Your analysis of how Akin represents the values of the Romney campaign is really off base
Show me where I stated at Akin represents the values of the Romney campaign and you may have a point.
But, if you really want to get into this, sure, I'm game.
Akin wasn't 'awarded the nomination'. He won it outright with 36% of the total votes. Let us be absolutely clear about this. The largest percentage of GOP voters in Missouri thought that Akin best represented their views and values as a member of the US Senate, including all of the extremist elements contained there in.
So you're saying that support comes out only after a Democrat ad said outright 'this is the guy that is so extremely conservative that only wingnuts and fools could possibly support him'. And even if the GOP voters are so easily manipulated, he still polls higher than the 36% of just GOP voters who nominated him in the primary. As of the last poll, 44% of Missouriansstill support Akin's crazy extremist views enough to let him represent them in Congress.
The bottom line is that of course the Democrats wanted to face Akin because he's, well, crazy. And McCaskill's ad buy had the advantage of using his crazy to influence swing voters she needed towards her and energize her base. The fact that Republicans have possibly hit the point that the second a Democrat says 'this is the worst guy' is enough for them to embrace him regardless of the facts says a lot more about the myoptic insanity of the far right than it does about anyone else. The GOP nominated Akin in Missouri; no one else. The GOP embraced him as their candidate. The Democrats did not run a GOTV for Akins. They didn't donate directly to his campaign. They didn't hold up signs and stage rallies for him.
They made an ad buy that said 'this guy is the same crazy far-right extremist as embaressments like Bachmann, making the same crazy statements that the President is trying to destroy America'. So your assertion is wrong - the only way that the Democrats can manipulate the GOP base in such a manner is if they are dominated by extremist and reactionaries of that ilk.
But I should point out, since we're on the 'politics of hate', only one party has enshrined in their platform that gay Americans do not deserve all the rights enjoyed by straight citizens. Only one has enshrined that a woman loses the basic rights of self-determination at the very point of conception, regardless of the circumstances. Only one party had, as part of their natural platform, certain conditions underwhich some Americans get the same freedoms as others.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-08-21 08:37 pm (UTC)Show me where I stated at Akin represents the values of the Romney campaign and you may have a point.
But, if you really want to get into this, sure, I'm game.
Akin wasn't 'awarded the nomination'. He won it outright with 36% of the total votes. Let us be absolutely clear about this. The largest percentage of GOP voters in Missouri thought that Akin best represented their views and values as a member of the US Senate, including all of the extremist elements contained there in.
So you're saying that support comes out only after a Democrat ad said outright 'this is the guy that is so extremely conservative that only wingnuts and fools could possibly support him'. And even if the GOP voters are so easily manipulated, he still polls higher than the 36% of just GOP voters who nominated him in the primary. As of the last poll, 44% of Missouriansstill support Akin's crazy extremist views enough to let him represent them in Congress.
The bottom line is that of course the Democrats wanted to face Akin because he's, well, crazy. And McCaskill's ad buy had the advantage of using his crazy to influence swing voters she needed towards her and energize her base. The fact that Republicans have possibly hit the point that the second a Democrat says 'this is the worst guy' is enough for them to embrace him regardless of the facts says a lot more about the myoptic insanity of the far right than it does about anyone else. The GOP nominated Akin in Missouri; no one else. The GOP embraced him as their candidate. The Democrats did not run a GOTV for Akins. They didn't donate directly to his campaign. They didn't hold up signs and stage rallies for him.
They made an ad buy that said 'this guy is the same crazy far-right extremist as embaressments like Bachmann, making the same crazy statements that the President is trying to destroy America'. So your assertion is wrong - the only way that the Democrats can manipulate the GOP base in such a manner is if they are dominated by extremist and reactionaries of that ilk.
But I should point out, since we're on the 'politics of hate', only one party has enshrined in their platform that gay Americans do not deserve all the rights enjoyed by straight citizens. Only one has enshrined that a woman loses the basic rights of self-determination at the very point of conception, regardless of the circumstances. Only one party had, as part of their natural platform, certain conditions underwhich some Americans get the same freedoms as others.