will destroy anyone who takes what they think
they own.
"Go Mitt. Go Mitt. Go Mitt"
"Rove has made no secret
of his support for Romney as McCain's VP. "
Posted on 10/14/2011 5:40:45 AM PDT by IbJensen
Karl Rove doesn’t think Herman Cain stands a chance of being POTUS. Bush’s number one consigliere said as much on Fox Thursday night.
But is he right? I sure don’t 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 isn’t 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 it’s 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.
Here’s another data point: A couple of months back, Newt Gingrich’s entire campaign staff — including Dave Carney, the putative “next Karl Rove” — split and decamped for Texas, soon to join Rick Perry’s 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. I’ve met him too and he seems to be a fine fellow. Quite bright.
So what’s 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 it’s the latter. Given the amount of coverage they all get, it’s hard to imagine they need help in getting exposure. Maybe they need help in getting a little anonymity. (That’s particularly true in the current president’s case.)
And what about money — the legendary mother’s 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 Huntsman’s even richer. And look where it’s 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? What’s 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 don’t need pros and they don’t 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 wouldn’t 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.
. . what you said back at you, 666 is a shill, no emotion , just fact , check the record, no more tv for you until you do your homework, lazy moroon.
I see. Thanks for your insight.:-)
Perry/Romney, et al...
are politicians whose foremost priority is not alienating some group by clearly stating a core principal.
Cain is doing something different, something that attracted a lot of folks to Palin.
He’s genuinely stating his core beliefs, explaining why they are correct, and then “allowing” the hearer to agree or disagree, and vote for him or not.
This is something no ‘rat could ever do. And when you get someone stating core principals on stage with a lib who HAS TO obfuscate their beliefs, the contrast is stark.
"Go Mitt. Go Mitt. Go Mitt"
"Rove has made no secret
of his support for Romney as McCain's VP. "
Until you actually bother to LEARN what is in it, your ignorant hysteric childish rants about Cain are a complete waste of bandwidth
How about this. Instead of racing from thread to thread mindlessly trash talking Cain with ignorant slogans, try making a case FOR your candidate instead.
“next thing you’ll hear “Cain the job killer”...”
Apparently you listen to liberal pundits for information and consider them credible. This puts you in an exceptional disadvantage in all things practical and realistic -especially political discussions on this site.
I agree 100%, we need to get beyond money as the criteria for running. Many years ago, “they” said Barry Goldwater was “too honest” to win the presidency, I thought that was a terrible indictment of teh American people. Now “they” are saying Herman Cain does not have enough money to win the election, let’s hope “they” are wrogn thsi tiem.
I agree 100%, we need to get beyond money as the criteria for running. Many years ago, “they” said Barry Goldwater was “too honest” to win the presidency, I thought that was a terrible indictment of teh American people. Now “they” are saying Herman Cain does not have enough money to win the election, let’s hope “they” are wrong this time.
In some ways you are correct. I wouldn't say I am libertarian, though. I flirted with that stuff when I was younger, but that's not really my thought process. I would say I am radically anti-federalism.
In short, I think federalism is a flop. Federalism tries to have it both ways. It wants to dance with the Devil and not get burned, and in the end, I don't think it succeeded.
But that's academic. As I say on my profile, when you are as extreme as I am, it's impossible not to compromise. Which simply means that in the real world, I have to set some of my notions aside and deal with the world as I find it, in a pragmatic way. Otherwise I'd just never engage in the process at all.
So while some folks look for a "true" conservative because they don't want to compromise on principle, for me, EVERY political choice is a compromise on principle, because everyone in politics wants bigger government than I do.
On what base does Rove have this huge reputation?
He managed to win 2 elections by the skin of his teeth in 2000 and 2004 that he should of won handily. He managed the utterly disastrous showing of the GOP in 2006 and 2008. And the election in 2002 had way more to do with the Post 09-11 election environment then anything Rove managed.
Rove's reputation is vastly overblown.
Have you ever held public office?
Do you think you have the skills and mental accumen to replace Obama?
If men were angels, no government would be necessary.
The problem that the left has is that they don’t recognize the fact that the government is populated by people of like flaw - they are not angels either, so they must be severely limited in what they do.
Hysteric, ignorant and emotion based. Do you have anything rational to say?
Perry is three times governor of the largest conservative state in the Union and under his leadership Texas is one of the most prosperous states in the Union and the state that has created almost 40% of all the new jobs in the country since 2009. That is by itself is a super mighty record that dwarfs anything the TALKER Cain has on his resume.
Being 35 and a natural born citizen qualifies you to be president. Being a math major, rocket scientist, self-made success, multiple-time CEO, talk-show host, brilliant conservative qualifies you to be an excellent president. Shove off, noob.
Great minds think alike.
Paul Jr/Paul Sr
e.g., I’ve never voted for Ron Paul. But I have voted for George W Bush, and John McCain, and Chris Christie.
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.