I think he has been labeled too decisive a figure. The man is a brilliant guy and President Bush owes him, robably more than anyone, for his 2 electoral wins, but I think a lot of the party (moderates) do not see him in a good light and do not think of him as a uniter.

I think it’s a question of whether he wants the job. If Karl Rove wants to run for Chair of the RNC, I would enthusiastically support him, but I’d need to hear it from him first.

He may decide not to for various reasons and I’d respect that, too. The main thing about my support for him is that I know how badly he’s been maligned (unfairly) and I also know that there is no person in this country who has a better grasp of electoral strategy on as fine grained a level as you’d like to look than Karl Rove.

Maybe he’s not the “face” the RNC would like to put forward; it could be that he’s better in a consulting capacity. It’s something people higher up the food chain will have to debate, including the person in question.

But I know that there isn’t anyone in this country who understands the electoral map better than Karl Rove does: he’s made it his lifetime pursuit, and he does it better than anyone else.

I knew Obama was going to win at 9:40 on election night when Karl Rove was on Fox talking about the outcomes in Ohio and Pennsylvania. It was over at that precise moment, and Brit Hume knew it also.

Now in terms of whether or not he’d get along with other people in the RNC or whether he’s the best “face” for the RNC to put forward, I suppose that’s something for others to debate. There’s no denying that on the basis of his deep knowledge he is qualified for the position.

look at 2000 and 2004. In 2000 Bush eked out, literally, the narrowest of EV victories and lost the popular vote. In 2004, as an incumbent president in a time of war, and against a really cruddy Dem opponent, Bush won the popular vote by just 2.4% (although his EV total was better).

I don’t think Rove’s incompetent by any means, but a lot of the hype seems unfounded.

I wonder what Rove is like behind the scenes.

Steven
http://thenewrepublicans.net – young Americans “reinventing” the Republican party

I like Rove. There is no one on our side of things who understands the numbers and elections the way that Rove does.

BUT Rove was not only the architect of 2000, 2002 and 2004, but he was also the architect of 2006. We reaped 2006 because of his approach to try to “win” votes with different demographics by trying to buy them.

He is a great analyst, but placing him as a leader is not a smart move.

If we are looking for a spokesperson for the Republican party, someone to appear on television and talking up the Republican party, Rove probably isn’t the right guy.

If we are looking for a strategist, than he could be the right guy.

I think taking the attitude that anyone associated with George W Bush should be dismissed as a RINO is a bad idea.

Think about it. Republican nominees of the past 40 years:

Richard Nixon (wage and price controls)

Gerald Ford (……)

Ronald Reagan (Great conservative)

George H W Bush (Read my lips, I am raising your taxes)

Bob Dole (The tax collector for the welfare state)

George W Bush

John McCain (I know how to reach across the aisle)

Among the people on that list, I think George W Bush comes in as the 2nd most conservative Republican.

Agree?

I believe Rove and his company are the ones who invented ways to determine who your “base” is so they could be more efficiently energized, things that Democrats have now copied.

Unfortunately he is also known for “push polling”, kind of a dirty trick, which was used against McCain in 2000 in Florida.

The party could sure use his intellect, but RNC head? I dunno…

When the democrats decided to pick Howard Dean it wasn’t just because of his strategy. It was because he was a big change from the past. A Rove chairmanship tells the country that the party is stuck in the Bush era, fair or not. He can be a part of strategy from the side lines. Time to pick a fresh face with a fresh idea.

I’m not allowed to user 90% of the words that come to mind upon contemplation of Karl Rove as RNC Chair.

Whatever might be said about his intellect, his planning, plotting, etc, what I shall always remember KR for are these elements of the Rovian strategy:

• Take away Dem talking points by enacting left-wing legislation — a la NCLB, Medicare Prescription, other huge-government plans.
• Hey W, ignore the critics, just don’t answer all those charges from the media. They’ll eventually go away. We’re above such low discourse.
• And while you are at it, don’t defend other Repubs when they come under attack. Don’t defend your nominees for the courts. Don’t defend the Iraq liberation. Don’t defend anything we do. There is PLENTY of room under your bus.

Rove.

Urickson.

Note that both are trailing behind “How to Avoid the Most Fattening Soups”. and “Is Obama the Anti-Christ?”

I didn’t say it; Newsweek said it.

…to run against Mary Landrieu in LA, we need a new face.

Landrieu was beatable. Here, McCain had coattails, so Kennedy, the least attractive candidate imaginable, ran relatively close.

Even though I run in pretty conservative circles, I knew not a soul who was an enthusiastic backer of Kennedy (a liberal D candidate for Senate in 2004, a 2004 Kerry backer, and a guy that’s been an R for about a year).

