Skip to comments.'I blame Karl Rove'
Posted on 11/04/2010 4:30:30 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
click here to read article
That is not necessarily true.
Murkowski lost her primary and may still win the Senate. Lieberman has already done it. Losing a primary doesnt make you a weak general candidate, just makes you a weak party candidate.
In Delaware they beat the establishment, but with a candidate handicapped with tons of bizarre baggage.
Three out of four is pretty good.
She’s never trashed conservatives that I know of... Tokyo Karl has quite a history on that one.
Whatever happened to Reagan’s 11th Commandment?
Rove = FAIL.
“but if it does, perhaps the Delaware Tea Party folks might use the experience to find a good candidate next time.”
That is the key.
We lost the House in 2006. It was more important for conservatives to make a statement than to help Rove and the Republicans remain in power. Similar to the O’Donnell race.
WORST MISTAKE EVER! !!
--Said as chastisement to his staff for canceling an opponent's meeting with then Governor Reagan. Quoted on KCBS radio in 1972 by Reagan's gubernatorial chief of staff.
Other than that, he would have voted with the democrats.
What do you think COC will do next to advance conservatism?
Ooops. I meant COD of course!
Sorry, folks Rove was correct, and ya’ll are just shooting the messenger.
The Tea Partiers focused too much on “purity” and not enough on electability. Extremely bad candidates got chosen in some races that should have been cakewalks during this election cycle.
The Tea Partiers literally wrecked the GOP in Colorado, nominating a Republican candidate (Dan Maes) who was so bad he couldn’t garner 10% of the vote, thereby relegating my party to minor party status in my state, a very troublesome development. (Dan Maes was so unpopular, that that fool Alvin Greene in South Carolina garnered over three times as many votes, percentage wise than Maes.)
In addition, The Colorado Tea Partiers brought us that fool Ken Buck who repeatedly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by his inability to stay on message and who continuously waxed poetic on dozens of divisive issues of little central importance to most voters. With her experience from previously winning state elections, Jane Norton, who Buck defeated in the primary, could have handily beat the unpopular Bennett.
Sharon Angle was a weak candidate too. Either of her two opponents would have waltzed over Reid.
And the really sad thing is that Senators are far more valuable than Congresspersons, since it requires a two-thirds majority of them to govern, and there are so few of them.
Ive written repeatedly about the importance of electability, and not just being conservative. I was just commenting to my wife that the naive and starry eyed liberals get bad candidates like Obama who get elected, but the naive starry eyed Tea Partiers get bad candidates who dont get elected.
Conservatives who have done well like Scott Brown, Marco Rubio, and my own newly elected Cory Gardner here in CO-4 on the eastern plains of Colorado first paid their dues in the state legislatures. It gave them time to mature as candidates, learn the ropes, and make their big mistakes in small ponds first. The military does not promote privates directly to generals for a reason, and unfortunately the Tea Party promoted way too many privates into generals who were essentially clueless about how to lead their troops to victory.
I admire and appreciate the enthusiasm and energy of the Tea Partiers, but this purity nonsense is totally self-destructive. It is simply not possible for a candidate to perfectly represent exactly ALL of the positions of more than a very few voters, maybe none, actually. Therefore, in addition to electability, it is necessary to agree upon a small number of core issues amongst the support group. Over hundreds of years (not just in the U.S. mind you) political parties formed to formalize this platform-building process to avoid the bloody self-destruction that results from a no-rules, no-holds-barred, hand-to-hand combat over purity.
Personally, I simplified this election to a single issue, namely, were you staunchly opposed to the Obama agend, would you follow through on your word to repeal Obammunism and were you the most electable candidate with the preceding two attributes. This greatly focused my thought processes and made my decisions easy about who to support with my energy and money.
People can whine all they want about Rove, but Rove did not cause a single loss by a candidate, he merely made predilections that unfortunately turned out to be correct.
In my book, the only thing that counts is results, not simply giving it the good ol’ college try. That kind of thinking is the same kind of false self-esteem-building nonsense in the public schools: it’s ok to fail as long as you try real hard.
Hopefully, the Tea Partiers will grow up, learn from their mistakes, and focus more on winning in the future rather than purity.
Her campaign was all about conservative principles.
Karl Rove has been all about conserving the establishment at any cost.
Bears bumping and repeating.
By the way, I donated $250 to O'Donnell via Jim DeMint. But I was never under the illusion that she was anything other than an extreme long shot.
What has she said she will do now? What do you think she should do?
