Listen Here:
Full Transcript:
Guy Benson: Joining us now is Karl Rove, senior advisor and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, a Fox News contributor, a Wall Street Journal columnist, and a bestselling author. He wears a lot of hats. Karl, always great to have you.
Karl Rove: Thank you. What are you doing on the West Coast, man?
Guy Benson: I had a talk here earlier in the week. It was yesterday. I flew out on Wednesday night, and I actually have a very cool story that I’m going to tell the audience in our next hour about what happened while I was out here. I’ll tease it. I’m teasing here, Karl: The hotel I was staying at, which was also where I spoke yesterday, was also the hotel of a rather significant sports team that’s out here in Los Angeles playing some important games. I’ll just leave it at that. There we go. And there’s a very cool story to go along with that coming up in our happy hour in the next hour.
Karl, let’s talk about politics. I just have to get your response right out of the gate to something the president of the United States has posted on Truth Social. Here’s part of what he said:
“Sadly and very stupidly, John Cornyn and his little buddy, super rhino, Karl Rove, are doing everything possible to make it hard for Ken Paxton, the greatest attorney general in the history of Texas and one of the best in the United States, to win the upcoming midterm elections against a radical left lunatic, James Talarico, who is the antithesis of Texas values.
“John Cornyn, who after my endorsement lost the primary to Ken by a very wide margin, and Karl Rove, who shouldn’t be allowed to spew his jealousy on Fox News, should be ashamed of themselves. They’re hurting Texas and, more importantly, hurting the United States of America.
“If Ken Paxton loses, it will be because of weak and ineffective political hacks like John Cornyn and Karl Rove, who have ineffectively opposed me for my entire political career as your all-time winner in the history of Texas.”
Trump went on to say that he won 96% of the counties in Texas.
So that’s the rant of the day from the president, directed at you. I’d love to get your reaction.
Karl Rove: Well, first of all, it sounds like he thinks Paxton is going to lose and he’s looking for somebody to blame. And if I’m weak and ineffective, how could I have done anything to diminish the power of the man who won 96% of Texas counties?
Since 2019, I’ve been the chairman and fundraiser for a voter registration project that, in this cycle, has added 180,000 Republicans to the voter list. So I don’t know what the president is talking about, and with all due respect, I really don’t care.
Guy Benson: What is your overall analysis of the race in Texas? You look at the polling, and according to a lot of these surveys, James Talarico is up slightly. There are one or two polls now showing Paxton pulling into a tie or slightly ahead.
Texas is definitely a red state, but not invariably red all the time. Where do you think this is headed? How close do you think it really is?
Karl Rove: Well, I think it’s a coin toss, and each side has strengths and weaknesses.
On the Talarico side, he’s riding a wave of concern about Ken Paxton’s background and the scandals surrounding him. He’s a fresh face, and he’s got an enormous amount of money for a Texas candidate.
On the Paxton side, Talarico is a Travis County, Texas, Democrat. I live in Travis County, in Austin, Texas. It’s a wonderful town. But if you’re a Democrat in Austin, you don’t worry about anybody to your right. You’re worried only about people to your left.
So you say crazy things like oil and gas jobs are going away, and that’s good because the use of fossil fuels is an existential threat. He says things like we shouldn’t be spending any money on border security.
In 2019, Texas had a legislative battle over an $800 million appropriation in our biennial budget for border security. Talarico said we didn’t need it and should spend all of that money on education. He accused the governor of grandstanding. He said we needed to get rid of this “secret police force,” referring to ICE. And he’s said all kinds of goofy things over the years.
So that’s an advantage Paxton has. The question is: Where do voters come down on Election Day?
Do they vote for the guy who seems fresh and new but is far to the left of where they stand, even though Talarico is trying to portray himself as a moderate? He’s good at carrying that off, but his record belies it.
Or do they vote for the guy whose character, credibility, and honesty concern them, but they’re willing to overlook those issues because they don’t want a Democratic Senate?
Guy Benson: And that’s basically where Paxton’s estranged wife has landed in that ad, right? The basic message from her seems to be, “If I can get over this, so can you.”
Karl Rove: Yeah, I don’t think it’s about getting over it. I think it’s about saying, “I’m voting for the Republican ticket.” But I think that’s gotten over it.
Guy Benson: My read on the ad she cut is that she’s saying if she’s willing to vote Republican up and down the ballot–and we all know what that means in relation to her estranged husband–then the stakes are too high to do otherwise.
If she’s willing to do that, it’s sort of like a permission slip for Republicans who aren’t sure about Paxton and haven’t been sold on him to come along with her. Does that make a difference to some of those potentially undecided Republican voters?
