Bush political strategist Karl Rove (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove) is on record claiming the GOP loss this past election wasn't that bad (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061113/13rove.htm). Some Republicans disagree, understandably so. However, they're only looking at the score. What about the spread?
By all rights, the Republicans should have gotten pounded. In reality, they didn't lose that many seats. Were it not for the unforeseen scandals that shook the Conservative Christian base, the GOP might have held their lead. Rove's assessment then appears more rational than rosy.
Furthermore, a long-term strategist would have foreseen this turn of sentiment by understanding the inherent fickleness of the general public. The GOP was due for a hit, if not a loss, this year. It is likely this desire for change will only increase in 2008, making for a rough election season for Republican poster boys, particularly in the race for the Presidency.
I daresay only a perceived maverick (http://mccain.senate.gov/) of a Republican could hope to keep the White House red. Such a candidate could campaign on a platform of change without changing parties. It would let voters have their cake and eat it too. If only this candidate had made a deal with Bush and Rove in 2004 to endorse him then in exchange for campaign support in 2008. Then his place in the White House would be secure and Rove could still be heralded as a brilliant but evil political genius. | 
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home