« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Enter Rove, Stage Right

Is "The Architect" the right man for RNC chair?

By: Victoria Coates (Diary)  |  November 17th, 2008 at 12:59 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Let me be clear, I have no idea how you become Chair of the Republican National Committee. I don’t know if you write a letter or let certain people behind the scenes know you could be tempted or send up smoke signals. But it seems logical to me that one thing you might do is write a detailed proposal of how the party can come back from the devastating losses of 2006 and 2008.

Karl Rove has done this. (in the issue of Newsweek that also features Redstate,yeah!). I find myself pretty much in agreement with his points, and thinking that I preferred 2000, 2002 and 2004 to the last two rounds. I know everything ever associate with the current President is supposed to be anathema, but I have to wonder if we have anyone better at managing and organizing and motivating at the grass-roots level.

What do you all think?

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • EastCoastObserver

    I think he has been labeled too decisive a figure. The man is a brilliant guy and President Bush owes him, robably more than anyone, for his 2 electoral wins, but I think a lot of the party (moderates) do not see him in a good light and do not think of him as a uniter.

  • kowalski

    I think it’s a question of whether he wants the job. If Karl Rove wants to run for Chair of the RNC, I would enthusiastically support him, but I’d need to hear it from him first.

    He may decide not to for various reasons and I’d respect that, too. The main thing about my support for him is that I know how badly he’s been maligned (unfairly) and I also know that there is no person in this country who has a better grasp of electoral strategy on as fine grained a level as you’d like to look than Karl Rove.

    Maybe he’s not the “face” the RNC would like to put forward; it could be that he’s better in a consulting capacity. It’s something people higher up the food chain will have to debate, including the person in question.

    But I know that there isn’t anyone in this country who understands the electoral map better than Karl Rove does: he’s made it his lifetime pursuit, and he does it better than anyone else.

    I knew Obama was going to win at 9:40 on election night when Karl Rove was on Fox talking about the outcomes in Ohio and Pennsylvania. It was over at that precise moment, and Brit Hume knew it also.

    Now in terms of whether or not he’d get along with other people in the RNC or whether he’s the best “face” for the RNC to put forward, I suppose that’s something for others to debate. There’s no denying that on the basis of his deep knowledge he is qualified for the position.

    • youthgrunt

      I like Rove. There is no one on our side of things who understands the numbers and elections the way that Rove does.

      BUT Rove was not only the architect of 2000, 2002 and 2004, but he was also the architect of 2006. We reaped 2006 because of his approach to try to “win” votes with different demographics by trying to buy them.

      He is a great analyst, but placing him as a leader is not a smart move.

  • Tamblin

    look at 2000 and 2004. In 2000 Bush eked out, literally, the narrowest of EV victories and lost the popular vote. In 2004, as an incumbent president in a time of war, and against a really cruddy Dem opponent, Bush won the popular vote by just 2.4% (although his EV total was better).

    I don’t think Rove’s incompetent by any means, but a lot of the hype seems unfounded.

    • Spiral

      If we are looking for a spokesperson for the Republican party, someone to appear on television and talking up the Republican party, Rove probably isn’t the right guy.

      If we are looking for a strategist, than he could be the right guy.

      I think taking the attitude that anyone associated with George W Bush should be dismissed as a RINO is a bad idea.

      Think about it. Republican nominees of the past 40 years:

      Richard Nixon (wage and price controls)

      Gerald Ford (……)

      Ronald Reagan (Great conservative)

      George H W Bush (Read my lips, I am raising your taxes)

      Bob Dole (The tax collector for the welfare state)

      George W Bush

      John McCain (I know how to reach across the aisle)

      Among the people on that list, I think George W Bush comes in as the 2nd most conservative Republican.

      Agree?

      • Vladimir

        …to run against Mary Landrieu in LA, we need a new face.

        Landrieu was beatable. Here, McCain had coattails, so Kennedy, the least attractive candidate imaginable, ran relatively close.

