First, Just about everyone has, by now, weighed in on
what Karl Rove said last week. But nobody seems to have picked up on
where he said it. Let's revisit the scene:
"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," Mr. Rove, the senior political adviser to President Bush, said at a fund-raiser in Midtown for the Conservative Party of New York State. New York Times 6/23/05
Why is this significant? To understand it you'll first need a primer in New York State politics (continues after the fold)
First, here in New York, any party that can get 50,000 votes in the Governor's race, gets "permanent" ballot access (e.g., no time-consuming petitioning requirements for nominated candidates). At the present time there are four minor parties that manage to maintain permanent ballot access year after year: the Working Families Party (liberal), the Independence Party (flakey middle of the road), the Right To Party (the name speaks for itself) and the
Conservative Party (ditto). While the major election battles are between the Democrats and Republicans, the minor parties traditionally cross-endorse major candidates, partly to influence their ideological bent, and partly to curry favor and patronage with the major players by delivering extra voters (for example, in the Giuliani days, if you couldn't bring yourself to vote for Rudy as a REPUBLICAN, you could vote for him on the LIBERAL PARTY (now defunt) line - - the payoff being that Raymond Harding, the LP head, got his son a cushy Administration job).
The second thing its important to know is that, from a high point in 1994, the NYS Republicans have been collapsing, politically. Since Pataki's first election, they've lost the Attorney General slot, Al D'Amato's Senate seat, and are holding onto control of the State Senate by the skin of their teeth. They are struggling to find any competitive candidates for the'06 election. And to be competitive in New York State, they have to moderate their campaigning and governing styles to attract majority Democrats and Independents.
Now, as we've all noticed, following Bush's re-election, the conservative and Christian Right groups have been flexing their muscles a lot more, and expressing their unwillingness to keep supporting the Republican politicians who give them lip service on issues they care about, but little actual policy. The same applies here in NY, where, in 2004, the Conservative Party refused to back Howard Mills, the Republican nominee for Senate against Charles Schumer. Running their own candidate, they got 220,000 votes that otherwise would have fallen in the R column. The Conservatives have also indicated that, in the event that Governor Pataki runs for a fourth term, he'll be unlikely to get their endorsement because of his gay-rights and abortion views.
Now its time for Karl Rove to make his speech. It would have been easy to stay in DC and address the Heritage Foundation or the AEI, but he chooses instead to come up to NYC. While here, does he speak at a fundraiser for Governor Pataki, an aspiring Presidential candidate and who, weak as he is, is probably the best statewide candidate the Republicans have to try and hold onto power here? No. Does he do it at a fundraiser for Mayor Bloomberg, who put out the red carpet for Bush & Co at the RNC Convention, and who's in a re-election battle in a city with a 5-1 Democratic edge in voter registration? No. He chooses instead to play before the New York Conservative Party. Now, they're certainly more in tune politically with President Bush than most NY Republicans are, but remember that the Republican Party here is teetering on the brink. Encouraging a hard conservative tone in New York risks either dragging Republican cnadidates to the right, or severing the traditional R-C coalition, and threatens to sweep the Democratics into complete control of the state government in 2006.
What this suggests to me is that, with everything going wrong for W, Rove and Co. care ONLY about Bush's support at this point, and could be ready to throw the Republican party structure over the side whenever it comes to a choice between the party's future and Administration support in the remaining years of his presidency. Could make for a fun 2006 election.