July 26, 2005


Court nominee does well in poll; Rove does not (Susan Page, 7/25/05, USA TODAY)

[B]y 34% to 25%, Americans have an unfavorable view of Rove; 25% have never heard of him. Seen by many as Bush's most powerful White House adviser, Rove has been in the news lately because of an investigation into whether administration officials illegally leaked the name of a CIA operative to reporters.

The controversy hasn't gripped the public's attention. Just half of those surveyed say they are following the story closely; one in five aren't following it at all. [...]

In the survey, Bush's job-approval rating was steady at 49%, in the same range where it has been for more than a year. [...]

His current rating as a "strong and decisive leader" is 62%, about the same as in 2000.

Only the modern Left could have switched its time and energy to someone even more marginal than Tom DeLay.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 26, 2005 10:58 AM

What is Rove's job again?

Posted by: Brandon at July 26, 2005 11:56 AM

I'm convinced Rove is safe, but consider....

What if he and Bush decided, "well, I've done most of what I came here for, maybe I should resign", and Rove did.

And then the Dems get their butts handed to them, AGAIN, in '06 because of reasons of underlying philosophy and demographics..... nothing to do with Rove at all.

I expect the latter to happen, but I wonder what the reaction would be when it happens even though Darth Rove is gone.

(Must be... um.. CHENEY.... yeah that's it, that's the ticket, uh huh.)

Posted by: Andrew X at July 26, 2005 11:57 AM

He's going to have to resign--it's just no one will notice outside the Beltway.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 12:01 PM

OJ - no crime, no need for Rove to resign.

I may be wrong but I'm in the camp that the Fitzgerald investigation is targetting Wilson, Plame, or reporters and not Rove.

Posted by: AWW at July 26, 2005 12:22 PM


It's Washington--hindrances get punted.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 12:25 PM

Rove's not going anywhere, he's not a hindrance to the president. If Bush had gotten rid of all the folks that the Dems/MSM wanted gone, we would have seen the last of Rumsfeld, DeLay etc. Instead, look at the roster of "retired" figures: Powell, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, Christie Whitman, Dan Rather, Eason Jordan ... Tells you something.

Posted by: sam at July 26, 2005 12:37 PM

De Lay's still in charge in the House, no?

When you've got the executive, and both houses of congress, and the media have spent the last three years destroying their own credibility, and no law has been broken, no one has to go.

It's not 1987 or 1974 anymore.

BTW: Rove ain't a hindrance either. The dems are making fools of themselves again and again over him. Keeping him means they'll keep doing it.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at July 26, 2005 12:38 PM

To the list above, you can also include Big Labor ...

Posted by: sam at July 26, 2005 12:39 PM

He would have ditched DeLay if he could have.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 12:40 PM

All that energy and time wasted on getting rid of a presidential advisor, who if Bush does fire, he could call up on the phone three times a day for advice.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, but that's what you get when you confuse "symbolic" victories for substantive one's. Who's next on the Democrats' list? The mail-room kid?

Posted by: Mikey at July 26, 2005 12:40 PM

Rove resign? Now hold on, I'm still waiting for Cheney to resign.

Posted by: jefferson park at July 26, 2005 1:12 PM

Republicans decided after the Gingrich debacle and the impeachment battle that they're not going to get a fair shake in the media in terms of quotes and sound bytes, so there was no point in having "hot" aggressive personalities in the highest-profile positions. Bush, Cheney, Frist, Hastert all fall into the "laid back Republican" cantgory (as does John Roberts), which infuriates the immediate gratification types like Ann Coulter, but increases the liklihood that the legislation they favor is going to be passed sometime down the line.

DeLay's really the only aggressive personality among the GOP leadership. That makes him popular among the core of the party but like Gingrich, can also lead to some statements that, even if they are mild, are jumped on by the media and replayed over and over again to show how mean-spirited and cruel Republicans really are.

A Karl Rove unchained would probably be less aggressive than DeLay, but more aggressive than his boss or some of the other GOP leaders in going after Democrats. But Karl's public apperances are so few and far between to the majority of the people he's just a name or a concept, so the Democrats' attacks don't justify the amount of energy exherted based on the results achieved, a minor drop in Bush's poll numbers.

Posted by: John at July 26, 2005 2:28 PM

No he hasn't resigned yet. Just my poor typing skills. Read "trying to get rid of" in my first sentence. It'll flow better that way.

Sheesh, after thirty-nine years I still can't proof-read.

Posted by: Mikey at July 26, 2005 2:28 PM

Am I supposed to believe that four fifths of Americans are following this story, half of them closely?

Posted by: David Hill, The Bronx at July 26, 2005 2:33 PM

David Hill:

Four-fifths of the MSM is following this story, half of them closely. MSM=Americans. Didn't you get the memo?

Posted by: sam at July 26, 2005 2:46 PM



Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 3:06 PM

oj - Rove's title will just be changed, from "Architect" to "Lightning Rod." Either way, he serves a useful function. All the time the left spends attacking Rove is time and energy they can't devote to the more promising lines of attack they'd eventually stumble upon if Bush puts down the weak attacks.

Posted by: pj at July 26, 2005 3:59 PM


Sure, he can just over to the RNC and run the Senate campaigns then gear up the McCain campaign starting in '07.

his resignation isn't meaningful, just necessary.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 4:10 PM

oj -

pj has it exactly right. Rove can play his part in the ongoing Dem psychosis only by remaining at Bush's side. It's not Republican derangement syndrome. It's all about the Dems' (mis)perception of Bush. While still President, he should never reveal himself to be as talented as he really is. Keep 'em mesmerized by their own cognitive filters.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 26, 2005 4:55 PM

He said the leaker would have to go, so he will.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2005 5:00 PM

I don't believe he EVER said that. And both Powell and Fleischer are already gone.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 26, 2005 5:03 PM

oj - When Rove was given the titles "assistant to the president, deputy chief of staff and senior adviser" and moved to an office next to the Oval Office, what was that but his promotion to Lightning Rod? Of course the Left wants to believe that Bush is controlled by a Machiavellian genius, and this was the perfect way to inspire them.

Rove is just where Bush wants him -- drawing the Left's fire, like a good decoy.

Posted by: pj at July 26, 2005 9:04 PM