Christine O’Donnell won the Republican primary in DE and Karl Rove immediately went on FOX and trashed her. His actions then and in the following days of weaving in his anger towards her at every opportunity thru the national media certainly did provide fuel for her opposition. Even had COD won that DE senate seat, I would have always remembered what Rove did and no amount of spin will erase my disgust and memory of his ongoing attempts to sabotage her campaign. I wonder whether Rove is still even a Republican and I understand that he was at one time a RAT so maybe he has reverted to where he is most comfortable. I am also curious as to whether Delaware Republicans will hold primaries in the future. Will candidates for office now go directly to independent runs, not only in DE but all over the country? Who needs the opposition of their own party along with their other opponents? DE has probably affected the voting process outside their state far more than is now realized. The refusal of Republican candidates in Alaska, Fla, and Delaware to accept defeat with no adverse consequences from the party is an open invitation to a third party to step in and provide a disciplined and viable alternative. The GOP had best pay attention to their unelitist voter base who realize that they can make their own rules for choosing and electing candidates.
She ought to paint Karl Rove to be the establishment, anti-conservative weenie he is.
Invoking Reagan's 11th is ridiculous nowadays on this forum
What do you not understand that Rove did it on TV...not on FR...and there is a difference. You can't make excuses for him! He screwed up ... his behavior was inexcuseable, IMO. If you see it differently, so be it, but you won't change my opinion.
Rove might be a "good guy"...when things go his way. It isn't about COD...it's that Rove made a fool of himself...on TV...and I think it revealed character flaws.
It's one thing to correctly see that many of the lifetime GOP pols are not friends of conservatism.
But what we saw in the O'Donnell campaign as well as (to a lesser extent) Angle, Buck, and Paladino, was the attempt to exalt political naivete as a outright virtue.
That concept, to put it mildly, failed.
Good point. We will be watching her to see how she continues to handle her loss to an evil Democrat.
It is possible that Castle would have lost this race, too.
It still is a shame that Christine did not enjoy the full and enthusiastic support of the entire Republican party. Rove, Castle, and others held back when it is not a time to hold back, IMO.
Don't hold your breath. "Conservatives" gave the Dems control in 2006, and are determined to keep them in power at the expense of moderate Repubs (RINOs).
That's one of the reasons we are doomed.
BTW...excellent post but not many here will agree.
She may well have lost anyway. But Rove’s attacks certainly didn’t help.
You make some great points. I don’t want the “Tea Party” movement, or the Conservative movement, to make heroes out of the politically abused. I want us to make SMART choices, as well as conservative ones. I think we can go forward and use what we have learned here in the future, I hope the GOP has learned as well. We can have good, electable candidates that ARE conservative as well, we shouldn’t have to settle. The next elections may not be as “easy” for Republicans as this one was, with this historic wave. We have to be smart.
2006 wasn’t the voters’ fault. It was the Republican Party’s fault for forgetting why they were sent to govern.
Agreed, it was a mistake, but I disagree that there is much difference between grass roots or pundits trashing Repub candidates.
Both are harmful.
We wore that topic out on this thread:
The key phrase.
If we lower our standards, we have no business bitching about the left's pandering to the laziest impulses in our citizens.
We have tons of talent and the best ideas. We have the luxury of being choosy, or will if we make the party welcome to the best of our nation's people. What a message to send to the country--we're the party of the best, and look at our candidates for proof of that.
What can the party of Barney Frank and the community organizer put up against that? Nothing but fear and pandering.
She may well have lost anyway. But Roves attacks certainly didnt help.I think they are 2 separate issues:
1. Rove's behavior and what should be done about it.
2. Why Christine lost.
It's important for us all to truly understand why Christine lost, so that we can avoid that kind of loss in the future.
As for the first question, I think we're all here agreed: he should lose all respect and all position of authority everywhere.
Agree or disagree with what Rove said (I disagreed), he simply doesn't have the power attributed to him in this article.
He is a Fox commentator. He has no position of authority in the Republican party. Those who do are far more to blame than Rove is (NRSC, etc.).
People on our side who claim he has some kind of power over elections are just as misguided as those on the left who do the same thing.
Nope. "Conservatives" thought Republicans and GWB could snap their fingers and change things. I knew it was foolish then, but no one wanted to listen.
We didn't have to worry about a government takeover of healthcare, or of a trillion dollar plus deficit, or ROE's in the wars that guaranteed defeat, or abandonment of Israel, or our tax cuts being taken away, or the EPA destroying our energy supply, or terrorists being given all the rights of a common American criminal, or any of a thousand other things that Pelosi and Obama have foisted on us.
"Conservatives" didn't realize how good we had it, or how bad it could get.
Now, after this tsunami (more like a high tide), we are about the same place in the House, and nine Senators down. I doubt conservatives will ever regain the power they had in 2004.
You can't be both an objective political strategist on a broadcasting network and the promoter of the party and he was stupid to even try.
Not even a worm like Carville would have maligned a Democrat selected in the primary the way Rove did O'Donnell.
Rove isn't smart. He is only vindictive and power-hungry.