I wouldn’t mind seeing Rove or Ken Mehleman at the RNC. Perhaps not as Chairman but someone in the background that knows how to build a political machine. Let Steele be the Front guy and go on TV and raise money, but get some political gurus in raising a new RNC machine; including someone like Ruffini in charge of internet operations.

I agree with what he says in the Newsweek article (except I have questions about a “green” policy).

He has also demonstrated excellent communication skills in his many media appearances since exiting the WH staff. He cuts a sympathetic — not an abrasive –figure for his calm and intelligent reason ability.

I expect he would recruit and groom good candidates.

As I understand it, the RNC chair is selected by the President (if you are the party in power) or by the state GOP organizations. It is very likely to be someone from inside those organizations, which means it can be Steele, but can’t be Rove.

I’ve heard it stated that it is likely to remain Mike Duncan, who proved he can raise money effectively (the main job of the post). Neither Mitt or Fred are interested in the job (and I personally heard them say that).

Rove has a few assets. But Rove not only should be nowhere near a television camera, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power.

Rove’s brand of politics are to appeal to people’s basest emotions without trying to win over new converts to conservatism. He makes no attempts to win over new voters who could be considered conservatives, but goes with a blowtorch strategy that is simply designed to get 50% +1 more voter. People who might otherwise vote Republican are turned off, because he turns it into a black-and-white “with us or against us” meme.

Additionally, he doesn’t concern himself with policy or agenda. His only concern is winning, but there are times where you need to articulate why you want to win. He is the perfect example of what our problem was in the majority: you should try to gain power to advance an agenda, but instead he had it backwards and advanced an agenda to try to gain power.

So, emphatically, not just no, but heck no on any thoughts of Rove being in a position of power with the RNC.

And, believe it or not, I am asking a serious question.

There is no better person at picking apart, analyzing and even predicting the election numbers but as far as conservative principles go, I have no idea where he stands. I want an RNC Chairman who stands for and articulates conservative principles but the only thing I’ve ever seen Karl Rove stand for is getting his guy elected, no matter what.

He has stated he wants the job. We need new faces and new blood, and we have a great opportunity at this time to open the door to salvage conservatism in the Republican Party. I love Karl Rove, and we do need his skills, but get real! Put baby in a corner and lets get some fresh faces out there……and SOON!

Also here is something you all might find interesting.

http://www.minyanville.com/articles/GE-New-York-nws-nyt-washington/index/a/20024

Rhetorically, what effective person could we nominate that liberals would not categorize as being divisive or some other negative adjective? Hellooo, has anybody noticed our most effective advocates and leaders are demonized? Should we nominate another moderate, some hoary guy or other less effective person just to hold hands and sing Kumbaya? I don’t know about anyone else, but I have certainly had enough of the “we should be more like them, I am John McCain and I paid for this message” group. Crimeny, have we learned anything from the last election in which we were (spoiler ahead) trounced?

Karl Rove is a person that knows how to win, period. He is insightful, smart, measured and a realist. Listen when he talks about the issues, history, elections, tactics and communication. Karl is a general, not some wanna-be, demographic targeted, give-the-guy-his due, media chasing blowhard. He can organize across the spectrum from grass roots to corporations. Frankly, after those recitations do you really need to know why he is so hated by the left…anybody? He wins, darn it, period, full stop. Gosh, if I have to listen to another year of tripe being represented as sagacious campaigning and party strategy I will self immolate.

Karl is the guy who will work with us, real party leaders and other groups to develop a winning strategy. He gets my vote any day.

Time for the Conservative movement to move on! Time for a man like Michael Steele to CHAIR the RNC.

as I understand it. He was great at mining for votes where they already existed. That helped President Bush, who was very uncomfortable with communication, eke out two extremely narrow electoral victories. But we’ve mined about as many votes as we can where they already exist. Now we need to expand the Republican base, by converting Democrats and Independents. That’s a message and communications problem. I doubt a member of the Bush administration is the right person for that job.

Also, do we want someone with Rove’s views on immigration running the RNC?

from the Bush administration through his articles in Newsweek, WSJ and his commentary on Fox News. He has as much said that he did not agree with Bush’s policy of never addressing his critics, or some of his hiring decisions (e.g., Scott McClellan); so does anyone really know Rove’s policy stances?

I think now that he exhibiting a more public persona, we are beginning to see where he stands. I’m more in the Steele camp, but I don’t see Rove as a bad choice either.

He makes some good points, but like his old boss, he is clueless on immigration, and it doesn’t help that he keeps citing the bogus 44% in 2004 figure. Bush did not win 44% of the latino vote in 2004. He might have won as much as 40%, and that is good for a Republican, but it was still a double-digit loss to a lame opponent in John Kerry. It is very likely that Bush never even carried the Hispanic vote in his home state of Texas in any of his four races there.

