In retirement, Rove will have a willing audience among his party's faithful. Though the president has lost his shine among some die-hard conservatives, Rove largely hasn't—despite being the architect of the push for comprehensive immigration reform. Even after the 2006 losses, conservatives were saying it wasn't Rove's fault, but the fault of a corrupt, confused GOP congressional leadership. Conservatives also need Rove to survive as a guru. While Republicans are momentarily depressed, it doesn't come from a fundamental conundrum about their party's core beliefs. Many just think that circumstances, a poorly managed war, and a distracted president harmed the execution of GOP policy.
I don't know about this. Inside the beltway, an awul lot of conservatives are sour on Rove (as Josh's essay bears ample witness), with the purists viewing him as having sold small-government principle down the river and the pragmatists holding him at least partially responsible for the '06 defeat. As for the broader "movement," my sense is that the feeling toward the Architect runs from mild affection to irritation (see Michelle Malkin's reaction to his resignation) to indifference (see Ed Morrisey's rejoinder to Malkin's post), with none of these sentiments burning terribly bright. It's worth remembering that pro-Bush conservatives have traditionally tended to downplay Rove's role in the administration and scoff at the whole "Bush's brain" theory (see, for instance, K-Lo's instant reaction this morning); this means, in turn, that Rove's reputation as a world-historical figure has always been more inflated on the left than on the right.
Karl Rove turned out to have one of the best political minds of our time. He taught Pres. Bush the art of politics through winning against Ann Richards in Texas and then went on to guide him in defeating John McCain and Al Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. He not only was a master of realpolitik but a quite decent person who withstood savage political onslaughts against him with humour and grace.
The left, of course, having been often creamed by him tends to become apoplectic upon hearing his name. Reading the WSJ column by Paul Gigot today, one is struck by Rove's prediction that the Democrats "are likely to nominate a tough, tenacious, fatally flawed candidate by the name of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Holding the White House for a third term is always difficult given the pent-up desire for change... but 'I think we've got a very good chance to do so.' " This sounds hard nosed and about right.
When the political passions of our day calm down Rove will be regarded as a brilliant political mind who helped realign American politics from the vacuous and effete liberalism of the left to the more grounded conservatism of most sensible Americans whom Pres. Bush has represented well, though not without flaws.
Posted by Peter Leavitt | August 13, 2007 4:54 PM