Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Karl Rove Says Florida Will Be 'Ground Zero' in 2004 Election
HeraldTribune.com ^ | 8/13/03 | AP

Posted on 08/13/2003 5:58:48 AM PDT by NYC Republican

Karl Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, says Florida will play a crucial role in the president's re-election strategy next year.

Rove, in an interview with editors and reporters of The News Herald of Panama City, said the campaign strategy in Florida would be a combination of "brotherly love" - a reference to the president's younger brother, Gov. Jeb Bush - and an effort to "register, identify and turn out our vote."

"This clearly is going to be ground zero," Rove said in the interview, published in Wednesday's editions. Rove has been vacationing in northwest Florida, where he has been making trips for the past 16 years.

Florida, now with 27 electoral votes, decided the 2000 presidential election and is expected to be a battleground state next year.

Rove said the strategy would not likely change if Florida Sen. Bob Graham was on the Democratic ticket - as the presidential or vice presidential nominee.

"Frankly we're not focused on it," he said.

Rove said the Bush administration understands the frustrations of military families who are anxious for the return of their loved ones in Iraq. But he said the protracted stays of many service members are a result of a military "stretched thin."

"Our military, when it gets into Afghanistan and Iraq, is taxed," he said.

Rove said the administration is committed to the rebuilding of Iraq and hopes by this time next year to have "a country clearly on the road toward a democratic, market-oriented, secular state."


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: gwb2004
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: Brilliant; NYC Republican
RE post #3 - I agree, as I think GW will win FL with no problem. Gov Bush is very popular, and the state has been doing well, especially when compared with other states. It will be a win for GW. Hands down.
21 posted on 08/13/2003 6:53:05 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
Joe, Thanks for the ping. I meant to ping you on my post #21. :)
22 posted on 08/13/2003 6:54:16 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hemogoblin; Joe Brower
Re post #7 - Yes; the FL Dem Party is basically
non-existent at this point. I too think Nov 2002 proved that.
23 posted on 08/13/2003 6:55:35 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Bush has taken a harsh anti-veteran stance; veterans come lower than practically anything you can spend money on in Bush's agaenda. There are a lot of veterans in Florida, not a few of whom, to be sure, are pissed. Either Bush straightens up and flies right with veterans, or they vote for the other freak.
24 posted on 08/13/2003 7:05:53 PM PDT by mathurine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
Lucky us. At least we're sperienced.
25 posted on 08/13/2003 8:31:57 PM PDT by floriduh voter (President Backbone's Got My Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mathurine
Examples?
26 posted on 08/13/2003 8:35:05 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Politics is war. I think that's why KR said ground zero. At least hanging Chad moved to California. I wonder if any of the candidates wlil demand a recount.
27 posted on 08/13/2003 8:35:52 PM PDT by floriduh voter (President Backbone's Got My Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Now I'm craving cake, but not yellow cake.
28 posted on 08/13/2003 8:37:13 PM PDT by floriduh voter (President Backbone's Got My Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
If all the states go the same way that they did in 2000, I think Bush gets 278 or 279 EVs. This is because of redistricting. So I think he could lose WV and still win with just the same states. And while the Democratic candidate isn't known, I think Bush should win Florida relatively easily: look at how much Jeb won by. However, there are a few other states that Bush could win. Oregon, New Mexico, Minnesota and Washington were all fairly narrow margins for Gore. I think Bush could also have a shot in Pennsylvania. Of course, if Bush won Pennsylvania, he could probably lose Florida and still win the presidency. West Virginia is probably the most difficult state for Bush to win this time, although New Hampshire probably isn't going to be that easy either. Changing demographics might make Nevada reachable for the Dems, depending on their candidate and their message. Too liberal of a candidate, and I doubt they have a chance. I don't think Edwards and Graham would have much pull in the south. Graham would probably make Florida very competitive, but I don't think Edwards would even make North Carolina that competitive. As Veeps, I don't think Edwards could do much, but Graham could still make Florida competitive. I don't think Gephardt would make Missouri all that competitive, since he's never won statewide there.
29 posted on 08/13/2003 8:45:33 PM PDT by Koblenz (There's usually a free market solution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
In the 2000 election, Hillsborough County, Florida, was called Ground Zero by the Republicans because of the necessity of getting a large turnout in the Tampa area for Republicans to offset South Florida.

The name "Ground Zero" is a carryover from that election.
30 posted on 08/13/2003 8:53:45 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (VOTE FOR ARNOLD -- GOP's Best Chance to Tank Hillary for 2004 and beyond!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer; Brilliant; NYC Republican
"Yes; the FL Dem Party is basically non-existent at this point. I too think Nov 2002 proved that."

I beg to differ, summer. From my work in the last two elections, I learned in no uncertain terms that they get quite rabid, not to mention how they will pull every dirty trick in the book that they think they can get away with.

