The first thing that stands out to me is the fact that the Republicans in the congress are willing to take the heat for obstructing popular legislation, even when they have an unpopular lame duck president of their own party who could veto it and let them off the hook. Normally politicians, survivalists that they are, would be trying to distance themselves from a 30% president by this time and he would be forced out there on his own. But here you have them racing over the cliff right along side him. That they have maintained such solidarity in the face of dramatic failure is quite impressive. 

My suspicion is that they are banking on the media failing to properly inform the public about what is going on (and which I discuss in more depth here.) From the looks of things, that's been a pretty smart strategy. The public certainly holds the congressional Republicans in contempt, as you might expect after seven years of rubber stamping this failed presidency, but they are equally contemptuous of the Democrats for failing to turn things around when they took the reins. The Republicans apparently surmised that they could make the public see it as a wash. 

The GOP presidential candidates have pretty much followed the same path. While it's certainly true that they are running for the support of their party's base at the moment, with a president at 30% you would think that they would at least be leaving themselves some daylight for the general election. But so far they are all running proudly as successors to a man whose fall from grace has been one of the most dramatic drops in presidential history.  

If one assumes that we are dealing with a party and a political movement that operates as the constitution expected politicians to operate, this would all be very odd. But they aren't. The modern Republican party has somehow managed to create movement loyalty that supersedes not only the national interest but their own political self-interest.  

And that's probably where money comes in. In a system where people are aware that historical narratives are being written to spec and where they are rarely held accountable for past political misdeeds, there is little downside to putting party before country or even before your own public career. There is no such thing as disgrace, and if you lose an election, when you leave office you immediately become a well paid director or executive of various firms you used to regulate, a television commentator or "motivational speaker" and just wait a bit before becoming a high priced lobbyist. There are not only second acts in conservative politics, there are third and fourth acts, well paid and guaranteed.  

This is true to some extent in the Democratic Party as well, but the conservative movement is a much more organic, full service organization that offers cradle to grave welfare for loyal soldiers at all levels (and a lonely wilderness for apostates.) They don't fear losing. As individuals, they stand to benefit handsomely from their association with the Business Party and no matter what happens they remain comfortably ensconced in the vast array of conservative organizations and affiliations that have been created over the past 30 years.  

The conservative movement is built to last --- even when it suffers electorally, the individuals within it pay no price, and the movement itself is reinforced. They believe, with good reason, that they have a solid minority at least that will always vote for them and whose regional and political prejudices they will always represent well. They know they will win the presidency as often as not. They are very good at political campaigning and manipulating the media.  

Their movement is sustained by wealthy individuals and business interests who will make sure they have an endless supply of money. So while Karl Rove may have had the personal ambition to create a permanent majority, it really isn't necessary. They have no need to govern well or in the interests of the people. Those they really serve are as easily served from the minority as the majority, especially now that more than a decade of GOP governance set the baseline. (Will the obstructionist Senate minority ever pass a tax hike?)  

The founders worried a lot about the power of political parties or factions. In Federalist 10, Madison defines a faction as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." 

Ironically the major concern was that the rubes would use the power of faction to take away the property of the Big Money Boyz. Obviously, he needn't have worried. When it comes to common impulse and passion, nobody has it over the conservative movement in service of its wealthy benefactors.