Patterico's Pontifications

11/10/2008

Who Will Be the Next RNC Chair?

Filed under: Politics — DRJ @ 7:26 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Allahpundit at Hot Air says it’s shaping up to be a battle between Newt Gingrich and Michael Steele, although Mike Huckabee is supporting his former campaign manager, Chip Saltsman.

I’m not a Huckabee fan so I don’t know anything about Saltsman, but I hope there’s room in some capacity for both Gingrich and Steele.

— DRJ

39 Responses to “Who Will Be the Next RNC Chair?”

  1. One vote for Michael Steele.

    And hey, why don’t a get a vote on this? Wouldn’t the parties have more active members if they actually let the members vote on such things? Anyone listening out there?

    PrestoPundit (ff5e16)

  2. Jeez. Huckabee really is shameless.
    Can we please, please do something about that jackass?

    jdub (483ded)

  3. If Michael Steele wins, do you think the libs will throw Oreo cookies at him again when he appears in public?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  4. Hmmm, I’d dig out my Steele bumpersticker and stick it back on the car if I thought it would help.

    #3 daleyrocks:

    you think the libs will throw Oreo cookies at him again

    They stopped?

    EW1(SG) (4cdcbc)

  5. I have two words for you: Sarah Palin. “You betcha!” Release the pitbull! Already George Bush has become her latest victim. She is the One
    “I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration?” Palin told the Anchorage Daily News and Alaska’s KTUU Channel 2.

    “How have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration? If we’re talking change, we want to get far away from what it was that the present administration represented and that is to a great degree what the Republican Party at the time had been representing. So people desiring change I think went as far from the administration that is presently seated as they could. It’s amazing that we did as well as we did.”

    .
    Sarah Palin.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  6. Gingrich, while dynamic, is yersterday’s news-so to speak. And, very much like Hillary, he is a polarizing figure and would perhaps energize the liberal base as much as the conservatives…

    I think that Steele is the man for this job. In addition to giving him good national level exposure, it may also serve to open up minority groups minds to the Republican message and ideals…

    Best Wishes…

    Bob (99fc1b)

  7. Forget about Steele. Why is every Republican choice these days made after worrying how the media and Democrats will like it? That’s how McCain got nominated. Gingrich is the man for the job, polarizing or not. A party chair is supposed to be polarizing. DNC chair Howard Dean was polarizing, wasn’t he? The GOP needs Gingrich, and closed primaries.

    Official Internet Data Office (95d2f9)

  8. I want Newt Gingrich and blogged on it here:
    http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/11/newt-gingrich-for-rnc-chair.html

    Without a leader who ‘gets it’ our efforts to rebuilt the party will be valiant but futile.
    To that end, I think we need to draft Newt Gingrich to be RNC Chair:
    1. He embraces the use of new technology
    2. He shows he ‘gets it’ when it comes to leveraging grassroots networked movements, as shown by his American Solutions effort.
    3. He is the most articulate spokesman we have and is high-profile enough to be able to represent the face of the Republican Party and carry some weight. He is a recognizable figure to unify the GOP that has no natural leader at this time. He can go toe-to-toe on Sunday talk shows, can and is already a draw for audiences.
    4. Being an outsider of the past 8 years and a critic of Bush administration, he is not tainted by administration’s failures and subsequent unpopularity. He has critiqued the execution of the Iraq war, opposed the bailout, and been critical of administration on spending and immigration. In short, he stands with the people on issues that the Bush WH lost popular support over.
    5. He has never wavered from solid conservative principles, taking popular and correct stands, on drilling, on the bailout, on spending, on fixing Iraq, on immigration. He has credibility with the Republican base.

    6. He engineered the 1994 victory, and 2010, in our best-case scenario, could and should be a similar repeat. Who better to win in this situation than to bring out the man who won this type of battle before.

    PS. PALIN IS A NON-STARTER. SHE HAS THE IMPORTANT JOB OF GOVERNOR TO ATTEND TO. Besides, if you read Palin’s comments on Bush, they are as vague as an Obama speech. Gingrich goes for the jugular, and has said specifically what the Bush administration has been doing wrong in iraq and afghanistan and elsewhere (like criticizing the bailout).

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  9. “Jeez. Huckabee really is shameless.
    Can we please, please do something about that jackass?”

