Andrew Sullivan
Win a fitness package worth more than £3,000
If you have a reputation for being a Machiavellian, you aren’t one. That was Machiavelli’s view, at least. The key to all successful power-mongers, he argued, is the appearance of innocence, and a reputation for honesty and benevolence. Underneath, of course, you’re stitching the system up.
So it doesn’t take a genius to realise that if Niccolo were around today he would laugh heartily at the idea that Karl Rove is a master of the art of ruthless politics.
President George W Bush’s right-hand man has a reputation as one of the nastiest, toughest players in the business. Last week Congress prepared but did not deliver a subpoena to have him testify about the highly suspicious firing of eight allegedly independent US attorneys in battle-ground states. He is regarded as being at the centre of the outing of Valerie Plame, the former covert CIA agent.
A true Machiavellian would never be associated with these tawdry and counterproductive political manoeuvres. A true Machiavellian would keep his eyes on the big power moves while coming off like Mother Teresa.
But just as Rove has become entangled in petty scandal, he has bungled the bigger strategy as well. Six years into the Bush presidency Rove’s fantasy of a permanent Republican majority is fast becoming a B-movie of a broken political movement.
The myth of Rove’s political bril-liance is not hard to dispel. He has often picked the easiest and sleaziest short-term tactic over the more difficult long-term strategy. He began his
career race-baiting and liberal-bash-ing a moribund Democratic party in the Deep South. It wasn’t hard to fell those teetering timbers in the 1970s and 1980s.
Yes he shepherded Bush to be governor of Texas in the 1990s, but again the political winds were strongly behind him. Texas had been trending Republican ever since the Lyndon B Johnson era, and Rove found in Bush a congenial and single-minded fellow to occupy a relatively weak executive office.
Rove does deserve credit for creating an aura of inevitability around Bush in 1999 and 2000, and for sliming John McCain in the South Carolina primary (after a near-fatal setback for Bush in New Hampshire). But much of the credit for Bush’s eventual razor-thin victory goes to Al Gore.
Even so, Rove actually advised Bush to stop campaigning the weekend before the vote, and suppressed a drunk-driving record that emerged very late in the campaign and nearly derailed the entire effort. These tactical errors made Bush’s victory a statistical rounding error.
Then came what in retrospect seems the stupidest decision made in a very long time in American politics. Rove advised a moderate, congenial and compassionate Republican, elected with a minority of the popular vote, to forget about retaining the political centre. Rove believed that appealing to moderates was a fool’s game when there were millions of alienated evangelical voters waiting to be tapped.
“Play to the base” was Rove’s mantra — and he could create what he called a “permanent majority”. If four or five million fundamentalists who had previously never voted could be marshalled into a new political movement, victory would be his. The rest could be bribed with large amounts of government spending (cash for churches, pills for the elderly, tax breaks for big business, tariffs for steel, subsidies for agriculture).
So Bush cut taxes, turned on the spending spigot and stuck to a strictly religious line on social policy: no new federal embryonic stem cell research, judicial appointments designed to reverse the Roe vs Wade case that established women’s right to abortion, a constitutional amendment to ban civil recognition of gay couples and a clumsy attempt to play politics with Terri Schiavo, a woman in Florida in a permanent vegetative state.
Bush’s response to 9/11 fell exactly into this Rovian pattern. Some war leaders respond to an attack by bringing the opposition party into their cabinet (as Winston Churchill did) and creating a government of national unity. Bush did the opposite, forging a war policy solely in the executive branch, sidelining the Senate and then running a mid-term election strategy by accusing Democrats of being soft on terror. It worked in the short term. But by the 2004 election the strains were beginning to show. Mistakes in Iraq were not viewed as national faults, to be corrected, but as the president’s sole responsibility, to be denied.
In wartime, Americans tend to back their president: those reelected to a second term do so with big majorities. Bush, thanks to Rove, broke this pattern, gaining a mere 51% in wartime with an economy goosed by Keyne-sian spending. Yes, he won — and he was lucky again in his opponents. But the basic structure was weak.
