Skip to comments.Maybe Karl Rove Has a Point
Posted on 02/07/2013 6:50:50 AM PST by Perdogg
Lets put ideology aside for a moment.
Karl Rove, architect of the George W. Bush-era Republican victories, says hes sick of fanatics running his party into the ground. So hes devised a strategy to preemptively sink unelectable candidates early in the process. Hes formed a new super PAC to implement this strategy. Its called the Conservative Victory Project, and its led by a guy named Steven Law, who was the head of another super PAC, called American Crossroads, which went something like 0-7 in the 2012 election cycle. (Not that anyones counting.)
Grass-roots conservatives, needless to say, are quite perturbed. Im filing the paperwork to form a super PAC to support freedom-loving conservative alternatives to (Karl Rove) on FOX, tweeted former Rep. Joe Walsh. Surely, he wont be the last to counter Roves efforts
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Not an endorsement, but food for thought
Ok. He's ugly too.
I left the R’s when they controlled the two branches and still spent like drunken sailors. It seems with every news article I read about the party’s vision, I feel more vindicated.
That's exactly the problem with Rove & Co.
Maybe Karl Rove Has a Point...yeah, on his head.
Maybe Karl Rove Has a Point
Yeah, check the top of his head!
“Human Events” is a RINO/GOP-e SUCK A$$ RAG!
Well good for you. Thank goodness Reagan didn’t “leave the R’s” and instead BECAME the R’s - but good for you that you “left the R’s.”
By the way, does this make you immune “to the D’s.”
didn’t think so. Hows that workin for ya.
I believe in the Constitution as it was written by our Founding Fathers.
I am a Christian who believes Our Nation was founded by Christian men who warned future generations that failure to abide by Christian teachings would be our downfall.
If that makes me a fanatic, so be it.
“Maybe Karl Rove Has a Point...yeah, on his head.”
Haha “Pointy-headed intellectuals who couldn’t park a bicycle straight” - George Wallace
“Lets put ideology aside for a moment”, couldn’t EVEN get it right from the first sentence.
I'm sick of socialists, progressives and liberals destroying the country and the constitution.
I am sick of women killing their babies at the altar of 'Choice'
I am sick of RINOs who are little different from the socialists, progressives and liberals destroying the country
We need strong conservatives to take back our party and the country.
I’m proudly becoming more extreme by the day.
To see one look in a mirror Karl.
We, as conservatives, have let ideology cloud our judgement a bit here and there.
Don't get me wrong, we need rock solid true conservatives, but we do also need to make sure they are not amateur gynecologists or part time witches.
The author's point is solid. However, Rove's solution of looking for media savvy ideologically milquetoast pretty boys is capitulation.
All the media has to do is omit or take a word or two out of context, or ignore context, and presto - the 'wacko' narrative.
No, if the GOP wishes to begin win more elections they're going to have to fight, persuade, lead. There is no substitute.
BFD. He turned what should have been two run away wins into an extra inning affair and a late inning come back.
And thanks to the "New Tone" crap helped usher in what will be at least an eight year march to the destruction of this Republic.
Rove put his stamp of approval on the doddering Tommy Thompson, helping him defeat Eric Hovde in the primary. Hovde would have made mincemeat of Baldwin, but he was determined to be "too risky and unproven".
I have mixed feelings about this. On the on e hand, I am a Conservative and want to see true conservatives in the Senate. On the other hand, it is important that the candidate nominated can beat the Democrat. In the last 2 election cycles, the Republicans threw away winnable Senate seats, notably Harry Reid’s seat in Nevada in 2010 as well as the Maryland seat that same year. In 2012, they lost seats they should have won in Indiana and Missouri. I probably have missed a few, but because of fielding unelectable candidates, they most likely forfeited the Senate Majority to Harry Reid and his gang. They have a real possibility of winning the Majority in 2014, but if they don’t have strong candidates we will get more of the same.
Bottom line. When someone like Rove brings up Akin, McDonnell and Angle, but ignores the stories behind Crist/Rubio and Cruz/Dewhurst, etc.
There is no guarantee with any one candidate, and pointing out one or two losses while ignoring a historic wave election is dishonest and disingenuous. 2010 was the biggest year on record for our party, and lot were underdogs in the primaries. I, for one, and thrilled with that class of freshman, as we had more true conservatives, more business people, and more ‘real people’ elected than any other year in my lifetime.
The DC idiots will signal out a loss in NV as proof that the base can’t select a candidate, but they ignore that we lost easy pickups in CO that year, and a slew of easy Senate pickups in 2012 from ‘safe’ candidates.
Yep, I found Karl Rove's "Point"
No. It makes you right.
Impeach Rove (so to speak). Get him off the air now.
Good point. Reading this article one might think Rove & Co have a perfect record on selecting candidates.
Well you have to admit, we’d be much better off if Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle, Todd Akin, and Richard Mourdock hadn’t been nominated. They all took lead pipe cinches for the R’s, and gave them to the D’s.
And yes, the people they beat for the nominations weren’t as conservative. However, if you want to be a purist, then don’t complain when your party is perpetually in the minority.
Sorry not going along with your bashing of Christine O’Donnell.
Not at all.
“Not an endorsement, but food for thought”
That won’t be well received here! But I agree, it is something to consider. The Democrats have the luxury of not worrying about their candidates because their “brand” is so strong right now.
It’s a fact for either party, the candidates farther to each extreme do well in primaries, and not as well in the general elections. As distasteful as it may be, it’s all about winning elections.
Liberals beat us by playing the long game. The playbook is open and easy to read. We can implement that playbook, or we can whine and cry as our elected officials become more and more leftist.
