Posted on 04/23/2006 7:22:07 PM PDT by RWR8189
NOW THAT HE'S BACK IN the elections business, Karl Rove has a huge task on his hands: assuring strong Republican voter turnout. At the moment, Republicans are in a funk. And their dejected mood may presage a low turnout in the midterm election on November 7. Should a large number of Republican voters sit this one out, Republicans could lose control of one or both houses of Congress. It's when Republicans are either inspired or angry that they show up in large numbers and win elections. So Rove, along with Republican national chairman Ken Mehlman, has the job of shaping issues that will make Republicans angry or inspired, or both.
There's one big problem--two, actually. First, Rove's magic won't affect the biggest issues dogging the Bush presidency and causing Republicans to be disheartened: Iraq and rising gas prices. But the second problem--President Bush's sagging job approval among Republicans--is one that Rove can address by emphasizing policies that appeal to Republicans and by creating strong fears of a Democratic takeover.
Let's be clear about turnout. It matters enormously. The sweeping Republican defeat following Watergate in 1974 was only indirectly related to the scandal. The Democratic landslide was directly attributable to the diminished Republican turnout that resulted from Watergate-induced dejection among Republicans.
More recently, the turnout factor has been the single greatest influence on midterm elections. In 1990, 27.4 million Americans voted for Republican House candidates, and the party lost 8 seats. In 1994, however, the Republican turnout jumped to 36.3 million, and the party captured 52 House seats. It dipped in 1998 to 32 million, prompting a loss of 5 seats. But in 2002 it soared to 37 million, and Republicans won 8 House seats.
In presidential election years, jacking up turnout is relatively doable, as the Bush campaign showed in 2004. Presidential elections unleash "incredible energy," a senior Bush adviser says, and that generates volunteers, donors, a campaign infrastructure, and a flood of voters to the polls. "By definition there's less energy," says the adviser, in nonpresidential years--and less infrastructure for a national campaign. The "key" in these years, the adviser continues, is to make "your base as inspired as possible."
With the 2006 midterm election six months away, the Republican base is uninspired. In the Fox News poll in mid-April, only 66 percent of Republicans said they looked favorably on the Bush presidency. This is a disastrous number for Republicans. Of course, it wasn't as bad as the overall Bush rating of 33 percent, which included Democrats and independents.
Low job approval can have a double whammy effect. By itself, a 66 percent rating means that turnout by Republicans is likely to be low. In 2002 and 2004, when Republicans won House seats, Bush's approval among Republicans was 20 or more points higher.
The second effect is to cause further Republican disenchantment. Low poll numbers like 33 percent approval are bound to prompt some Republicans to feel they must separate themselves from Bush and join in criticizing him and Republicans in Congress. This, in turn, leads to lower turnout.
It's a vicious political cycle, but it's not the end of the world for Republicans. There's a lot Rove can do now that he's freed from the administrative duties that went with his old job as deputy chief of staff. He's back to his first-term job as the chief political strategist for Bush and the Republican party. And he has closer ties to the new chief of staff, Josh Bolten, than he did to Bolten's predecessor, Andy Card. He's in a position to invigorate Bush's message and rally Republicans.
A political adviser who works closely with Rove has developed a list of issues that Republicans should concentrate on to spur turnout. They aren't a big secret. Republicans can't survive by relying on incumbency, money, and attacks on Democrats. They need a positive agenda to stir the Republican base in general and conservatives in particular.
So at the top of his list is passage of a federal budget with at least minimal restraints on spending. Before the Easter recess, the House failed to pass one. Since spending curbs are important to conservatives, they'd better pass a budget soon. Republicans also need to stress the "culture of life" by noisily opposing abortion, cloning, and expanded federal subsidies for embryonic stem cell research. And they should push to make the Bush tax cuts permanent and propose serious health care legislation. If they do all this, Bush's support among Republicans should rise and so should his overall approval rating.
But what about Iraq and gas prices? Here, Bush needs help from outside events. Since early 2005, his presidency has been beset not only by Iraq and gas prices but by other outside events, including Hurricane Katrina and the Dubai ports deal. Now, a Republican official says, "it would help to have an outside situation that we could take advantage of."
A permanent, elected government in Iraq might be one, especially if it leads to fewer bombings and further reductions in American casualties by this summer. A break in gas prices is unlikely, but stranger things have happened. It would help. And Democrats may foolishly contribute by making themselves more vulnerable than ever to attacks of the type that Rove is adept at organizing.
The old football saying about winning applies to turnout in 2006. It's not everything. It's the only thing. For Bush and Republicans, turnout is destiny.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard and author of Rebel-in-Chief (Crown Forum).
bump for tomorrow
Yep. I am voting on immigration this time around. Not to mention I don't WANT the government fooling with health care!!
What those who are now venting their spleen, on this thread, are ignoring, is that this is not a presidential election. It is also a truism, as I have stated on this thread and many others, that even though most people really HATE all Congresscritters, when all is said and done, they like their own...or at least, they will keep electing them over and over and over again.
We'll see, I guess.
It makes me cringe to say this (after being such a Bush enthusiast for so many years), but if the Pres keeps pushing this blasted amnesty notion of his, I don't think I'll really give a damn about his political fate following the mid-terms.
I know what it was like here, in '97 and '98 and in 2000.
My word, it's almost like you expect the "small-government, low taxes and anti-socialism" party to, (gasp!) Horror of Horrors(tm), govern like a small-government, low taxes and anti-socialism party!
I suggest you take another look at the latest FR poll if you believe that.
If you disagree with this, as you appear to, then you are in disagreement with FR and most of its membership; not to mention the owner of this site.
