Hmm. So now we're to believe Obama was "suppressing the vote." It reminds me of Rove complaining in June that Democrats are "trying to take their wallet and buying" the election -- while he raised millions from billionaires so he could buy the election.
But putting that aside, this notion that negative ads constitute voter "suppression" is important because it's crazy.
On the one hand, we see Rove's party, which spent two years imposing the most sweeping new voting restrictions seen in the United States since Jim Crow, targeting likely Democratic constituencies. On the other hand, we see the president, who ran television commercials that criticized his opponent.
One party engaged in voter suppression through legal disenfranchisement, while the other party shaping its message to maximize the electoral impact. For someone to see these as comparable is to strip the word "suppression" of any sensible meaning.
I realize Rove is having a tough time right now, but this is deeply ridiculous.