Just how weak is beginning to become clear. The Rove coalition has no viable candidate for 2008. Rudy Giuliani is a social liberal; McCain loathes the Rove base, and the feeling is mutual; Mitt Romney was only very recently boasting that he would be more pro-gay than Edward Kennedy. Evangelicals are splitting between those who want to keep their focus on sexual issues and those who want to take a more public stand on issues such as the environment and torture.
The mismanaged war has removed the Republicans’ advantage on national security. The younger generation is overwhelmingly Democratic. I remember when it was actually cool to be conservative. Those days are gone. In 2002 the parties were tied at 43% each across all Americans. After five more years of Bush, according to a survey by the Washington-based Pew Research Center released last week, the Democrats have 50% support compared with the Republicans’ 35%.
The survey also found big drops in religious intensity and big increases in the percentage eager to see government play a larger role in taking care of the poor. One of Rove’s ideological legacies may be the revival of old-school liberalism.
What Rove has also done by centring the Republican party in the Deep South is alienate many moderates and centre-right voters in the Rocky Mountains and Midwest. A state such as Colorado that was once evenly split now looks increasingly Democratic. California — the state of Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon — was abandoned long ago. And the one issue that really fires up the white base of the Republican party is hostility to illegal immigration. But a policy like that could turn off the huge and growing Hispanic vote, isolating the Republicans even further into a white, narrow and angry image.
Rove, in other words, may be on the verge of a historic realignment of the kind he used to boast of. He may indeed have created a new and permanent majority — but for the Democrats, not the Republicans. Machia-velli would be unimpressed.

Andrew Sullivan is an author, academic and journalist. He holds a PhD from Harvard in political science, and is a former editor of The New Republic. His 1995 book, Virtually Normal: An Argument About Homosexuality, became one of the best-selling books on gay rights. He has been a regular columnist for The Sunday Times since the 1990s, and also writes for Time and other publications.
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£Excellent+ executive benefits
Torres and Partners
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
Alstom Power
Europe
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
Special Offers now available
At the new sophisticated
Encore Las Vegas Resort!
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Remember this??
' WHOM THE GODS WILL DESTROY, THEY FIRST MAKE MAD'....
R Fryer, Seattle, WA
Commander in chief of what, Dan? The Swiss navy or the Liechtenstein army?
Peter Day, Doncaster, UK
Let's not forget how the Bush presidency has realigned (for better or worse) US politics towards the right:
The Supreme-Court has a solidly conservative majority and has already chipped away at Roe v Wade.
Competition in provision of education - something which would be a left-wing interest if the left weren't beholden to teachers unions - has become more mainstream with the No Child Left Behind Act.
Democrats are tripping over themselves not to condemn guns - even after the horrific killings at VT university.
The environment has been successfully supressed as a political issue.
In summary, the Bush administration has had more impact on the centreground than one might have thought judging by his incompetence and lack of popularity.
Anthony Tricot, London, UK
Mr Andrew Sullivan,
Let me congratulate you for this wonderful piece of journalistic art and prose on American politics. Within a few paragraphs, you have summarized beautifully and concisely the downfall of the republicans.
That's the best political article I have read since I could read the alphabets.
I remember a quote on Bill Clinton : "He could smile and talk at you and piss on your shoes at the same time and you would not notice a damn thing". That's Machiavelli :)
Denis Li Tim Cheong, Port Louis, Mauritius
For Dan - why in the world do we need another Bush in government? One could think that the only valuable people belonging to the Republican party are from the Bush family. I for one have had enough of them. When the first one was president, I didn't really agree with most of what he did but compared to his son, he was a compassionate genius.
And for DRS, why "Lord save us all from AMERICAN politics" - I don't think that politics is any better in England or in France where I live for example. Americans just have more world power.
Alan Denisot, Chambery, France
I think Jeb would would make an outstanding commander in chief.