        Even though I run in pretty conservative circles, I knew not a soul who was an enthusiastic backer of Kennedy (a liberal D candidate for Senate in 2004, a 2004 Kerry backer, and a guy that’s been an R for about a year).

  • newrepublican

    I wonder what Rove is like behind the scenes.

    Steven
    http://thenewrepublicans.net – young Americans “reinventing” the Republican party

  • CFPeterson

    I believe Rove and his company are the ones who invented ways to determine who your “base” is so they could be more efficiently energized, things that Democrats have now copied.

    Unfortunately he is also known for “push polling”, kind of a dirty trick, which was used against McCain in 2000 in Florida.

    The party could sure use his intellect, but RNC head? I dunno…

    • joetheslacker

      When the democrats decided to pick Howard Dean it wasn’t just because of his strategy. It was because he was a big change from the past. A Rove chairmanship tells the country that the party is stuck in the Bush era, fair or not. He can be a part of strategy from the side lines. Time to pick a fresh face with a fresh idea.

      • kowalski

        The morning after the election I had one of those sourpuss phone calls with a liberal friend of mine who asked:

        “So, aren’t you surprised about the election? I guess you’re crying this morning.”

        I shot back:

        “No, actually I’m not. Karl Rove told me at 9:40 last night what the outcome would be and he’s been predicting it very accurately for weeks. It’s disappointing, but it’s not a surprise.”

        To answer Tamblin — yes. Rove really is that good. But you have to understand where his particular strength really is: understanding the electoral map on a fine-grained basis and predicting where it will go. He’s invaluable.

        The Left hates Rove for the same reason the “cool kids” hate the nerds in high school. Karl Rove is the Ubernerd and I say that with the utmost respect.

        I don’t know whether he’ll be the best “pitchman” for the RNC, though. That’s a question that I think he’s qualified to answer, oddly enough. If he decides he is, he probably is.

        • bs

          “divisive”. “Decisive” would probably be a lot more complimentary than you seem to be implying.

          • Moe_Lane

            …to be ready to fall into a pit of suicidal depression, or something. I mean, yeah, sure, Tuesday night kind of sucked; but at least the election was finally over. We spent two freaking years on that one.

          • E_Pluribus_Unum

            I’m not allowed to user 90% of the words that come to mind upon contemplation of Karl Rove as RNC Chair.

            Whatever might be said about his intellect, his planning, plotting, etc, what I shall always remember KR for are these elements of the Rovian strategy:

            • Take away Dem talking points by enacting left-wing legislation — a la NCLB, Medicare Prescription, other huge-government plans.
            • Hey W, ignore the critics, just don’t answer all those charges from the media. They’ll eventually go away. We’re above such low discourse.
            • And while you are at it, don’t defend other Repubs when they come under attack. Don’t defend your nominees for the courts. Don’t defend the Iraq liberation. Don’t defend anything we do. There is PLENTY of room under your bus.
          • EastCoastObserver

            Yes, I meant divisive, but you are correct he is certainly decisive also.

            I just feel that a lot of the GOP leadership would not want Rove as the “face” of the party for the next 4 years, because, although he is a smart political tactician, he is also viewed as divisive by not only Democrats but many moderate Republicans that the GOP needs to bring back into the fold in order to regain the coalition needed for control. I’ve always felt that Rove himself would rather be a behind the scenes kind of guy.

          • jbwbubba

            I wouldn’t mind seeing Rove or Ken Mehleman at the RNC. Perhaps not as Chairman but someone in the background that knows how to build a political machine. Let Steele be the Front guy and go on TV and raise money, but get some political gurus in raising a new RNC machine; including someone like Ruffini in charge of internet operations.

          • Tbone

            , as opposed to knowing Jack Shi, if recent performance is any indication.

            “Let me be clear, I have no idea how you become Chair of the Republican National Committee.”

        • Vladimir

          Rove.

          Urickson.