Karl Rove: I think it does to some degree, but it also raises the issue again. He had a girlfriend and mistress who was an employee of one of state Senator Angela Paxton’s colleagues. He subsequently dumped that girlfriend and has a new girlfriend whom he met when he attended the 2024 Kentucky Derby at the invitation of her then-husband.
So I think it makes the issue more about reminding voters of some of the character questions. It might have been better to have his daughter or one of his former colleagues make the argument that we’ve got to have a Republican Senate and that people need to vote for the entire ticket.
But look, I think all of this is consequential. This race is in the hands of voters who will be influenced by advertising. Even more important, though, is the internal conversation they’re having with themselves about the outcome of the election.
Guy Benson: Yeah, I think that’s fair.
On the Talarico record point, if you watch him today, over the last couple of weeks and months, he’s talking a very different game than he did for years, and different from the way he voted for years.
One example I just saw was that he was at least feigning ignorance about the SAVE Act, which deals with voter ID and ensuring only citizens vote. He seemed to say, “Oh, I’m not totally familiar with that,” whereas months ago he was railing against it as racist.
Now he’s pretending he isn’t really sure what people are talking about. He’s done this 180 on a lot of different issues. When he’s called out directly, he’ll say, “Oh, that was annoying in the past,” or, “That was cringey, but I’m not that person anymore.”
Does that sell? Is it credible? To me, it’s obvious that he’s saying whatever he has to say to appear palatable statewide, even though his long record is what it is.
Karl Rove: Yeah, no, you’re absolutely right. I think it undermines him, although it may be smart politically. It diminishes him because anybody paying attention to who he is and what he’s about says, “That’s not who he really is.”
I thought it was interesting that he had an exchange during that CNN segment with a woman who was concerned about him having declared that God is nonbinary. He seemed to be trying to appear sympathetic to her, but I couldn’t quite figure out the point he was making.
He closed by saying, I guess, that this shows what we must all strive to do: not try to talk about God in human terms.
I’m thinking, that’s exactly what you did when you declared that God was nonbinary. You were trying to put God into a left-wing political box, specifically a political gender box.
You were being too clever by half, Guy. You should have said, “Hey, I’m really sorry. That was a cringeworthy comment. Let’s move on. I’m glad we’re both Christians.”
But instead, he had to make this elaborate argument that God is above human characteristics and that we should be very careful about how we describe God. Well, that’s what you were doing in your original declaration.
Guy Benson: Totally. And if we broaden this out from Texas to the overall political picture, the behavior of both parties suggests Republicans are playing heavy defense, even in very red places, while Democrats are feeling excited about their opportunities.
But there are some silver linings for Republicans–or dark clouds for Democrats–that are still out there.
In my mind, it boils down to this: In these very red places, Democrats are trying to make gains. But when you look at the polls and the overall sentiment, there are still a lot of voters, including people who tell pollsters they’re undecided, who view the Democratic Party as way too extreme and left-wing.
So we have this collision between people who are frustrated with the president, the party in power, gas prices, and everything else, and people who have deep suspicions about and aren’t comfortable with the opposition party, in part because of its positions on so many issues.
How do you think those voters, caught in that tug-of-war, will ultimately decide?
Karl Rove: Well, I think you put it very well, and you’re absolutely right.
I was struck by the NBC poll’s net favorability numbers. Take the approval ratings and compare them with disapproval: The Republican Party was at minus 13, Donald Trump at minus 18, and the Democratic Party at minus 21.
The Democrats have achieved the unachievable. They’ve become the least popular political player in America today.
And again, I think this is the bet Republicans are making, and it may be the right bet: As we get closer to the election, the people who are less enthusiastic tend to be Republicans, and the people who are undecided tend to be more Republican than Democratic.
So in red states like Ohio, Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa, Republicans will come home to their party. In blue states, voters will tend to come home to the Democratic Party.
Guy Benson: Like New Hampshire or Minnesota, that kind of thing?
Karl Rove: Well, we’ve got a couple of different characteristics there.
First, New Hampshire has a very popular Republican governor. The Sununu name operates outside the normal political realm. People remember the older Sununu, who did a great job for our country and state. They know his brother, who has been a spectacular three-term governor of the state. They know John because he served in Congress and the Senate.
They know what Sununu means: New Hampshire values, those flinty New England values. They do the right thing. So that state has a very popular Republican governor and a Republican legislature.
Minnesota is different. We’ve got a candidate in Michelle Tafoya who has a Republican label but is basically an apolitical figure in a state where people are tired of the Walz administration. Her opponent is Walz’s lieutenant governor.
Guy Benson: Radical.
