We agree but I have to point out that: Sure they can. They can hope right up until the moment they lose.
Strategy doesn't have to reflect reality if hope and distorted perception is your driving force. Rove's model of the electorate seem's to revolve around a rather simplistic normal distribution where a move to the "center" and away from the right would pick up votes. Quite the opposite is likley if the electorate is bimodal (culture wars, anyone?).
I don't know if Rove's approach is driven by his personal preferences or a skewed view of distributions (pun intended) but if it isn't redirected it could lead to the latest chapter of "The Stupid Party in Love and War".
Rove has stated that "triangulation" does not work, he is partially right, it doesn't work for republicans, only democrats. I think his goal is clear, he for some reason believes that he has done alot for the conservative base, and now can lean a little, and then go even harder in the second term.
Rove's mistake, and one thing Jeb is very good at is, selling the right to the center, not going to it. Reagan didn't go to the center, he brought the center to the right, he moved the center farther and farther rightward. Its called the "sliding rule" of politics. Hence why in europe,far right conservatives would be somewhere on the fringe part of the left side of the democratic party, and conservative to liberal would be green party and communist/socialist here. (not much difference in underlying intent, but claims vary much).
If Rove's goal is to move the economic side farther and farther rights, while bring the social side with him, and tag along that needs to be accepted, that sounds politically viable. The key is, you join us, we do not change for you.