Obama’s team shows shades of Rove
Dante Chinni
Posted: 10.15.2008 / 7:17 AM PDT
Ann Arbor, Mich. – There are probably very few Democrats who would ever admit to being fans of Karl Rove, the political strategist who successfully led George W. Bush through two presidential elections. But Sen. Barack Obama’s team seems to have studied the campaign efforts of Mr. Bush’s former adviser and is putting the lessons learned to work.
For proof, simply take a look at the corner of Liberty and First Streets here in Ann Arbor. There sits an Obama “Campaign for Change” office in all its Rove-ian glory.
What does an office in this extremely left-leaning college town – as well as those in other “Campus and Careers” communities – have to do with the well-known Bush aide? Plenty.
In 2000 and particularly 2004, Bush won the White House by bringing out the Republican base – driving up votes from reliably Republican areas.
Going into the 2008 race, most thought “the base” strategy was over. Bush’s low approval numbers meant that the Republican nominee, whoever he was, would have to run more to the center to pick up moderate voters who had turned against the president.
But on the other side of the ideological street, the Democrats are not in such a bind, and the Obama campaign knows it. Thus, even as the Illinois senator plays to the middle (and the middle class) in speeches and proposals, he is devoting more effort to bringing out his base. And if this town is any kind of example, it’s working.
If there ever was a place that Senator Obama didn’t have to worry about, it’s Ann Arbor. College towns (most centered in “Campus and Careers” counties) are reliable turf for him, and that’s certainly true for this well-known liberal bastion.
In 2000 and 2004, neither Vice President Al Gore nor Sen. John Kerry bothered opening a shop here. The Washtenaw County Democratic Party is well organized.
But the fact that Team Obama has its own office here is a sign of two things. One, his campaign is flush with cash. And two, he wants to drive up the vote in these places big time.
Ann Arbor Democrats currently estimate, according to the city’s mayor, John Hieftje, that 97 percent of eligible voters are registered in the city and 95 percent in the county – at least in the Democratic strongholds the party has been canvassing.
“On a recent Saturday morning, we had canvassing time set up, and more than 200 people showed up to pick up clipboards and knock on doors,” Mayor Hieftje, himself a Democrat, says. “Our challenge has been finding enough places to send all the volunteers we’ve had. We’ve gone west and east, as far as the Detroit suburbs.”
One odd thing in Ann Arbor is the relatively low amount of Obama signage. At first look, the campus does not seem overrun with Obamamania.
But Andrew Grossman, editor of the student-run Michigan Daily, says that is partly because “it’s just so obvious how the campus is leaning.”
Up until Oct. 6 – the deadline for registering to vote in Michigan – “you really couldn’t walk four feet without someone asking if you were registered,” Mr. Grossman says. “They were everywhere.”
In 2004, Senator Kerry won Washtenaw County 63 percent to 35 percent. But Grossman and many others here think Obama’s registration/turnout machine will boost the Democratic margin.
Obama’s collegiate base strategy is well represented in Michigan. His campaign has opened offices in East Lansing (home of Michigan State U.), in Mount Pleasant (home of Central Michigan U.), in Ypsilanti (home of Eastern Michigan U.), and in Kalamazoo (home of Western Michigan U.). Obama even opened up offices in the distant Upper Peninsula in Marquette (home of Northern Michigan U.) and in Houghton (home of Michigan Tech.).
On the GOP side of things, supporters for Sen. John McCain have been dispirited by his campaign’s decision to pull out of Michigan earlier this month.
Senator McCain’s departure from Michigan sent a signal to the college Republicans here, says Jane Coaston, executive editor of the conservative Michigan Review. “They see the writing on the wall,” she says.
But the group was never hugely behind McCain, Ms. Coaston acknowledges. “A lot of them say they want a real Republican,” she says.
Whom they mean – from Rep. Ron Paul to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney – depends on who is talking, of course. But with the election less than three weeks away, the down mood means that Obama’s base strategy is likely to pay big dividends in Michigan.
And if the organization here is a sign of what’s happening in other “Campus and Careers” locales, it may be enough to have a significant effect in other battleground states as well.
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
October 15th, 2008 at 8:10 am PDT
Hmmm, isn’t it kind of a cheap shot to say that working college campuses is being “Rovian”?
College kids are naturally inclined to at least feign interest in politics, and yes, most are probably Democrat leaning, but hardly The Base.
When one hears “the base,” it implies hardcore, dedicated voters. College kids might be enthusiastic, but too fresh to be considered dedicated.
Therefore, too uncertain to be called “the base.”
Therefore not all the prey of a Rovian machine.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:13 am PDT
The headline to this story is misleading and ridiculous. Karl Rove is known for sleazy political tricks that go way beyond getting out the base vote.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:14 am PDT
Imagine leading this article with such a ridiculous title “Shades of Rove”. That really is a stretch calling opening up a campaign office on your turf a Karl Rove strategy. Like saying that building a good highway, like Germany’s autobahn, makes you a fan of the Nazis.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:15 am PDT
Wow what a worthless article. Rove is not successful for just playing to the conservative base, he is a mastermind of deception and unethical poltical tactics. It is shameful to call the Obama campaign a Rove-esque campaign
October 15th, 2008 at 8:16 am PDT
This is a misleading and a stretch at best to try to connect Obama’s campaign and Rove in such a transparent and inappropriate way. I (used to) expect more from the CSM.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:20 am PDT
So did this college town election office commit voter fraud? How about outing active CIA agents? So apparently blogging now consists of coughing up a ridiculous caption and backing it up with nonsense.
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
October 15th, 2008 at 8:36 am PDT
The term “Rovian” has come to be as an adjective comparing something to the underhanded political practices of Karl Rove and the Bush administration.
No one sees the link. Anyone who read the article was expecting to see information about Obama’s shady politics.
Reaching out to your base is not a unique Rovian characteristic.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:48 am PDT
Last comment and the I’ll let you all have your say.
The extent of this base outreach is different. It is much broader and deeper than in the past. And it does look quite a bit like Bush’s strategy in 2004, which was Rove’s.
What’s more, I think if you asked the Obama people about it they would say they learned from Rove. That is actually a strength of their campaign. The ability to take and adapt models that worked for other candidates to their side.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am PDT
Darn it! We have 3 weeks worth of ads to sell! Obama is kicking McCain’s butt!
Let’s say that he’s at the statistically lowest end of any poll, so only a 4 point lead instead of 14 points…that helps…
Not enough! Well um…
Let’s compare Obama to Karl Rove!
October 15th, 2008 at 9:05 am PDT
There is nothing Rove-like about Obama or his campaign, particularly since he’s refused to engage in such dirty Rove-ian tactics to win. Sadly, the McCain campaign can’t make that same claim. I really expected better from the CS Monitor.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:07 am PDT
In Every US Election…. Candidates “Bring out Their Base”
What are they Supposed to Do? Ignore their Base… as “Proof Non-Rovian”?
This is Chinni false linguinni!
October 15th, 2008 at 9:07 am PDT
This isn’t Rovian; it’s just smart politics for a candidate with the funding to do it. Any campaign operative would tell you opening an office where your base is located is a good idea…
October 15th, 2008 at 9:08 am PDT
So your saying that Karl Rove was a community organizer?
October 15th, 2008 at 9:08 am PDT
So you’re saying that Karl Rove was a community organizer?
October 15th, 2008 at 9:10 am PDT
you get paid for writing this???? It might get a C grade in a college creative writing class, but an F in journalism.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:11 am PDT
You’re reaching and you know it, Dante, and the readers are rightly calling you on it.
All successful candidates mobilize their bases, using all the technological and organizational tools at their disposal.
Rove is different because he uses the tactics of smears, character assassination, and personal revenge, and because he appeals to the voters’ basest instincts.