    He should run for office in 2010, for US Senate, or be forced OUT of the 2012 primary. WE NEED TO STOP THIS SELF-PROMOTING POLS WHO DONT DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE CAUSE AND FOCUS ONLY ON THEIR OWN AMBITION.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  10. PR-wise, Steele would be a great face to put on the GOP brand. He is conservative, articulate, and he does not bring any negative baggage to the job AFAIK.
    Gingrich, on the other hand, is a thinker who can express his thoughts in both the written and spoken word. He has the ability to go for the jugular when engaged in the talking-head battles, but in an intellectual manner.
    In an ideal world, they would both be Chairman:
    Steele for his public persona, Gingrich for his intellectual dynamism.
    The Party does need someone who knows what an idea is.

    Another Drew (e25459)

  11. That is a very good summary, AD, and surely there’s a place for both of them.

    DRJ (cb68f2)

  12. Huckabee = John McCain + speaking skills. That ain’t nearly enough to beat Obama if he hasn’t ground this nation to a halt in three years.

    One of the only bright spots of this election is that Huckabee was NOT the nominee. You saw what the media did to Palin just for standing up a couple of times in front of her congregation — imagine what they would have done to Huck every time he made one of his often-inappropriate Biblical references. Huck should stick to his boring Fox News show with his crappy band.

    L.N. Smithee (18346f)

  13. Hey, love2008 — I have a lengthy reply to your ignorant remarks the other night. Check my blog in the next few days.

    http://lnsmitheeblog.blogspot.com

    L.N. Smithee (18346f)

  14. I’m not a Huck fan. He’s a smarmy, soft on crime, tax increaser.

    I agree with Travis’s point though, that it’s good to have someone in the position that is not using it as a springboard for their own personal ambition. That could be an issue with someone like Steele, but for people like Gingrich or DeLay.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  15. L.N. – Lovey’s been getting hysterical tonight about sex ed for five year olds over on the Rocky First Days for Obama thread.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  16. Steele has in his favor the fact that before Obama was a viable candidate for President, Steele was the victim of racist attacks and dirty tricks by Democrats. His SSN information was illegally accessed by a former Media Matters staffer working for Chuck Schumer, and he had Oreo cookies thrown at him in a campaign appearance.

    L.N. Smithee (18346f)

  17. Here is something that Republicans should borrow from the Dems: Have one professional running the show as co-chair with an elected politician also in the captain’s chair as co-chair. The irony is that I will agree with love2008, but I like Mitt Romney as the out-of-office co-chair and Sarah Palin as the in-office chair. Can’t see how you would lose there.

    JVW (4a6382)

  18. #17.
    I can tell you how the GOP would lose with a Romney Palin team… They would kill each other. At least some of the anti Palin leaks are rumored to be Romney loyalists in the McCain campaign. Romney is going to set himself up to run again in 4 years. There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell he wouldn’t burn Palin down to get what he wants.

    I voted for Romney in the primaries (Fred was out by then) and under the right circumstances would vote for him again. but I’ll be the first to acknowledge that he is a shameless self promoter. He would not be running the GOP, he’d be running Romney 2012. The party can’t afford that.

    BSKB (632eb1)

  19. Steele would be played by the media as “me, too!” Palin has a job as governor and has not shown any particular organizing skill. Most of the job of RNC Chair is on the phone quietly talking to people. Huckabee is the darling of 25% of the party, and anathema to the rest — social conservative big-spending nanny-staters are not most Republicans’ ideal.

    Of all the ones mentioned only Gingrich knows how to organize and get something done. I’d rather see him running for Speaker by way of Georgia-8m but he’d make a pretty good RNC Chair. Certainly knows how to get a message out.

    This is about organizing, recruiting and finding a message, not about which candidate from last time we want next time.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  20. um, Georgia-8th

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  21. Steele is a liberal moderate and has threatened to quit the party

    good Riddance

    EricPWJohnson (cc9286)

  22. I like Michael Steele but I think Newt is the man for the job. The Pubs need a good, swfit kick in the ass and Gingrich is the man to do it. Wake up, already!

    Cop the Truth (7d72e2)

  23. Is there a rule against co-chairs? Each has his own strengths; Gingrich is the idea guy and Steele is the people person who would do a good job of selling the ideas.

    Let’s face it, I generally abhor identity politics, but having Steele out front can be a positive. Don’t get me wrong. I think he would be great on merit, but this could help deflect the race issue pushed by the left and the MSM

    Fred Schwartz (fcf819)

  24. Newt! Newt! Newt’s the man, he’s done it before, and he can do it again. Mike Steele’s OK, but he’s got no fire in his belly, leave Steele right where he is, on the Telly.

