The Fingerprints of Karl Rove

I still glance at Spokane's alternative weekly, The Inlander, a sometime source of sanity in that comminity. This past week it carried a syndicated article by Eric Boehlert which originally appeared at Media Matters For America. Boehlert writes:

My favorite article from the just-completed campaign season appeared in the Oct. 9 issue of Time, in which Mike Allen and James Carney wrote a detailed piece about why Republicans were not worried about the upcoming elections. "The G.O.P.'s Secret Weapon," read the bold headline. "You think the Republicans are sure to lose big in November? They aren't. Here's why things don't look so bad to them," read the subhead.

The article goes on to talk about the "eerie, Zen-like calm" (an ironic metaphor if there ever was one) that Republicans felt because Karl had never lost an election, and Karl's numbers showed them keeping both houses of Congress. Another article in Newsweek explained that Rove's theory was that public opinion polls are no longer accurate in the age of cell phones and do-not-call lists, and that his figures on early voting and voter outreach were more accurate. He even planned to host a post-election workshop for Republican political strategists on why the polls weren't accurate. I hope his deposit on the meeting space is refundable.

The point of the article, though, is that the corporate media has long worshiped Rove, his political skills, and to a certain extent his policy preferences. Even in the six months leading up to the election, a bellweather institution like Time could do nothing but swoon:

Bush's presidency was in shambles (think Jimmy Carter, circa 1979), yet Time eagerly passed along the transparent spin about how Republican chances were "getting better by the day." Those kinds of simplistic campaign talking points worked wonders with right-wing bloggers and radio talk show hosts who excitedly repeated them as a way to calm their nerves during the campaign homestretch. But Time?

A couple of points come to mind. One, of course, is the increasing cowardice of the mainstream media. Thirty years of incessant claims of liberal bias have beat the media into submission, and consolidation of ownership has seemingly placed the final nail in the coffin. "Balance" now supercedes truth in journalism, and balance is defined as "he said/she said" with no analysis except what an event does to the political scoreboard. And the most attention is given to the "rockstars"--Karl Rove in this case, and in other cases Gingrich, Obama, and so forth.

Another point is the futility of the politics of division. By his own admission, Rove's was a "50 percent plus one" strategy. He never wanted to gain the support of a large majority of the electorate. To go beyond 50 percent plus one required compromising too much on ideology. And to even get to 50 percent plus one, he had to inject a large measure of fear. Kerry will take your guns away, Gore will force Christians to worship underground, Hillary Clinton will force all states to accept gay marriage, Howard Dean will take your land away, a Democratic Congress will "cut and run" from terrorism. The problem is that these claims are untrue. Another problem is that when you have 50 percent plus one vote, you can't lose a single vote.

Karl Rove grossly misread the critical mass of the American public. Considering the fact that redistricting since 2000 has left very little competition in Congressional races, this was a sea change. Lies, corruption, senseless warfare, and favoritism toward the ultra-wealthy are not what the American people want.

Despite this, the media mostly gushes at Rove's genius. Two ABC News reporters just released the latest Rove-is-a-genius book, and as Boehlert comments:

Rove's fingerprints are all over both miscalculations, but the press, still not over its Rove crush, shies away from the tough questions.

It has been interesting to watch the gradual change in the media narrative since the elections, but I'm not at all sure that they have moved much closer to where most Americans stand. Mainstream media has become a mouthpiece for megacorporate America. Blessedly, alternative media and online resources offer a balance to this for those willing to listen.