Kent: I’ve spoken with you enough to know you’re a perceptive person. Perceptive enough to know darn well I meant Akin stated women can fight off pregnancy from rape, not fight off each and every rape itself. Please don’t feign ignorance.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoOh, you’re objecting to the science source Jr. My mistake. You can find the same facts pretty much anywhere, if you object to E Klein. Here’s another location.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hal-herzog/why-are-rape-victims-moreb1823152.html
Kent Mueller
9 months, 1 week agoJohnathon, I am not feigning ignorance. However, when we (me included) discuss opinions and facts, it is important to be precise. So many of these issues morph to something that doesn’t even resemble the original issue. Sandra Fluke is a good example of that.
Johnathon Busby
9 months, 1 week agoNoted, sir, in the general. (Will argue the specific examples as they arise.)
George Hunsucker
Northland
9 months, 1 week agoYou were the one bitching about having to live here JOhnathon, not me… I am perfectly happy to live in a state which will vote for Romney over the big zero, and an Akin over a lib like air claire….
Akin misspoke obviously, air clarie voted for zero’care, porkulus and debt ceilings….
JR Beillenhouser
9 months, 1 week agoJohnathon -
You have a real issue with putting words in other peoples mouths. I didn’t make any of the statements you claim I did. Nuance seems to be above your so called “scientific” expertise. For the study that you claimed to be actual science, above reproach, there seems to be issues with some of the statistics. To question the methodology of the study is science. To look for multiple sources is science. To accept the finding of others without question is ignorance.
“Jr: My link is to a video, I believe. Also, like I tell the libs when I quote Fox News, so long as the info is accurate you can stomach the source. You prove my point better than I could; that for the socially conservative, Akin’s lie is embraced as truth because it further justifies their government regulation of people’s choices. From your suggestion that the number of reported rapes is inflated to your suggestion that rape victims be forced to carry to term, your every word speaks to a religious agenda of control. Thanks.”
I didn’t say any of the things you claim I did, nor do you know what I think on this matter. I simple copied a view that spoke how the science that you claim to know as fact, may actually be flawed research. Were certain study members taken out of the survey removed to inflate the numbers? Does that make the link you provided true or false? Neither. But it does imply that for someone who claims to have all the answers as they claim for science, that you are unable to understand that scientific theories are created based upon multiple sources of data, not just ones you agree with.
Here is a great study that you should probably look at. Please read “The Righteous Mind” by Jonathan Haidt. Haidt, a liberal, finds that
“The hardest part, Haidt finds, is getting liberals to open their minds. Anecdotally, he reports that when he talks about authority, loyalty and sanctity, many people in the audience spurn these ideas as the seeds of racism, sexism and homophobia. And in a survey of 2,000 Americans, Haidt found that self-described liberals, especially those who called themselves “very liberal,” were worse at predicting the moral judgments of moderates and conservatives than moderates and conservatives were at predicting the moral judgments of liberals. Liberals don’t understand conservative values. And they can’t recognize this failing, because they’re so convinced of their rationality, open-mindedness and enlightenment. ”.
(The fact is that Haidt went into the research thinking that the opposite was true.)
I dare say that you are the perfect example of this behavior.