Friday, September 7, 2012

#MOSen: Akin Campaign Denies That Their Ads Were Pulled

Todd Akin

The Hill is reporting that a Columbia, Missouri station has pulled Akin's ads:
A Columbia, Mo.-area television station says it has pulled Rep. Todd Akin's (R-Mo.) ads off the air because it has only received half the payment for them, CBS reports, stoking speculation that he could be running out of campaign funds.
The story was first reported by KOMU late yesterday. I contacted the Todd Akin's campaign to find out if this is true. Akin spokesman Ryan Hite told me:
This story originating from KOMU is simply misleading and factually incorrect. No ads have been pulled. The current flight of ads is still running and is paid in full.
Update: Renee Hulshof, a radio host in Columbia, Missouri, and wife of 2008 Republican gubernatorial candidate Kenny Hulshof, added this:
Update 2: The Akin campaign just released the following statement:
St. Louis, MO: The Akin campaign today blasted a factually wrong and misleading story suggesting that television ads were being pulled due to a lack of payment and implications that the Akin campaign was running out of funds. Perry Akin, Campaign Manager, released the following statement: 
"This story is simply false. Our television buyers have paid for every ad that has aired and even bought more ad time today. A political campaign, like an advertiser, makes constant decisions about where and when we want our ads to air. This is standard practice in campaigns across the country. Unfortunately, a particular television station decided to twist the facts and created a story that is simply untrue. We are still on the air across Missouri. However, we will not be doing any more business with KOMU-TV because they have lied. 
"KOMU should be ashamed for publishing a false story when they know what the truth is. No ad was pulled because no ad ever airs without being paid for. Ads are only ever "pulled" from the air for legal or ethical reasons, and this ad is 100% accurate regarding Claire McCaskill's record. 
"We are exceeding our fundraising goals and have raised over $400,000 online alone in the last 20 days."
I applaud the Akin campaign for cutting off KOMU. I'm inclined to believe that the truth is closer to the campaign's story, but it's hard to know for certain. KOMU is owned by the Curators of the University of Missouri according to Wikipedia.

Akin's fund raising needs to be better than $400,00 in 20 days, so if you are able please contribute $5, $10, or more.


Gravelyvoice Jim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gravelyvoice Jim said...

I suggest we all ignore today's polls since the McCaskill campaign has basically gone silent for the time being. Like a snake who has it's prey cornered in the back of the cage, Claire is waiting for just the right time to strike. She will do so quickly and with overwhelming force across the state when the timing is right for her.

When will this occur? Somewhere around September 26, when it's too late for Akin to remove his name from the ballot, the Missouri airwaves will be hit with with a barrage of pro-McCaskill/anti-Akin ads. Akin's paltry onesie-twosie ads targeted to specific markets and demographics will be crushed by the McCaskill juggernaut of ads that will sweep across our airwaves targeted at the general population. This is not wishful thinking, it's REALITY. The polls today reflect a close fight between a wounded duck (Akin) fighting for it's political life and a rattlesnake (McCaskill) that is coiled up but hasn't yet struck. I'm guessing that if Akin stay in and his campaign remains broke, sometime around September 30 the polls will show drastically different results.

Akin supporters should start demanding that the likes of Huckabee and Tony Perkins start pouring cash into his campaign. My suggestion to those on this blog supporting Akin (I don't, but I would never vote for McCaskill either and abhor the thought of the Bush/Rove cabal hand-picking our senate candidate from the outside.) is to relentlessly call the offices of the evangelicals who are encouraging Akin to run - Perkins, Barton, Schlafly, Huckabee, etc. - and a) ask them how much money they or their PACS plan to contribute to Akin, and b) DEMAND that they send even more NOW. It's time for them to either buck up and put their money where their mouths are or to stop egging the poor guy on with empty promises of support, none of which is financial.

I am of the belief that Akin's vocal supporters should send their life's saving to him if they truly believe he can win. The man needs money fast and it's time for his friends to put up or shut up. Afterall, I suspect the Akins are investing their family resources in the campaign. As for the rest of us, even a $10 campaign contribution to Akin is $10 that could go to another, more viable candidate somewhere. Asking us to throw our good money after bad is a little more palatable after they have done so themselves.

While I do not believe that Akin stands a chance once the fury of the McCaskill campaign kicks in, I would rather see him on the ballot in November than a hand-picked Bush/Rove stooge. My real hope is that Akin puts his pride aside, comes to his senses, and does the right thing for the country he claims to so dearly love by stepping down, and is then replaced on the ballot by another pro-life candidate who ran in the primary - Brunner or Steelman - who has at least elements of a state-wide campaign still in place. So I'm back to square-one, to where I was BEFORE the primary and Akin's stupid comments afterward. But the ball is squarely in Akin's court and whatever happens in November - good or bad - will be a result of HIS actions and and either the actions or in-actions of his most vocal current supporters.

freespeak said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
freespeak said...