Obama is doing nothing of the kind, and everybody knows it. You haven’t made your case, and in fact, you have failed spectacularly to make it. The entire premise of this article is preposterous.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:13 am PDT
To most, Rovian, means smear tactics and dirty politics. Setting up offices in heavily Democratic areas does not seem Rovian to me. What are you talking about?. Your article is Rovian, because it mis-represents the facts and makes them into something they are not.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:14 am PDT
Rove’s tactics ended up destroying the Republican party as we shall see vividly on November 4th. He so overplayed the Republican ‘hand’ after 9-11 that we will watch for a generation as the GOP try to sort out the mess they are in… only a complete reinvention can save the party as the nation and world are changing much too fast for the GOP to simply retrench and become a more refined version of what they once were. Rove’s name will be a scar on history - like Rasputin.
—————————————————-
Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?
We wont.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:15 am PDT
[…] I see that the Obama campaign is, wisely, modeling much of its campaign planning around Karl Rove methodologies. […]
October 15th, 2008 at 9:19 am PDT
“Love Rove or hate him, the extent to which the Obama campaign is pounding the base vote bares his stamp.”
Pretty sure attempting to rally your base existed in politics long before Rove came along. By using “shades of Rove” in the title of this article it immediately implies that the Obama campaign is using the more “shady” techniques of Karl Roves past campaigns, whether or not the author admits to it.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:21 am PDT
Absurd premise. Shades of Rove means, and the author knows this, shades of unethical, dirty politics. Misleading headline- actually, this article is more Rovian than the tactics discussed in it- tie someone to an undesirable label even if it doesn’t actually fit.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:21 am PDT
Gimme a break. What a misleading title and disingenuous article. There is no connection whatsoever to Rove with how they are campaigning. This is an insult to the Obama campaign. Rove is affiliated with underhanded and unethical campaign tactics, which isn’t even remotely what is going on here. This article itself is quite the good example of Rovian tactics used by the right. The McCain campaign and his supporters are starting to reek of desperation in these last weeks before the election.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:22 am PDT
I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say that using a supportive voting bloc as a resource is an unworthy, manipulative tactic. It’s actually a pretty smart decision. It’s like football, if you want to win games, you give the ball to your solid playmakers. Karl Rove didn’t invent this “strategy” 8 years ago. Candidates have been playing to their strengths forever.
The problem I think most posters have with this article is that the connotations of the terms are misleading. “Roveian” usually signifies shady, underhanded, deceptive tactics. What you outlined in the article is just common sense.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:23 am PDT
Kind of a deceiving title for an article, isn’t it?
Rove isn’t exactly known for opening offices on college campuses. He’s more known for deceitful campaign tactics. I think that you can hardly say that Obama getting people to register to vote in this year’s Presidential election is Rovian. If anything it is anti-Rovian. Rove didn’t want more people to register to vote. He wanted fewer. He only wanted his Republican voting base, which was already registered, to actually show up on election day.
Rove’s tactics were to target and question and dispute new voter registrations not allow new ones. This article couldn’t be much further off the mark.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:23 am PDT
Mr. Chinni, I’m more of a Ron Paul fan than anything else, and, I find this article to be a HUGE stretch. To pass the smell test, I would look for at least three distinct methods Mr. Rove used, and at least one of them must be either “Swiftboatian” or comparable to the deeply cynical get-out-the-evangelical-vote, which as directed by Rove, was dark in its motivations- literally, Rove exploited people’s faith and beliefs for Bush’s political gain on an unprecedented scale. I didn’t see these things discussed in your article, I don’t see these things in Obama’s campaign, and I find your article, as I said, a HUGE stretch. It doesn’t work for me.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:24 am PDT
This is one of the most laughable pieces I’ve seen this election season. What you don’t seem to get, Dante, is that readers are reacting not simply to your incendiary, bait-and-switch title but to the paper-thin support you provide within the article. Turning out your base didn’t begin with Karl Rove. Indeed, it’s among the most fundamental concepts of participating in a democratic process. Your thesis seems to be: “if Bob needs to breathe and Jane needs to breathe, Jane obviously learned how to breathe from Bob.”
Had you opened the piece with the (admittedly less sexy) title: “Obama team bases GOTV effort on 2000 GOP model” I doubt you’d be getting quite the same reaction…even if the body of the article was no more instructive.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:25 am PDT
Thats really thin, Like it took me 6 years and four schools to get a two year journalism degree thin. You Betcha !
October 15th, 2008 at 9:26 am PDT
Does everything in campaign-strategizing that’s just simple common sense have to be labeled Karl Rovian simply because it’s working, or were you just running dry on ideas on what to write? I only got here because Google news picked this up.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:26 am PDT
Yea, right.
Chinni, stop trying to be a journalist. Your not smart enough, sorry.
Try doing some investigative reporting first rather than some sham report.
But, if they really stooped low enough to reach Rove, then it would be a “fight-fire-with-fire” tactic since McStooge has been delving into Rove-like tactics all along. Much to his loss.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:28 am PDT
Rove is known for using UNETHICAL tactics…The title implies to the average reader that Obama is using UNETHICAL tactics…This is misleading, Dante. Please read the CSM motto above, i.e., “To injure no man…”
October 15th, 2008 at 9:30 am PDT
Let me join the chorus here and say, Yikes! Sorry Dante, but this article seems like it was written to justify the headline. You’ll have to provide more evidence than simply “rallying the base” to convince almost anyone that the Obama strategy warrants the headline of your article. Let’s not ignore the fact that Obama has the means to run this operation in ways that neither Kerry no Gore could. Who’s to say either of those two candidates wouldn’t have done the same had they the ability to do so. Would that then be considered a “Rovian” tactic?
In fact, using the argument you’re attempting to justify in this article, your title could have also read ‘Obama’s team shows shades of Dean.’ In fact with Obama’s expansion on grass-roots organization and profound use of the internet, that comparison would probably hold alot more water.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:31 am PDT
The headline of this article is terribly misleading, and the content is ridiculous. Obama’s campaign is about as far as you can get from Rove. Your argument makes as much sense as saying Obama is “Rovian” because both men wear shoes. What a complete crock. Shame on you.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:32 am PDT
I’m not usually given to commenting on articles, and I usually respect the writing of the Christian Science Monitor, but this article is absurd. The information included is pertinent, but to say that having an office in Ann Arbor and attempting to register voters is “Rovian” is ridiculous. The magazine’s choice of sensationalistic titles disappoints me.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:32 am PDT
When your losing you will say anything. Smear is all you can do. Christian science? Guess you forgot scriptures, do not cause a man to stumble. Your sticking a leg out to trip. Shame on you. Shame.
I felt bad when Hillary lost,but I did not jump on the hate wagon, if your a true Christian public forum then you are lost, for how can a Christian cause someone to stumble.
I really tried to look for the good in this article, but I found none. And more so, lots of gibberish.
Also I have to wonder, how was Karl Rove so wonderful for the republicans? Yet now use him as a club to beat on another man?
This is pure nonsense.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:32 am PDT
What a crock — this argument “might” hold water if carl rove was the first one to try to increase the activity of a candidate’s base. You know full well that Rove is best known for his underhanded, dirty campaigning, and to try to associate Obama with Rove is a (futile) attempt at dragging Obama down into the dirt. Obviously, it didn’t work; all it did was put your own integrity level on display. Sorta reminds me of a presidential aspirant who once was considered a decent, honorable man, even a war hero of sorts, whose lasting legacy now will be as a mean-spirited, angry old man who doesn’t know the meaning of the words honor or truth or integrity.
If you are going to play in the dirt, that’s your choice. But play with yourself; don’t try to drag others into the dirt with you.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:33 am PDT
Dante,
Do you possess any marketable skills? Apparently journalism is not your greatest strength!
RABO
October 15th, 2008 at 9:34 am PDT
This is another sign of focusing on things that don’t matter. I’m an independent and this is the stuff that drives me crazy. Can you really not find something of substance to write on? I’ve heard about a few things like the War in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economy, unemployment, corruption, human rights violations, drug cartels, the public education system, etc. But hey I’m just a voter and it seems as though no one in Washington really cares what we want b/c everyone stays in line with Party Politics instead of whats best for America.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:34 am PDT
I will never read another one of your articles. The Christian Science Monitor is one of the most respected news magazines…. how did you get a job there?