-——It’s important for us all to truly understand why Christine lost——
Rove et al were always correct..... she never had a real chance of winning the race in Deleware as it presently exists.
The messenger is being killed because the message is unacceptable.
I personally hold Karl Rove to blame, followed closely by Senator John Cornyn. Rove is an establishment Progressive Republican of the first order.
Following O'Donnell's message of values victory in Delaware, Rove started slinging mud in her direction because he realized she was a woman that couldn't be bought & sold on a D.C. street corner.
Not me. I blame the voters.
Well, why she lost is a number of reasons, really.
So, the real question is: how do we get the best candidates? That’s not an easy question to answer. Rove would say, just nominate moderates or liberals in liberal states. But, that’s a bad idea for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that they usually don’t win anyway, even when they bring money to the table (see: Fiorina, Whitman).
Christine may have been a better candidate if the GOP didn’t fight her tooth-and-nail every step of the way. I don’t know if she would have accepted constructive criticism, but it might have been worth a try...in private. By criticism, I don’t mean “abandon all your positions.” I mean more Frank Luntz-type message control.
Of course she had a chance. Coons was a weak candidate, by design.
Rove was personally offended that the old-boy network deals had been broken up by some woman who actually believed that politics should be about principles, instead of “you run for this, and I’ll run for that this time.”
So, he (and Mike Castle) did everything in his power to ensure she would lose.
Rove is a free agent, as entitled to his opinion as you or I.
Two words: Harriet Miers.
very conservative of her not to look in the mirror and take responsibility for her shitty campaign. She got her clock cleaned
You really want to live in a World where individuals can’t think, analyze and express their opinions?
How often do Conservatives win a Senate seat in a State as blue as Delaware?
How greater the odds when the Conservative candidate has a record of saying some of the dumbest things ever heard and where not just foes but even friends can not stifle laughter at some of those idiotic comments?
Rove is surely overrated but here he was right. And blameless.
Christine may have been a better candidate if the GOP didnt fight her tooth-and-nail every step of the way. I dont know if she would have accepted constructive criticism, but it might have been worth a try...in private. By criticism, I dont mean abandon all your positions. I mean more Frank Luntz-type message control.That's a very good point.
I guess this whole thing is so frustrating that I am having a hard time dealing with it and I'm trying hard not to think that Rove actually lost this one for us.
That thought is as frustrating as the thought that Nevada is now a blue state.
And particularly frustrating is that NO ONE on Fox News called him on his behavior, not even Hannity, who pretended to, but kept it as such a "kid glove" level that it wasn't much of a criticism at all.
Rove got away with this completely, in terms of all the other media snarks out there on the so-called "right"... with the exception of talk radio, of course. But who in the "establishment" takes talk radio seriously?
Off topic, but I don't think that's true. Rory Reid got shellacked. It's hard to defeat an incumbent, let alone the Senate Majority Leader. Angle came close, at least.
Four words: Sonia Sotomayer, Elena Kagan.
Please read my post # 8. it’s hard to win when your own don’t come out to vote. Further, the Rats poured Millions into Biden’s old seat, and Biden
and Obozo Hussein where ther almost every day! The Machine had every Dead Person and Illegal vote that day! Maybe we will be surprised and Christine will follow in Renaldo Maximus’s Footsteps as You so rightly point out!
I think the worst thing to happen to the Tea Party is the Tea Party Express.
Check out the results at the statehouse level. Dems held both state senate and state assembly in NV.
Looks pretty blue... and pretty bleak... to me.
To go where? He doesn't old public office -- he gets paid by FNC as a political analyist, that's all. And his analysis that O'Donnell was a (far) less-than-ideal candidate to run for office in an ultra-lib state was spot on. I've been no fan of the guy ever since he told Tancredo a few years back never to "darken the doors of the WH again," but the guy knows his business.
Silly. O’Connell was a horrible capaigner who let her opponents trick her into humiliating herself. Angle was also a poor campaigner who should have been able to easily dispel silly smears, but somehow could not figure out how. On the other hand, Rand Paul and Ron Johnson proved to be very effective campaigners.
We have a new bunch of potential rising stars coming out of the Tea Party movement. Some like Paul and Johnson proved themselves in the field of battle and should be supported. Others like Angle and O’Connell proved lacking in campainging skills, so better candidates should probable be found to replace them. As simple as that.
I don’t think Rove’s comments singlehandedly cost her the election.
But he did GREAT damage. He handed the Democrats their talking points, a devastating set of soundbites, and in my extimation DELIBERATELY undermined her campaign, in attempt to maintain the illusion that he is a strategical wizard (all for personal gain).
The man is detestable to me. It disgusted me to see his fat, piglike face as Fox commentator on election night.
I know. Telling the truth is hell.
Ask Juan Williams.