[Delhi Rebels]

One thing I did see in my Missouri neighbors: if Akin had withdrawn, there was so much bitterness about the GOP elite pushing him out that his replacement would have been lucky to get to 40% in November.

I don't doubt that at all. And had Akin been forced to withdraw then that's about the only scenario I can imagine that could have cost Romney the state.

I don't think Akin is a bad person, I think he's a bad candidate. I would have liked to have taken Missouri, but I would also would like to have taken Ohio or Michigan as well. In all three cases, the Republican candidate is preferable to the Democrat. But I recognize that the GOP is not going to take Ohio or Michigan so I don't think spending money on any of those candidates is a wise use of resources. I don't think Akin is going to win in Missouri, either. So I don't see wasting a lot of time and money there. That doesn't make me pro-McCaskill. It just makes me a realist.

[Uncle Chip]

<>It just makes me a realist.<>

No — it makes you a RINO like John Danforth:

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2012/09/26/former-senator-danforth-campaigns-ed-martin-neither-escape-akins-shadow/

“I cannot support Todd Akin,” Danforth said.

[Lakeshark]

He may or may not be a bad candidate, but there's no excuse to badmouth him now.

Unless you're an Axelrod conservative........

It's either him or McCaskill. Which do you want as MO senator?