Do not underestimate you enemies -- nothing will hand them the battle more quickly. And they are enemies, and this is a battle. Those are the rules of engagement as defined by them.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

31 posted on 08/13/2003 8:54:55 PM PDT by Joe Brower (The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
In the 2000 election, Hillsborough County, Florida, was called Ground Zero by the Republicans because of the necessity of getting a large turnout in the Tampa area for Republicans to offset South Florida. The name "Ground Zero" is a carryover from that election.

Yep, I realize that, but I can't help but think that the Dems will try to use it against us, by saying that we're trying to politicize the WTC disaster (which is also called "Ground Zero".

32 posted on 08/13/2003 8:58:11 PM PDT by NYC Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
In all that time, I never heard a single story of any single voter who claimed to not vote because of the early call. Not only that, I never even heard of any rumor of anyone who 'had a friend' or 'knew of someone' who didn't vote.

"Bob Glass, (a Pensacola resident and owner of Windshield Express) who had been such a true believer that he manned a phone bank to implore others to vote for Bush,...decided not to exercise his sacred right to vote for President of the United States."

"'What's the use?,' he reasoned. 'I mean if Gore has already won the state, there's no use in voting for Bush. I was so infuriated. I was so distraught. And I just went home.'"

< snip >

"'By prematurely declaring Gore the winner shortly before polls had closed in Florida's conservative western panhandle, the media ebded up suppressing the Republican vote,' concluded John R. Lott, Jr., senior research scholar at Yale University Law School. Lott put Bush's net loss at a 'conservative estimate of 10,000 votes'."

"John McLaughlin and Associates, a Republican polling firm in Washington, D.C., pegged the loss at 11,500 votes."

- Bill Sammon, At Any Cost, Regnery Publishing, 2001. pp 18-19.

33 posted on 08/13/2003 9:45:51 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (http://righteverytime.blogspot.com - home to Tall_Texan's new column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan; capt. norm
Bob Glass, (a Pensacola resident and owner of Windshield Express) who had been such a true believer that he manned a phone bank to implore others to vote for Bush,...decided not to exercise his sacred right to vote for President of the United States."

Bob Glass was so dedicated to the cause that he didn't find time to vote during the day, waited until the last minute, and then didn't vote? Not likely.

You mean with congressional seats and other offices up for grabs, this dedicated man didn't vote? I don't buy it. John McLaughlin and Associates, a Republican polling firm in Washington, D.C., pegged the loss at 11,500 votes."

And I say hogwash.

The conventioanl wisdom was the Bush would win handly, especially in the panhandle. I can believe that there were at least 12,000 registered voters who weren't concerned about voting enought to actually make it a priority in their day. In the panhandle, traffic and lines are not a problem. Polling places are easy to get to and lines are mild, if at all, during most of the day. So suppose that you are one of those who thought Bush would win handily and didn't vote. Now you find out that the election is extremely close and mayber you feel a bit guilty. Next a Republican polling firm asks you if you were cheated out of voting by the national media. Do you tell them A)that you didin't vote because of apathy and carelessness; or B) do you save face and tell what they want to hear?

Putting Pensacola, Crestview, FWB, and Destin all together even including Hurlbert, Eglin, and PNAS together I don't believe that there were 10,000 cheated voters.

As I stated before, I went to supervise ballot openings and counting; I went to rallies; I met Party officials and activists; I met Freepers; I was all over the papers, TV and Radio for news and I never heard of a cheated voter, I never met any cheated voters, I never met anyone who claimed to know first or second hand of any cheated voters. The cheated voters didn't make it to TV, the paper, or the radio.

Yet there were a few cases of mishandled absentee ballots by Democratic party operatives. That made the paper and radio talk shows.

It defies common sense that one or two cases of absentee ballots being mishandled would make the news yet 11,000 cheated voters didn't.

Perhaps there were some. Perhaps.

Were there thousands and thousands that could have voted earlier in the day but didn't and then regretted it? Absolutely. Did those that were polled save face by telling the pollsters that they were cheated? I believe so. Makes more sense.

I've had this discussion before on FR and you'll probably be like the others who will believe people from the outside with an agenda to prove vs someone living and working there without the same agenda.

Oh, norm, think about it. I'm going to the rallies and ballot countings. What is my agenda by denying the idea of 10,000 cheated voters?

34 posted on 08/14/2003 6:06:17 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (There ought to be a law against excessive legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
The television station I work for here had its switchboard jammed with calls when it was announced that Gore won Florida and complaining that there, as yet un-cast, vote would be meaningless.

I don't doubt your stats. But episodic results from wherever derived produce only a snapshot at best.

35 posted on 08/14/2003 7:50:26 AM PDT by capt. norm (How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Putting Pensacola, Crestview, FWB, and Destin all together even including Hurlbert, Eglin, and PNAS together I don't believe that there were 10,000 cheated voters. As I stated before, I went to supervise ballot openings and counting; I went to rallies; I met Party officials and activists; I met Freepers; I was all over the papers, TV and Radio for news and I never heard of a cheated voter, I never met any cheated voters, I never met anyone who claimed to know first or second hand of any cheated voters. The cheated voters didn't make it to TV, the paper, or the radio.

