As with Bush, Rove focuses like a laser on battles, just to lose the entire war.
Neither has foresight nor depth of long term consequences for their decisions.
2007-10-19 07:31:23 · 17 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Good for Bush, while he was there anyway, bad for most of the rest of the country!
2007-10-19 07:34:16 · answer #1 · answered by fairly smart 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He won the only way Republicans can, by using social issues. They have been the party of the capitalist from the beginning but because of their position on slavery they had majority support. By 1930 they had become a minority party but the Vietnam war, social change in the 1960 and Roe vs Wade gave them an opening which they used very effectively. The support of the civil rights movement by the Johnson broke hold the Democrats on the south, the role of the Democrats in both starting and ending the Vietnam war made them untrustworthy to keep the peace and defend America, and abortion upset the fundamentalist Christians. Karl Rove did not invent the strategy, he was just an effective practitioner of it. Any long term damage to the party was done by the Iraq war not Rove. It has undermined one of the key Republicans advantages, that is the perception that they are better able to keep the peace, and not get involved costly foreign adventures.
2007-10-19 09:10:16 · answer #2 · answered by meg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the long term, Karl Rove *is* the republican party.
2007-10-19 07:35:59 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He was good for Bush. Bush's Brain, the Spinmaster, did what he had to do to get Bush elected twice. That doesn't make him good for our country. In the end, Bush aside, he has hurt the Republican Party. But at least his boy Bush received the benefits of his special brand of assassination politics.
2007-10-19 07:49:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good points.
However, Rowe also adopted a "scorched earth" political strategy, based on wedge issues, divisiveness, smear tacts, etc. That kind of thing hass very little long term appeal. After a while, everyone catches on and it simply discredits the speaker. Which is precisely what has happened to the GOP.
2007-10-19 07:46:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I could care less about the Republican party.
Speaking on Bush and Rove...they will have matching pitchforks in hell....
2007-10-19 07:36:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rove was destructive to America, not just the Republicans.
2007-10-19 07:35:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
sixty 9% of Hispanic electorate who DO vote vote Democratic, yet what with regard to the indisputable fact that a extensive proportion of the Hispanic would not vote? look on the congressional races of Texas that purely befell 2 months in the past and look on the uncooked variety of votes that have been solid interior the districts of southern Texas (all of that are Hispanic-majority) and evaluate that to the uncooked variety of votes solid interior the Anglo-majority districts in necessary and northerly Texas. and be conscious that Republicans purely gained 2 of the races in those Hispanic-majority districts!
2016-12-18 11:57:04 · answer #8 · answered by eisenhauer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Awful. He alienated a lot of people with his policies. The democrats will take years to forgive the repulicans, all the while decent republicans are getting disgusted with the party and are leaving the republican party.
2007-10-19 07:41:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Rove destroyed the Republican part. He infected it with the religious right.
The religious right is destroying the US.
Carl Sagan was right. We are heading towards another dark ages, where folklore and not science is used.
2007-10-19 07:41:28 · answer #10 · answered by joe s 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Karl Rove is a genius.
2007-10-19 07:41:41 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