Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


It’s on: Gingrich versus Michael Steele for RNC chair

posted at 6:30 pm on November 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

A follow-up to Ed’s post from earlier today: The Washington Times spies a gathering storm.

Republicans close to each man say they are intent on ousting Mike Duncan when his tenure ends in January and to insert themselves to articulate a counter-agenda to President-elect Barack Obama´s administration.

A bevy of backers for each man, neither of whom is an RNC member, have been burning up the phone lines and firing off e-mails as they try to sway the 168 RNC members in the wake of the second consecutive drubbing of Republicans at the polls.

“The Republican National Committee has to ask itself if it wants someone who has successfully led a revolution,” Randy Evans, Gingrich confidante and personal attorney based in Atlanta, told The Washington Times on Monday…

“Steele is a good guy,” Mr. Gingrich said in an e-mail response to The Washington Times. “There are a number of good guys.”

I’m partial to Newt just because he seems at times to be the only man left in the party with any new policy ideas, but you can’t go wrong either way.

You know what this calls for. Exit question: Is it worth trusting the Wash Times this time when they teased us with a similar story about a Steele chairmanship bid that went nowhere two years ago?

Update: None of the above, says Huck, who’s evidently going the Obama-esque crony route.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

flash044 on November 10, 2008 at 11:15 PM

You just basically summed up Newt’s Platform of the American People. Look it up.

Most conservatives are Newt supporters and they don’t even know it :P

Brains on November 10, 2008 at 11:29 PM

Ideas matter, Steele folks. I understand everyone wants something new and exotic. However, this is a war of ideas and the RNC Chairs job is to present a vision, back it with policy/ideas, overcome current electoral challenges, and restore the American people’s faith in Conservatism — Conservatism with emphasis on all three legs of the so-called stool. Newt is the man to do it. He has done it in the past and I know he can do it today. He is the only one with the ideas, the drive and the savvy to make it happen. He is a tough, tough and partisan pol who takes no prisoners. Steele has not once came across to me as someone brimming with ideas and vision. Instead he comes across as someone more interested in “reaching across the aisle” and expanding the tent by compromising. I don’t want anymore compromise and I know Newt is one that will not compromise unless in the end it serves our interest.

Time for a pitbull and not a poodle.

Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 11:34 PM

How do you guys make the bar and change the color when you copy from other replies????

Gracias…

flash044 on November 10, 2008 at 11:36 PM

Maybe i wrong but i think Newt would be better at the RNC and Steele would be better at elective office.

I agree 100%! Newt is the visionary the man with the plan. I’d like to see a new contract with America and another 94 style revolution – and Newt is the guy to do it. As a matter of fact he’s already written two different drafts of it, and they are on issues and ideas that will resonate with the American people. see http://www.newt.org

Steele would be very effective in Congress, or as Governor of Maryland whichever office has an opening first. Steele would be a great face to challenge the Obama administration and their ideas from Congress. Whatever office he decides to run for, he will get my financial support.

joncoltonis on November 10, 2008 at 11:40 PM

It’s incomprehensible to me that anyone would pick another old grey head like Newt. Everyone seems to agree “they’re both good but…” and then they dump on Shelby. Unbelievable. Where do you sheeple come from?

Newt is a tired old professor. Just what we need; charts, history and sage advice from a guy who hasn’t won anything in 12 years. It’s 2008 dudes. Newt’s “bomb throwing” days were when he was Shelby’s age. I’m a boomer myself but we have to go fresher than putting a sexogenerian on point.

If this is as bold as you Hot Air conservatives can think we’re going to get flattened.

rcl on November 10, 2008 at 11:47 PM

The selection of either shows me the RNC is as clueless now as when they pushed McCain. Neither man is inspiring as a speaker and both are failed politicians. Clearly the bench is empty.

Even more depressing is the selection of topics here at HA.

Angry Dumbo on November 10, 2008 at 9:12 PM

Do you live in Maryland or nearby? I was wondering why you describe Steele a a failed politician?

Red State State of Mind on November 10, 2008 at 11:51 PM

Well after the Condolezza and Powell betrayals, I think we better stick with the proven Republican with both loyalty and ideas, rather than the affirmative action candidate.

federale86 on November 10, 2008 at 11:52 PM

Steele. Go with the new and the now. :)

ddrintn on November 10, 2008 at 11:54 PM

Definitely going to vomit if I hear that again. Our country just elected a radical friend of known terrorists and criminals, and you’re worried about Newt’s baggage.