October 15th, 2008 at 9:35 am PDT
So you’re equating knocking on doors to get out the vote with lying, manipulating and sidestepping the issues? Putting that headline on this story is more Rovian than the Obama Ann Arbor campaign, and next time I see your name on a by-line, I will keep that in mind as I move on to the next article.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:36 am PDT
Wow, what a stretch. Seem’s like you came up with the headline, and then wrote a story to fit it.
Obama’s campaign is going after every vote. They’ve run a fantastic campaign and they deserve every vote they get. Rove in the 2004 elections just got churches to do the hard work for him (rallying up the base, registering, transportation to the voting centers etc.)
So….quite polar opposites, no?
October 15th, 2008 at 9:36 am PDT
The latest poll just published on Reuters shows 48% to 44%. Obama’s lead is narrowing. Tonight McCain Needs to address how he is going to deal with Economy and why will it work and remind America about Obama’s luck of experience, judgement and character. Do bring up ACORN, and why Obama is not fit to lead (Rev. Write, Ayers, REZCO, etc)
October 15th, 2008 at 9:37 am PDT
Agreeing with the chorus: Headline is very misleading.
It suggests the Obama campaign is using Rove’s dirty tricks, such as suggesting McCain has syphilis or that he fathered a black child (Rove tactics in 2000).
The existence of a campaign office on a college campus? Rove tactics?
Misleading headline, unnecessary story.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:37 am PDT
I expected better from the Christian Science Monitor. If I wanted sensational headlines with no content to back it up, I can go any number of places.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:39 am PDT
I love how you right wingers are all now trying to equate Democrats’ current success with your own past success. I’m not sure whether your attempts at this are trying to somehow gain credit for thinking of these rather obvious tactics first, or whether your “see, they do it, too” is meant to mean Dems are somehow just as bad as you are and that justifies your dirtier campaign tricks, as well.
You and Tara Wall over on CNN.com, who recently touted a list of 20 ways Obama agrees with Bush, love to treat common sense like it’s some kind of superpower. Obama goes after his base for votes? Oh, my! My common sense is tingling, Chinni! God knows he would’ve NEVER thought of that without Karl Rove, right? Ms. Wall like to point out Obama agrees with Bush on teaching kids both abstinence AND contraception (I’m feeling all tingly again.)
Chinni, you must’ve really been hard up for something to write this week and here’s another news flash for you: The American People are finally waking up and smelling the coffee (or should I say the ****) of your right wing bull—-. Get used to backseat. You’re not going to be driving after November.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:41 am PDT
Dante -
It doesn’t seem that anyone sees this relationship that you’ve tried to establish. ‘Rovian’ tactics equal shady, underhanded, deceptive, etc., politics in the minds of many. However, if reaching out and touching base with your community before an election is a Rove idea (which seems odd to me considering we’ve had elections for 200 years for presidents, governors, mayors, etc.) then it’d be a good thing.
I don’t see how Rove was the first to come up with the idea of rallying up a party around their candidate, though - it just doesn’t make sense considering our long history of elections here.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:42 am PDT
the right wingers have nothing else to discuss regarding Obama so they have to contrive issues or should I say non-issues.
seriously dude get a life.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:44 am PDT
Ramping up a party’s voting base is hardly attributable to Karl Rove. This fallacy of equivocation is the writer’s poor attempt at gaining attention for himself.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:46 am PDT
Dante says “As much as I know Obama supporters HATE Karl Rove, I think they should recognize what the Obama campaign is taking from the Bush 2004 team. Love Rove or hate him, the extent to which the Obama campaign is pounding the base vote bares his stamp.”
You may want to revisit what the Democratic “base” is. The Democratic party base is not college students. Overall college students may lean Democratic but the true base of the party lies in blue collar workers and large city dwellers. If Obama wanted to follow Karl Rove’s tactics then he would be speaking in only the largest cities and crisscrossing the US to rallies at predominantly union-based businesses to mobilize the already registered voters to show up at the polls on Nov 4. This is HARDLY the tactic that Obama is taking.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:47 am PDT
“Mail (will not be published) (required)”
whomever Gabe is - your email address just popped up on my screen - thought you’d like to know how safe your info is on this site.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:49 am PDT
Using your logic, I guess the US Army would be a lot like Hitler’s Army because they both fired weapons at their enemy.
Having an Obama office in Ann Arbor is NOT “playing to the base”, dear sir, because the US election is determined by the Electoral College vote which, if you may have noticed, is counted at the state level. And if there are a lot of rural voters in a state and those voters may go for Bush, then building a strong “base” of urban voters in the same state to counter this is not a strategy that even the mastermindedly Karl Rove can take credit for.
I’m sorry, my far-reaching friend, but if you want to make a connection between Obama and Rove, you would have to say that Barack Obama is planting false electronic bugs in their own offices and insisting that they came from the McCain camp.
You have confused “strategy” with “targeting”. Merely working in an area where turnout is expected to be high and focusing on a group that is likely to support you is not devious, nor does it take a great deal of mischief or malice. I think your article is the most sensational piece of trash to come from the CSM since I have known of it’s existence, but then again - as Karl Rove would remind you - it worked, didn’t it.
You got someone to read your article when normally I don’t give the CSM much of my time at all. Send my congratulations to Mr. Rove, won’t you?
October 15th, 2008 at 9:49 am PDT
Dante Chinni….nice try - equating David Plouffe with Darth Vader Rove….but you struck out. You recognize good campaign techniques when you see them but you cannot distinguish between the ethics of the people who use them. Rove/ Bush/ Cheney used effective techniques but were unethical liars. Plouffe/ Obama/ Biden use effective techniques but according to John McCain Obama is a “decent person”. Whether you like it or not the American people are fed up with lies about torture, lies about our economic strength, and lies about trickle down economics and the beauty of free trade. The simple fact remains that Rove and the Republicans destroyed the American middle class to benefit the wealthy.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:50 am PDT
Yes, I’d have to agree with the other posters. Rove did not invent the concept of revving up the base - he’s just been the most successful practitioner of it in recent times. And Obama is certainly not emulating the more insidious aspects of Rovian strategy. For an example of that you’d have to look to the McCain campaign, I’m afraid.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:50 am PDT
Weak, sir. Very weak.
This is exactly the kind of anti-intellectual pandering that has clearly worn out it’s welcome with the electorate. Kudos though, for making terms like “college” and “university” positively drip with disdain. The louder Sarah Palin screeches about how Obama isn’t “one of us” (referring, of course, to the same drooling “Joe Sixpack” crowd that your essay seems to target) the more turned off those voters are getting. Or…, have you not noticed the polling information that specifically identifies this trend?
Probably not. I believe that there’s a term for that. What was it, again…? Oh, right…
Out of touch.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:54 am PDT
Well, let me be the first to write that I kind of understand the point you’re attempting to make. However, I don’t necessarily agree with it entirely. I will agree that there is no question that Democrats, the Obama campaign in particular, have studied the Rovian playbook well enough to counteract it and even, I believe, exhibit some swift preemptive manuevering. In short, the Obama campaign has successfully set the tone and controlled the debate and is not simply responding to the topic set by the Rovian machine. That’s just smart politics, my friend.
A point to consider in relation to the college campuses, if I recall correctly there is currently a peak population of 18-22 years olds. Again smart strategy, smart politics and I personally don’t believe the “base” theory applies. Cheers to getting the attention of those of us who consider ourselves the Democratic base. Respectfully from a lifelong MO DEM.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:55 am PDT
This articles shows shades of Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:55 am PDT
I think the purpose of the title was to get hits for this ridiculous article. Sorry I clicked the link from google news; I’ll be reluctant in the future to follow a link to CSM.
Oh, and it’s “bears his stamp”, not “bares his stamp”. Maybe your editor is on vacation.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:55 am PDT
I think you misunderstand what Rovian politics is. It is not about appealing to the base as much as it is appealing to the basest nature of your supporters - tapping into their fears and prejudices.
Saying Obama’s name with the emphasis on Hussein is Rovian. Hinting that Obama is a terrorist is Rovian. Employing the push poll (for example calling voters to ask them if they would vote for Anne Richards is they knew she had lesbians on her staff or “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?”) is Rovian.