John McCain was hurt by the drop in latino support, but not as much as he was hurt by his loss of white votes. Why do we hear so little about this from Rove, especially when the key to Bush’s victory in 2004 was increased turnout and support from white evangelicals.

It would also be nice if people like Rove would be honest about what they mean by a ‘guest worker program’ and ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’ With the former, the title is a cover for a new way to increase permanent legal immigration, while the latter means amnesty for illegals and large increases in permanent legal immigration.

The fact is that large-scale immigration was always going to be bad for the GOP. Mass immigration reinforces pretty much every factor that leads Hispanics (and now Asians too) to vote Democratic in the first place. If current demographic trends continue, then the GOP (as anything resembling a conservative vehicle) is doomed. It’s as simple as that. The best bet would have been to significantly reduce legal immigration while getting tough with illegal immigration. This would have no doubt led to a deeper collapse of support from Hispanics and other immigrant groups (thanks to the demagoguery of the Left and WSJ-style conservatives), and this would have likley lasted for many years, even decades perhaps. But eventually, the conservative-GOP message would have had a better chance to break through, and there would have been a demographic environment where the GOP at least had a chance. Now, with no end to mass immigration in sight, there is very little reason to think the GOP can hope to do better than minimize the degree of landslide by which they’ll lose the Hispanic vote.

Karl Rove by reputation is a terrific, brilliant strategist and, on a more personal level, from those who know him and who have commented to me, he is supposed to be a great guy. But he is not the right guy at the this time for the RNC.

First, I am troubled by the “reform” speak I hear in much of what he says. We, as Republicans, need to find our traditional base again, not reforming a message which we don’t understand ourselves at this moment.

Second, he will be villified by the press, despite his best efforts at rehabilitation in these past few months.

Third, he can serve us just as well in his strategist role behind the scenes, where his genius need not be front page news.

Karl Rove by reputation is a terrific, brilliant strategist and, on a more personal level, from those who know him and who have commented to me, he is supposed to be a great guy. But he is not the right guy at the this time for the RNC.

First, I am troubled by the “reform” speak I hear in much of what he says. We, as Republicans, need to find our traditional base again, not reforming a message which we don’t understand ourselves at this moment.

Second, he will be villified by the press, despite his best efforts at rehabilitation in these past few months.

Third, he can serve us just as well in his strategist role behind the scenes, where his genius need not be front page news.

If we are ever going to broaden the image of the GOP, this would be the time to start doing it. And Steele is a really good guy.

I like Rove, or at least I did, and I loved what he said about Biden to Deborah Solomon in the NYT. But I think his day has passed. Of course many would say Fred’s day has passed (EPU!! FRED!!!!) but I disagree. He has great things to offer the GOP and just has to find the perfect fit.

I vote for Steele. I would donate if it were Steele.

As a liberal, I don’t agree with much that Rove says. But, I can admit that he’s brilliant. When I’ve seen him on any of the news shows or Sunday morning talk shows, he has always come across as incredibly bright. He’s also very good at articulating specific points. And as others here have said, he doesn’t need to please me. He doesn’t even really need to please you. He has to get Republicans elected. I want a strong (well, not too strong) opposition Republican Party, because one-party rule is rarely successful for very long in this country. Rove may be the best choice to get Republicans through to the other side (2010 or perhaps 2012) in terms of limiting losses and turning the corner in the House and Senate.

, as opposed to knowing Jack Shi, if recent performance is any indication.

“Let me be clear, I have no idea how you become Chair of the Republican National Committee.”

Since the 2004 I have received the same
old repetitive fundraising letters from
the GOP. EVERY time they threatened my
with the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, and
finally Obama’s socialism.
A party that cannot stand up and fight for its values and has to go on the defense will never win.

We need a clean slate that is proud of
our conservative values, and willing to
start today on a positive, optimistic
slate highlighting conservative states
that are not calliling the government for
a bailout due to their governing.
They must accentuate the downfall of their democrat counterpart that are lined up at the government bailout line.

Our North Carolina grassroots was a disgrace. No wonder Libby Dole lost. No signs available until the last weeks for
Dole or McCain. Stupid balls dropped.

This starts from a lack of leadership at
the RNC and lack of a solid message. It’s time to regroup and utilize the
wisdom and intelligence of Karl Rove and
bring in the passion and energy and intelligence of an impassioned conservative

….we need Micheal Steele…..a man of true appeal and well spoken and one not easily dismissed by the Rats or the msm…..

why do we kick ourselves when we’re down?……why can’t we move ahead ala the Sarah Palin pick….truly out of the box and spot on?