What Rove Wrought

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 11:57:26 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Kevin Drum writes:

Instant analysis: It doesn't really matter. History will judge Rove a colossal failure, a man who never understood how to govern and, for all his immense knowledge of polls and politics, never really understood the times he lived in. It was 9/11 that both made and broke the Bush presidency, not some kind of mystical McKinley-esque realignment. Rove was blind to that, and blind to the way Bush should have governed after 9/11. His one-track mind, in which every problem is solved by wielding the biggest, nastiest partisan club you can lift, just couldn't adapt. . . .

(Emphasis supplied.) What was Karl Rove's job? It was to win elections and expand Republican control. Until 2006, Karl Rove was spectacularly successful, especially considering the weak government he was working with. Karl Rove did not decide to invade Iraq, but he used Iraq in 2002 to further Republican control. That was his job. It was a job that should not have existed. But Republicans believed that using national security issues to expand political control is fine.

Iraq has led to the downfall of Bush and the Republicans. Rove did not decide that. More.

Where did Rove go wrong in his job? In my opinion, on two issues. Social Security and immigration.

On Social Security, Rove tried to destroy one of the few remaining strengths for Democrats. He counted on the Dems to roll over. It was not a bad bet. In early 2005, there were many noises made by the Lieberman/DLC wing of the Democratic Party and the Broder Wing of the Media about how "something" had to be done about Social Security. Indeed, the issue itself was not a disaster for Rove and the Republicans except in this sense - it demonstrated to Democrats that the way to regain their political fortunes was to be Fighting Dems. It was the first step towards the Democratic Party's rejection of DLC triangulation and towards fighting back on Iraq. Which led to the big Democratic win in 2006.

On immigration, Rove still dreamed of Republican realignment by winning over Latinos. Remember this was his most notable success for Bush in Texas. And in reality, Rove understands that Republicans can not form governing majorities long term with te current makeup of its coalition. The demographics are such that the GOP will need to graft on at least some type of additional coalition partner.

But Rove misunderstood the President's weakness. Whereas he could force through the prescription drug bill, on something not national security or tax cut related, Bush simply did not have the oomph to override the GOP base. Even worse, he exacerbated the GOP's growing problem with Latinos by emphasizing the nativist streak of the GOP. It was a tremendous miscalculation.

All in all, to call Karl Rove a failure is to blame him for events beyond his control. One must remember what his job was - to enhance Republican Party control. When he had a hand to work with, he did exactly that. Give the devil his due.

< Karl Rove Resigns | False Confessions in CT >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

What Rove Wrought | 43 comments (43 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Except that, was that really his job? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Duckman GR on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 12:42:26 PM EST

To win elections? Or was it to win elections for the Bushies and keep them in there as long as possible while their corporate controllers looted this country for all that they could?

Because in that respect they've done very well by Bush and Rover.

Governing was never in the playbook methinks. And I think the 1000 Year Right was just so much misdirection.

All of the wire tapping and the war and the unitary executive were just tools to keep them in as long as possible. And I've always thought that anything more than one term was just a bonus.

: Note: the U.S. stock markets have (none / 0) (#5)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 12:45:26 PM EST

gone up since Rove announced he's leaving.

Thanks for this post. (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Edger on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 12:43:08 PM EST

You show him in a much wider frame than the one dimensional modern day Goebbels that he's usually depicted as; a frame in which he is not so smart or capable in other arenas as he is at selling fear to dummies.

An ethical and moral failure as a human being, like Bush and the rest of his administration, but also a failure of competence.

No comment about "winning" elections... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:13:06 PM EST

...can be credible without first acknowledging that the current state of voting equipment and its hackability has renedered our election system entirely untrustworthy. I have no reason to believe my vote is accurately counted. Nor does anyone else. The presidential elections Rove helped "win", to be certain, will go down in history as simply not credible. Fraudulent, to be exact.

BlackBoxVoting always needs help.

Heh and hoho (1.00 / 0) (#18)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:24:38 PM EST

I may be wrong, but I believe that the method of voting, the machines, etc., are the responsibility of the state and local governments.

Rove may have been good, for example he clearly was the cause of Katrina, but I don't think he was able to command the Demo party in FL to design the ballot the way they did.


"Madame Butterfly" and the redesign of (5.00 / 0) (#29)
by bronte17 on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 04:51:12 PM EST

ballots when she was not remotely qualified to do so, as well as many other steps in the theft of our 2000 election were coordinated through various channels, though not through Karl Rove.

According to Salon, Theresa LaPore worked for international arms dealer, Adnan Khashoggi, during the 1980s. He's a close friend and business partner of the bush family. When they installed her as the election supervisor in Palm County, she changed her voter registration from Republican to Democrat. The rest is sordid history.

"Madame Butterfly" Theresa LePore wasn't always an embattled Palm Beach ballots chief. In the 1980s, she moonlighted as a flight attendant on private planes owned by Saudi weapons dealer Adnan Khashoggi, a middleman in Reagan administration arms sales to Iran.

Can you also ytell me (1.00 / 0) (#33)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 06:19:44 PM EST

what studio in Hollywood the Lunar landing was shot in??

And I have always wanted to know the real story of who killed Kennedy.


: Ah, so you're one of (none / 0) (#45)
by bronte17 on Tue Aug 14, 2007 at 11:49:21 PM EST

those people.
A gratuitous insult slung out in lieu of a substantive response?

And don't forget the private sector (none / 0) (#30)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 04:51:19 PM EST

Rather's report also takes a look back at the fiasco that spurred the widespread changeover to touch-screen machines: the 2000 election, notably in Florida, where "hanging chads" and other irregularities caused havoc. In that state, more than 50,000 punch cards were discarded as invalid because voters appeared to have voted for more than one presidential candidate (or none).

Rather interviews seven former employees of the company that made punch cards used in Florida. They agree that after decades of maintaining high production standards, their company in 2000 began opting for cheap, even defective, paper.

"It's the flour for the bread," says one former worker. "I mean, if you don't have good paper, you won't make good ballots."


CA's Sec'y of State decertified most (none / 0) (#11)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:15:05 PM EST

computer screen voting options, so most counties are returning to the land of hanging chads--punch out the circle w/tally done by optical scan. Nothing's perfect.


I'd rather have chads that hang... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:26:08 PM EST

...rather than machines programmed by partisans. The ease with which votes can be flipped and tossed and whatever else is just too easy with computer voting.

The hanging chad is beautiful and represents the people counting votes. Every house should be counting, every citizen, we should all be checking each other's math.

The computers are INFINITELY worse to me.


Don't faint (1.00 / 1) (#20)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:30:35 PM EST

But I agree. My preference would be paper ballots with an old fashion No. 2 lead pencil, in ENGLISH only.


: We're still fellow human beings... (none / 0) (#28)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 04:16:18 PM EST

...and fellow Americans. And despite our obvious and sometimes vehement disagreements, I still have a soft spot in my dark heart for you.
At least I think it's just soft and not entirely rotted yet. ;-)

Rove was unethical (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by cmpnwtr on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:20:48 PM EST

Rove was kicked out of the Bush One campaign for unethical behavior. Slimy Bush Two handed him the reins of power. His approach to political consulting was to ignore the fact that truth matters,that the rule of law matters, that the constitution matters, that the well-being of the nation matters, all for the sake of apparent short term political advantage. He had a goal of a "permanent" Republican majority. What a self-deluded fool! Nothing is permanent in this life, especially in politics. And apparently he was such a nihilist that nothing of our civic life matters either. He is a personal and professional failure in my book .. period.

: Rove is running interference for Gonzales (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by manys on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:59:46 PM EST

All of this is a cacophony of showtunes to distract people from the problems with the White House and Attorney General. Rove was always on his way out, why would he stay around for a 25%'er when there are bigger and better jobs out there with the election coming up? That he would use a stereotypically fake reason for resigning is just window dressing. Take Rove at face-value at your peril, and Gonzales and the White House are still lying and stonewalling.

For me, these three paragraphs (5.00 / 4) (#16)
by Edger on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:07:14 PM EST

from Ron Suskind paint probably the clearest picture of the kind of person Karl Rove is.

January 1, 2003
Why Are These Men Laughing?

Eventually, I met with Rove. I arrived at his office a few minutes early, just in time to witness the Rove Treatment, which, like LBJ's famous browbeating style, is becoming legend but is seldom reported. Rove's assistant, Susan Ralston, said he'd be just a minute. She's very nice, witty and polite. Over her shoulder was a small back room where a few young men were toiling away. I squeezed into a chair near the open door to Rove's modest chamber, my back against his doorframe.
Inside, Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. "We will f*ck him. Do you hear me? We will f*ck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever f*cked him!" As a reporter, you get around--curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events--but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. "Come on in." And I did. And we had the most amiable chat for a half hour.
...
Since then, I've talked to old colleagues, dating back twenty-five years, one of whom said, "Some kids want to grow up to be president. Karl wanted to grow up to be Mark Hanna. We'd talk about it all the time. We'd say, 'Jesus, Karl, what kind of kid wants to grow up to be Mark Hanna?'" In any event, it's clear, when I think of my encounter with Rove, why this particular old friend of his, and scores of others--many of whom spoke of the essential good nature of this man who was a teammate on some campaign or other--don't want their names mentioned, ever. Just like Rove's mates on the current team--the one running the free world--who go numb at the thought of talking frankly, for attribution, about him. These are powerful people, confident and consequential, who suffer gaze aversion when I mention his name.

Hardly the end of Rove (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by Alien Abductee on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:24:36 PM EST

He's going to write a book and "teach" - a whole new generation of baby Roves waiting to be influenced to carry on his legacy and take it to new depths yet undreamed. At least they'll probably be from all across the political spectrum. Or will lessons actually be drawn about the short-term advantages and long-term damage to the country of his approach? Naah...

And the book title will be (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by Edger on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:29:03 PM EST

"A Moral Methodology" or "Amoral Methodology"?


Admit it (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Alien Abductee on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:33:46 PM EST

You'll read it too. We all will. :)


Of course I would. ;-) (none / 0) (#24)
by Edger on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 03:16:22 PM EST

: Fergit that (none / 0) (#43)
by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 14, 2007 at 10:45:01 AM EST

I'm holding out for CliffsNotes.

Contract Worker (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by squeaky on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 03:39:40 PM EST

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Rove became a contract worker, doing the same job as he has been doing but at twice the pay.

Rove Paranoia (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by chemoelectric on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 05:03:19 PM EST

Rove has a very limited and predictable bag of dirty tricks, and is good at little or nothing else. Swiftboating is an example of what Karl Rove can handle, which is to take someone's strength and dirtily turn it into that person's weakness; bugging his own office is an example of another skill. I'm not sure whether Rove knows much else.

The Theresa Schiavo fiasco, the SS scam, and immigration reform were standard political bamboozlement, in which Rove has no special skills.

He isn't a genius and he doesn't run everything. Having Rove gone is likely to make little difference in how the White House operates, now that it has nothing left but the waging of what, to Bush, is Christian Jihad.

: There's a difference between genius and thuggery (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by Ellie on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 06:33:56 PM EST

Rove racked up his big wins because he cheated and thugged beyond other people's willingness to push back at the same level of extremism and illegality.
It doesn't take talent and imagination to threaten people's families, livelihoods and reputations. (I'd argue, along with some here, that it requires the opposite.
Winning a rigged game, like disenfranchising literally millions of their rights and impeding their access to their rightful resources, isn't a glorious accomplishment.
Focus is a quality and focus to win is a developed, elite skill. Focus to win at any cost to others might better be categorized as a mentality or a pathology depending on what a person hooks it into. (I'm not a psychologist or familiar with the terminology.)
What Rove's been doing for hire is thuggery, not genius. People might respect the results but I doubt that even those who benefit from that want too much of that Rove presence deeply in their lives, professional or personal.
I see him as a sad, pathetic, hollow man and it's not based on partisanship. I just done't respect someone like that.

