WHAT KARL ROVE WON’T TELL YOU [Why Grassroots Say NO to Republican Establishment ]

TheAmericanSpectator ^ | September 23, 2014 | Scott McKay

[Steelfish]

WHAT KARL ROVE WON’T TELL YOU Wave goodbye to the Republican wave?

By Scott McKay – 9.23.14

Last Wednesday (Sept. 17), former George W. Bush political guru and current Republican Super PAC king Karl Rove took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to exhort that paper’s readers to make it rain to the benefit of Republican senatorial candidates with just six weeks left before Election Day.

“…[R]educing the Democratic cash advantage will tip the needle in the GOP's direction,” Rove said. “That will only happen if Republicans open their wallets to candidates whom they may have never met, and, if they live in a battleground state, they clear their calendars to volunteer to identify and get out the vote. If they don’t, they should prepare for two more years of Majority Leader Harry Reid.”

Rove says the Republican “wave” everyone expects this fall isn’t materializing as yet because Democrats are outraising and outspending Republicans across the board. As evidence, he cites that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had outraised the National Republican Senatorial Committee by $1.6 million in August and, as of August 31, was sitting on a $5 million larger war chest. Rove also noted a study by American Crossroads which concluded that so far Democrat political entities had run or placed some $109 million in campaign TV ads, while their Republican counterparts had only run or placed $85 million.

[txrefugee]

McConnell vowed he would crush the conservatives. He did. Crushed people don’t vote.

[C. Edmund Wright]

LINK PLEEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[AdaGray]

Remember McDaniel.

[nathanbedford]

Rove is all about winning.

If he is, he would do well to look to his game because his record is spotty.

I agree with you when you say this:

If you don’t win, your philosophy doesn’t matter. If you win and your philosophy sucks, winning doesn’t matter.

But what about the idea that the philosophy is the condition precedent for winning for without the right idea there is no electoral enthusiasm. I accept that if enthusiasm appears eccentric it turns off a portion of the electorate. I saw that in 1964 when Goldwater was made to be a crazed warmonger. Lyndon Johnson was presented as the soul of reason, the inheritor of Kennedy, the middle American.

Goldwater had the right philosophy but he could not present himself as the messenger. I think that Romney was a good messenger but had no philosophy to sell.

[wastoute]

Thatcher. Win the argument. Then you win the election.

[BuckeyeTexan]

No. AFTER they do the jobs they were elected to do in 2010, THEN they get money. Not before.