That is your opinion and your fear needs to shift to BELIEVE.
This is about so much more than just pro-life issues.
I DO NOT VOTE ON ISSUES ALONE and neither should anyone else.
To say we need to get another pro-lifer in, is too much focused on that, period.
Akin's record is outstanding, and you are yet another voice who wishes us to bow to establishment railroading.
He got the vote and he has the support.
That,has not changed
It seems you are the one who needs to make up your mind.
How about focusing on horrid McCaskill, and getting the word out about her horrid record and intent.
She is able to crucify herself with her record alone.
And word of mouth does not cost money, except for some gas, maybe...and a megaphone!

Gravelyvoice Jim said...

patriot soul - I never said it is just a pro-life issue, but do you honestly believe that if Akin drops out and is replaced with a pro-choice candidate that candidate will win?

Sorry, but gas and megaphones alone won't win an election when the opponent is blitzing the state with big media buys. Even if it's better, the town crier's message will always be heard and MENTALLY PROCESSED by far fewer than that of the person who can constantly bombard a broader geographic area with his message. This takes money, and LOTS of it, but it appears that the Akin campaign is running on a shoestring budget.

It seems like the people in this area believe that Akin can win a state-wide race if his "base" gets energized. Keep in mind that that base consists primarily of voters in the 2nd district. That may have been enough to put him over the top in a primary since the 2nd District is one of the most heavily Republican areas in the state and Akin had the benefit of name recognition and "buyer loyalty" there. State-wide, though, it's a different game and the tactics will need to be different; like it or not, McCaskill will have many of the same advantages state-wide that Akin has in the 2nd District. The reality is that a handful of Akin supporters standing on street corners with megaphones in their spare time just won't get the job done, it will take big media buys to fight big media buys.

This all being said, I'll ask: How many hours between now and November 6 do you plan to spend standing on a street corner with a megaphone conveying Akin's message? You and hundreds of others will need to do this full-time to counter McCaskill's big state-wide media buys. Are you "all in"? In the mean time you might want to demand of Schlafly, Huckabee, and others that their PACS pour MILLIONS into Akin's campaign to give you top-cover to help counter McCaskill's media ads. It's the least they can do if you are planning to spend all of your time on a street corner from now until the election.

freespeak said...

Jim, the gas/megaphone thing was an option, not an entire strategy.
Of course a bigger strategy is needed, but I have not lost faith in the power of the grass roots, as long as there is(enough)unity.
Also,negative campaigning is an issue for McCaskill. It's either that or lies or both for her.
I voted for Brunner, and as I recall, his negative campaigning was a downer by enough to make a difference, along with other issues that can be picked apart by Communists.
Who knows.
Looking back, a good record and tons of experience as a consistent conservative in so many areas, in MO, is a huge plus to win against the machine.
(I use"conservative" with flexibility. That makes me independent?)
It is up to all of us (who decide to support) to keep the focus on McCaskill's bullcrap, which is much bigger than a gaffe and as big as her backside!)
She will blast ANYONE who could replace Akin, whose record shines in contrast.
So,support with teeth over panic, is preferable, no matter who runs.
And it is not fear of HER or RINOS that will drive ME to turn tail and look for someone else, especially when the election has come and gone.
Votes matter and truth rules.

I am SURE there are different opinions, all with some merit, but this is mine.

dsm said...


I think Jim's right about McCaskill's strategy. It's Akin's decision to make whether he gets out, but Akin's gonna get slammed as soon as McCaskill has run out the clock for getting out of the race.


Good points about financing his campaign. I suspect the Christian conservative leaders you mention are already "all in" at the max $2500 level. I'm not sure what the PACs are doing.

freespeak said...

Okay, so who can we push in there without running into establishment nightmare candidates?
I thought they were the only ones that can make a decision.
Is it possible?
Who can really beat her?
Brunner at least?
I have heard the sentiment, Steelman would be crushed.
I feel really uncomfortable folding on this stuff...especially on the votes. Where is the control?
I have read there are other ways to win this w/o MO, though always.
These are some reasons I have felt Akin should stay, besides overall principle...and previous noted things.
Perhaps strategy wins on this.
I am open....though I have been vigorously supporting him elsewhere.
McCaskill has got to go.

dsm said...


We don't push anyone. The decision is Akin's to make and he seems inclined to stay. If he were to go, the establishment Republicans who would choose his replacement are aware that they have to placate the grassroots... Of course, sometimes they're shockingly stupid.

There's no need to fold, just understand as best we can what the future holds. Don't look at the Akin campaign with rose colored glasses. They've got issues, but they're getting better.

I think our time may be better spent attacking McCaskill's atrocious record rather than defending Akin. Let Akin's campaign take care of that. But... I'm not sure about this.

That said, it's pointless to speculate about Akin replacements--the decision is his, and his alone, to make.

freespeak said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
freespeak said...

Good answer.
Here is some motivational jazz.
Up to about 4:00 could certainly apply.