Replies

"I think Rove is may actually be more ideologically grounded then Newt, I just think their most gifted talents or the ones they have displayed the brightest are in different areas."

Rove strikes me as someone who is willing to jettison a commitment to limited government if it means growing the GOP's appeal. Of course, that may be more Bush than Rove, but I see it as a little of both. Newt attempts to find a way to communicate Republican ideals to a broader range of people without as much compromise.

"Rove with obvious talents in organizing resources behind elections appears more pragmatic, because figuring out which areas to concentrate on and which to exclude is by nature pragmatic."

I believe that his talent lies more in this area BECAUSE he is more pragmatic than ideological in orientation.

"Newt with obvious talents in formulating policy in concise popular terms appears more ideologically grounded because formulating policy is by nature ideological."

As with Rove, Newt's talents suit his temperament. In short, Newt excels in an area that "is by nature ideological", BECAUSE he tends to be ideologically inclined.

"Rove strikes me as someone who is willing to jettison a commitment to limited government if it means growing the GOP's appeal. Of course, that may be more Bush than Rove, but I see it as a little of both. Newt attempts to find a way to communicate Republican ideals to a broader range of people without as much compromise."

Those are valid insightful points, and I don't disagree. I still believe that Rove is ideologically grounded (hard to compare what level with other people), however his job objective/title of winning elections masks or covers his ideology/philosophy.

Politics actually needs both and I believe the struggle between pragmatism and ideology is often the root of many (interparty) debates. There are some things which one should never obviously never compromise on. If one was never pragmatic about where to put resources and careful about which battles to fight, one's philosophy or part of one's philosophy would never be implemented. I believe that when compromising one's ideology as an attempt to get part of it implemented that one should explain their ideology/philosophy and reasons why it is better. This is an area were Republicans have much room for improvement.