The whole Rove strategy is to slow the surrender to the Democrats at every opportunity. The Rove strategy isn’t to reduce taxes. The strategy is to reduce the amount of tax increases by Democrats. He doesn’t want to increase freedom. He wants to slow the loss of our freedoms.
That’s how we ended up with 53% of the budget going to entitlements. Rove would claim victory because it wasn’t 60%....yet.
Well good for you. Thank goodness Reagan didnt leave the Rs and instead BECAME the Rs - but good for you that you left the Rs.
By the way, does this make you immune to the Ds.
didnt think so. Hows that workin for ya.
What AM I doing? In October of 2008 I bought a small farm occupying an entier finger of a plateau. In 2011 I moved there from my 45 year home of Seattle. My only serious investments are precious metals, meat and vegetables grwon on the property, guns and ammo for hunting (and other uses), solar and wind power and useful buildings on my property so that my progeny, when (not if) ths SHTF can live - assuming they can get here.
This is about the whole world, not just the US. And no politician with a plan that will actually solve this can possibly be elected. It will probably take God’s overt involvement. Yeah, I’m expecting Ezekiel 38,39, Daniel, Revelation, Matthew 24, etc. to come down on us very soon.
But then, I have not had TV since 1997. I have a different perspective than many. On a side note, if I still lived in Seattle the November election would have been hard to take. Now, it just reinforces that I did the right thing.
Karl Rove picker more losers and drove opportunity into the ground and wasted more money than ANY conservative candidate he can mention.
In fact, he is directly responsible for the loss in the Missouri Senate Race.
He led the piling on by republicans, something that democrats NEVER would have done.
Their brand is strong because they bother to sell it.
Did I miss the joke?
Does this author actually think electing RINO’s is progress?
I don't have a party.
Although the Tea Party was very grassroots born of justified frustration, it and the “big tent” recruitment push by the GOP has some responsibility in a number of un-electable candidates muddying the Primary water.
What most of us conservatives fail to see is that the elected GOPers spent like drunken sailors because that is what their constituent majority wanted. The overage came from everyone thinking “their pet project” was essential and sacred and it was the other guys that were pissin the money away.
Our disheveled political situation has lots of finger pointing. An old saying is appropriate, “when point a finger, we fail to recognize that a greater number of our fingers are pointing right back at us”.
” . . . winning elections seems to be a crucial part of politics.”
” . . . institutionalize William F. Buckleys rule: Support the most conservative candidate who is electable.”
“Their brand is strong because they bother to sell it.”
Can’t argue that. It’s been said here before, the nature of conservatives is individualistic where the nature of liberals is collectivist. The collectivist mindset leads to a strong party, and more of a lock step following.
It’s against a conservative’s nature to sell the party. But, as we’re seeing, to not sell the party is to not be elected.
Fwiw, democrats stopped standing by Toricelli, Spitzer, and Weiner when it was obvious they couldn't win for their stupidity.........don't kid yourself, they like to win.......
Rove gave money to Mark Rubio’s campaign in 2009.
Your post has it right.
Rove has no record to stand on. He’s just doubling-down on stupid. This last election was his ticket, and anyone can see how that worked out.
The GOPe is also the architect of all of the GOPs “open” primaries. That should already be getting Rove all of his “electable” candidates. How is that working?
Cruz and Rubio are intelligent, articulate, capable candidates. It’s a stretch to suggest they were comparable to Akin, McDonnell, and Angle.
The LOSERS in the establishment GOP pushed the LOSER Romney on the GOP primary voters, when 70% of the primary voters wanted someone more conservative. (Remember: Romney was the LOSER who lost to the LOSER John McCain who lost to Obama)
But “frontrunner” Romney was who the LOSER Rove wanted.
This was because Romney had what voters crave- he had electability! Despite never getting more than 30% in the, um... primary elections,... among GOP voters themselves...
So... the GOP lost (surprise!) and the LOSERS who lost it, to the worst pResident in history, want to form a PAC to ... do what exactly? Push candidates with more ‘electability’ again?
I applaud your off the grid moves, and we are in early stages of some similar strategies.
Having said that, when you post little drive thru comments on a purely political issue, like this one, you are begging for improper context. You and I share similar beliefs about spiritual things and similar strategy about personal things, but I guess I have a little more feel for what a secular political message board is about....
In other words, the fact that “no political party will solve this thing” is not a license to be ignorant of which one will destroy it the quickest.
OK, now how about all the GOP-E candidates in 2012 that lost? Including Romney. That knife cuts both ways.
Right on, bro.
All of the thoughts, reasoning and views presented in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution had their origin in the Bible - every one of them. They came from nowhere else. All our founders had a thoroughly Christian world-view, and they sought to maintain and promote that as much as possible.
Part of that view is allowing all freedom of religion - so the Muslims get their right to practice their religion from Christianity - but they do not reciprocate that view as their religion says kill all unbelievers. There could not be a greater contrast.
The Marxists, quite according to a patient and well-executed plan, have used our own system to take control of our system and destroy it. Which it thoroughly allows - when godly men cease to do their duty to maintain their values.
We have, collectively as Christians, given our country to the devil. By our non-action, and failing to continue to be “salt” to the unbelieving world.......
Here’s an irony for you. A lot of frustrated conservatives complain, and rightly so, about the establishment “forcing candidates down our throats” - and yet, many of them turn around and try to “force the Todd Akins” down my throat.
I didn’t particularly like Angle, O Donnell or Akin, and Mourdock was a decent guy who had a retarded moment. Yet I pulled for all of them on election night. I still know Bruner would have beaten McCaskill, I think Tarkanian would have beaten Reid, and O Donnell was worth the shot because Castle is just horrible.
Every situation is different. Rove is almost always wrong, but not always. The Tea Party is almost always right, but not always right. Nothing wrong with using our brains from time to time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.