Having a campaign office in a college town is having a campaign office in a college town.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:56 am PDT
I’m glad to see I am not the only one who found this article (and its title) to be garbage.
I thought for sure that you had uncovered a vast campaign of Swift Boats ads and obtained video of rabid Obama mobs chanting “Flip Flop.” Or at the very least you would have fabricated such things.
Not only is nothing you say valid — it’s a poorly executed smear piece.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:56 am PDT
This isn’t just sloppy, there is something deliberate and weaselly at work here. How can you not know the connotations that “Rovian” entails?
A huge part of Rove’s base strategy was *not* just to turn them out, but to use every slimy and misleading tactic possible against the opponent in order to turn him into what the base hates. *That* was Karl Rove’s “base” strategy, and it has nothing to do with the way Obama is campaigning.
>Love Rove or hate him, the extent to which the Obama campaign is pounding the base vote bares his stamp.
No. You can’t just turn this into a “love him or hate him” game, as though all these commenters are just being partisan. Without basis, you are leaving open a whole planet of implications that Obama’s campaign is somehow using dirty tactics, its a legitimate substantive flaw.
October 15th, 2008 at 9:58 am PDT
“Rallying a base” and “rallying a fundamental Christian base to foster unnecessary war efforts with fundamentalist Islam through shameless fear and misdirection” are slightly different.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:04 am PDT
I’m going to go ahead and agree with all of the other comments here. Getting out your base vote is just good strategy. Rove is know for voter suppression and gerrymandering/redistricting among other slimy tactics. He was a good strategist, but he also injected healthy doses of sleaze and dishonesty. These are the tactics that most would consider “Rovian”.
Don’t write just to write; come up with something worth putting to paper. The internet is too full of people with too-ready a mouthpiece.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:05 am PDT
I am a long time reader of the Monitor and have recently been checking out the blog. I think that the blog seems to be trying to attract attention with outrageous nonsense like this article. I live in Ann Arbor, and we always have democratic campaign headquarters in our downtown area. Where’s the news??
October 15th, 2008 at 10:09 am PDT
Silly. Very Silly. The author has shades of Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:21 am PDT
How can you be respected as an objective, fact-checking, truth-spitting journalist when you write articles such as these? Shame on you Mr. Chinni.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:23 am PDT
Bringing out the base is Rovian? The things dems (and McCain alike) disliked about Rove were the whisper campaigns, the voter supression, the personal attacks, the “facts not in evidence” insinuations (like “Kerry was not at an anti-cancer rally. Kerry: Pro Cancer?”). Rallying your base is Rovian? Then call me a Rovian.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:28 am PDT
To the Author of this story. The other respondents are being way too kind in their critique of your work. This is REPREHENSIBLE journalism. I’ve taught journalism and if you’d turned this story in it would have rated and “F” and you wuold be asked to consider another major. Shameful, shameful work from a ‘professional’.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:31 am PDT
What a ridiculous article. To say opening an office in a liberal town is “Rovian”. I’m sure this man wrote the article to go with a google searchable title. In fact the article was probably written starting with key words (Rovian, extreme liberal, and so on).
This election year has too many journalists and pseudo-journalists wanting to get a name for themselves even though they write poppycock tabloid text.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:32 am PDT
How dare Obama drive up support in his own party base! The man should ignore his youthful democrat supporters and strive for the college-aged apathy toward voting of past elections.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:37 am PDT
Mr. Chinni
Your article is more “Rovenian” than what you ‘try’ to explain on it. The mere insinuation that opening an office in a college town is a shade of Rove’s tactis is just beyond belief. I guess previous to Mr. Rove, no other campaign had done so ? Mr. Chinni, it’s clear to all that your article has more shades of Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:38 am PDT
This article is so bone headed, I can’t even bear to type this comment.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:41 am PDT
for a minute here i thought i was reading fox news…
October 15th, 2008 at 10:45 am PDT
Right on Josephine !
The “Writer” is an Idiot. He is drumming up the same “guilt by association” that Hate-Monger Palin is doing in Rallies, only, he is taking it even a bit further by linking Obama Camp and Karl Rove just by the location alone.
LOSER Dante Chinni !
October 15th, 2008 at 10:47 am PDT
this title is sensational. it’s not like the campaign offices are push-polling. getting out the base is important and NOT SNEAKY OR SUSPECT. these offices by default cover large geographic areas - 4 years ago we were calling people up to 100 miles away. that is nowhere near the “base”. also, it leaves out important information - like that there are actually THREE offices in the area - one in pittsfield, one in ypsilanti, and the one specifically mentioned in the article. yes, the offices will cover areas in detroit and the like, but regular operations include surrounding areas that aren’t necessarily the base. what is wrong with having offices where there is a lot of manpower and making sure you cover a large swath of geography? there is also the danger that people see a lead and are less concerned about voting, thinking there’s enough of a lead. one more thing: i volunteered for kerry in 2004, and i suppose the temporary office i worked out of might have been a county-run office, but really? there was definitely a temporary office on hand.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:48 am PDT
Bad article. Congratulations on getting bunch of people to read it based on the headline. You’re bad. Stop writing.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:49 am PDT
So we’re supposed to believe that Karl Rove invented grassroots organizing!!!??? Give me a break!!!
I fought and won my first election as a campaign strategist (though we didn’t have any such high-falutin’ titles back then…) probably before Rove was out of diapers. We had no money and very little else other than a great (but unknown) candidate with a solid message and the whole key to the campaign was organizing the base. And I don’t give myself credit for having invented the strategy…
Apparently you also didn’t notice that it was exactly the same strategy that enabled Obama to defeat the Clinton machine in the primaries
October 15th, 2008 at 10:50 am PDT
The logic the led to the conclusions in this article is the same logic that says “seeing Russia from my house” constitutes Foreign Policy experience.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:53 am PDT
Barack Obama seeks votes! What a Rovian maneuver!
Next thing you know **** be breathing oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide … a typical Rove stunt!
October 15th, 2008 at 10:54 am PDT
if there were really any rovian activities, we’d be seeing all kinds of keating 5, libby, graham, timmons, davis commercials running. esp one with timmons taking money directly from saddam hussein.
what a atretch
October 15th, 2008 at 10:54 am PDT
What? So getting you base out is a Rovian tactic? Seriously, when I think Rovian Tactic, I think smearing the other candidate with lies. Saying he fathered an illegitimate child, or is an A-Rab. That sort of thing. Dante, shoot your editors for the headline. A better more accurate headline would be, Dems focusing on the Base this time. OR Baseline for the Dem. THe base wont go away. or How about them Bases. OR Dems follow the Baseline OR This time its the Dem’s base. OR HEY HEY READ ME.
Sad state of Journalism when this sort of thing shows up in the monitor.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:55 am PDT
Wow Dante, isn’t instant feedback a wonderful way to confirm your doubts about your writing talent, or lack thereof?
Your attempt to paint Obama’s grassroots efforts with traditional base locales as Rovian is indeed Rovian. Karl must be tickled as a turd that he has become a noun, a verb, an adjective and an adverb. Much like a couple of four letter words we all know.
Hopefully your superiors are too busy surfing the web to read these horrible grades on your less than acceptable attempt at journalism. Ouch.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:55 am PDT
This article was a waste of my time.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:56 am PDT
Dante Chinni, you need to do some research about the history of getting out the base when the other side is weakened because Karl Rove sure didn’t invent that strategy at all. That’s like crediting a good quarterback with inventing throwing the ball. Rove did not invent that tactic and in fact, that is not what defines a Rovian tactic.
Rove is known for two major slimeball political strategies. The first is attacking other people for what you yourself are guilty of. That’s a key tenant of a Rovian strategy and you can see it at work in McCain’s campaign. Sarah Palin, the great unknown, is out there saying we don’t know Obama. Sarah Palin, shortly after being found to have abused her power, was out there making statements about the need to end abuse of power. McCain, the deregulator, is out there attacking democrats for being against regulation. Etc… The other one is the effective use of whisper campaigns and innuendo that encourages belief in whisper campaigns, without the candidate actually coming out and saying it. The veiled and vague statements made by the McCain camp that encourage, though not overtly, belief that Obama has ties with terrorists that dovetail nicely with the blatant right wing propaganda flying around in emails stating absurd things about him being a manchurian candidate, a radical muslim, etc… that’s a textbook Rovian ploy.