Our goal is not to destroy Democrats. They're not aliens or terrorists. We may disagree with them fundamentally on policy, which is why we should be running people who implement a conservative agenda. This Congress has done jack s**t to promote that agenda, so what's the difference between them and the Democrats? Not much of anything, except a party designation.
Sorry guy, but I'm not going to keep on handing power to the Republican Party if it's going to be a bunch of Democrats. Better off getting Democrats in Congress, so at least there's a stalemate in government. If we can't get the GOP to enact less government, we'll create our own lack of government, by creating a stalemate where nothing can get done.
That's hell of a lot better than anything the GOP has done in this Congress so far.
Also, quit speaking for the membership of this site and the owner of this site. I'm sure there are thousands of members on this site who disagree with you, some of whom have posted in this thread. You are not the authority of Free Republic; hell, I don't even know who you are. So quit acting like it.
The Republicans will get my vote if they act like Republicans on the key issues. If they don't do that, they don't get my vote. It's that simple, and I'm sure THAT is the true position of FR.
The Bush administration seems doggedly determined to stick with their current immigration policy and they will pay a huge price in November that may end with the Presidnt's impeachment.
Furthermore, they had better understand conservatives are not as easily manipulated as they once were.
Fred, you Washington guys keep missing the point.
We the base (mostly me) are upset with immigration, border security and the lack of our representatives to push through an energy bill that would take down these gas prices.
Why aren't we drilling in ANWAR and on the Florida and California coasts.
I am tired of the run a way spending for pet congress critters projects..
I am tired of every time a new bill is proposed to do something about spending, the cuts are always where it hurts the little guy the most.
I am sick of all the allegations, counter allegations and leaks from the people who work for MY GOVERNMENT.
I am upset with a lack of strong leadership from top to bottom.
I am sick and tired of Republicans selling out and running from just about every fight involving American traditions.
I'm sick of this thing called conservative compassion.
Compassion for what, people who want to destroy my way of life.
Mr Barnes, I would ask that you not start the engine if you don't plan on putting the car in gear.
He won't. His heart belongs to Vicente Fox. He doesn't give a crap about what's happening to America.
It may have been "well known" to people in Arkansas, but it wasn't all that well known across the country and the MSM did everything in its power, in '92 to shield him.
In '96, his sycophants didn't care and Dole wasn't enough to get enough supposed conservatives to vote; no matter how much they hated Clinton. The old cut off your nose to spite your facers stayed home.
Clinton was NOT impeached because he can't keep his pants on. Good grief...if THAT is what you believe the impeachment was about, then you know NOTHING about it!
I give up....you don't know nor understand this stuff. And at this hour, I am NOT going to give you even the Cliff;s Notes version. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh...I give up.
Oh yes, and LEARN HOW TO MAKE PARAGRAPHS!
Our goal IS SO to destroy the Dem! They are the enemy within and in some respects, afar greater threat to America and her people, than al Qaeda.
The fight, for conservatives, is in the primaries. It is there, that we have the only hope of getting more conservatives into position to be elected; however, we DO still need a majority, in both Houses, so a few moderates are tolerable.
Frist is a disaster. I said that during the time of the Lott debacle.
The House hasn't done that bad a job, but the Senate IS a mess. On that point, I will agree.
If you don't think that there are any differences between the damned Dems and the GOP, then you are willfully ignoring the differences.
I'm not a "guy"; but, you are political naif, who doesn't know and doesn't want to know how politics works and what reality really is.
Don't attack my political aptitude if you're going to make absurd statements like the above.
It's pieces of trash like you that give the DNC and the liberal left perfect ammunition to attack conservatives and Republicans with.
Our goal is not to destroy the Democrats. Our goal is to promote a conservative agenda and enact policies that meet that end. Republicans should not exist solely to beat Democrats- they should exist to promote policies that are better than those of the Democrats. Enough of this "vote Republican just because they're not Democrats" crap. The Republicans have to give people a reason to vote for them, not a reason to vote against the other guy.
Remember, John Kerry tried the "vote for me because the other guy is worse than me" tactic back in 2004, and he got trounced. We shouldn't be doing the same thing in '06.
Fred's liberal co-host on Fox News and Fred sound almost alike these days. Fred sees Karl as a solution and not part of the problem which is Fred's problem also.
"Our goal IS SO to destroy the Dem! They are the enemy within and in some respects, afar greater threat to America and her people, than al Qaeda."
What say you Mr. Robinson? Does the man in charge of FR agree with nopardon's ascertion that the Dems are equivalent to if not worse than Osama?
I stated, quite clearly, what the founder of FR says one of FR's missions and goals are. He recently posted a thread to that effect; reiterating his position and FR"s. If you don't like/agree with it, take it up with Jim Robinson.
Oh goody...a personal attack; how charming. LOL
But seriously, it is political naifs, like you, whom the Dems adore. You further their agenda, you give them aid and comfort when election time roles around, and you try to divide us here; not to mention making Conservatives look like emotional idiots.
You can't "promote a conservative agenda and enact policies that meet that end" by simplistically and hysterically posting to FR; damning all elected GOPers out of hand and/or not voting for the GOP candidates.
We don't live in a nation that has a conservative majority.
The majority of the populace doesn't even vote; though the dead do in some places.
I never said that the sole purpose of the GOP is to beat the damned Dems, but if they don't, then getting anything done, is an impossibility.
Don't mix apples and oranges and please DO try to grasp more of what's reality, than you do. THINK; just don't vent your spleen. And for GOD'S sake, learn some facts.
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.