Rove, for a change, seems to be offering his party some sound advice. That Republicans will probably ignore it is fitting.It is worth remembering that Rove, for all his talents, tends not to have a long-term view of politics. It always seems to be about the next election with old Karl. Sure, scheduling the Iraq War Vote one month before the 2002 midterm elections meant they managed to get the outcome they wanted, but it also meant that meaningful criticism was stifled--criticism that might have been much better for the long-term prospects of the Republican Party. It's hard to know how history might have turned out had the GOP embraced the reach-across-the-aisle style centrism that predominated American politics immediately after 9/11, although my instinct is to say that they might very well have built a GOP majority for a generation. Of course, it wouldn't have been a right-wing GOP majority. I guess we can see where the hearts of the Bush team were really at...
To be fair, Rove has had some long-term political strategies, such as Bush's prescription drug benefit and the ill-fated amnesty bill. Still, doubling down on economic royalism and terror scare tactics might have let the Republicans win two elections, but the administration squandered a once-in-a-generation chance to lead because of Karl Rove's myopia. He's good at winning a single election here and there, but if I were a Republican I wouldn't be too thrilled about these missed opportunities. I'll be very interested to see if conservatives still like George W. Bush in eight years, especially if we've had a popular Democratic President and Democratic control of congress for that entire time.