To my knowledge, Obama has not employed either of these strategies to any great degree, if at all, whereas it would be Rovian to use these strategies as a major leg of support for the campaign(see Swiftboat Vets).
Rove is not someone to be admired just because he could win elections. He won, but the cost was the dumbing down of the republican base, which is now heavily populated with types who were once viewed as fringe. Short term profit, but long term it may well have crippled the republican party for a decade or more. Kinda like republican economic policy after 9/11.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:56 am PDT
I agree with the other posters here - “rallying the base” is not a specifically Karl Rovian tactic (or ’strategy’). Of course, putting controversial titles on mundane observations could arguably be Rovian in its intended deception. It sucks that Google News puts lame blog posts like this on their front page.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:00 am PDT
OH PLEEEEEEEEEASE!
After of months of sucking up to Obama the Press is sticking it’s tippy toes into the COLD WATER of actual Journalism and daring to criticize the Messiah. My advice to all the “Journalists” at the CSM is that you should all resign and apply to become Servants at the White House since you’ve been Servants to obama for the last 2 years. It has been TRULY disgraceful the contempt shown by CSM for the First Amendment. It would be a Joke if the situation wasn’t so Serious. Go back sucking up. The CSM has no journalistic credibility anymore. What a JOKE CSM is! HA HA HA….October 14, 2008 and the “Journalists” at CSM tepidly criticize (indirectly at that) their CHOSEN ONE. What a complete joke CSM is in terms of Journalism. What a JOKE!
October 15th, 2008 at 11:00 am PDT
The author is being deliberately provocative, and giving Karl Rove credit for creating the idea of a “base” strategy. He does not deserve such credit.
Every campaign has a base strategy. Every candidate wants to get out as much of its base vote as it can. It’s called retail politics, and is as old as the Republic.
What distinguished Rove was not the “base vote” strategy, but a tactical decision to campaign based on discrediting the opponent. And he didn’t even invent that. Lee Atwater did, in the modern sense, with his “Willie Horton” campaign in 1988 for Bush Sr.
I think the author knows this, but ignores it to attack the Obama campaign.
But it’s misrepresenting history and facts in the name of making an attack which is Rove’s real contribution. The only Rovian here is the author.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:01 am PDT
What a waste of my 2 minutes.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:01 am PDT
You’ve stretched this rubber band of an idea so far in trying to connect the non-existent dots that it has snapped. By your own words, you recognize Rove as an individual many hold in contempt, and then (like Rove, himself) you attempt to draw a correlation between his tactics and those of the Obama campaign with phantom threads. This is shoddy journalism and duplicitous commentary; attributes that are, ironically, very Rovian.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:01 am PDT
If anything, this article is “Rovian” in nature. A flashy headline designed to attract people, with no real substance, truth, or relevant facts to back it up.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:02 am PDT
Wow. What a misleading headline. Patchwork indeed.
What is this? “Made You Look” journalism?
October 15th, 2008 at 11:03 am PDT
Apparently GOTV efforts are now a Rovian machination. That is a logical leap worthy of an appearance in the Guinness Book of World Records.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:03 am PDT
Obama just doesn’t stop does he .I don’t like the way either are running but Obama is going over board.running two new television advertisements and a radio spot, there is enough of him on tv already.Obama TV and every other ad is his on almost every tv station. Ads on video games His picture on every corner or at lest his name.Before long there will be statues of him every where.When are we going to have to get on our knee’s when he inters a room. He is power hungry and its showing big time. I thought he was better then that.He has been taught well on how to give a speech and get people to think he is some great man that will save the world.He is just another man with big promises that he will not be able to deliver.Wake up people.His change he says he will make will not happen like you think.He will not shine that light down on you like he says.The world will keep on going on even if he is not president.He will not pad you pocket book with money. You have to work for that.he will not make all you troubles go away you also have to work for that.He will not bring peace to the world in 4 years or 8.People have to work for that not one man.He will not give you a $500,000 dollar home you have to work for that.He will not give you a job you have to get off your butts and get your own job.But he will give you welfare and free collage and free health care and SS if you are illegal.He will give you free stuff and help if you are black or Hispanic. do your home work.Your GOD is just a man with many things he is going to do you have no clue about.I would rather have a poor man as president in office then some rich man who say he knows what we are going through then some young rich guy who spends money like there is no tomorrow and pretends he cares. But if want him go for it. he will not be there to pick you up when things get bad.You will have to do that your selfs.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:04 am PDT
CSMonitor and Dante Chinni show shades of Rove by using a misleading headline to get the attention of their base.
It isnt simple ignorance or carelessness on the part of the writer. The Rovian attempt at deception is deliberate.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:05 am PDT
As someone has already pointed out, college kids don’t quite qualify as “the base”. Additionally, Obama has set up camp here at Ohio State, which has a huge republican “base”.
I agree, this article is more Rovian than it claims Obama’s camp is.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:06 am PDT
Wow, imagine that a democratic campaign office on a college campus. I went to UMich back in the 80s and remember seeing *all* not only the two mainstream parties but also independents and 4th, 5th, 6th party candidates (really obscure). That is what you get at a campus. Maybe you should submit this article to FoxNews where it belongs.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:07 am PDT
I, like most other people who have commented on this article, clicked on this link because I was expecting to get a juicy tidbit of Obama gossip.
When I realized that I had been had, I immediately scrolled down to post a complaint, but it looks like lots of people already beat me to it; nearly unanimously.
Very impressive.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:09 am PDT
I hear National Enquirer is looking for a headline writer. Your sensational wording made your article was dishonest.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:09 am PDT
Duh,huh..What?! The title of this article is totally misleading. I cant believe I wasted my time reading this. I kept reading to see how Mr. Chinni would make this Rovian connection, and what did I get? Nada. I see that I am not alone in my criticism of this article. This article is purley speculation. The connection that the author attempts to make, quite febbley I might add, is so embarrassingly weak that I wouldn’t be surprise if he wouldnt be allowed to write for any reputable news organization beside the Christian Monitior. Maybe they too will wise up and dump this writer so that they can save a little face and earn back some respectablity.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:12 am PDT
I thought it would talk about the fraudulent voter registation, or the funny money that paid for his travels as a young man and his house, etc. The article was downright respectable and informative. Well done. Karl Rove killed the GOP if you ask me.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:14 am PDT
your concept is disingenuous. when i think of karl rove (he of bush’s brain) i think of character assaults through falsehoods or by playing on ultra conservative prejudices and exclusivities, for we have rove to thank for the innuendo campaign against ann richards in texas and mccain in the 2000 election. rove is famous for playing dirty, not so much for raising a campaign sign. when the primary got nasty and clinton was knee-capping obama and getting called the tonya harding candidate, that was rove-ish. when palin and mccain beat the fear and hate drums, that’s rove-ish. most of your comments here show that your article is more rove-ish or ignorant than insightful. or cute.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am PDT
>>>The latest poll just published on Reuters shows 48% to 44%. Obama’s lead is narrowing. Tonight McCain Needs to address how he is going to deal with Economy and why will it work and remind America about Obama’s luck of experience, judgement and character. Do bring up ACORN, and why Obama is not fit to lead (Rev. Write, Ayers, REZCO, etc)
///
What BS!!!! It’s sad that all the republican have to go on is guilt by association. It’d be a better trick if McCain didn’t have someone just as bad or worse in comparison. Rev Wright = Rev John Hagee. Tony Rezko = Charles Keating. Bill Ayers = David Ifshin. OBAMA WAS 8 YEARS OLD when Ayers pulled his patriotic stunts. Yes, I said PATRIOTIC. The founding fathers thought questioning government was the epitome of patriotism. Thomas Jefferson said that a revolution every 75 years would be a GOOD thing.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am PDT
What a garbage article. While its content was marginally informative, the ridiculous headline just ruins it. Pathetic attempt to garner web traffic. You knew damn well this story had jack s**t to do with Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am PDT
I kept reading and waiting for the punch line after you assured us that a campaign office and Karl Rove had plenty in common, what a waste of time! Since when did “appealing to your base” become a Rove tactic? The Christian Science Monitor should be ashamed and asking you to pack up your desk.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:17 am PDT
Dante, In one of your responses you said this: “What’s more, I think if you asked the Obama people about it they would say they learned from Rove.”
