Media: Tea Party upset with Rove because he “Wins”?

 

You have really gotta *love* the remnants of the mainstream media.  Check out this piece of reporting by John Drescher’s shih-tzu:

kro

[…] House Speaker Thom Tillis of Cornelius, meanwhile, hosts a noon fundraiser at Bank of America Stadium with former White House adviser Karl Rove. Rove has angered many conservatives by promising to help Republicans nominate candidates electable in a general election, and a protest is planned during his appearance. […]

Let’s see.  TEN of twelve of his Senate candidates in 2012 LOST.  Rove worked against Ted Cruz in Texas, Rand Paul in Kentucky, Marco Rubio in Florida, and Mike Lee in Utah — obviously siding with somebody else who was, um, “electable.”   

Rove saddled us with the *dynamic* Elizabeth Dole to replace the legendary Jesse Helms.  He led George W. Bush’s uninspiring lots-closer-than-they-should-have-been races in 2000 and 2004. Rove was at Bush’s right hand when (1) the DC GOP lurched into a spending spree that ended the party’s 12 year reign on Capitol Hill; (2) the size and scope of government exploded during GOP control of the executive and legislative branches, arguably leading to the Obama era;  and (3) bureaucratic meddling led to the financial crisis and the disastrous bailouts.

I believe the Tea Party’s animus toward Rove has to do with all that as well as THIS: 

Karl Rove has founded a new group designed not to beat Democrats, but to destroy a wing of his own coalition: the Tea Party. […]

3 thoughts on “Media: Tea Party upset with Rove because he “Wins”?

  1. It is not just the Tea Party upset with Rove. Rove is an anti-conservative and is at war with the whole conservative movement. He is constantly taking squishy positions on issues like supporting amnesty for illegal aliens and refusing to fight to defund Obamacare. He is also constantly opposing conservative candidates and supporting squish candidates.

    Rove is not alone as a squishy establishment GOP force. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) has been doing exactly the same thing. Conservatives need to avoid giving to the NRSC and give to effective conservative groups like the Club for Growth, the Senate Conservatives Fund, and the Madison Project instead, or directly to sound candidates.

    Rove got a lot of his squishy candidates – they are such bow-wows that we should call them ”Rovers” – nominated in 2012, in races we should have won, but most of them lost. There was a good video up on the Club for Growth site (it may still be there) showing the Club’s president demolishing Rove on this ”electability” issue in a televised debate.

    A very good example is the North Dakota elections in 2012. ND is a state Romney carried and it had an open Senate seat plus its lone statewide House seat was also open. It is a good comparision of the electability of conservatives as opposed to RINO’s as the Senate nominee was a Rove and NRSC backed RINO, and the House nominee was a Club for Growth backed staunch conservative. The House candidate ran on red meat conservative issues, while the Senate candidate talked about being bi-partisan and reaching across the aisle. Rove poured in more money for his guy than the Club did for its candidate. When the votes were counted on election day, the conservative House candidate won by a healthy margin, but the squishy Rove backed Senate candidate lost to a Democrat.

    North Carolina needs to tell Rove to take a hike. We know the type of candidate who wins, and it is not a squishy corrupt Rover like Tilli$.

  2. Anyone with two brain cells should run as far away from Karl Rove as possible. The guy is toxic and is completely out of touch with what real Americans believe and want. If he is the face of the GOP we can plan on losing election after election, and finding fewer wanting to be engaged with another member of the so called “ruling class” that Rove thinks he belongs.

    Rove needs to retire to somewhere and leave the rest of us alone. He’s only slightly better than the liberals he reviles.

Comments are closed.