          Note that both are trailing behind “How to Avoid the Most Fattening Soups”. and “Is Obama the Anti-Christ?”

          I didn’t say it; Newsweek said it.

          • Bsports

            Time for the Conservative movement to move on! Time for a man like Michael Steele to CHAIR the RNC.

          • CFPeterson

            Drill, baby! Drill!

            Michael Steele is the energizing leader we need. Though my opinion needs jack @#$%. I’m sure the RNC really values me and my $25 a year.

          • Joe_Cor

            as I understand it. He was great at mining for votes where they already existed. That helped President Bush, who was very uncomfortable with communication, eke out two extremely narrow electoral victories. But we’ve mined about as many votes as we can where they already exist. Now we need to expand the Republican base, by converting Democrats and Independents. That’s a message and communications problem. I doubt a member of the Bush administration is the right person for that job.

            Also, do we want someone with Rove’s views on immigration running the RNC?

          • Rudy_Cajka

            I agree that Rove would make an excellent RNC Chair. Its not only his ability to predict the Electoral Map that makes him valuable, I believe he is the best political strategist that the Republican Party has had since Ed Rollins was actively working for Republican candidates.

            Rove wold be great doing the day to day strategy, but a separate position should be carved out for Newt Gingrich. Newt should be the chief spokesman for the party, kind of a “General Chairman”. Rove for the nuts & bolts and Gingrich for the grand philosophical ideas. A winning team.

            If we can’t have Rove, or he doesn’t want to do it, I am quite happy with Michael Steele, who has already announced.

  • John_E

    I agree with what he says in the Newsweek article (except I have questions about a “green” policy).

    He has also demonstrated excellent communication skills in his many media appearances since exiting the WH staff. He cuts a sympathetic — not an abrasive –figure for his calm and intelligent reason ability.

    I expect he would recruit and groom good candidates.

    • Brad_Smith

      Hard to envision Dole or Ford supporting Bush’s Medicare expansion, such a rapid growth on government spending, or as foolish a foreign adventure as the invasion of Iraq. Ford used the veto pen left and right to try to control spending (with limited success against a veto-proof congressional majority) and Dole is arguably the greatest tax cutter in history – it is because of Dole that tax rates were indexed to inflation, a more significant move to control federal taxation than the Bush rate cuts.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    As I understand it, the RNC chair is selected by the President (if you are the party in power) or by the state GOP organizations. It is very likely to be someone from inside those organizations, which means it can be Steele, but can’t be Rove.

    I’ve heard it stated that it is likely to remain Mike Duncan, who proved he can raise money effectively (the main job of the post). Neither Mitt or Fred are interested in the job (and I personally heard them say that).

    • Spiral

      I was in grade school during the Ford admin. I remember reading that Ford had to veto lots of spending after the Watergate elections of 1974. I guess my only question is why he didn’t do what Reagan did: Get rid of the price controls on oil and gasoline?

      As for Dole, I didn’t realize that he was the main proponent of indexing the tax rates. Dole always seemed to me like someone itching to raise taxes to balance the budget. I guess I should give him credit for being willing to cut spending too, however.

      As for the Iraq war, if support for it is liberal, Obama is a conservative. I’m trying to figure out if I subscribe to that way of thinking.

      • ZootSuit

        [nt]

  • Nick_Haynes

    Rove has a few assets. But Rove not only should be nowhere near a television camera, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power.

    Rove’s brand of politics are to appeal to people’s basest emotions without trying to win over new converts to conservatism. He makes no attempts to win over new voters who could be considered conservatives, but goes with a blowtorch strategy that is simply designed to get 50% +1 more voter. People who might otherwise vote Republican are turned off, because he turns it into a black-and-white “with us or against us” meme.

    Additionally, he doesn’t concern himself with policy or agenda. His only concern is winning, but there are times where you need to articulate why you want to win. He is the perfect example of what our problem was in the majority: you should try to gain power to advance an agenda, but instead he had it backwards and advanced an agenda to try to gain power.