Karl Rove: And she starts many of her rallies with a prayer asking for forgiveness because the land was occupied by a Native American tribe 300 years ago.
Michelle Tafoya, whom I’ve met, impressed me. She’s authentic and empathetic. You get the sense that she’s a real person who genuinely cares about things. She can talk sports with people and connect with farmers in outstate Minnesota.
So those are two very different places. Does that mean Republicans are going to win? I don’t know. Do they have a shot? Yes. Are those races atypical? Yes.
Guy Benson: I wonder how that fits into the larger puzzle. Democrats appear to be a little nervous about a couple of the races we’ve been discussing, as well as Maine, where Susan Collins is running. That cuts against the idea of a giant blue tidal wave.
If the Oregon governor’s race is very close in a very blue state, could this be an election with unusual crosscurrents, even if the overall picture tilts blue?
That’s one of the questions I have going into this. And to roll that into another question: As you look at the map and sit down on election night in a handful of weeks, what are the early bellwethers you’ll be watching to get a sense of how the evening might go?
Karl Rove: I’m going to be watching Virginia, which reports early and tends to report completely. I’ll look at how Democrats are doing in major counties compared with what they received four years ago.
I particularly want to watch the two congressional districts in the Tidewater area represented by Republicans, both of whom won by narrow margins. Trump carried those districts narrowly, and the Republicans carried them by slightly bigger margins. They’re going to be close, and they’re places where Democrats hope to pick up seats.
We’ll get an early sense from those results.
I’ll also compare turnout in counties wholly within a congressional district or, as in Ohio and New Hampshire, in places where there’s a statewide contest we can compare with results from four years ago, whether in a governor’s race or a U.S. Senate race.
It’s going to be a long night because Alaska is up in the air, and we have a number of Western House seats that will be important to the margin Democrats are likely to gain.
But I’ll start with Virginia because the results come in quickly and comprehensively.
Guy Benson: Are there one or two races you’d identify as dark horses or a little under the radar that you think are important? Maybe races you’re particularly invested in or intrigued by that aren’t the major marquee contests we’ve been talking about for months?
Karl Rove: I’m intrigued by Colorado’s 8th Congressional District, where Republican Gabe Evans is running. Trump won the district by two points.
The district was newly created this decade when Colorado picked up a seat. It’s an interesting district that stretches from the suburbs of northeast Denver all the way up to Weld County, including Greeley, which has a substantial agricultural industry. About half the cattle in Colorado are in Weld County.
Evans is a terrific member of Congress with great promise. He’s being challenged by a Democratic Socialists of America-adjacent candidate who’s very far to the left.
I think this race will test how effectively Republicans can paint an accurate picture of what these DSA affiliates believe and want to bring about.
I’m also interested in Juan Ciscomani’s race in Arizona. It’s another toss-up seat that could go either way. He’s a terrific person and a wonderful member of Congress, and I think he has real potential to become a star in the House in the years ahead. But he’s being tested, and we’ll see if he can hang on.
Guy Benson: Where do you come down on the overall theory about polling misses? It’s being debated by a bunch of data enthusiasts on social media. We’ve seen polling errors in the past. Sometimes they cut in one direction, but they often seem to underestimate Republicans, who then outperform expectations, especially in Senate races. We’ve seen it with Trump as well.
A lot of Republicans and conservatives are betting that if the polls are off just a little bit again, it could be a much better night for them than the polls currently suggest. Do you buy into that to some extent? What do you make of it?
Karl Rove: You’ve had Patrick Ruffini on, haven’t you?
Guy Benson: We have, yep.
Karl Rove: I’m a huge fan. He’s really, really smart and data-driven.
He considered that question and did something you and I would never be able to do: He analyzed 3,312 polls across the last four election cycles.
His basic point is that 73% of the time, polls overstated Democratic performance.
Think about it. The outcomes can overstate Democratic performance, overstate Republican performance, or be largely accurate. Those are three big possibilities, and three-quarters of the time, it’s the first one.
So there may be a bias. Perhaps it’s unintentional, perhaps it’s driven by methodology, or perhaps it’s driven by shy conservatives or Republicans who don’t respond to pollsters. Nonetheless, I found the results pretty impactful.
A couple of weeks ago, the polling error was roughly six or seven points. By the end, it tended to close, and the final error was around 2.6%.
But look at the races. That would mean virtually every one of these contests is already within the margin of error. It suggests Republicans could do better on election night than they look like they will today in a significant number of races.
Guy Benson: Karl Rove, senior advisor and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, a Fox News contributor, Wall Street Journal columnist, and bestselling author. Karl, we always appreciate your time and insights.
Karl Rove: Thanks for having me on, Guy. All the best.
