by Mark Silva
Karl Rove, "architect'' of President Bush's two winning presidential election campaigns, suggested today that the historic nature of the campaigns of both Democratic Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York work in their favor.
“Americans are looking for a way to break barriers,'' Rove said In an interview with National Public Radio's Tell Me More. "They would love to elect a woman president; they would love to elect an African-American president. And to the degree that either gender or race plays into this race, it plays far more in a positive direction than it does in a negative direction.”
Rove also told show host Michel Martin this about the outcome of New Hampshire's primary elections, in which Obama closely trailed Clinton after polling as the front-runner in pre-primary surveys following Obama's upset over Clinton in the premier Iowa caucuses:
"Let’s not have Obama suffer for the mistakes of the pollsters. If you talk to political pros, you would find that there was pretty solid agreement that it’s really tough to poll a primary.
"And particularly a primary in a state like New Hampshire where they are not just simply voters, but active players in the drama, and they know it,'' Rove said "So, you know, Senator Obama suffered a little bit from the expectations built up for him by the media that having won Iowa, and then looking at these polls, that he had double-digit leads in New Hampshire, that somehow or another it’s his fault that he didn’t live up to what the pollsters had predicted when the pollsters really had – we ought to take these polls with a grain of salt.”
On the factors behind Obama's loss to Clinton, Rove said: "Obama’s problem is not that he is – you know, he is an inspiring figure and an historic figure. That is not his problem.
"His problem is that he can... he deals with the concerns that people have about Hillary Clinton but he can’t close the argument, at least he didn’t in New Hampshire. He let the rhetoric soar, but it’s sort of like a lot of people probably said, well, you know, where is the beef.”
On the lack of a clear frontrunner among the Republicans: "We could enter Super Tuesday with three or four credible candidates, yes. In fact, look, last night’s results mean that both primary – both parties are going to have contests that exist through at least February 5th.”
• 
• 
• 
Comments
"Americans are looking for a way to break barriers,'' Rove said In an interview with National Public Radio's Tell Me More".
Yep and once again KKKarl and his Neonut friends are will do everything they can (swiftboat) to make sure that the status quo "angry old Republican white guy" wins again in 08.
Posted by: John E | January 9, 2008 2:22 PM
This is the first time I have ever read something he said that was non-partisan. I guess I'll have to buy his book to find out why he thought that demonizing more than half of the country for 7 years was going to benefit his party in the long term.
Posted by: Tom | January 9, 2008 2:22 PM
Kiss my butt Karl. You are the last person in the world I would ever take advice from.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 9, 2008 2:25 PM
Well, I never thought Rove wasn't gifted in reading the political winds. Thanks for the post, interesting to hear him give an analysis when he isn't in the employ of one candidate.
Posted by: Eva | January 9, 2008 3:23 PM
It's always a "pleasure" to read the worthless thoughts of the worst mankind has to offer: John E., weinerbrain and the rest of their demented brethren.
And, Tom, if Karl Rove demonized folks, then what do you call what James Carville, Paul Begala and the rest do?
Posted by: John D | January 9, 2008 4:47 PM
He must be lobbying for an analyst seat next to Bill Bennett. This guy called half the nation bin Laden sympathizers for questioning his war built on lies. Where's the beef?, large quantities went into his lyin', smirkin' face.
Posted by: dt | January 9, 2008 4:50 PM
Let’s not have Obama suffer for the mistakes of the pollsters.
I never in my wildest dreams thought I would agree with KKK Karl on anything,but we do agree on his statement.
Now,go back to Hell where you belong.
Posted by: Raving Loon | January 9, 2008 5:05 PM
Karl Rove is only the most successful political operative of our generation. It's one thing to ignore the political issues he pushes forward, and another to ignore his comments related to his area of expertise.
Posted by: jeremy | January 9, 2008 5:53 PM
Karl Rove is only the most successful political operative of our generation. It's one thing to ignore the political issues he pushes forward, and another to ignore his comments related to his area of expertise.
By all means, keep up that thinking. The architect of the 'permanent Republic majority' sure looks invincible.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 9, 2008 8:50 PM
"Americans are looking for a way to break barriers,''
He's just looking for a way to break wind.
Posted by: bill r. | January 9, 2008 10:35 PM
"You may end up with a different math, but you're entitled to your math. I'm entitled to the math."--Karl Rove, insisting to NPR that 2006 pre-election polls "add up to a Republican Senate and a Republican House"
Posted by: dt | January 9, 2008 11:27 PM
Karl Rove is obviously a smart guy. But he needs to know that he used self serving means to accomplish and entrench his candidate in power. In the process, he divided a NATION. That is certainly NOT a record to be proud of. I understand his struggle with irrelevance. He's the wrong guy to be advising Obama.
Posted by: Sal Daf | January 10, 2008 1:23 AM
No president has ever called fellow Americans of the opposing party "unAmerican" or "terrorist sympathizers" except this one, encouraged to do so by Rove. This helps explain the Bush "hatred". Clearly, this strategy hasn't scored Bush, Rove, or the republican party any points in the long term.
Posted by: Tom | January 10, 2008 8:57 AM
"He's just looking for a way to break wind.
Posted by: bill r. | January 9, 2008 10:35 PM
That would be the aptly named Turd Blossom.
Posted by: C.Morris | January 10, 2008 9:19 AM
The big question about Karl Rove to me is: was he a success?
By his own definition, he not only failed to produce a permanent Republican majority but we'll know in 2008 if the GOP is, as expected, banished to the wilderness for a generation. (Note: though I am liberal this is not necessarily a good thing. Look at the 1990's for a prime example of how a strong opposition party can help to balance a strong president.)
Karl Rove did manage to get an underqualified dry drunk adult with the intellectually curiosity of a toothpick elected to the highest office in the land twice. That is certainly a triumph, in particular when you consider just how pathetic Mr. Bush's resume was, and the fact that it was evident to anyone watching that he lacked the intellectual heft to lead a great nation.
But the GOP brand is in tatters, with voters preferring Democratic solutions and Democrats in general by wide margins, even on old GOP fallback topics like national security and the economy. You can thank Mr. Rove and his craven divide-and-conquer attempt with that.
So, was Mr. Rove a "success?"
Posted by: Jones | January 10, 2008 12:47 PM
guess I'll have to buy his book to find out why he thought that demonizing more than half of the country for 7 years was going to benefit his party in the long term.
Posted by: Tom | January 9, 2008 2:22 PM
A suggetion -get it from the library. Don't put any extra money in his pocket. Leave that to the neonuts who purchase tons of books and then pass them out as "gifts" for their friends
Posted by: chimpymcflightsuit'snavigator | January 10, 2008 1:12 PM
KKKarl is full of you know what. as far as being an intelligent person, he sure knows how to steal elections.
Posted by: Loco Gato | January 10, 2008 1:21 PM