This may surprise you but as YOU are the ‘journalist’ that should have been your job. Did you even contact the Obama people for comment? Doubtful, much like your premise.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:19 am PDT
>>>The latest poll just published on Reuters shows 48% to 44%. Obama’s lead is narrowing. Tonight McCain Needs to address how he is going to deal with Economy and why will it work and remind America about Obama’s luck of experience, judgement and character. Do bring up ACORN, and why Obama is not fit to lead (Rev. Write, Ayers, REZCO, etc)
///
What BS!!!! It’s sad that all the republican have to go on is guilt by association. It’d be a better trick if McCain didn’t have someone just as bad or worse in comparison. Rev Wright = Rev John Hagee. Tony Rezko = Charles Keating. Bill Ayers = David Ifshin. OBAMA WAS 8 YEARS OLD when Ayers pulled his patriotic stunts. Yes, I said PATRIOTIC. The founding fathers thought questioning government was the epitome of patriotism. Thomas Jefferson said that a revolution every 75 years would be a GOOD thing.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:21 am PDT
Fred: Obama is the new comer for change the world will be a better place because of him.He has good ideas and wants to help the people.I hope they do have statues of him around America people need to know that he will be the one for change and that we should thank God for giving him to us to do these changes.So what he is on tv we love seeing him and hearing what he stands for. its good for America. Obama will always be there to pick us up when we need it just like he is now.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:23 am PDT
So by your by your defintion ANYONE attempting to get there base out to vote is “Rovian?” Ridiculous. I didnt know first of all that energizing your base was invented by Rove. #2 we now use Rove as comparision whenever this occurs? The headline could have easily read “McCain’s Team Shows Shades of Rove” Once again this decision to entitle this peice is purely designed to trump up readers with a controversial headline. Now THAT sounds Rovian to me.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:23 am PDT
This piece wins the “it was a dark and stormy night” award for journalism — for this sentence: “There sits an Obama “Campaign for Change” office in all its Rove-ian glory.”– A more meaningless statement has very rarely appeared anywhere…I had assumed that to write a story about something being “Rove-ian” would entail knowing what “Rove-ian” means, which seems to be beyond the writing skills of of this blogger…
October 15th, 2008 at 11:24 am PDT
now, this article is complete rovian, designed to smear the obama campaign in a most surreptitious way by aligning it with the likes of karl rove. sneaky, sneaky!
October 15th, 2008 at 11:25 am PDT
This author is is using McCain-style logic. It seems to be contagious, like Doublespeak and Doubethink that are now so prevalent in the Republican campaign. You know, black is white, bad is good, Obama is Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:27 am PDT
What about all the offices he set up in red states? He’s not just driving up the numbers in safe places like Rove, he’s engaging all the voters in all the states. Dumb article.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:28 am PDT
Geez, does anyone on this comment board actually know anything about Karl Rove? He didn’t sit around eating live kittens, he was a brilliant (albeit evil) political strategist! Stop acting like defensive children! I hate what he’s done to America. HATE IT. But the “base strategy” was just a strategy, neither good nor bad, and it worked. So: 1) Why the heck wouldn’t a smart campaign like Obama’s put it to use? 2) Why are you getting so defensive when Dante’s pretty much just saying that Obama’s adopting a good strategy that was heavily used by Karl Rove? He didn’t say “Obama’s evil just like Karl Rove’s evil.” Frankly, I’m glad that we’ve finally got a democratic campaign that’s running a really smart race for once. All that hope stuff is being backed up with real winning strategies–like squeezing a lot of votes out of your base. Stop thinking in one dimension, people.
As an Obama supporter, sometimes I feel like the guy in the middle of a roaring crowd looking around going, “Holy cow, what’s going on here?” Some of this glassy-eyed unconditional support for our guy scares me. What if Obama does something really terrible in office? It could happen. Are you all going to continue ripping on everyone who doesn’t give the guy glowing reviews?
Great observations, Dante. Don’t let the peanut gallery get to you.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:33 am PDT
Yes, because Rove was the first person who ever thought of appealing to the base. Regardless of that, this article is blatant in its sensationalism. When it comes down to it, this sounds like a Republican making assumptions about the Obama campaign’s intent. A just as logical explanation of having an office in college towns is that Obama wants to empower his people to be active in politics and not the seemingly “Rovian” tactic of treating the constituency like sheep.
“Four legs good, two legs bad.” -Orwell, Animal Farm
October 15th, 2008 at 11:38 am PDT
CSM has really gotten shrill during this election. Yes, I am a libral, but I used to think more of your publication - that there was some critical thinking behind most of your stories, even if I might disagree with your world view.
It’s sad to watch the decline of your publication into thoughtless babble.
Cheers
October 15th, 2008 at 11:40 am PDT
What?! You must be insane!
October 15th, 2008 at 11:41 am PDT
people will get tired of the way Obama is doing his campaign because they are getting tired of seeing him on tv all the time and paying for half hour show witch will be more and more of them from what i hear.lots of people watch tv to also get away from all this campaign and when someone keeps putting their face in yours 24 hours a day they will get tried of it and it will hurt him in the long run.I am a Obama voter but do hate seeing it all the time myself.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:42 am PDT
I don’t see how this makes Obama a fan of Rove as much as it makes him anti-stupid.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:43 am PDT
Obama in the Middle…is America that stupid?
They will actually be voting for the farest left Senator in the Senate!
TAX and TAX and TAX!
October 15th, 2008 at 11:43 am PDT
What is this?
Never made a point, never connected to the title in any meaningful way. Seems more like a slight against Barack from some kook looking for anything to associate Barack or the left with Rove.
Get your facts first - then lie about them.
I just don’t see any facts just supposition to feed an overextended imagination.
Thanks anyway Dante there are some good articles out there maybe you should try again?
October 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am PDT
Your title is sliding toward sleazy journalism. They are obviously intended to convey the idea that Obama’s campaign efforts in Ann Arbor are underhanded, rather than smart politics. You should know better. Journalists, I remind you, have an ethical responsibility to tell the truth.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am PDT
Rove can’t even carry Pelosi’s jock strap
October 15th, 2008 at 11:45 am PDT
Wow, holding comments makes this an exercize in meaningless crappola!
Get a real blog - moderation is not monitoring.
Thumbs down!
October 15th, 2008 at 11:46 am PDT
“Christian Science Monitor uses Rovian Tactics to Endorse McCain”
See inflamotory
October 15th, 2008 at 11:46 am PDT
poorly written.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:47 am PDT
I get what you mean, Dante. I also get the outrage of any association of the Obama campaign with the wretched Rove. Folks are taking it as saying that Hitler made the trains run on time. What you’re doing is using the title to get people to read the article. But, what the article really points out is that Obama is well organized and part of Rove’s success came from being organized. I’m sure you will also allow that the Obama supporters are sensitive to having their candidate smeared by association with notorious characters, feel compelled to rise to his defense and spurn your suggestion that Obama got his playbook from Rove. But, Hey, it’s about getting eye-balls on the page.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:48 am PDT
The Pentagon’s War College trains tomorrows generals by studying past defeats. By studying pasts defeats they hope to avoid the same mistakes and miss cues that led to defeat. I applaud Obama for taking the initiative and opening field offices. I don’t see how this compares to baser Rovean tactics though.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:49 am PDT
Change the title and premise of the story away from Rove and I think the article is decent. But good job getting people to read the article based on a misleading title.
Playing to the base (which college students really aren’t the *base*) isn’t a new tactic.
Rove only used the tactic better than others because of his smear tactics to scare old and religious people into voting against Gore/Kerry.
