Posted on 05/02/2013 9:02:25 AM PDT by jimbo123
Former Bush adviser and GOP strategist Karl Rove says Republicans have a good chance of taking the Senate from Democrats in 2014 if they avoid nominating the types of candidates who stumbled badly in once competitive 2012 races.
“Republican success will depend on having quality Senate candidates,” Rove wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday. “Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock self-destructed last fall, and other candidates squandered important opportunities.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
“I do understand Castle was a RINO squish and a walking turncoat. But winning the Senate in 2010 was really important.”
It’s this kind of thinking that is killing us politically. Nominating people who seem to have a monopoly on being straight up ASSHOLES, like Castle, gives us Boehner’s approval rating. Also, do you think some grand conservative agenda would have been passed in a Republican senate full of McLames? If you nominate LIBERALS, no matter who controls the senate, the laws passed will be LIBERAL.
She wasn’t perfect, but I’m sick of hearing about how she lost such an “easy race”, when Reid’s well-funded machine is virtually invincible anyway. Its not comparable to what happened in Missouri against that b*tch. THAT was a disgrace, but it was not due to the election of a candidate who was ‘too conservative’. It was due to electing a candidate that was supported by his opponent, and was an grade-A idiot.
She wasn’t perfect, but I’m sick of hearing about how she lost such an “easy race”, when Reid’s well-funded machine is virtually invincible anyway. Its not comparable to what happened in Missouri against that b*tch. THAT was a disgrace, but it was not due to the election of a candidate who was ‘too conservative’. It was due to electing a candidate that was supported by his opponent, and was an grade-A idiot.
What he means, of course, candidates of the “right sort.” Like the rino he supported the Delaware primary, candidates willing to reach “across the aisle.” and who will be beholden to him and his clique, unlike men such Lee, Rand and Cruz.
I agree with everything you said there. Not an Angle fan, but no, her loss had nothing to do with being “too conservative” or it being “an easy” race - or anything else said by the likes of Rove or the other estabs. I just think Tarkanian, for example, would have been an okay candidate and likely been able to navigate the dirty and unusual Vegas political landscape.
And there were two very good candidates beaten by Akin and his McCaskill supporter cross overs in that race. Agree again, not at all similar to Angle’s situation.
Leading into that election, Reid was the most unpopular Senator in the nation. The MOST unpopular. He was considered one of the most vulnerable Senators up for election. The ONLY reason he won is because we nominated Angle. Every political analyst knew Angle was the candidate Reid wanted to win the GOP nomination in 2010 Nevada, just like people who understood the situation knew Akin was the candidate Claire wanted to win the GOP nomination in 2012 Missouri.
Akin was NOT the ‘conservative’ choice
No, he was the socon choice from the Huckabee wing of the party. We'd have won that seat had the Tea Party candidate, Sarah Steelman, won the nomination.
but the people of that district made a judgement call.
Yes, a bad one (and one that can't be blamed on the "establishment"). Which was the point of my comments. Republican primary voters are throwing away too many seats on terrible candidates. I am not finger pointing at any single group, I am saying we need to be nominating the most conservative candidate that CAN actually win.
Sometimes it’s best to withdraw graciously from the field.
Well, let me say two things: First, I was giving the opinion of what my friends in SC say about that district, that it’s likely to be easy to win in 2016. Second, SC-1 is not at all like any of the disctricts you used as analogy.....nothing similar in any way, shape or form.
“So this is Tokyo Rove’s last stand.”
Yes, let’s hope you are right! That said, Rove IS RIGHT about Akin and Mourdock.
We need solid conservative candidates, not extreme right wing folks with loony views about social issues.
Rove marches from failure to failure and still they throw money at him. He represents the wing of the party that is determined to hold on even if that means always being in the minority. They want to use the minority status to put money into their pockets; to hell with the public good.
Impressive, ‘smessive. She is not Reid.
Sorry I’m not star struck enough for you.
LOL
...and your point would be? (you don’t have one, you’re making a straw argument.....)
He was on Fox News with the Trip fellow and he consistently got the numbers correct indicating a Romney loss.
He was also absolutely on target in Delaware.
In spite of his politics, he seems to be correct a lot
Baloney. He was on FOX News as the returns came in bawling his eyes out. This CAN’T BE RIGHT, he sobbed!!
JimRob is correct - and besides, crunching numbers and understanding messaging are two entirely different talents. As a direct mail geek, which Rove was for 19 years, he understands tactics but he is ignorant to big picture over all messaging trends. He is in tuned with the minutae, and blind to the zeitgeist.
Rove’s biggest sin is his contempt for the grassroots. His 2nd biggest sin is his misogyny and anger towards women.
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.