I’m sure “Shadow” Party makes a great headline, but when you give interviews about what you’re doing, and talk about it openly, then it’s hardly in the shadows.
I think he means it in the sense of the UK’s “shadow cabinet”, that is a parallel party apparatus thats out of power, rather then a “secret GOP party”. The point of a shadow cabinet is to publically and loudly oppose the actual cabinet, the opposite of being secretive.
Yea, I’m just saying its the same general sense of the term “shadow”, not that there’s a perfect analogy between the two.
But it seems kinda like a gimmick to reassure GOP donors who might be uncomfortable with the Tea Party antics or giving money to the seemingly inept RNC. As the article says, the with the exception of Castle, the money seems to basically be going to the same candidates that the RNC is backing.
Rove senses the Repubs can not control the baggers. The Repubs are all about control. They vote in unison and talk alike. When they get O’Donnell and Angle types on the stage ,they have to conjure up a way to defend them. As they get wackier ,the defense gets more difficult. It is necessary for Rove and the masterminds of the party to find a way to squeeze them out.
But they can not do it publicly. That is why they will develop a sneaky and heavily financed sub group to do it under the radar.
I don’t think any of us here has anything to teach Karl Rove about how to get votes, and how you can’t get them, and most especially about all the secret things you can do to get them. Remember who we’re talking about.
At present, Rove is straddling the fence, playing get-away-closer with the Tea Party. If the Tea Party movement split off to form a third party, I’m pretty sure Rove would stay with the GOP. He’s not as radical as they are; and he’s not a populist paleoconservative, he’s not a libertarian, he’s an elitist neoconservative; and, most importantly, he’s not an idiot.