Karl Rove

by: tommy harper

Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 18:16:37 PM CST

( - promoted by mooncat)

Rove validates Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. Too bad the Dems have moved away from it.

"I hate to say it, but we need to copy what Howard Dean did, and that is make our ground game in all 50 states," Rove told Sean Hannity on Monday. "While we had a reasonably good ground game in places like Ohio and Florida -- look, we didn't have a ground game in a lot of these states with Senate races and so we lost North Dakota by 3,300 votes. We lost [Montana] by 17,000 votes. We need to have a better ground game in all 50 states."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/13/karl-rove-howard-dean-strategy_n_2122459.html

tommy harper :: Karl Rove

Tags: 50 State Strategy, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Share |

Karl Rove | 3 comments

Rove's a con artist whose con got exposed last week (0.00 / 0)

He spent $300 million plus of conservative money and didn't win a single race. This week he's desperately casting around for good ideas to make him sound smart again -- and found Howard Dean's 50 state strategy.

I like how he praised the GOP ground game in Ohio and Florida -- seem to recall they lost both states.

Work harder and work smarter!

by: mooncat @ Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 17:59:30 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Howard Dean does not get enough credit (4.00 / 1)

While he's way to liberal for my tastes, he had a great strategy for 2008. It's hard to get any coattail action if the top candidate has no presence in an opposition state.

by: jthomas666 @ Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 15:11:09 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Swing state voters actually see competing visions of the future (0.00 / 0)

... thanks to their importance in presidential elections. As a result, they are far more likely to have two healthy parties instead of a single dominant one. Look at Ohio, for example: Senators Sherrod Brown (D) and Rob Portman (R) couldn't be further apart ideologically, yet they represent the same electorate. Or Florida, with Senators Marco Rubio (R) and Bill Nelson (D). Even in Missouri, Claire McCaskill (D) was elected statewide just like wingnut Roy Blunt (R). Here in Alabama we have Richard Shelby and his less intelligent twin, Jeff Sessions -- in large part because there is no competition of ideas, visions or anything else. Everyone assumes the Republican will win so why bother?

I don't know which comes first, an electorate willing to listen to both sides or robust campaigns from both sides, but we need that competition to ensure a healthy democracy. Howard Dean thought campaigning for every district could sway opinion as well as votes, hence his 50 State Strategy. In a world of sufficient resources, I suspect that would be the norm. Question is, with corporate cash lining up on the other side, can Democrats afford to compete everywhere? Or is that a reason to say we can't afford NOT to compete everywhere?

Work harder and work smarter!

by: mooncat @ Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 15:46:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]