You should have come to Panama City (Panhandle's second largest city off-season/ largest on-season). Unless you could find a really good hidiing place, you couldn't miss it.

I also was all over the media as I do both radio and television news here for a living and had a generous supply of the data you couldn't find.

I hope this wasn't a "forest & trees" situation.

I'm goiing to mention your post on the air the next time the subject comes up aand we'll see what happens.

36 posted on 08/14/2003 7:57:41 AM PDT by capt. norm (How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: capt. norm
The television station I work for here had its switchboard jammed with calls when it was announced that Gore won Florida and complaining that there, as yet un-cast, vote would be meaningless.

I'm sure that the switchboards were jammed, and rightly so.

However, are you saying that people were complaining about uncast votes being meaningless or THEIR uncast votes being menaingless?

It's going to take a lot to convince me that there were tens of thousands of voters who honestly and sincerely were going to vote and didn't because of the networks.

The problem is that Republicans WANT to believe that this is the case, just like the NAACP WANTS to believe that the FSP was roadblocking blacks to keep them from voting.

You'd think that if half of those cheated voters existed that I'd have run into at least one person (besides you) who claimed to be cheated or actually knew someone who made the claim.

Heck, it's easier to find libertarians in the panhandle than cheated Republicans!!

37 posted on 08/14/2003 8:09:54 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (There ought to be a law against excessive legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Personally, if I was a dedicated voter (which I am), I wouldn't have left it up to the last minute to cast a vote. What happens if you get a flat tire or you get called to an emergency? Personally, I'd rather get my ass out of bed early and be there when the polls open so I've spent maybe 30 minutes voting rather than to get there just before closing time and wait for two hours - but obviously a lot of people do that or there wouldn't be the long lines at closing time.

And surely somebody in that long line is listening to a walkman or watchman and is going to speak up if he hears the networks have already called the election. Now, standing in line for two hours seems like a waste of time. But you said you had heard not one story. I provided one. I gave you the name of his auto glass repair business. If you want to verify it, look up the number and ask to speak to Bob Glass. If Bill Sammon was lying in his book, I'd like to know. That way you can either be convinced that at least one person (and probably more) really did choose not to vote after being told the state was won or you can disprove it by finding out if the story is a fraud. As for the 10,000 figure, I too find that a little tough to swallow but would it have mattered if it was 1,000 or 500? It might have been enough of a difference to have convinced Gore not to prolong the election for over a month. Sammon points out that the difference would not have changed the law requiring an automatic statewide recount but it could have prevented the month-long shenanigans we all suffered through and might have saved you additional days of work and frustration as well. I think you owe it to yourself to look up Bob Glass in Pensacola and find out the truth. I hope to hear back on this.

38 posted on 08/14/2003 8:59:18 AM PDT by Tall_Texan (http://righteverytime.blogspot.com - home to Tall_Texan's new column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
"You'd think that if half of those cheated voters existed that I'd have run into at least one person (besides you) who claimed to be cheated or actually knew someone who made the claim. Heck, it's easier to find libertarians in the panhandle than cheated Republicans!! "

You obviously weren't looking in the right place.

Reminds me of the State Dept. official that went to niger to see if Iraq had tried to buy any "yellow cake" uranium ore and spent several days sipping spiced tea but never found any evidence.

And, yes, these people were complaining about their own votes. Some had actually voted and by the time they got back in their car they heard on the radio that their votes meant nothing. These aren't the kind of people who really care about the other guy's vote. They are Conservative Democrats who have only recently started to vote Republican.

A lot of them weren't so much concerned that Gore was taking the state as they were about their own votes having an effect.

The Bay County Sheriff's Ofice (they observe the polling places) reported (I have their spokesman on video-tape) that people standing in the lines were going back to their cars and leaving when the word started to spread.

It was headline news here...sorry you missed it.

39 posted on 08/14/2003 9:12:17 AM PDT by capt. norm (How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Libertina
The veterans groups have a litany of problems, and I personally share three or four of them. If you are not aware that Bush treats veterans poorly, then you are probably not a veteran, or are a rich veteran who doesn't give a squat about anyone else, anyway. However, I will swop my service committed disabilities for your largesse if you are already rich. (Especially if you will swop your future longevity for mine In view of my service connected disabilities. Bush personally doesn't owe me, I got mine serving other commanders in chief-- the veterans he will owe will be showing up later. But Bush certainly will not get my vote next time, as he did before, and he certainly will have my opposition if he does not do the right thing on veterans issuues he absolutely knows about.
I'm happy to live in a state that should be quite a swing state in the next election, since it went Republican in the last election whereas it seldom has before; and I will be voting this time as a veteran, not as a partisan like I usually have done-- and if Bush does not support veterans I will be voting against him and campaigning against him, which will cost him some more votes, I am sure.
40 posted on 08/16/2003 7:37:36 PM PDT by mathurine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson