Post-Primary: Todd Akin The Biggest Surprise & Jay Nixon Would Win In November

Patch's polling of influential Republicans and Democrats in Missouri also reveals Lt. Governor Peter Kinder has a lot of work to do to rebuild bridges within his own party.

If the November election was held today, a majority of political insiders polled in Missouri, both Democrats and Republicans agreed that Gov. Jay Nixon would win a second term over St. Louis businessman Dave Spence.

That was one of the main results of a non-scientific survey of Patch's Red Arch/Blue Arch panelists, taken between Aug. 8 and Aug. 11, after last week's primary elections. A total of 29 responses came in from members of each party using an automated survey tool.

When asked about the governor's race, 96.6 percent of Democrats said Nixon would win if the election were held today, while 37.9 percent of Republicans went with Spence in the matchup.

 win in a spirited GOP primary fight to face Claire McCaskill for Missouri's U.S. Senate was far and away the biggest primary elections surprise, according to 62 percent of the Democrats and 51 percent of the Republicans polled.

Given the "if the election were held today" question in an Akin-McCaskill matchup, 89.6 percent of Republicans chose Akin, while 72.2 percent of Democrats went with McCaskill.

When Republicans were asked:  'Which candidate will have the toughest time bringing their primary opponents and supporters into the fold,' 50 percent said it would be Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, who fought off a challenge from State Senator Brad Lager despite a series of bad headlines over the past year related to 

"Many voters that supported Lager supported him because of Kinder's past personal choices. That sentiment won't change now," one participant wrote.

Another cited what they called Kinder's "outrageous past and his lack of acknowledging that he did any wrong in as far as the taxpayer's dollar was concerned. Just because he paid the funds back doesn't imply that it was okay!"

Kinder will face Democrat Susan Montee in November's general election.

Twenty-one point four of respondents said Dave Spence would have a tough time rallying his opponents, while 7.1 percent each mentioned  and State Representative Shane Schoeller, who won the primary campaign to run for Secretary of State.

What do you think of the post-primary landscape in Missouri? Tell us in the comment section.

Peter Russo August 16, 2012 at 11:01 PM
TO RDbet: Charities are begging for Government support? Well, I do know that al charities under 25 employees are getting Govt support for health care. I would be skeptical the Govt would mix Public money direct to any Religious-Charity. That would create a political fire-storm, in my opinion.
Peter Russo August 16, 2012 at 11:12 PM
MIKE: You are correct> I am talking about the 50's-60's. City. Only Public high school was on any Radar screen back then. At least in my territory.
RDBet August 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM
It sounds like you agree there is a middle ground when it comes to regulation. Some of the past disarming of regulatory agencies, from mine safety to the SEC, was a disarming of these agencies. Instead of reforming and providing oversight for regulators-which is a job duty of elected officials-these politicians seem bent on dismantling the agencies, or doing away with them all together (as promised by several GOP candidates). To me, politicians do this out of twisted ideology, or payback to their donors from the business world. Thus the weakened agencies of various sorts are overmatched to regulate big business, and the regs miss their target and come down harder on smaller businesses as per your examples.
Devon Seddon August 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM
I hope that too Tamara, thank you. I do not wish you any ill-will, ever, PLEASE don't misunderstand. It's awesome you were able to persevere. Bless your heart. I have been close to those that have been afflicted, it's actually the source of my disdain. I was thankful that there were people there that wanted to help (those like you). BUT, when all they could do was take good-people's life savings (or any inheritance for their kids, who now get a bill instead), while their chances were still around that of a coin toss. I decided then, I would follow that money. When I did, I saw that there are at least 6 EXTREMELY powerful entities out there that continue to benefit ONLY as long as they treat but not cure. (Many lesser benefactors as well) Our healthcare industry no longer has incentive to be about healing anymore (it's not run by the ones like you unfortunately). The incentive is money. BIG money. Not the 'evil big corporations' that we're trained to hate, but the ones that deserve it. They have every incentive to hide a cure to make their money, and I believe they do. Think getting the government involved will fix it? Maybe, but not while they are the biggest benefactor, taking at least 1 piece of every single dollar. Doctor Bills, Drug Co's, Insurance, "Cure" Orgs, Researchers, Tax Dollars, etc. It only takes 1 member of any 1 of those entities to make a cure go away. ONE. Either they all come around or we do. It doesn't benefit them, only us, so WE have to.
Scott Simon August 17, 2012 at 12:43 AM
You pro Democrats pushing the notion the size of government today is smaller - there are more government union dues paying members than union dues paying members in the private sector. Please, don't tell me government is smaller.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »