Does "to beat" mean "to be defeated"?

[NewHopeR]

Context:

In the three-person Republican Senate primary this year, Mr. Akin also was not favored, yet he won in part because Ms. McCaskill and her supporters spent nearly $2 million on advertisements highlighting his conservatism. This was part of the McCaskill camp’s strategy to help Mr. Akin win the race, as it thought he would be the easiest candidate to beat in the general election.

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/u...faith-is-central-to-his-politics.html?_r=1&hp

 

[NewHopeR]

No, they thought that Mr. Akin would be the easiest candidate to defeat. "defeated" means that someone has already lost.

So the "defeat" is a noun? If being verb, it means "win a victory over".

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, "defeat" is a verb and it means to win.

Gillnetter's point was that the original sentence was not about a past tense "to be defeated" but a future event "to defeat."

 

[NewHopeR]

Yes, "defeat" is a verb and it means to win.

Gillnetter's point was that the original sentence was not about a past tense "to be defeated" but a future event "to defeat."

Ah? Akin's in trouble now because his comments on rape and abortion.
"Mr. Akin would be the easiest candidate to win"? Why not "Mr. Akin would be the easiest candidate to lose"?

 

[5jj]

"Mr. Akin would be the easiest candidate to win"? Why not "Mr. Akin would be the easiest candidate to lose"?

Neither of those works.

 

[NewHopeR]

Neither of those works.

Well, it remains a myth to me.
Searching through OneLook one by one, the fifth dict tells me:

Defeat is the opposite of victory. When you lose, you suffer defeat. When you win, you defeat your enemy.
This is a word that's all about losing. In World War II, America and the Allies defeated the Axis powers: we beat them. In basketball, Michael Jordan usually defeated his opponents. Any loss can be called a defeat. When you're disappointed or think that nothing is going right, you feel defeated. If you're determined to win, you could say, "I won't accept defeat!" Some people are so stubborn that even though they've obviously been defeated, they won't admit defeat.

Akin to defeat (his contender in an easiest way)? Seems not likely.

 

[NewHopeR]

Merriam-Webster:

[h=2]Definition of DEFEAT[/h]1
obsolete : destroy

2
a : nullify <defeat an estate> b : frustrate 2a(1) <defeat a hope>

3
: to win victory over : beat <defeat the opposing team>

— de·feat·able \-ˈfē-tə-bəl\ adjective


3 is the most likely choice, but 5jj denies this?

 

[5jj]

3 is the most likely choice, but 5jj denies this?

It is not the most likely choice. It is wrong.

Akin is the easiest candidate to beat, to defeat.
Akin is the most likely candidate to lose.
Akin is the least likely candidate to win.

 

[NewHopeR]

It is not the most likely choice. It is wrong.

Akin is the easiest candidate to beat, to defeat.
Akin is the most likely candidate to lose.
Akin is the least likely candidate to win.

Yeah. Isn't "to lose" meaning "to be defeated"? It seems that I've guessed it right at the very beginning.

 

[Barb_D]

Maybe you're just not asking your question in a way that makes sense to us.

"Defeat" is a transitive verb. She wants to defeat her opponent. She may have faced any one of three opponents. Of the three, she thought Akin would be defeated most easily. He would be the easiest one to defeat.

The problem with your win/lose sentences in post #4 is that you are trying to use an intransitive verb as a substitute for a transitive verb in that sentence and it doesn't work.

Of the candidates, he would be the most likely to lose against her. - He is the "doer" of lose.
He would be the candidate most easily beaten/defeated. - He is the "recipient" of the action of being defeated.

 

[SoothingDave]

McCaskill thought that Akin would be the easiest opponent to beat, the easiest to gain a victory over.

"To beat" does NOT mean "to be defeated" as you say in your title. It does mean "to defeat."

 

[Tdol]

3 is the most likely choice, but 5jj denies this?

How would the third definition of defeat prove that win/lose cannot be used in some sentences? It's not denialism, but your research is wrong. We do say defeat somebody, but we would not use lose somebody in the same way- if you lose somebody, they die- I lost my brother a few years ago, etc. You win cups/competitions/prizes/elections, but you don't win people.

5jj is not in denial- he's right. You may have a theory, but looking at the third definition of a different word proves nothing more than that you are looking at the wrong word. Looking up kill tells you little or nothing about the usage of die. It certainly doesn't prove that someone is deliberately denying the truth.