Dan, Council Bluffs, IA
An overlooked part of the Republicans' current predicament is that for the last 2 decades or more, Independents had more frequently sided with Republicans in elections, particularly since the Democrats were perceived as weak on national defense since Vietnam. However, starting in 2006 polls show that Independents have abandoned their support of Republicans in droves and begun siding with Democrats, primarily because of Iraq. Iraq destroyed the Republicans' claim to be the party of national security since the Iraq debacle has weakened American security. Also, it became glaringly obvious that Bush and the Republicans have isolated the U.S. internationally. So the Republicans have no one but themselves to blame. The same defection of Independents has occurred here in Colorado; in the astonishingly short space of 4 years (2002-2006), we have gone from a Republican Governor and Legislature to a Democratic Governor and Legislature, and we're hosting the 2008 Democratic Natl. Convention.
Mark M, Highlands Ranch, Colorado/USA
You know, all of you who are saying that Dubya might try and run again based on his having really lost the first time, I could really see that happening!! Actually, I think he sit back and get ole' Jeb elected so they can then go after Iran. I mean, he went in and finished up what Daddy didn't finish, so why wouldn't Jeb do the same? Lord save us all from American politics!!!!!
DRS, Denver, NC, USA
This Administration has killed over 600,000 PEOPLE, on lie after lie, they deserve the worst things we could do to them, how about adding them to the SURGE
jim edson, windsor,
I thought there were "WMD's" in Iraq without anyone telling me and I'm voting for John McCain. I secretly hope that some more of our so called allies will join the fight against fascism. But you know there are people out there that think this movement by radical Islam will just magically blow over or something if we have a change of power in Washington. I wish. Karl Rove, I'm not sure what he does or has done, is human like you and me. God almighty is in control of planet earth here and the best that we can all do is react to situations as they occur. Standing idle while genocides and ethnic cleansings take place is not honerable behavior in Gods eyes I don't think. Thanks!
Danny, Council Bluffs, Iowa / U.S.
"He is regarded as being at the centre of the outing of Valerie Plame, the former covert CIA agent. "
Only poorly informed, Bush bashing lefties spout that nonsense....Plame was outed by Richard Armitage, nothing to do with Rove.
viv, London, England
To Scary,
I don't think Kim is suggesting that Bush should be impeached simply because she/he disagrees with him. I think she would like to see him impeached because he lied to the American people which is now considered an impeachable offense. Not only did he take an oath to uphold the Constitution, which he has repeatedly failed to do, he lied about the WMDs in Iraq. He knew there were none before he went on television and told the American people that there were to justify a pointless and obscene war. I too think the Shrub should be impeached.
As for the article, Mr. Sullivan has presented a very accurate explanation for the implosion of the Republican party.
Cate, Florida, USA
Kim Righetti: interesting that you say that George Bush's patriot act was bad for civil liberties and I agree with you. You undermine your argument, however, when you go on to say that somebody whose opinions you don't share should face prosecution (of which impeachment is the first step), suggesting that Bush doesn't have the right to disagree with you.
Either you believe in freedom of thought and democracy or you don't: make your mind up.
Scary, Windsor, Berks
Couldn't George W. sign a "signing statement" saying that he is preznint for as long as he likes, at his 'pleasure' so to speak? If there's any dissent, all he has to say is "that's what Clinton did".
Bill, Gatesville,
You can label George W. Bush with whatever name you'd like. It comes down to the fact that he is a disgrace. His failed foreign policies have set The US back 100 years. Civil liberties take a backseat to his unconstitutional Patriot Act. This guy needs to be impeached!
Kim Righetti, Upland, Calif. USA
"BTW, I read the Times online every day here in NY. I love it! We have NOBODY resembling Jeremy Clarkson here! Dan Hermann, Brooklyn"
If you stump up the postage we could always send him over to you, heartbreaking though that might be for us all.
