How much does the Republican establishment hate Todd Akin?

The three most prominent faces of resistance to Rep. Todd Akin in his Senate race with Claire McCaskill (D-MO) are Karl Rove, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. We already know that Rove's feelings of disgust for Akin reach the level of joking about the congressman's murder to a bunch of wealthy donors. Since Priebus and Cornyn appear to be following Rove's lead when it comes to withholding financial support for Akin, is it worth asking how much influence the former Bush senior adviser has over them?

When Akin made a bizarre comment during an interview in August about 'legitimate rape', the establishment suddenly had an excuse to withdraw its support while also calling for Akin to step down.

Earlier this year, Cliff Kincaid produced a source who charged that one of the reasons Rove so detests Akin is that the latter simply would not vote the establishment line during the Bush administration, to include "No Child left Behind". Which is the bigger mistake, Akin's comment this past August or that woeful piece of legislation? Akin's comment or Rove's joke about murdering him for staying in the race despite pressure to drop out?

Rove, et. al. also had a plausible excuse for denying financial support because Akin fell so far back in the polls, it would have been money wasted.

There's a problem. Akin has been scratching back into the race and still is getting no support from the establishment.

Now, the Akin campaign is outright claiming that Rove, et. al. would rather have McCaskill win than see Todd Akin take her seat.

Via Daily Caller:

Republican Rep. Todd Akin’s campaign is accusing influential GOP-affiliated organizations that refuse to spend money to help the Republican senate candidate of genuinely wanting Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill to win the hotly contested senate contest in Missouri.

Rick Tyler, a senior adviser to Akin, told The Daily Caller this week that Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS and Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s National Republican Senatorial Committee are trying to undermine Akin.

“I believed at one time they did want Akin to win, even though they didn’t want to admit it,” Tyler told TheDC. “I’m convinced now they don’t want Akin to win.”

In August, Akin told a news station that “the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down” if a “legitimate rape” occurs, prompting outrage and condemnation from both sides of the political aisle.

The race might even determine which party will control the U.S. Senate next year. But both Crossroads GPS and the NRSC, which are spending millions to help Republican Senate candidates across the country, vowed not to support Akin in any way after they determined his rape comment threatened to hurt other Republican candidates across the country, according to Tyler.

“It is incomprehensible to me how Rove and Crossroads GPS and the NRSC could possibly stay out of this race” unless they want Akin to lose in November, Tyler told TheDC in a phone interview.

The establishment is choosing to put itself into a box here. If Akin wins, the fire within the conservative wing of the Republican party will be given a huge dose of oxygen because a conservative candidate will have triumphed over prominent liberal incumbent without the help of the establishment. If Akin loses, especially if by a narrow margin, it will have meant establishment pride triumphed over conservatism at best, and that extreme liberals are preferred over conservative Republicans at worst.

Another dynamic is at work here is the establishment's double standard. Mitt Romney was their guy; he won. Conservative voters were not happy with the selection. The establishment asked conservative voters to get behind their guy whether they liked him or not. Conservative voters did just that. In fact, in the wake of Romney's first two debate performances, conservative support for him has reached an energized high.

The natural inverse would be that if a conservative candidate is going against a liberal incumbent, the establishment should do the same.

In the case of Rove, Priebus, and Cornyn, hypocrisy appears to be on full display.

St. Louis Fox Television affiliate KTVI has a news report on tonight's debate between Akin and McCaskill:



Read entire DC piece.

Gingrich: Rove would rather have Harry Reid as majority leader than Todd Akin in Senate

Newt Gingrich definitely has a way of contrasting and simplifying things. In an interview with the Daily Caller, he called out the Republican Party establishment for its inexplicable treatment of Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), who is in a dead heat with extreme liberal Claire McCaskill for a U.S. Senate seat in Missouri.

Newt pulls no punches here, calling Charlie Crist a 'snake' while pointing to the establishment's decision to back him two years ago over Marco Rubio. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), who heads the National Republican Senate Committee (NRSC) was wrong then and he's wrong now.

Gingrich also singled out Karl Rove, again referring to the Fox News contributor's comments at a fundraiser that involved joking about Akin's murder. At the essence of Gingrich's take here is that the Republican establishment seems to have more animus for the conservative wing of its party than it does for the Democrats. That sentiment is clearly not mutual when one considers how conservatives have rallied behind Romney.

The conservative wing of the Party clearly would rather have Romney than Obama but it doesn't seem to be getting reciprocal sentiment from the establishment wing.

Though not doing so by name, at the end of this clip, Gingrich calls out the likes of Rove, Cornyn, and RNC Chairman Reince Priebus when he says that anyone who refuses to support Akin in a race that is neck and neck, would rather have Harry Reid remain on as Senate majority leader than have Akin in the U.S. Senate.

He's absolutely right.

Via the DC:

CORNYN STILL DOESN'T GET IT

There are some thick-headed Republican senators out there who just never seem to wise up. Texas senator John Cornyn voted for TARP despite his constituents overwhelmingly telling him not to. Those constituents were proven right. Back in May, as Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Cornyn threw his support behind Florida Governor Charlie Crist for the 2010 SENATE RACE there despite conservative objections that it was too early and that Crist was too moderate.

Lo and behold, Marco Rubio is now neck and neck with Crist. Instead of Cornyn deferring to the conservative base of the Republican party after they proved him wrong again, he continues to double down, saying that conservatives need to be more realistic in their expectations in the 2010 elections.

Imagine how this race would look like now had the The National Republican Senatorial Committee, chaired by Cornyn, withheld support for Crist and let things play out. Erick Erickson at RED STATE also points out that the NRSC also scoffed at Pat Toomey's chances in Pennsylvania against Arlen Specter. Specter is now a reeling Democrat who looks very vulnerable.

So Cornyn and the NRSC jump into bed with Charlie Crist because of the poll numbers in Florida and now Crist is tied to or behind Marco Rubio. The NRSC also said Pat Toomey was not a viable alternative to Arlen Specter and even after Specter jumped to the Democrats, the NRSC worked valiantly to try to convince every other Republican in Pennsylvania to get in so they wouldn’t have to deal with Toomey.

Erickson goes on to explain the issue Cornyn and Republicans seeking to put up moderate candidates are facing:

Here is the problem for the NRSC and the Republican Establishment.

They are panicked.

The tea party movement outpolls the GOP.

The conservative challengers are performing as well as or better than the establishment picks.

The NRSC lost in Pennsylvania.
The NRSC is going to lose in Florida and California.
The NRSC is losing in Kentucky.
The NRSC may very well lose in Colorado and New Hampshire.

On a different but related note, everyone needs to remember what happened in 2004. Rick Santorum, along with Bush, threw his support behind Specter in the primaries, thereby dissing Toomey at the time. Specter won and Pennsylvania had two Republican senators. In 2006, Santorum lost his seat to Democrat Bob Casey in part, due to a lack of conservative turnout. In 2009, Specter became a Democrat.

End result? In late 2006, Pennsylvania had two Republican senators. In 2009, it had 2 Democrat senators by following the moderate Republican model.

No thanks. Cornyn needs to pipe down and get in line.

Read the WHOLE THING