I doubt this little priss cares anything about the Tea Party, but I bet he knows all about the area of colonososcopies.
Posted on 02/07/2013 11:34:39 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
According to Politico, “a political colonoscopy is going on before our eyes.” Yuck. Karl Rove has set up a Super PAC to keep controversial conservatives from winning Republican primaries and the Senate leadership has established a “buddy system” to keep Tea Party congressmen in line (“buddy” as in “you should probably vote the way we tell you to, buddy…”). But the most important changes are taking place at Fox where heavyweights Sarah Palin and Dick Morris are out as contributors. A lot of this is post-election house clearing (CNN has moved staff around, too) but it also suggests that the GOP establishment is blaming the 2012 election loss on the Tea Party and the impolite Right.
Is its assessment correct? Yes and no. “Yes” in the sense that the outspoken weirdness of some Tea Party candidates shifted the balance of the Senate in the Democratic Party’s favour and “yes” in that they allowed Obama to play the culture war card so brilliantly against Mitt Romney. The margin of the 2012 election was decided by gender, race and age – and while the GOP did well with its old white guy base, Tea Party radicalism helped Obama to build a winning advantage among “everyone else”. And so moderates are now conspiring to silence the conservatives.
But, in defence of conservatives, the Republican Party did not actually run a Tea Party candidate in 2012. It ran a moderate from Massachusetts with a record of inventing Obamacare and supporting legalised abortion. Romney might have u-turned on all those positions, but the idea that the Tea Party hijacked the GOP nomination in 2012 is simply absurd...
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
The TEA Party does not need Fox News Channel, it didn’t before.
This is not Rove acting on his own. No doubt there’s involvement from the other asshats in DC.
I wonder how Karl Rove makes his money?
If he only skims off 5% of the money he raises he’s up there with Mitt Romney and Donny Deutsch.
I understand the elections of 2006 and 2008 as people being tired of the Iraq war and tired of republicans who controlled the presidency for 8 years, the house of reps for 12 years and the senate for 5 years.
I understand the 2010 election as real anger about healthcare.
I don’t understand the 2012 results. In a state that romney carried by 10, Mourdock (a decent candidate) lost on some very benign comments. I don’t understand a decent candidate like Scott Brown losing to a liar and a left wing nut like Warren. I don’t understand Heitkamp beating Berg. I don’t understand how a center right, decent guy like Romney loses to Obama. I don’t get how Montana can reelect a democrat and our candidate was solid.
The only thing I do understand is Akin getting beat.
I doubt this little priss cares anything about the Tea Party, but I bet he knows all about the area of colonososcopies.
“The only thing I do understand is Akin getting beat.”
I do too. rove and his honchos pulled ALL of his funding and screeched like cats in heat for him to give up the nomination. He was a true Conservative and did NOT deserve what they did to him.
I agree with some of it. The balance of power in the senate was shifted toward the Democrats by a couple politically inept conservative candidates. However, the “Tea Party candidates” were not solely responsible for losing the senate. Fact is, several moderate nominees lost, too.
In regards to the culture war, I think the inept conservative candidates did indeed give Obama ammo that he used against Romney. I can’t say whether that resulted in a significant change in the election results.
The author is certainly correct in his assessment that Romney was not a conservative by a long shot. We ran a squishy moderate (again) and found that only so many people will drag themselves to the polls to vote for someone they don’t like (and don’t trust) to stop someone else they like even less.
I understand it perfectly... viote fraud in my opinion!
Most of the HOUSE seats remained the same, it was the Senate and President that was the upset.
It was too imprtant for Obama to lose his Presidenct and equally important he did not lose the Senate either.
VOTE.....sorry for the typo
We need our own conservative news network.
Well, Karl Rove's shennanigans worked very well to Obama's benefit in the 2010 and 2012 elections. There's several Trillion stolen dollars in that kitty.
telegraph UK...competitor to Murdock (FOX). trying to lessen viewership
Tea Party got along fine without Rove and most republicans...
...this little snit is just wedging....
FOX had better watch out.. they are slowly becoming UNwatchable..
I used to believe much of their programming.. as principled..
But its beginning to look like platitudes.. and rhetoric..
I live in a mostly republican area.. and many are becoming “indies”.. or something else..
A/The Tea Party Caucus is spreading.. partys may becoming obsolete..
Many are noting the white stripe down ROVE’s back.. and the YELLOW on his tummy..
Tea Party was not the reason for failure. Weak candidates and liberal agenda is loser recipe.
The latest pandering to Hispanics via Illegal Alien Amnesty means more years of losses.....extending to House seats.
As for Karl Rove......look for George Soros hanging arouind. Rove is going to kill the GOP via overspending on campaigns
Fox News needs to fire Rove before their ratings crater
Dems won the popular vote in the house, and picked up a few seats.
Your comment is like saying we don't need money to win an election. That is wishful thinking, but completely false. Fox News is THE only news station that isn't in the tank for Democrats. Without Fox, there is no truth and no message.
Rove is an experienced player, and he is probably correct about certain issues. For example, conservatives have done a horrible job at reaching out to hispanics lately. Any mention of immigration reform and some of us get rabid. Meanwhile, Obama is seducing them with BS. Sweet BS is better than bitter indifference.
The real problem is that we need a candidate we can trust. Reagan was able to lead. He was Christian, all inclusive, and knew how to communicate. Don't forget Reagan gave millions of hispanics amnesty, while Obama is having them deported in greater numbers than ever.We have the real message of "hope", but Obama is the only one being heard. The media bias is a huge problem, and none of us here know how to solve that. May God help us.
The Tea Party needs an “enemy at the gate” (Machiavelli) .. It also needs to pick a target (The Alinsky Tactics – Rule 13 – Pick the Target, Freeze it, polarize it...). Karl Rove is tailor made if the Tea Party gets smart. Listen to Levin’s podcast for Feb 4th...Rove is mostly “myth”... Has engineered more losers than winners...he is a perfect target because he is touted, but is nothing but hot air and his record, outlined in detail by Levin, proves it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.