    Ropelight (5b609a)

  25. Prestopundit-I agree on letting us vote, why don’t we get to vote on who our chair is? On either side, I have alot of Dem friends who would LOVE to vote Pelosi out of her speaker position.

    Love2008-Your statement on Sarah Palin may be the first thing I’ve ever agreed with you on. Make no mistake, I have serious doubts about Palin’s qualifications but I’m not against her. Mostly I’d just love to see Sarah and Nancy go at it on the floor!

    That being said if I could vote on this I would vote for Gingrich (see comment by Travis Monitor for why)

    A Californian (485ef9)

  26. This to me a resource allocation problem …..

    Gingrich is the perfect Chair for the party. We need a guy who will have an opinion (Conservative) and fund politicians who firmly believe in these principals. As RNC Chair he helps decide who the RNC will support, where money goes and what battles to fight. Having a clear minded theoretician is helpful in this role. Also, it is an unelected position so his baggage is not a big deal.

    Steele (who I don’t know) is so wonderful and without baggage then errrrrrr…. Run for Governor or Senate or something of value. THe fact he has already lost a state race does not give hope he is a closer but give it s second tussle. We don’t need more conservatives on TV — we need them in Office.

    Use your resources wisely Republican’ts. Don’t be dumb arses.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  27. Steele a libby Republican? Don’t think so base don what I have seen but ….. who knows. Souter was going to be a purist and constructionist.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  28. I’d go with Steele.

    PCD (7fe637)

  29. I’d go with neither. Same old same. (BTW: Newt in 2008 is not Newt in 1994. Do you forget that he was forced out of his leadership position and out of Congress?) We need new blood.

    nk (95bfab)

  30. P.S. I’ll grant Obama this. He is the “dark horse” that the Democrats desperately needed. And so was Billy before that. Where are ours?

    And another thought as I was typing this: Is it the Bushes who bring out the best in the Democrats?

    nk (95bfab)

  31. He probably won’t take it, but the rep. from Wisconsin (Paul Ryan) has been impressive in laying out the GOP’s traditional stances on fiscal and personal responsibility for many years now. Only 38, but already an experienced leader, and also one who’s represented a traditionally Dem stronghold.

    Dmac (e30284)

  32. Those are the two main candidates but there are also a couple of minor league types in the running.

    I have even seen a couple of reports that The Fred is considering tossing his hat into the ring.

    daytrader (ea6549)

  33. Comment by nk — 11/11/2008 @ 9:08 am

    I disagree that Newt was forced out of the Speaker’s chair, and Congress.
    He had taken the position with his caucus that if they suffered losses in the off-year election, he would step down. They did, and he did; and he resigned his seat because he felt he could more easily articulate his positions if he was out of Congress rather than sitting on a back-bench (again).

    Another Drew (6a5b36)

  34. #26 Robert Rodriguez:

    THe fact he has already lost a state race

    He didn’t: He lost a very close Senate race in a state where an R shouldn’t have had any chance at all.

    As a speaker and presenter, he makes the O!ne look like an illiterate clod~and he isn’t as polarizing a figure as Gingrich is to the left. He is also an experienced organizer of the type needed for the job.

    To be honest, I don’t really have a dog in this fight~but if the Repub party is going to claim to represent me, they need to get their friggin’ act together if they can’t wallop the snot out of a pair of empty suits like O!bama/Biden.

    EW1(SG) (da07da)

  35. NK,

    The Bushes aren’t real conservatives. They are good benchwarmers who get to play when no one else is available.

    daytrader,

    I think Fred wants to run for President again. He’s already started laying the groundwork.

    DRJ (cb68f2)

  36. EW1(SG)

    There is nothing more annoying than arguing facts.

    Steele has lost a state election. Period. Don’t like it at all. Could he win a next one — yes.

    Nice to see liberal Democrats throwing Oreos at him. I can’t imagine that happening to a Democrat without major NYT coverage.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  37. According to Wikipedia, Steele hasn’t lost an election for state office within Pennsylvania. He was, however, defeated in his bid to represent the state of Pennsylvania in the United States Senate. Before that, he was the Lieutenant Governor of Pennsylvania.

    brobin (c07c20)

  38. Maryland, not PA, brobin.

    Also, according to Fox, Newt ain’t running. Steele is.

    Pablo (99243e)

  39. Brobin,

    You are right, he has not lost an election in PA. Can’t argue that. ROTFLMAO.

    Again, nothing more annoying than arguing facts.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4235 secs.