    So, emphatically, not just no, but heck no on any thoughts of Rove being in a position of power with the RNC.

  • ZootSuit

    And, believe it or not, I am asking a serious question.

    There is no better person at picking apart, analyzing and even predicting the election numbers but as far as conservative principles go, I have no idea where he stands. I want an RNC Chairman who stands for and articulates conservative principles but the only thing I’ve ever seen Karl Rove stand for is getting his guy elected, no matter what.

    • ZootSuit

      [nt]

      • kowalski

        Karl Rove reminds me — and I’ve never met him, but he reminds me nevertheless — of one of the really extraordinary people my father once had on his programming staff. He was head and shoulders above everyone in terms of his complete grasp of the systems he was writing code for, but he was a reclusive person, actually painfully shy, and physically he wasn’t the most beautiful person in the world to look at, let’s leave it at that. He also told jokes that were enormously funny but that a lot of people found crass. Socially a mistfit, in other words. A shame, because he was measurably the smartest person in any room. Such are the hands God deals us.

        I think Karl Rove will not take the job even if it is offered. He is not what a media-driven culture will accept. He’s not the “face” the Republicans need.

        • JSobieski

          Policy not strategy needs to run the party.

          Win the debate first, then win the votes.

          Politics is a dynamic contest, not a static one.

          Giving away a bunch of stuff contrary to your principles is not a lasting way to get that extra 5% of the electorate. Eventually, it backfires.

          • JSobieski

            No more static model politics where people don’t even consider moving the electorate in a meaningful way.

            Karl is very data driven, and he is smart. But the weakness in that approach is that Karl is always fighting the last war.

            How would Karl Rove have advised Reagan in 80?

          • AcademicElephant

            The thing about Rove’s “green” strategy is that he proposed it as something that was driven by the markets rather than by ideology–as I understand it the reverse of what the Ds are trying to do with Detroit, which is to impose the green strategy on an industry. I like the concept of making it responsive to market forces if it has to be.

          • Spiral

            It’s like when Bush’s father raised taxes in 1990, breaking his promise to never raise taxes.

            In 1992 Bush Sr. argued that the American people shouldn’t elect Bill Clinton because ……. he would raise your taxes.

            Similarly, McCain’s arguments against Obama’s class warfare lacked effectiveness party because he voted against the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 using class warfare rhetoric.

            Republicans can not have it both ways. We have to stand for something, even if it might be temporarily unpopular with the public. Once they get a dose of socialism and the poverty it creates, they will be begging conservatives to get back into office. (I shouldn’t say “back” into office since moderates have been in office up until now.)

          • Darin_H
          • furious

            “Bush Wins Presidency”
            –2000, 2004.

            Republicans Retain/Increase Congressional Majorities/
            –2002, 2004.

            …“Rove/Bush/Cheney/etc. are warmongering homophobes…and racist, too!”
            –Democrat Shills, repeating ad nauseam to their media enablers.

            “Rove/Bush/Cheney/etc. Seen as ‘Divisive’”
            –ABCNNBC/PBS

            “Divisive”, from the Latin verb Dividere, translated as “to defeat Democrats”.

            We all know how the game is played, and how the Democrats get their talking points disseminated as conventional wisdom into the broader electorate .

          • txchick57

            Also here is something you all might find interesting.

            http://www.minyanville.com/articles/GE-New-York-nws-nyt-washington/index/a/20024

          • EastCoastObserver

            If Rove’s “permanent majority” actually lasted more than 2 years and if his type of political tactics this year (implemented by Schmidt) actually worked, but instead the negativity drew people away from the GOP including prominent members of the party.

          • Lords86

            Karl Rove by reputation is a terrific, brilliant strategist and, on a more personal level, from those who know him and who have commented to me, he is supposed to be a great guy. But he is not the right guy at the this time for the RNC.