Brains on November 10, 2008

True, but your forgetting one important factor: Newt won’t have 90% of the media running cover for him like the thug-in-chief that was just elected.

xblade on November 10, 2008 at 11:56 PM

It’s 2008 dudes. Newt’s “bomb throwing” days were when he was Shelby’s age.

Um Shelby’s only three years younger than Newt. It’s Michael Steele we’re talking about here. LOL.

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 12:01 AM

Well after the Condolezza and Powell betrayals, I think we better stick with the proven Republican with both loyalty and ideas, rather than the affirmative action candidate.

federale86 on November 10, 2008 at 11:52 PM

Yours is the flip side of the same coin–the same mindset that thinks we have to “reach out” on the basis of race.

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 12:03 AM

How do you guys make the bar and change the color when you copy from other replies????

Gracias…

Copy the text from the comment you want. Paste it into your comment box. Highlight the quote text and hit the “quote” button in the Comment menu bar. That will put the BLOCKQUOTE tags bracketing the quoted text.

Check it out with the “Preview” button.

A su servicio amigo.

rcl on November 11, 2008 at 12:05 AM

Use the Newt for his wisdom, but go with Steele…that and Palin in 2012!

serenity on November 11, 2008 at 12:06 AM

We need a rock rib conservative and nothing short. RNC chair will pick the line up for 2010 & possible 2012.

What I have seen of Steele he is a NE Republican, of the better kind but still not a Rock Rib, and not what is needed now. I absolutely disagree with federale86 Steele is NO affirmative action candidate and Steele is a strong anti-affirmative action leader.

C-Low on November 11, 2008 at 12:09 AM

Forgot the last line NEWT for RNC all the way. We need a renewed updated contract aggressive call em out people and most importantly someone to pick a crop of new upstarts for 2010 & 2012 to retake those lost seats but this time with rock ribs.

C-Low on November 11, 2008 at 12:15 AM

Um Shelby’s only three years younger than Newt. It’s Michael Steele we’re talking about here. LOL.

Whoa. That is pretty darn funny. Shelby was on with Dennis Prager last Monday. Must have made quite an impression.

Okay. I always had the right guy in mind; almost Gov. of MD.; ran a great race; overlooked for RNC in favor of typical phony conservative Bush croney.

Find/Replace Shelby/Michael. Same take.

Humbling but not as big a mistake as bringing up Tom Delay.

Newt and Delay were there at the foundation of the K Street corruption. The worst of the offenders are their friends and colleagues. All the old guard has to be purged. It isn’t going to happen with one of their own in charge. Personally I think Newt’s dirty. His only virtue is he got kicked out before the real big money started rolling in.

Michael S. would be a much better choice.

R.

rcl on November 11, 2008 at 12:19 AM

I really like Michael Steele and hope he is a future face of the party but i think we need someone with experience and frankly a genius like Newt is to lead the RNC….

Conservator23 on November 11, 2008 at 12:35 AM

Steele is a bad choice, another RINO which is exactly what the RNC DOESN’T need.
Steele:
Supports assault weapons ban which goes against D.C. V Heller
Supports affirmative action
Supports Roe V Wade staying in place
The RNC needs to FIND A DEAD ON CONSERVATIVE, PERIOD!
Michael Steele is a nice guy, a good speaker but he’s NO conservative.

nelsonknows on November 11, 2008 at 12:35 AM

To hell with these professional politicians – put Zo in charge!

Phildorex on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 AM

But the real question is… who does Palin support?

faraway on November 11, 2008 at 12:41 AM

We need Newt as a strong voice and strategist, but we need fresh faces and new blood. Newt and Steele need to work out a way to get the best of both.

Jindal 2012!

Laura in Maryland on November 11, 2008 at 12:45 AM

GO MIKE GO!

Buckaroo on November 11, 2008 at 12:45 AM

Shelby was on with Dennis Prager last Monday. Must have made quite an impression.

Back in 1990, reading one of Shelby Steele’s books made me realize that I didn’t have to be a Democrat just because I’m black. The title of the book is, appropriately enough, The Content of Our Character. The author is, indeed, an impressive guy.

