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 ...
He’s got so many. It’s a looooong list.
“We need to be nominating the most conservative candidate that CAN win.”
Best post on this thread! Could not agree with you more. The Sheeple need to start doing their jobs too. I used to be involved in Conservative Politics here in CA with the CRA. When I was involved, you always had to be fendng off the local nutball candidate trying to get backing for his or her run. One of the major problems was centered around “religious groups” becoming major voting blocs in the CRA to facilitate “their candidates.” Personally, I find a Born Again Christian almost as much of a problem as a Muzzie. Neither should be allowed to bring their particular “theology” into the publc discourse. The vetting process needs serious improvement to avoid the Akins, Mourdocks, O’Donnells and Angles. Those people represent four Senate seats that we should now occupy. Somehow it needs to be impressed on the would be candidates that it isn’t about them, it’s about us.
no kidding.
Well, I seem to remember Obama having lower approval ratings than ANY president who had won re-election before at several points during the campaign. Still eviscerated moderate Romney though, because he got his zombies to the polls. I’m telling you if you don’t understand how Harry Reid wins elections, you don’t understand how Nevada works. Reid is an expert politician. I doubt we’ll beat him next time either.
I can’t disagree on Tod Akin. I would not have voted for him, because his record was not one of fiscal responsibility. BUT, Rove would not have backed the Tea Party or any real conservative. He would have put up a moderate, who would have lost too.
My point about Sanford is that he has not lost yet, so your whining is premature. You say the people of that district made a bad call, and maybe they did, but what would you prefer? Rove coming in and putting his money behind HIS preferred candidate?
Karl Rove’s goal is NOT to nominate the most conservative candidate who can win. His goal is to nominate the most moderate who can lose. It gets pretty damn frustrating when people focus on Akin, Angle, O’Donnell, and Sanford (how conservative is this guy anyway?). What about Allen, Berg, Rehberg, Romney, McCain, McMahon, Thompson, Harrington, an unknown number of House seats? Oh, I guess their moderate-ness had nothing to do with it. ‘Must have been a ‘wave election’ or some other bullshit from the Rovepedia of excuses.
Sometimes you have to take what you can get. We are not going to elect a conservative stalwart in Delaware right now. It’s just not going to happen. O’Donnell was not even electable and ended up losing by something like 18 points.
Democrats run fake “conservatives” and “moderates” in red states in order to deny us seats. They understand the importance of the vote for leadership. They know the likes of Pryor, Begich, Heitkamp, are going to vote against the party fairly regularly, but it’s worth it for them to deny us a seat. Those senators vote for Dem leadership and give them procedural votes as needed.
In Delaware in 2010 we could have denied the Democrats a seat. That’s the best we could do there at that time. We’d get a vote for our leadership and on most procedural votes. It’s really not that complicated, we need to be nominating the most conservative candidate that CAN win.
What?! Because Rove was soooo right about Crist. What a truckload of BS. I can’t understand how people continue to polish the turd that is Karl Rove.
Do you remember a Republican called Arlen Specter? Castle was the next Specter.
I’m sure they think that. I’d rather not be facing a dem - even a joke - as an incumbent when it’s no longer a joke. Chris Carney in PA is another one who survived until the wave. The point is not to concede a race assuming you’ll get it back.
“Personally, I find a Born Again Christian almost as much of a problem as a Muzzie”
Possibly the most retarded thing ever posted on FreeRepublic.
More RINOs?
There are still RINO-enablers creeping around unfortunately. They’ll be angry when Graham gets primaried.
More RINOS = More consulting dollars and kickbacks
Yep, but this is how they’re seeing the silver lining - the cloud is the cloud, and likely caused by Sanford trying to make a comeback way too soon. I mean, I hope he wins, but I never ever thought it was the right time for his comeback. His whole situation was so bizarre and so recent that it was a foregone conclusion that the entire race would be about that. That’s not what we needed to fill Tim Scott’s seat.
When was Rove ever right about Crist?
“O’Donnell is far more impressive than given credit for, and it literally would have been a disaster to nominate Castle....”
You are right about Castle, but it was equally disastrous to nominate O’Donnell. People like her have issues that are important to them that are not important to the electorate, and in some cases those “personal issues” are counterproductive to being elected (Can you say Todd Akin)? While religion was an issue for Romney, he tried not to make it so which is more than can be said for the failed candidates that have been mentioned in this thread.
But he did win the primary pretty convincingly, didn’t he?
I would only quibble around the edges with you on this- that being the fact that many of O’Donnells personal problems were merely the typical “life is tough” stuff that we all go thru. Life is easy on the goverrnment dole, and that includes elected officials and government bureaucrats. The rest of us have to face the real world, and its not always easy.
Sorry, we're all over the board here....who are we talking about?
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.