Posted on 10/14/2011 5:40:45 AM PDT by IbJensen
Karl Rove doesnt think Herman Cain stands a chance of being POTUS. Bushs number one consigliere said as much on Fox Thursday night.
But is he right? I sure dont know, but I certainly have a suspicion why Karl thinks what he does. The Herman Cain candidacy is a direct threat to his occupation. Rove arguably the reigning monarch of political pros went on to register his disapproval that Cain was wandering around Godforsaken places like Tennessee flogging his book, when any serious candidate should be pressing the flesh where it counts to wit, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
Worse yet, the candidate isnt raising any money (or not enough to have flashing neon signs that say 9 9 9 like Burma-Shave along every highway in America not that we have to be reminded).
Now I have no beef with Rove. In fact, I rather like him, having interviewed him for PJTV. But its obvious that times have changed and that Herman Cain is running a very canny media campaign virtually all by himself. Yes, I know he has a staff, but you do get the sense this man is his own thing, which is part of the tightrope walking fun. Can he make it to the other side Pennsylvania Avenue without falling? Whatever the case, Rove and others like him (the sorry David Axelrod, the Carville-Matalin duo, etc.) are in danger of becoming, if not extinct, at least more marginal than previously assumed.
Heres another data point: A couple of months back, Newt Gingrichs entire campaign staff including Dave Carney, the putative next Karl Rove split and decamped for Texas, soon to join Rick Perrys campaign. What happened? Today Gingrich is rising in the polls apparently on the strength of his debate performances and Perry, who started strong, is, at least for now, in trouble.
Again, I have no beef with Carney. Ive met him too and he seems to be a fine fellow. Quite bright.
So whats going on here? The more powerful the political pros, the worse the campaign? Or is it really about the candidate in our non-stop media world? I tend to think its the latter. Given the amount of coverage they all get, its hard to imagine they need help in getting exposure. Maybe they need help in getting a little anonymity. (Thats particularly true in the current presidents case.)
And what about money the legendary mothers milk of politics? Well, it too might not be as important as it is cracked up to be. Cain, as noted, has spent very little (at least until now) and Jon Huntsman is the richest guy to run since, well, John Kerry. Maybe Huntsmans even richer. And look where its got him, duking it out with Rick Santorum for the privilege of keeping Gary Johnson out of the debates (unfairly, in my estimation).
We may all hate our media they are even less popular than politicians but they are ironically diminishing the importance of money in politics. No money? No pros? Whats next? Actual democracy?
Of course, I have overstated it, but I think not by a lot. What also may be going on is that the American public at least on the Republican side is very engaged. They know we are in a crisis and they are paying strict attention. They dont need pros and they dont need advertising to attract their eyes. Their bank accounts already woke them up and if not that, a friendly reminder from the neighborhood jihadist.
Does this mean that the candidates should all strip down and fire their advisers? (Be like Herman, not like Mike.) Well, in one sense, that wouldnt be a bad idea. But in these dire economic times, with everyone so concerned about jobs, putting all those political pros on the unemployment lines could be heartless. And no candidate Rick Perry would be glad to remind you wants to be accused of that.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
You’re welcome
I’ve read your stuff, but never “tussled” with you.
I save that for the crevo threads.
I only have so much tussling time.
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.