Wonder if he’d like to be the RNC chair. :-)

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 12:46 AM

Many interesting posts here. I would ask you to consider the following.
1) We have only one general who has fought this battle before and won. Newt.
2) MS is a part of the east coast or Rockefeller Republicans. He doesn’t appear to be a RINO but looks can be deceiving. I love the man but am not certain I fully trust him yet. Plus as many of you here have mentioned it would give the appearance if not the reality of pandering.
3) Fred! I really love Fred but don’t see much fire in the belly. Senior adviser/spokesperson would be fine with me.
4) I would like to know who Sarah, Bobby J., Mitt R. would pick. They are the future and have more to loose than anyone here.
5) If the Republican party doesn’t move back to being the RR Conservative party there are going to be a lot of divorces and a third party.

LCL4 on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 AM

Why can’t the RNC have them both?

Texas Gal on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich needs to be named head of the GOP, or, just let him tell everyone what the strategy is, daily.

Michael Steele is great, too, but he hasn’t had a remarkable political win (yet) either strategically or as to any of his campaigns.

Newt, tried, true, remarkably intelligent, a great tactitian. Let’s not dally around here — let’s go with the gold and be efficient about this.

S on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

Why can’t the RNC have them both?

Texas Gal on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

My first thought, also. There’s room and work enough for both. Gingrich, however, seems to merit some sort of “senior fellow” position, just let the man work at his own declaration and trust the outcome. No reason Steele can’t work WITH Gingrich, as long as the two of them feel fine about that.

S on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 AM

“Ronald Reagan made it cool to be a Republican, for God’s sake.” – Michael Steele, November 2008

Nuff said.

Kokonut on November 11, 2008 at 1:05 AM

Michael Steele is AWESOME. The optimism, decency and intelligence this party so desperately needs leading it.

therightwinger on November 11, 2008 at 1:11 AM

Newt is one that will not compromise unless in the end it serves our interest.
Time for a pitbull and not a poodle.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 11:34 PM

Lemme fix that up to better reflect reality:
Newt is one that will not compromise unless in the end it serves HIS interest.

Time for a pitbull and not a poodle.
who ran out of Washington with his tail between his legs in 1998 when the Democrats went after him in.

LegendHasIt on November 11, 2008 at 1:12 AM

Legend-Hasit,

A good general picks his battles carefully.

LCL4 on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 AM

like them both, actually, LOVE Newt, but Newt is yesterday’s news. Steele all the way!

Chewy the Lab on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 AM

Steele is a RINO. If we don’t learn from McCain we’re doomed t repeat him.

lodge on November 11, 2008 at 2:41 AM

Lodge: And I won’t go with Newt because he’s a friggin’ grayhair who had his day back in 1994. His time is done.

Katon Dawson would be a good choice, maybe Jon Huntsman (gov of Utah), or even possibly bring in J.C. Watts.

Or you could go with my favorite: Michele Bachmann.

Sakaki on November 11, 2008 at 3:21 AM

I voted Steele, but I’d take either one in a heartbeat.

SueM on November 11, 2008 at 5:26 AM

I voted Steele too, and I agree either would be acceptable.

But how about a write-in vote for Jeri Thompson? From what I’ve seen in interviews, she’s a take-no-prisoners kinda gal!

GrayLoess on November 11, 2008 at 6:23 AM

lol, there can be only one, i love it.

I was a huge proponent of Michael Steele to head the RNC (still am), until Gingrich announced interest.

Gingrich has proven capable of bringing in true reform in the past and he still has fesh ideas today. He also was one of the few high profile Republicans who took issue with the bailout, but in a knee jerk way. I am torn over this, but would have to go with Gingrich.

Steele would be awesome though and it would help the Repbulican party to show some diversity. Steele is a good spokesman, has energy and core conservative values which can speak to a wide audience.

Daemonocracy on November 11, 2008 at 6:33 AM

If the two can’t work out a powersharing arrangement, I have to go with Steele. Gingrich has been on the side lines acting smart without pitching in, IMHO. How we ended up with McCain as a candidate is an endorsement for a complete house cleaning of the GOP leadership. Steele is moving to fill a vacuum and I like his aggressiveness. I think it might be his time and Gingrich might have to stay on his lofty perch if he can’t cut a deal. IMHO.

JAW on November 11, 2008 at 6:55 AM

Neither of the above – soso conservatives. Who does Sarah want?

bill30097 on November 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM

bill30097 on November 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM

You just called a pillar of the conservative movement a soso conservative. Yay.

Brains on November 11, 2008 at 8:20 AM

Although Newt did lead the revolution, I think he has been in washington too long. As one of our founding fathers said and I paraphrase “A person who seeks to be a Senator soon find himself to be a citizen of Washington and not of the his state”. Newt is now a citizen of Washington, Steele is a citizen of the United States and is better suited to articulate the conservative principles that made this country great…I support Steele for his bid as head of the RNC.