Obama might be scaring people into voting for him rather than McCain, but at least he’s doing it using political reasoning instead of smear tactics.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am PDT
What does this have to do with Karl Rove? The author needs to start to spend more time thinking before starting typing.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am PDT
Dante, In response to your comment at 8:48 “What’s more, I think if you asked the Obama people about it they would say they learned from Rove.” Why didn’t YOU ask them before you wrote your commentary? Just curious.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am PDT
This is a terrible affront to Obama. Karl Rove is deceitful, dishonest, and runs the shadow government. He and his shadow government are as unamerican as can be.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:51 am PDT
The concept of inspiring your base is not original to Rove. The concept of inspiring your base via sleazy character assasinations and culture wars is.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:51 am PDT
This article is truly a disappointment. The CSM can generally be relied on for solid reporting and considered opinions, but this article is naught but drivel with a provocative title.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:51 am PDT
Whenever I have seen the Monitor listed in Google’s election news, I alway click and read because the articles have always been thoughtful. It was with trepidation that I clicked on this one, expecting to be disappointed in Obama. What a crock! The headline is VERY misleading! Turning out the base has been a part of each candidate’s plans in this election and others. You might as well say Obama is muslim because, as a baby, he was nursed on milk and muslims are nursed on milk.
This headline seems to just be trolling for hits. I expect better from the Monitor.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:52 am PDT
Being “Rovian” implies insidious innuendos (like McCain’s black daughter) and pandering to racist sentiment. Either the title is wrong, or the wrong article sits under it. My hat’s off to Obama’s campaign managers. They understand that, unlike the Republicans, who rubberstamped everything that Bush/Cheney asked them to do, Democrats are truly more independent. Without a comfortable margin in the Senate, Obama’s plan can be hamstrung by Republican filibuster tactics. Having strong majorities in both houses of congress is no guarantee that everything Obama proposes will become law, but not having those strong majorities is a guarantee of Republican obstructionism. So, let freedom ring. Let’s finally have a president and congress that act responsibly instead of acting like partisan ideologues.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:53 am PDT
Adam, I doubt your sincerity as an Obama supporter. I can come on here and say I’m from Mars. Doesn’t make it so. You quote all the Rushisms word for word. I guess if I was a republican, I’d hide in shame too.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:54 am PDT
Now I have finally read it. When did the CSM get purchased by the New York Times in making a leap of logic that does not fit? My condolences to excellent, balanced reporting.
Karl Rove is a tactician. He is very good and that is what scares the Democratic party. Putting a campaign office in your back yard is poor logic. Putting the same campaign office on the edge of a back yard that allows you to penetrate the enemy’s back yard makes even better logic. Karl Rove understands those numbers.
College students provide the backbone of the new voters of the future. It does not matter which party.
However, for market research purposes until someone has consistently voted in 3 or more elections for the same party they are not considered a dedicated party voter.
Voters who swing from candidate to candidate regardless of party fall into the Independent/Swing category despite party affiliation. For many college students, voting liberal is their private opportuntity to rebel against their parents; hence the large growth of Independent voters coming out of college that rivals new Democratic registrations.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:57 am PDT
I have never posted to this blog before, but I have to voice my agreement with the other readers who found the title of this article to be inflammatory and misleading. “shades of Rove” has a sinister ring to it, and it is disingenuous of the writer to pretend otherwise…he’s stretching to make a negative case, and it’s not working. What’s more, it’s offensive. I hope this writer is fired from his position.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:58 am PDT
Obama is slick Willie. Led by the Geriatric DC Democrat Boys Club. BELIEVE it. You’ll all be scratching your heads wondering what you ever saw in Mr. Done Nothing in his life Obama.
There’s nothing DIFFERENT kind of politics about him. He’s been lying to the silly college kids since day one.
But as usual, American’s and kids are ridiculous know it alls - and have to learn everything the hard way.
Obama’s campaign has been the dirtiest Democratic group I’ve ever seen. I’m a life long Democrat. But I know NOTHING when I see it.
Gonna be fun to watch the karma.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:59 am PDT
All of you Obamaniacs w/ your knee-jerk reactions make me laugh. “Get out the base” is a longstanding election strategy, it’s not particularly “Rovian”. Rove’s strategy was to increase the base by polarizing the electorate. Right or wrong, it works.
For all of you who think Obama is somehow “above the fray” and doesn’t engage in “dirty politics”…boy, grow up. Go look up what he did to Alice Palmer in order to run unopposed. Obama’s a Chicago political machine product, Axelrod’s his campaign manager for gosh sakes, Mr. Astroturfer himself.
Obama is a grasping opportunist, perfectly suited as a politician. Look at how he manipulated his relationship with Rev. Wright and TUCC and then bailed out when his association started looking “bad”. Look at Tony Rezko. Look at ACORN. Oh, why bother…Obamaniacs are too busy letting Barack shine them on to pay attention.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:59 am PDT
What the ****? Okay and George Bush is a Nazi because he wears boots. I understand you want people to read your article. You have obviously accomplished that, but it’s also about making a name for yourself. Congratulations. Now everyone knows that Dante Chinni is a joke. If you get fired today, you should go work for the McCain campaign. I think they would appreciate your knack for strategy.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:00 pm PDT
This article is completely correct in it’s assertion. “Energize the Base!” was the mantra. The title just ensures it will be read. Rove is a lightening rod. I am a huge Obama fan and I find nothing offensive about this article. If this article offends you, you need to be doing something more important, say… Counting the Charms in a box of Lucky Charms cereal.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:00 pm PDT
Mr Chinni:
Sigh. As a former journalist, I can empathize with you. During my 20-year career, I got stuck with weird assignments like this from time to time: some boneheaded premise from an editor who never left the office and had no idea what was going on out there. You write the article and move on. It was all part of the daily grind and picking your battles is part of the gig. Nothing to put in your portfolio, but that’s the way it goes. Better luck on the next assignment.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:01 pm PDT
Obama and his campaign are well organized with roots everywhere, particularily low-income and homeless people. They have reached a point where doing nothing is enough to win the elections.
Can we afford not to do anything about ACORN ? (I understand Ayers is off limits now for some reason such as Obama doesn’t like the subject ).
Can American voters be cheated like that and be ok with that?
I’m a black Democrat registered voter and given the facts I will most likely not vote at all this time.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:03 pm PDT
Is this article with such a title purposefully devisive? You should check yourself Mr. Chinni. Mr. Obama’s appeal is broad-based for good reason and certainly includes the Democrat base, the character of this campaign far removed from the tactics of Carl Rove.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:04 pm PDT
I was “introduced” to Mr Chinni via a Bill Moyers program, on which he actually seemed to make some sense. Imagine, then, my utter surprise to see the headline of this article. I was even more amazed at Mr Chinni’s solipsistic argument as he attempted to make the body of his piece stay stitched to his rather provocative headline.
Organization = Rove (?!?!?) Obama is organized = using Rove strategy (!!!???)
Mr Chinni: A does not equal B or C; ergo, your entire thesis is beyond spurious.
If you are in fact a journalist, it may be time for you to back to class for some journalistic re-grooving; if you are simply another of the ‘talking heads’, it is time for you to take a vacation and try to find your moral center.
Regardless which candidate has claimed your allegiance, you do them no service with such absurd articles.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:07 pm PDT
I was “introduced” to Mr Chinni via a Bill Moyers program, on which he actually seemed to make some sense. Imagine, then, my utter surprise to see the headline of this article. I was even more amazed at Mr Chinni’s solipsistic argument as he attempted to make the body of his piece stay stitched to his rather provocative headline.
Organization = Rove (?!?!?) Obama is organized = using Rove strategy (!!!???)
Mr Chinni: A does not equal B or C; ergo, your entire thesis is beyond spurious.
If you are in fact a journalist, it may be time for you to back to class for some journalistic re-grooving; if you are simply another of the ‘talking heads’, it is time for you to take a vacation and try to find your moral center.
Regardless which candidate has claimed your allegiance, you do them no service with such absurd articles.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:10 pm PDT
I like how trolls (Todd) preface by saying they’re life long Democrats. Your so obviously a Republican hack. Nice try though. What flavor Cool-Aid are we drinking today Todd?