            First, I am troubled by the “reform” speak I hear in much of what he says. We, as Republicans, need to find our traditional base again, not reforming a message which we don’t understand ourselves at this moment.

            Second, he will be villified by the press, despite his best efforts at rehabilitation in these past few months.

            Third, he can serve us just as well in his strategist role behind the scenes, where his genius need not be front page news.

          • hogiewan

            Not that I’m all for Rove, but have you ever heard of a guy named Howard Dean?

            The committee chair is supposed to be partisan, and by extension divisive.

          • rbdwiggins

            The Republican brand was tarnished because those who served alongside Lt. Kerry dared to tell the truth regarding his incompetence, reckless endangerment and questionable resume embellishments during his three-month tour in Vietnam?

          • rbdwiggins

            Is Karl Rove bound by the same type contract with FoxNews as Michael Steele?

            Both are paid contributors, IIRC.

            Not that Fox wouldn’t release either of them to accept the position at the RNC.

  • candypam

    He has stated he wants the job. We need new faces and new blood, and we have a great opportunity at this time to open the door to salvage conservatism in the Republican Party. I love Karl Rove, and we do need his skills, but get real! Put baby in a corner and lets get some fresh faces out there……and SOON!

    • Aurelian

      He makes some good points, but like his old boss, he is clueless on immigration, and it doesn’t help that he keeps citing the bogus 44% in 2004 figure. Bush did not win 44% of the latino vote in 2004. He might have won as much as 40%, and that is good for a Republican, but it was still a double-digit loss to a lame opponent in John Kerry. It is very likely that Bush never even carried the Hispanic vote in his home state of Texas in any of his four races there.

      John McCain was hurt by the drop in latino support, but not as much as he was hurt by his loss of white votes. Why do we hear so little about this from Rove, especially when the key to Bush’s victory in 2004 was increased turnout and support from white evangelicals.

      It would also be nice if people like Rove would be honest about what they mean by a ‘guest worker program’ and ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’ With the former, the title is a cover for a new way to increase permanent legal immigration, while the latter means amnesty for illegals and large increases in permanent legal immigration.

      The fact is that large-scale immigration was always going to be bad for the GOP. Mass immigration reinforces pretty much every factor that leads Hispanics (and now Asians too) to vote Democratic in the first place. If current demographic trends continue, then the GOP (as anything resembling a conservative vehicle) is doomed. It’s as simple as that. The best bet would have been to significantly reduce legal immigration while getting tough with illegal immigration. This would have no doubt led to a deeper collapse of support from Hispanics and other immigrant groups (thanks to the demagoguery of the Left and WSJ-style conservatives), and this would have likley lasted for many years, even decades perhaps. But eventually, the conservative-GOP message would have had a better chance to break through, and there would have been a demographic environment where the GOP at least had a chance. Now, with no end to mass immigration in sight, there is very little reason to think the GOP can hope to do better than minimize the degree of landslide by which they’ll lose the Hispanic vote.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Rhetorically, what effective person could we nominate that liberals would not categorize as being divisive or some other negative adjective? Hellooo, has anybody noticed our most effective advocates and leaders are demonized? Should we nominate another moderate, some hoary guy or other less effective person just to hold hands and sing Kumbaya? I don?t know about anyone else, but I have certainly had enough of the ?we should be more like them, I am John McCain and I paid for this message? group. Crimeny, have we learned anything from the last election in which we were (spoiler ahead) trounced?

    Karl Rove is a person that knows how to win, period. He is insightful, smart, measured and a realist. Listen when he talks about the issues, history, elections, tactics and communication. Karl is a general, not some wanna-be, demographic targeted, give-the-guy-his due, media chasing blowhard. He can organize across the spectrum from grass roots to corporations. Frankly, after those recitations do you really need to know why he is so hated by the left?anybody? He wins, darn it, period, full stop. Gosh, if I have to listen to another year of tripe being represented as sagacious campaigning and party strategy I will self immolate.