Richie, Brighton , UK
Machiavelli also cautioned against self-delusion. You neatly argued that Karl Rove is no Machiavelli. Machiaveli would have planted fake WMD's in carefully labeled Iraqi warehouses where they would then be "discovered" by our military after the invasion, rather than let missing WMD's be used as political weapons by Democrats. Old Nicolo would also have reminded everyone that any President can fire any U.S. Attorney at any time with no reason given (just as Clinton fired all 93 back in 1993), because U.S. attorneys are political appointees who serve solely at the pleasure of the President. Machiavelli would also point out that true covert CIA operatives don't drive through the front gates at CIA headquarters to report to work every day, as Valerie Plame did. Nicolo would ask if true covert operatives submit their names to Who's Who In American Politics, as Plame did; or if true covert operatives pose for husband/wife photos to appear in Vanity Fair magazine; as Valerie Plame did.
Allen, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Tracey from San Diego,
There is no such word as disingenuine. Do you mean disingenuous.
Also, nice takes the comparative nicer rather than more nice.
As for your point, I quite agree.
Stan, St Albans, England
The Republican Party is seriously damaged. It may mean very little to many people at home and abroad but the American political system is designed for two parties. It frowns on third parties. So it's important for any movement, interest, or group in American politics to work in a party. It also allows the American states to change parties. The South is locked into the Republican Party. The Northeast Corridor and the Pacific states are Democratic. It's the Midwest that's been the battleground states for some time. W has pushed them into the hands of the Democrats by default. It's going to take years to live down Iraq.
DTL, Boston, Massachusetts
Right, Andrew. The democrats and liberals are sooooo much more civil and nice than the republicans. Where have you been living? Both parties are after nothing but power. If you think Pelosi and Reid will be any more honest than Bush and Rove then you are being disingenuine.
Tracey, San Diego, CA, USA
'Moderate, congenial, and compassionate Republican'. You are joking, right? Bush as victim of Rove. Priceless. Now that's Machiavellian. That poor, innocent man. Don't forget to blame his father - or his brother, as long as you are looking for some way to keep the President honest and ignorant.
Severin, London, UK
Sadly, the mismanagement of the war can be laid at the feet of Rumsfeld and Rove. The use of the flag in the states (symbolic patriotism) kept people from having significant debates on the war's prosecution. What has hurt GWB the most with his base is his "LIBERAL" social spending and lack of border control. The Rupublicans are losing their base because the spend like drunken sailors. With fiscal responsibility, the national debt would be under control. The Republican base would be supportive. Iraq was always predicted to be a long and bitter struggle. We are still in Korea. We will likely still be in Iraq in 20 years. Unless we abandon it like Vietnam. At least the Vietnamese only want to be left alone. I shudder to think of the Muslim nuclear states that are going to blackmail the west for years to come.
Jay , Orlando, FL
I would suggest that your recollection of a time where "it was cool to be a conservative" is as delusional as your Christian beliefs.
David, Beverly , MA
Dear Sirs,
Recently in the House of Commons, Politicians were criticizing Robert Mugabie unlawful rule. Surely they do not think for one minute the British public are going to applaud them, especially considering when this government has known for over a decade how Robert Mugabie has been responsible for countless acts of mass genocide, torture, letting his people starve and vote fixing?
It was only a couple of years ago the England Cricket team were planning to boycott playing in Zimbabwe, in protest of how Mugabie was treating his people. In the end, the majority of the cricketers decided against a boycott, but this was mainly to do with our government threatening to withdraw sponsorship in the form of government funding.
Samuel Richards, Worcester, England
Eh? Well, it's fair to say I never liked the de-masculinization to an otherwise decent quasi intellectual, albeit, a limey... Ah, I suppose on the other hand, to inform, Harvard College also decreed Allan Keyes a political science doctorate (phd). I'm a bit more impressed with Matt Damon and the like.
