ONTD Political

Rove: Obama won 'by suppressing the vote'

4:38 pm - 11/08/2012

GOP strategist Karl Rove went on Fox News today to argue that President Barack Obama "succeeded by suppressing the vote" -- an argument that directly contradicts the conventional wisdom that Romney failed to appeal to non-white and female voters.

Rove argued that Obama won with a smaller popular vote and a smaller margin of victory than in the 2008 election against Sen. John McCain. Instead of expanding voters, Rove argued, Obama "suppressed the vote" by demonizing former Gov. Mitt Romney and encouraging people not to vote.

"President Obama has become the first president in history to win a second term with a smaller percentage of the vote than he did in the first term," Rove said.

"But he won Karl, he won!" Fox News host Megyn Kelly interjected. Kelly also asked Rove how Republicans intended to appeal to minority groups, especially Hispanics, after doing so much to alienate them in 2012. Rove pointed to Hispanic-voter turnout in Texas to argue that there was no fundamental disconnect between his party and Latino voters.

As many pundits and strategists have pointed out, the Obama campaign succeeded in large part because it appealed to -- and registered -- non-white voters, expanding (rather than suppressing) the vote in key battleground states.

In a subsequent segment, Kelly would cite "demographics" and a "racial divide in the voting booth" that "raised questions" about whether the GOP needed to do more to reach Latinos and African-Americans. "Why can't the Republicans do better with people of color?" she asked her guests.

Rove's appearance on Fox News follows the now-infamous moment from election night when he argued with Kelly and co-host Bret Baier over the network's decision to call Ohio for the president.

By Dylan Byers. Posted 11/8/12 2:43 PM EST

purplerains 9th-Nov-2012 03:19 am (UTC)
I agree! And I really don't like how, across the board, the networks frame this as "demographics!!!"

It's not as if the democrats just take out a wand and wave it in the faces of non-white male voters, or like Fox would claim give out food stamps, abortions and citizenship door to door, it's because their policies are more beneficial to minority groups. Why can't they frame it that way?

The republicans cannot reach these groups because their policy outright DENIES the rights of minority groups. Why exit polls don't report democrats get 100% women, youth, latino, black, asian votes is amazing to me.
chimbleysweep 9th-Nov-2012 03:25 am (UTC)
Exactly. Very few people are explaining why these demographics favor the Democrats right now. They're just leaving it at demographics and that's it. This leaves it open to HORRIBLE classist and racist interpretation which will probably get infinitely worse.
cyranothe2nd 9th-Nov-2012 06:03 am (UTC)
This morning the Republicans were talking about how they needed to "rebrand" and "tone down" their racist rhetoric. As opposed to, you know, NOT BEING SO FUCKING RACIST.
thenakedcat 9th-Nov-2012 03:12 pm (UTC)

One of NPR's commentators pointed out that, although Republicans made a lot of noise about the growing importance of the Hispanic vote in places like Colorado, they failed to do anything that might be reasonably construed as courting that vote--like coming up with a viable path-to-citizenship immigration reform package. Instead, they pandered heavily to teabagger racism and nativism, especially during the primary.

Obama may not have been able to get comprehensive immigration reform passed, but he did make an effort to show that he understood the concerns of Hispanic communities--by appointing Latin@s to high-profile positions (like Sotomayor), issuing the executive order to stop deporting people who would qualify under the Dream Act, suing Arizona over SB 1070, making sure that his campaign had Spanish-language competency, etc. And voters responded to that by turning out at the polls and voting heavily in his favor.
This page was loaded Feb 27th 2017, 6:30 pm GMT.