    Karl is the guy who will work with us, real party leaders and other groups to develop a winning strategy. He gets my vote any day.

    • Achance

      by the Democrat sleeper cell that brought us the Plame affair, things might have been very different.

      One more reason to fire everybody in government the second your hand comes off The Bible.

  • Joo

    from the Bush administration through his articles in Newsweek, WSJ and his commentary on Fox News. He has as much said that he did not agree with Bush’s policy of never addressing his critics, or some of his hiring decisions (e.g., Scott McClellan); so does anyone really know Rove’s policy stances?

    I think now that he exhibiting a more public persona, we are beginning to see where he stands. I’m more in the Steele camp, but I don’t see Rove as a bad choice either.

    • furious

      …at the end of Godfather I? That’s alot of stair-climbing for poor Fat Clemenza.

      Actually, that would mean during the Oath.

      • furious

        …Abramoff, Duke Cunningham, the Alaska delegation, Mark Foley, Bob Ney, etc.

        Rove also didn’t introduce Chris Dodd to the ‘Friends of Angelo’ program, nor did he find places on the Fannie/Freddie boards for Democrat favor-seekers, nor did he channel Fannie/Freddie donations to Barney Frank’s re-election campaign. The poisoned fruits of which got blamed on the outgoing administration.

        Finally, he didn’t suggest that Sen. McCain halt his campaign and return to Washington to become the Poster Boy for the $0.7T bailout package.

        Other than those, yes, Karl Rove is totally to blame for the ’06 and ’08 wipeouts.

        • furious

          …cloven hooves, pointy-tail, and flaming trident really well when he is on television.

          Unlike, say, Newt.

          • Achance

            There’s lots of good lessons in there. Were it I, I would go from my inauguration to Church to contemplate the fact that I am indeed mortal. And while I was engaged in that contemplation, I would demonstrate to some people just how mortal they were.

          • furious

            …you mean, as compared to Michael Dukakis running against Bush Sr. (i.e. against the VP from an outgoing wildly popular 8-year president) in ’88?

            …and in ’04 during an unpopular war (how did LBJ’s ’68 re-election campaign go?) against Dan Rather’s October Surprise and the media being worth, in Newsweek’s Evan Thomas’ estimate, 15pts for the Kerry Campaign?

            Yeah, other than tacking against those headwinds Karl Rove was a TERRIBLE campaign strategist.

          • sickofitall

            We’re not trying to unite the Democrat party, we’re trying to defeat them. Any perceived offense they take to our choice of leadership is only an indication that they’re afraid. Rove knows what it takes to win. I think it’s a brilliant selection. I only fear that any good work he can do to elect true Conservatives in the next two cycles may come too late; once Detroit and our banking systems are completely nationalized it will be very hard to undo, no matter how large our gains are.

          • mbecker908

            Had they not entered the frey, we’d be moaning over John Kerry’s reelection right now.

          • JakePrime

            But SwiftVets also contributed to the tarnishing of the Bush and Republican brand. They were a double edged sword.

  • Lords86

    Karl Rove by reputation is a terrific, brilliant strategist and, on a more personal level, from those who know him and who have commented to me, he is supposed to be a great guy. But he is not the right guy at the this time for the RNC.

    First, I am troubled by the “reform” speak I hear in much of what he says. We, as Republicans, need to find our traditional base again, not reforming a message which we don’t understand ourselves at this moment.

    Second, he will be villified by the press, despite his best efforts at rehabilitation in these past few months.

    Third, he can serve us just as well in his strategist role behind the scenes, where his genius need not be front page news.

  • peg_c

    If we are ever going to broaden the image of the GOP, this would be the time to start doing it. And Steele is a really good guy.

    I like Rove, or at least I did, and I loved what he said about Biden to Deborah Solomon in the NYT. But I think his day has passed. Of course many would say Fred’s day has passed (EPU!! FRED!!!!) but I disagree. He has great things to offer the GOP and just has to find the perfect fit.