I suppose any clear read of the "Prince" might net one an objective scaling of a more exact value of Sullivan's extensive experience within/without the hallowed halls of like grifters. Of course, were it not objectionalbe, he and others could simply consult with an old friend, who coincidentally, is tried-n-true both as a fellow warrior and an honest-to-goodness real intellectual: JFK School of Government's very own Bernie Trainor, LTG, USMC (Ret); we really don't actually require quibbling from the 'never were'.
Joshua, Belleville, Illinois
Maybe Rove really wants a Democratic majority, and is isolating and destroying the Republicans from within. Now, that would be Machiavellian...
Bill, Cumberland, MD
I think the point that Gary is making is that the Dems look like they're fighting the last war, not the next, whipping a dead horse. The temptation will be great to do so because of all the pent up rage among anti Bush people. But whoever the Republicans put up, he'll be running as the UN-BUSH candidate. The Dems need to be ready for that.
BTW, I read the Times online every day here in NY. I love it! We have NOBODY resembling Jeremy Clarkson here!
Dan Hermann, Brooklyn, NY USA
Gary S. should know better. George Bush can only serve two terms as president. Of course, I wouldn't put it beyond him and Rove to suddenly claim, come GOP Convention time, that he technically was *not* elected in 2000, that the Democrats bestowed the presidency on him as some sort of gift or guilt offering, so he would therefore be eligible to run again in 2008. I would like to see them try that trick.
Sam, Rockville, MD, USA
I think it's wonderful that so many US citizens (or, at least, residents) read a national British daily newspaper.
I shall never again say that Americans have a narrowly parochial view of world affairs.
Alan Ainsworth, London, England
Sad
chuckles, montclair, nj
I can see the Bushies having slipped something into the Patriot Act that allows Bush to be Dictator for Life.
Shane N, Billings, MT
Gary, not sure if you are making a bar bet, but how about this: W will not win in 2008. I'll bet whatever amount of money you want.
Willie, Gilbert, AZ
Beat Dubya in 2008 at what?
Are you expecting a Constitutional amendment any time soon?
Gene Touchet, Palm Springs , California
To bert and Schroeder: You have to remember that Bush cannot run in 2008. There is a two term limit.
Greg, atlanta, MI
Gary - what are you talking about? Dubya can't run again in 08? I know he has open dislike for the Constitution, but even he can't avoid his own term limits.
Tom Smyth, Richmond, VA
Bert,
Gary is being ironic. The American constitution does not allow Bush to run again in 2008, ergo no one will beat him in 2008. I've always said Brits don't get irony... ;-P
Matt, beijing,
Um, lads, by 2008 George W Bush will have served two terms - the maximum number permitted for a US President.
Legally, that means he CAN'T run again.
Unless, of course, he concedes that he actually LOST in 2000, meaning that, legally, he would have only served one term (from the 2004 election), and hence...
August, Dallas, Texas, USA
Bush's approval ratings are around 30%, and a lot of people are wondering who those 30% could possibly be. Gary, evidently you're one of them, and you're planning to vote for Bush in 2008. Good luck with that.
bert, London,
It would be nice if Mr. Sullivan were correct in his pronouncement of the demise of the snarling wing of the Republican party, but "nice" has never been a word appropriate in describing the American political scene and certainly not in these days. As a native of the state of Indiana - a "Hoosier" for you Brits who know how to appreciate the cozy warmth of the American midlands - I can only hope that the end is fast approaching for the ascendancy of the southern breed of political animal who grins in your face as he/she twists the knife in your back. I listen to the Karl Roves of our nation with my back firmly pressed to the wall and try not to fall into a doze under the spell of that soft, drawling voice. It's hard not to turn away from the nasty spectacle and escape into the bliss of passive acceptance, but I think of that knife and decide I'd rather go down fighting to the end.
Robert Burch, Columbus, Indiana
Anybody want to bet that nobody will beat Dubya in 2008? I'll give 10 to 1 odds. Democratics are running against the wrong man again. Fatal mistake ...
Gary Schroeder, Azle, Texas
"I remember when it was actually cool to be conservative."
Common maybe; cool never.
Peter, London, UK