October 15th, 2008 at 12:11 pm PDT
c’mon folks. Give the writer a break! Can’t you stop the petty whining and complaining long enough to decipher the INTENT of this article? It was not intended to be demeaning….it was simply a matter of respect for the decision to site an office on a campus site where it will likely help the cause.
As much as Rove is disliked, he still has to be respected for his intelligence and abilities to get votes. The writer of this article is simply complimenting the Obama campaign officials for having the good sense to emulate a working tactic….no matter who came up with the idea.
Have a good day and enjoy socialism.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:11 pm PDT
Perhaps only the Monitor would find the essence of ‘Karl Rovism’ to be getting your base out to vote. Close your eyes, cross your fingers and wish the winsome wish - that Obama would so throughly and blindly reject ‘Karl Rovism’ that he would confine all of his get-out-the-vote efforts to the hills of West Virginia.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:11 pm PDT
Tabloid bloggers should not be confused with professional op-ed journalists. This is a BLOG and I suggest those that opine on its content ought to understand that. What bothers me is that the CSM would consider this writer’s comments in any way newsworthy.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:12 pm PDT
Your thoughts are interesting and dynamic, where can I subscribe to your newsletter?
On a serious note though, terribly written article, lacking substance, created to support a headline that you wrote first. This is sleaze-ball journalism with a complete lack of a substantiative message. People who read this article will get one of two messages:
A) You are a hack sleaze-ball writer with no integrity
or
B) OMG!!11! Rove, Obama *grabble* *grabble*
October 15th, 2008 at 12:14 pm PDT
Tabloid bloggers should not be confused with professional op-ed journalists. This is a BLOG and I suggest those that opine on its content ought to understand that. What bothers me is that CSM - or any other news feed - would consider this writers opinion in any way newsworthy.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:15 pm PDT
What an asinine article, better luck next time.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:15 pm PDT
To Mr Arne Saknussemm:
Please, before you decide to NOT vote this election - find some unbaised reporting on what REALLY is the connection between Mr Obama and ACORN. You think you know; but I assure you, based on your comments I have to say you have allowed yourself to be mislead.
Mr Obama is not responsible for all the actions of any organization with which he may have been associated, at any time. Rather, I would think, it is the responsibility of those self same organizations to make sure their actions can survive close scrutiny.
That being said, please do not allow yourself to be a victim of the continual flood of misinformation coming from the RNC and it’s fellows. They have fed you a load of hogwash - if I were you I would not swallow.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:16 pm PDT
Rove plays to the Republican base by inciting the worst elements of bigotry and fear through Big Lies and smears. Is it effective? Yes. Is it admirable? No! Rove who was a Lee Atwater protegee has continued to perfect the fear and smear, and more recently has added the American Idol strategy in the promotion of know-nothing Palin as a celebrity. He may be a genius at his work but he is an evil genius if so. He makes a mockery out of the democratic process. We all are paying a heavy price for his “genius”.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:16 pm PDT
>>>Look at how he manipulated his relationship with Rev. Wright and TUCC and then bailed out when his association started looking “bad”. Look at Tony Rezko. Look at ACORN. Oh, why bother…Obamaniacs are too busy letting Barack shine them on to pay attention.
Look how McCain manipulated Rev. Hagee and then bailed out when the association started lookin ‘bad’. Look at Charles Keating!! Look at ACORN!!! http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/acorn-mccain-have-you-lost/story.aspx?guid={9DF1C9E0-F0BA-4509-B4EC-AF741171DEAC}&dist=hppr
Oh, why bother…. Ditto heads are too busy letting El Rushbo do the thinking for them.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:17 pm PDT
So much hatred, calls for switching professions, character attacks on the author. LaVerne. Please, the guy just wrote a piece. You can agree or disagree with it. Suddenly this guy is a monster because he might not agree with you? What? Are we living in the 1950’s?
October 15th, 2008 at 12:18 pm PDT
What has happened to the CSM? It used to be a repected paper. Where are the editors? Why would they permit this kind of dishonest tripe to be published?
October 15th, 2008 at 12:23 pm PDT
This article is pretty Rovian. How useless. I can’t believe they even published it.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:50 pm PDT
Bravo, Dante…..always refreshing to have other points of view….
We think John McCain should have hired Karl Rove in the first place.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:53 pm PDT
It’s ok for Sarah Pailin to engergize the base, but not Obama??? And what’s this about taxes? Aren’t we going to pay more in taxes for the mess George Bush has made out the economy?
October 15th, 2008 at 12:59 pm PDT
Appealing to one’s political base is not “Rovian”; it’s good politics. If Obama’s supporters wanted to take a Rovian approach, they would be questioning McCain’s military service by spreading vile lies and innuendo. You know, like saying that Obama “pals around with terrorsits” because he once worked with a college professor and Chicago Citizen Of The Year who committed a crime when Obama was eight years old. Now THAT’S Rovian! I don’t think that Obama’s people could come close to being truly “Rovian”. I don’t think they have that inside them, even on their worst days.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:05 pm PDT
JoeFromQC: I don’t listen to Limbaugh or Hannity or O’Reilly, but nice try! Re: Hagee, McCain didn’t sit in his church for 20 years, Hagee didn’t baptize McCain’s children, Hagee didn’t inspire the title of a book (Obama’s Audacity of Hope came from Rev. Wright)…LAUGHABLE comparison. Nothing I haven’t seen from the Obamaniacs before, tho. Did McCain say he couldn’t disassociate himself from Hagee one week and then throw Hagee under the bus the next week! Puh-leeze.
Go look up the Daley machine and see where Axelrod came from…start connecting the dots on the Obama campaign. Barry’s chosen to associate himself with radical leftists his whole life. When you’re done connecting the dots, you probably won’t like the picture. But then again, maybe you will.
October 15th, 2008 at 2:11 pm PDT
October 15th, 2008 at 4:14 pm PDT
Thank you all for your thoughts and comments…even those I do not agree with, which is most of them, of course. But hey, that’s free speech.
I appreciate the extreme distaste for Karl Rove you all have. But I might suggest that your thoughts of how I am trying to “smear” Sen. Obama by associating him with Mr. Rove may stem more from your feelings about Rove than anything else. It certainly was not meant as a smear, but rather an irony that the tactic that Rove had honed into a powerful weapon was now being used against the GOP. (It’s more than simply “excite the base” as some of you say, it is massively register and turnout the vote in highly supportive areas. And as I noted in the piece, the Dems have not done it to this degree before.)
As for working for the McCain campaign, I’ll file those ideas with those from other readers who have commented on this site and suggested I go work for Mr. Obama.
One thing I would offer. I understand if you dislike a piece that is written, but please try to keep all personal attacks — whether they be against Mr. Obama, Mr. McCain, each other or even me — at a minimum.
Please take care and keep reading.
Thanks
-Dante
October 15th, 2008 at 6:33 pm PDT
Another disappointing reply that does nothing to answer the legitimate criticisms your readers are bringing up. Instead, you condescendingly patronize all of us for being “upset over Rove”, which is also offensive because it means you aren’t actually listening to the criticisms being made.
At this point what would be responsible is (1) acknowledging the toxic and unjustified connotations you bring out by associating Obama and Rove, (2) acknowledging that “turn out the base” isn’t a strategy that started with Rove, and even if he in some sense “perfected” it, calling it Rovian doesn’t make it any more clear what you mean.
You also say that this isn’t meant as a criticism. Who are you kidding? When has the term “Rovian” EVER been used in a way that wasn’t negative? This is a serious question, and its not just motivated by “being upset over Rove”.
October 16th, 2008 at 2:10 am PDT
Really Dante? Is everyone on this blog part of the leftist media? What Obama has done resembles nothing Rove did and you know it. No matter how you try to spin it there is nothing ironic about your comparison between the Obama campaign and Rove. What the Obama team has done is run a phenomenal campaign that didn’t, let me repeat that for clarity, didn’t resort to any “Rovian” tactics. That is exactly why he’s winning and will win this election. The reason? Because people have rejected Rove and everything he stands for.
November 13th, 2008 at 2:25 pm PST
Hi webmaster!