Skip to main content

View Diary: Karl Rove defends new scam (51 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Karl & The Buckley Rule (11+ / 0-)
    KARL ROVE: This is not to protect incumbent Republicans, it's to get in races where it is important to have a winning candidate. It's to try and find the most conservative candidate who can win, the so-called Buckley rule. Our job is not to protect incumbents, it's to win races by stopping the practice of giving away some of the seats like we did in Missouri and in Indiana this past year and that may mean telling the incumbent Republican that if he is going be in the race he shouldn't expect any funds from Crossroads n the general election.
    Karl doesn't realize this has been made redundant by the advent of The Limbaugh/Tea Party Rule.

    Free Image Hosting at

    •  And in an election year... (6+ / 0-)

      ... when voters are not "fed up with liberalism", you subsequently get crushed.  

      •  Exactly (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Voice from the Cave, eclecta

        By my count, Obama won all of those states except for ND and MT, where Dems had good candidates who ran great races.  Obama is more popular than many people believe, and his "vulnerability" was more a figment of GOP imagination than reality.  

        Obama has the greatest coat-tails of any modern president,...not so much because he is popular or significantly accomplished (Reagan and Clinton were more popular, and a lot of them were more accomplished).  But, Obama turns out voters like no Dem since Roosevelt.  And, more so, he turns out certain voters that nobody has ever been able to turnout:  minorities and youth.  And, he turns them out EVERYWHERE.  Even in red states.

        Fact is, this was pretty tough ground to fight on for GOP senate candidates in 2012, expecially after it became apparent that Romney was never going to be ahead in any polls in Ohio (ie, he couldn't win).  Whether this coalition stands without Obama on top of the ticket (and whether Obama is more popular than his party) is yet to be determined.

        Rove has a great electoral legacy, no matter what Jed says.  He elected GWB in 2000, when the economy was good, the country was at peace, and his opponent was an incumbant from the administration that oversaw that peace and prosperity.  That was a great feat.  

        He then engineered the 2002 midterms, when the GOP bucked historical trends and won the Senate and increased the House majority in their president's first mid-term.  Shall I remind you what happened in Clinton and Obama's first midterms?  

        Re-electing GWB in the face of sluggish job growth from a first term recession, and an unpopular war that was not going well, was an even greater feat.  Plus, he did it with a base election strategy to turn out voters in a few keys states.  Most president's margins go down in their re-election (see Reagan, Clinton, Obama).  GWB's went up most everywhere but Ohio.

        Rove has the right strategy.  He's betting that the Tea Party is smaller than it appears, and that money will beat them.  We'll see if he's right.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (157)
  • Community (73)
  • Elections (44)
  • Environment (43)
  • Bernie Sanders (42)
  • 2016 (41)
  • Hillary Clinton (35)
  • Spam (34)
  • Culture (34)
  • Republicans (33)
  • Media (32)
  • Climate Change (32)
  • Civil Rights (28)
  • Labor (27)
  • Education (24)
  • Science (24)
  • Congress (24)
  • Law (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site