In response to:

Maybe Rove Has a Point

AgrarianBarbarian Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 9:30 AM
It seems that the Roves of the world see politics as a game - winning is all that matters, even if it means governing as badly as the other side. No thanks. If Republicans become Democrats in better suits, I won't be voting for them. In 2012, I pulled the lever, somewhat reluctantly, for Romney. I did find myself hovering near Gary Johnson's name, but finally voted for Mitt on the "lesser of 2 evils" theory. But if the future of the Republican party is to be the "We're for big government, too but we'll run it a little better" party, then count me out. I don't agree with the Libertarian party on erverything, but they will be where I am heading if that's going to be the Repub strategy. I guess I prefer "purity".
Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 9:50 AM
If "winning is all that matters", why do they stick with establishment statism & reject conservatism even when the former loses & the latter wins?
Let's put ideology aside for a moment.

Karl Rove, architect of the George W. Bush-era Republican victories, says he's sick of fanatics running his party into the ground. So he's devised a strategy to pre-emptively sink unelectable candidates early in the process. He's formed a new super PAC to implement this strategy. It's called the Conservative Victory Project, and it's led by a guy named Steven Law, who was the head of another super PAC, called American Crossroads, which went something like 0-7 in the 2012 election cycle. (Not that anyone's counting.)

Grass-roots conservatives, needless to say, are quite perturbed. "I'm filing the...

Related Tags: Karl Rove Republicans rape