Well, why she lost is a number of reasons, really.
So, the real question is: how do we get the best candidates? That’s not an easy question to answer. Rove would say, just nominate moderates or liberals in liberal states. But, that’s a bad idea for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that they usually don’t win anyway, even when they bring money to the table (see: Fiorina, Whitman).
Christine may have been a better candidate if the GOP didn’t fight her tooth-and-nail every step of the way. I don’t know if she would have accepted constructive criticism, but it might have been worth a try...in private. By criticism, I don’t mean “abandon all your positions.” I mean more Frank Luntz-type message control.
Christine may have been a better candidate if the GOP didn’t fight her tooth-and-nail every step of the way. I don’t know if she would have accepted constructive criticism, but it might have been worth a try...in private. By criticism, I don’t mean “abandon all your positions.” I mean more Frank Luntz-type message control.That's a very good point.
I guess this whole thing is so frustrating that I am having a hard time dealing with it and I'm trying hard not to think that Rove actually lost this one for us.
That thought is as frustrating as the thought that Nevada is now a blue state.
And particularly frustrating is that NO ONE on Fox News called him on his behavior, not even Hannity, who pretended to, but kept it as such a "kid glove" level that it wasn't much of a criticism at all.
Rove got away with this completely, in terms of all the other media snarks out there on the so-called "right"... with the exception of talk radio, of course. But who in the "establishment" takes talk radio seriously?