    I vote for Steele. I would donate if it were Steele.

    • hogiewan

      that election was close because the media actively impugned the sitting president with obviously false documents

      • Grump642

        followed this year. He believes in
        1. Secure your base and don’t let them down.
        2. Slowly expand from your base- bringing other into the fold as you can
        This year, they took the base for granted, until Gov Palin, and were playing to the middle. They finally changed tactics, but by then they had lost alot of the base.

        • Grump642

          movement, and the Republican party as well. But I do not agree with molly-codelling rinos to get power back. Rebuild the base( conservatives), stand on our principals, and the middle will come. If we worry about bringing moderates in first, we, the party, will stand for nothing and be in the same mess we are now.

  • DL80

    As a liberal, I don’t agree with much that Rove says. But, I can admit that he’s brilliant. When I’ve seen him on any of the news shows or Sunday morning talk shows, he has always come across as incredibly bright. He’s also very good at articulating specific points. And as others here have said, he doesn’t need to please me. He doesn’t even really need to please you. He has to get Republicans elected. I want a strong (well, not too strong) opposition Republican Party, because one-party rule is rarely successful for very long in this country. Rove may be the best choice to get Republicans through to the other side (2010 or perhaps 2012) in terms of limiting losses and turning the corner in the House and Senate.

  • nivlem

    Since the 2004 I have received the same
    old repetitive fundraising letters from
    the GOP. EVERY time they threatened my
    with the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, and
    finally Obama’s socialism.
    A party that cannot stand up and fight for its values and has to go on the defense will never win.

    We need a clean slate that is proud of
    our conservative values, and willing to
    start today on a positive, optimistic
    slate highlighting conservative states
    that are not calliling the government for
    a bailout due to their governing.
    They must accentuate the downfall of their democrat counterpart that are lined up at the government bailout line.

    Our North Carolina grassroots was a disgrace. No wonder Libby Dole lost. No signs available until the last weeks for
    Dole or McCain. Stupid balls dropped.

    This starts from a lack of leadership at
    the RNC and lack of a solid message. It’s time to regroup and utilize the
    wisdom and intelligence of Karl Rove and
    bring in the passion and energy and intelligence of an impassioned conservative

    • WOSG

      BUT Rove was not only the architect of 2000, 2002 and 2004, but he was also the architect of 2006. We reaped 2006 because of his approach to try to “win” votes with different demographics by trying to buy them.

      The WORST political decision of the 2nd Bush term was pushing so hard for amnesty, er, ‘comprehensive’ immigration reform. There were/are so many better ways to do it policy-wise and politically.

      It was a disaster.

      The medicare part D pandering – won no votes, but lost our credibility on spending. result. conservatives stayed home…. big loss.

      let me also add that the Rove “GOTV the base” is hopelessly outmatched by what the Obama side did. They were calling Republicans! We had our side spend the last 8 years ignoring 45% of the electorate and then the Obama side started with that base and then poached into GOP territory to craft out a majority. We lacked the ability to punch back on that because all the call lists and walk lists are prescrubbed to get rid of Dems, and that meant 30 million Democrats from this years primary were off limits! (never mind that I knew some were Op Chaos voters.)

      Nothing sends a message like “WE LEARNED NOTHING FROM THE 2008″ than to have Bush’s architect be your RNC chair. It smells like a 5 day old fish, and I say that as someone who also respects his political campaign skills. bush’s unpopularity and the venom the left has for him will not help.

      He’ll have to practice his skills freelance and on case by case basis, NOT as the face of the party.

      I prefer the Newt Gingrich for RNC chair.

      • mbecker908

        for Stupid Comments.

  • leeside

    ….we need Micheal Steele…..a man of true appeal and well spoken and one not easily dismissed by the Rats or the msm…..

    why do we kick ourselves when we’re down?……why can’t we move ahead ala the Sarah Palin pick….truly out of the box and spot on?