: And to bad rubbish we say... (none / 0) (#32)
by desertswine on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 05:15:35 PM EST

"Goodbye, good riddance," Democratic presidential contender John Edwards said in a statement.

Drum doesn't understand (1.00 / 1) (#39)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 11:27:16 PM EST

History will judge Rove a colossal failure, a man who never understood how to govern

Someone should tell Drum that it wasn't Rove's job to govern, but to help Bush get elected, and advise him about politics.

: Exactly (none / 0) (#42)
by Repack Rider on Tue Aug 14, 2007 at 10:32:55 AM EST

Someone should tell Drum that it wasn't Rove's job to govern, but to help Bush get elected, and advise him about politics.
And look how that turned out. Bush became the worst president in our history, and no one else is even close.
Rove has damaged our country to the point where we will never again reach the level we were at on the day Bush took office. It has been all downhill from that day.
As failures go, Rove, Bush, Cheney et al have set the bar pretty high. Napoleon's invasion of Russia was the gold standard of failure before the Bush administration set the new record.

: ppj doesn't understand (none / 0) (#44)
by Sailor on Tue Aug 14, 2007 at 11:21:55 AM EST

Someone should tell Drum that it wasn't Rove's job to govern
actually someone should tell that to bush who let karl help plan the war and the surge and firing the USA's and other ' "improper political influence over government decision-making."

The devil never really seemed (none / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 12:25:33 PM EST

that smart to me. He felt that great Republican gains could be made in the exurbs. What he didn't seem to understand what that not everyone who lives there is a social conservative with racist/nativist feelings. Add to that the immigration, social security, and Iraq debacles you mention, and you get to about 28% down in dixie. Congrats Karl.

L.A. Times (Maura Reynolds):. (none / 0) (#3)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 12:42:44 PM EST

Rove was praised as a genius by allies and opponents alike, until the 2006 midterm election when Democrats took control of Congress. Since then, Rove's legacy has been a matter of debate in Republican circles: Did the excesses of Republican control of Congress lead to the election loss? Or was Rove's highly partisan brand of politics unsustainable over the long term, especially with the country unnerved by the war in Iraq?
Rove puts the blame firmly on Republican lawmakers: "The sense of entitlement was there ... and people smelled it," Rove said

L.A. Times left out Rove's statements about HIllary Clinton's candidacy being "deeply flawed."

: Revisit the kudos after the bodies are unburied (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by Ellie on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 09:25:18 PM EST

The Bush Gang's favorite dodge of accountability and transparency is embodied in Bush's moronic whine, when backed into a corner, that history be the judge. It's as if he and other abusers of office get to make up rules and consequences on the fly and never have to cop, in this lifetime, to what they did and/or make amends for it.
(Quasi-sequitur: I love the recurring BS -- when yet another one gets caught, often literally, with his pants down -- that he's taken responsibility by saying a prayer or admitting that he "mispoke" or put it "inartfully", or been taken out of context ... and now everyone go away and give him his privacy, mmmkay? Gawrsh, it's like they existed in a glittering, bubble-surrounded compound on a hill or something -- OH WAIT!)
The assumption about historical judgment and context is naively (or cynically) based on supposing that this Crimunal Cult will continue to be outpacing the weekly news cycle -- these two admins' bread and butter -- with the same intimate access to slavishly devoted or cowed media lapdogs and courtiers. It's an almost childlike delusion or simplistic because of the extent of the sheer arrogance.
I'm not alone in assuming Rove's "departure" is calculated poli/legal theater, fortuitously timed to distance himself from several criminal endeavors long enough to disentangle from accountability and be "back" on the campaign trail in '08.
And let's see how good this record looks and smells when the bodies literally begin to be unburied. Let's see how Rove's admirers, sycophants and complimentary foils across the aisle, gruffly showing their political cred by applauding on cue, keep up the praise when the true toll is taken.
Most of the public isn't remotely aware of what's been done in their name. Most pundits and pols who have an inkling think the scorecards will be reset after the 2008 elections and none of the atrocities -- and they're out there and grievous -- can be pinned to them.
I think they're in for a shocking and long overdue awakening on all counts.

