You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Rove: GOP could take Senate in 2014 if it avoids self-destructive candidates
2013-05-02
[THEHILL] Former Bush adviser and GOP strategist Karl Rove says Republicans have a good chance of taking the Senate from Democrats in 2014 if they avoid nominating the types of candidates who stumbled badly in once competitive 2012 races.
I have a good chance of becoming slender and svelte if I avoid pie.
...and if you avoid telling everyone that you're really not a witch...
"Republican success will depend on having quality Senate candidates," Rove wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday. "Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock self-destructed last fall, and other candidates squandered important opportunities."

Former Rep. Todd Aiken (R-Mo.) lost his Senate challenge to vulnerable incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) after controversial comments about "legitimate rape" sunk his campaign.Similarly, Tea Party favorite Richard Mourdock (R-Ind.) lost to Rep. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) in a red state after numerous gaffes, including a comment about pregnancy from rape being "something that God intended."

Republicans would need to net six seats in 2014 to take control of the upper chamber. Democrats presently hold the Senate 55 to 45, but will be defending 21 seats versus Republicans who will only be defending 14.

Rove said he's optimistic the GOP will hold all 14 of its seats, "unless a candidate ill-suited for the general election sneaks through the primary." He pointed to more than a dozen pick-up opportunities for Republicans in states where incumbent Democrats are retiring, where GOP nominee Mitt Romney won in 2012, or where strong candidates have already been identified as strong challengers in a winnable race.
Posted by:Fred

#10  The GOP wins the Senate but loses or pars vee the House + State Governator-ships IS STILL A DEFEAT.

Iff one believes that the US is being non-electorally driven or committed toward subornment under OWG-NWO, "Globalism", Global Fed "Unions" + related then by extens one should expect that the Bammer's successor come Jan 2017 - GOP or DEM - M-U-S-T be another alleged Marxist-Anarchist-Globalist.

The US-World Economy will continue to suffer BY DESIGN/INTENT until such time the US is firmly entrenched under the above.

E.G. DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, FREEREPUBLIC > US FEDERAL RESERVE BLAMES CONGRESS SEQUESTER CUTS [fiscal policies] FOR ECONOMIC WOES.

My bad vibes as per CHINA-VS-JAPAN-VS-DEBT/SEQUESTER-RIDDEN-USA just keeps getting worse.

* GLOBAL TIMES > OPED: "BIRTHER" LUNACY LEAVES ALL REPUBLICANS PAINTED AS [decadent wealthy capitalist elitist snobby]RACIST CROCKPOTS.

Apparently the GOP-Right + mainstream America = Amerika are crazy for thinking that under [post-2015?] OWG-NWO Americans may have to follow the diktat of OWG NAU, ETC. LEADERS WHOM HAVE LITTLE OR NO LINKS TO AMERICA, WERE NOT BORN, RAISED, OR NEVER RESIDED IN AMERICA, NOR EVAR! GAVE ALLEGIANCE + PLEDGE OF DUTY TO SAME,.....@ETC???

DEM LOONIES DEY ARE!

I'm telling Guam locals that iff China refuses to back down + a mil conflict breaks out in Asia andor East Asia, THAT IT MAY BE TOO LATE FOR THE PEOPLE OF GUAM TO EXERCISE ANY FORM = POLITICAL OPTION OF SELF-DETERMINATION [Statehood, Independence, Status quo, Free Association], AS SUCH WILL BE FINALLY DETERMINED BY WHOM WINS THE US-VS-CHINA, OR US-VS-CHINA-VS-NUCLEAR-ISLAM, STRUGGLE FOR DOMINATION + HEGEMONY IN ASIA-PACIFIC.

As illustrated by Pudgy = NOKOR's rants, CHINA is slowly but steadily getting ready to challenge the US position in Asia-Pacific, from East-SOuth Asia thru WESTPAC or CENTPAC.

RIGHT BEHIND THEM IS RADICAL ISLAM + NUCLEAR GLOBAL JIHAD, WHEN THEY ARE READY.

And thus, Virgina, we learn once again why, as it retreated or fell back across the Pacific, the USA decided to sink strategic Pacific Islands, etc. E.G. GUAM using "TECTONIC/
EARTHQUAKE BOMBS" IN ORDER TO DENY UTILITY TO ITS ENEMIES.

SILLY MORIARITY THOUGHT THE PHRASE "GUAM WILL CAPSIZE" WAS JUST SOMETHING A US CONGRESSCRITTER RANDOMLY SAID IN FUN.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-05-02 23:24  

#9  approved by the same people who betrayed Sarah Palin, McCain and told Romney to 'go easy'....
Posted by: CrazyFool   2013-05-02 16:28  

#8  Rove: GOP could take Senate in 2014 if it avoids self-destructive candidates

Beltway Newspeak translation - only pick Donk Lite candidates approved by the Beltway Party machine.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2013-05-02 15:58  

#7  Partisan coverage. Joe Biden has said more stoopid and unknowingly insulting stuff in the last 5 years than the entire Republican party
Posted by: Frank G   2013-05-02 14:23  

#6  "Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock self-destructed last fall, and other candidates squandered important opportunities."

Considering that we have current legislators of all stripes saying stupid things (and getting a pass), it would seem that the differences are:

1. What party the candidate belongs to. Party affiliation also affects how the candidate will be perceived and treated by the media, but there's more. Democrats will not let just anyone off the street run for office as a Democrat. The Democrats in California for example, have a farm-team system where they find, select, and groom people for higher office. The Republicans generally don't; they'll let new people run and let them succeed and fail on their own. We won't talk about Libertarians.

2. Who the candidate's handlers and campaign management team are and much much experience they have. A candidate can be coached on how to act at a press conference or media event (it isn't easy for amateurs).

3. Whether or not there is a local media willing to give a rank amateur candidate the benefit of the doubt. Again, Party affiliation affects how the candidate will be perceived and treated by the media.

4. Lastly, whether or not the candidate's party at all levels is willing to go to bat for that candidate once they become the frontrunner. Again, the Democrats tend to not let just anyone run in the first place. For the Republicans, when it comes to Tea Party or non GOP-selected candidates, the answer appears to be "no".

What it means is the system tends to discourage average citizens from running for office and encourage 'professional politicans'.
Posted by: Pappy   2013-05-02 13:41  

#5  The only problem is that Rove's choices would vote with the Democrats on most issues.
Posted by: AlanC   2013-05-02 12:09  

#4  When will Rove self-destruct?
Posted by: no mo uro   2013-05-02 11:57  

#3  The Trunks should also avoid spending their money on consultants like Karl Rove.
Posted by: lord garth   2013-05-02 11:55  

#2  Helen, please send in the next architect.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-05-02 11:54  

#1  I'm willing to lose a race or two if it means more Senators like Cruz, Lee and Rand.
Posted by: Iblis   2013-05-02 11:37  

00:00