Rove Comments On The Use Of National Guard Troops
Karl Rove, once hailed as the “architect” of the George W. Bush presidency, seems increasingly adrift in the post-2016 political landscape, and his recent comments on the deployment of National Guard troops to crime-ravaged cities only reinforce that perception. In The Hill’s breathless reporting, Rove’s prediction—that President Trump will suffer politically if he deploys troops without state approval—is treated as near gospel. But behind the headline is a familiar pattern: a legacy GOP strategist peddling obsolete ideas, and a left-leaning media outlet eagerly amplifying them to divide the Republican base.
Let’s examine the structure of Rove’s argument, which leans heavily on a single Reuters/Ipsos poll suggesting most Americans oppose the use of troops without an external threat. This poll is being treated as dispositive. Yet Reuters has long shown a demonstrable lean leftward, with its polling methodology regularly criticized for oversampling Democrats and underrepresenting independents and swing voters. A 5.1-point left-leaning bias isn’t a rounding error—it’s a red flag.
More importantly, Rove’s argument suffers not just from weak polling foundations but from a historical blind spot. In fact, American political history consistently demonstrates that a tough stance on crime helps Republicans. Kevin Phillips’ seminal book The Emerging Republican Majority outlined this dynamic as early as 1969. It correctly predicted that soft-on-crime policies in Democrat-controlled cities would alienate working-class voters, particularly white ethnic Democrats in urban and suburban areas. And, as Phillips described, it was precisely this issue—crime—that helped Republicans secure presidential victories from Nixon through George H. W. Bush.
Karl Rove certainly knows this. He once idolized Lee Atwater, who understood how the issue of law and order could realign national politics. Rove himself rode similar themes to power in Texas, positioning Bush as a tough-on-crime moderate who appealed across party lines. So why the change in tune?
It’s not political strategy—it’s political drift. Rove no longer represents the Republican base. His brand of establishment Republicanism—cautious, consultant-driven, and image-obsessed—was already fading in 2012 and collapsed entirely by 2016. His discomfort with Trump has less to do with tactics and more to do with cultural distance. The MAGA base doesn’t trust him, and with good reason. His worldview is no longer aligned with theirs.
And what of Trump’s political risk? Rove insists that deploying troops could hurt him, yet the RealClearPolitics averages on crime and immigration say otherwise. In fact, Trump’s numbers on crime (47.7% approval) nearly mirror his disapproval (48.6%), and they exceed his overall approval rating. Those are not the numbers of a political loser. They’re signs of a candidate whose message is resonating—especially in a country where violent crime is still making headlines and Democratic mayors are letting it fester.
Furthermore, polls are not predictive—they’re reactive. They tell us where public opinion is now, not where it will be after a sustained messaging campaign. Democrats and their media allies will no doubt continue to paint any use of the National Guard as “authoritarian” or “fascist.” But voters have heard that narrative before. “Dictator,” “threat to democracy,” “worse than Hitler”—these are old slogans, not new insights. Their impact diminishes with every repetition.
Rove’s real mistake is not in reading a poll incorrectly, but in forgetting the central dynamic of electoral politics: voters respond to real problems. Crime is real. Disorder is visible. And Democrat leaders in many cities have clearly failed to contain it. Trump’s readiness to act—whether with the National Guard or otherwise—may not appeal to Beltway pollsters, but it absolutely resonates with people living in fear, watching their communities decay.
In the end, The Hill’s framing of Rove’s remarks says more about their agenda than about Republican prospects. Their enthusiasm for Rove is not born of respect for his intellect—it’s a tactic, a signal: Even your own people think Trump is wrong.