BTD (none / 0) (#6)
by Slado on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:07:10 PM EST

Great points BTD. Don't agree with all of them but you put a nice perspective on him.

What is it with liberals/democrats and their hatred of Rove? They seem to try and have it both ways. On one hand he's an evil genius and the other a colossal failure.

He like Bush can't be both.

He was a successful political advisor that went 3 for 4 in national elections. Ask most advisors and campaign managers if they'd like to have that record and they would all tell you yes.

Just ask Bob Shrum.

"Ask most advisors ..." (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Lord Garth on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 06:32:25 PM EST

Slato said:
"Ask most advisors and campaign managers if they'd like to have that record and they would all tell you yes."
Sure they would. But they wouldn't become lawbreaking, cheating weasels to get it. They wouldn't rig elections and show contempt for the voting public. They wouldn't gleefully undermine the Constitution. That's the trouble with you neo-cons, the ends always justify the means.


This your first time here? (none / 0) (#7)
by Edger on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:10:14 PM EST

: Is this the Welcome Wagon? (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:13:17 PM EST

From NYT: (none / 0) (#8)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:12:44 PM EST

He said he believed the scrutiny would continue after he left the White House because of what he called the "myth" of his influence, which he referred to as "the Mark of Rove."

BTD, any predictions (none / 0) (#13)
by oculus on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 01:22:58 PM EST

as to how the Bush admin. will change, if at all, after Rove leaves?

There was nothng for Rove to do (none / 0) (#27)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 03:40:13 PM EST

anymore.

Iraq is Iraq for Bush. He ain't changing.

And there is nothing new to roll out.

Rove left, imo, because he had nothing left to do.


: BTD (none / 0) (#40)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 11:29:13 PM EST

Good point.
Of course we disagree on whether that is good or bad.

But he was a failure (none / 0) (#15)
by Tom Hilton on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:02:19 PM EST

In an extremely narrow sense, Rove succeeded; but he had much grander plans than that. Kevin's point is that Rove's one-size-fits-all strategy (50%+1) ultimately defeated his grander goal of realignment. Had he shifted to a broader-based, less confrontational strategy after 9/11, he could have built a much longer-lasting Republican majority--one that could have weathered things like the nativists' freak-out on immigration without crumbling.

You are the only devil I pay dues to! (none / 0) (#22)
by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 02:36:13 PM EST

Down with the Giant Red Satan. Down with Karl Rove. I hate him. Talk to me about this next week, I just can't get there right now.

Check this out (none / 0) (#25)
by thetruthsetsfree on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 03:36:56 PM EST

Hey, check out this short, satirical "You Tube" video blasting O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and other right-wing pundits. You'll love it! And, it's done by an evangelical pastor! www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hh3xwuH-rE

Rove was a SUCCESS ! (none / 0) (#37)
by seabos84 on Mon Aug 13, 2007 at 07:20:25 PM EST

he and his merry band of fascists set out to steal as much as they could for themselves and their friends AND
to be unaccountable

AND they did steal and they are stealing and they are unaccountable.

they do NOT care about being FDR or Lincoln, they care about stealing and living large and not getting caught.

they are NOT any different than any corrupt ruling class since before the Pharoahs.

Dems who want to treat these scum as anything less than enemies will lose ...

see 1980 to ... today!

rmm.