Dhitter on November 11, 2008 at 8:24 AM

mindset that thinks we have to “reach out” on the basis of race.

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 12:03 AM

The GOP needs to be purged, no doubt, but if they are serious about rebuilding, they had better heed this advice.

The rise of Obama is a tremendous opportunity for conservatives, and allowing this type of “mindset” to take shape in the new leadership would be disastrous…a continuation of the current faux conservatism that pervades the GOP today.

Conservatism does not need to be re-defined, so much as it needs to be articulated. The problem with the GOP is that the leadership does not believe, which is evidence of a deeper problem…they do not understand.

“If you can not explain it simply, then you don’t understand it well enough” Albert Einstein

What Reagan understood better than anyone else, and we obviously still don’t get it, is that most people are conservative, it’s just that a good portion of them haven’t had the opportunity to discover it.

Conservatism requires a leadership that understands and believes. It requires effective communication that speaks to good old fashioned American common sense. If the GOP needs to “reach out”, it is to the conservative buried within the heart of the Nation. This color blind approach, will build a diverse house, brick by brick.

The Left has just built a house from straw. Are we going to waste this opportunity?

Saltysam on November 11, 2008 at 8:41 AM

A su servicio amigo.

rcl on November 11, 2008 at 12:05 AM

Thanks for the HA HTML Posting 101…I’ve been wondering the same thing, myself :-)

LoneStarGal on November 11, 2008 at 8:42 AM

Two great options. It says a lot of good things about the future of the GOP.

One thing to consider: Steele doesn’t bring the baggage that Newt will have with some viewers. A big part of the party chairman’s job is appearing on various TV shows. And having Steele as a spokesperson somewhat inoculates the party from some lines of thought.

Newt’s big plus is his energy policy, which is something that Americans like, and a place where we can highlight bold differences between the parties. But I doubt he’ll get to bring that up in most interviews, because the media knows that’s good turf for him to be on.

hawksruleva on November 11, 2008 at 9:11 AM

Surprised this is pretty split down the middle among Hot Air posters.

I’m NOT a big Gingrich guy, but this role is perfect for him. He’s always had a lot of fresh and innovative ideas, and I think the Repubs are far better off with him than Steele, who appears to be a great guy, but I don’t think his intellectual heft is as great as Gingrich’s.

asc85 on November 11, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Can I write in “Carl Rove, the Magnificent Bastard”?

PappaMac on November 11, 2008 at 9:36 AM

I voted Steele, but either one works for me. When I imagine the tough stance needed to “talk the points” in an uncompromising way, Newt’s the one. Steele is more congenial and likable. He may make the conservative view more attractive. It will get even more interesting once we learn who may take Scream Dean’s place. We will want to choose a good match up. I’ll be watching to see how this one turns out.

Semper Paratus

DrStock on November 11, 2008 at 9:40 AM

No to Micael Steele

Michael Steele, a rising star in the party and one of its most prominent African Americans, said the first challenge for the Republicans was to admit that their demise was “all of their own making”. He urged a David Cameron-style reinvention to broaden the party’s appeal in the near future.

“We could very well be looking at a situation where we don’t get it back by 2016 or even 2020. So we could be looking at 12 years out like the Tories. They went through a long dark winter of reassessment and realignment, but now David Cameron has got himself in a position where he looks like he is going to be the next prime minister,” The Telegraph quoted Steele as saying.

Praising Cameroon for combining toughness and a delicate touch and having the wisdom to listen to the people of England, he said: “I have marveled how the Tory leadership has been able to do that. That is the model for the Republican Party to regenerate ourselves and move forward.”

William Amos on November 11, 2008 at 9:48 AM

If this were American Idol I’d go with Steele because he’s young! fresh! hip! cool! and allows the RINO celebrity zombies to show that they have a candidate who meets the trendy skin color requirements of today.

But this is big league politics whic steer the direction of the country, Newt knows these traitorous bastards, has kicked their hippy asses before, has vision, guts, can artculate a clear plan, and does not compromise true conservative values. The next election must be won on our terms:
Low taxes,
Secure borders,
Strong military,
Non activist judges,
Ending racial preferences,
Strong 2nd Amndmt rights.

I’d rather lose with guns blazing than put another liberal dressed up like a conservative in office.

Alden Pyle on November 11, 2008 at 9:49 AM

Newt needs the position. He needs to not play it like a dictator though. He’s respectfful enough to step down when he loses to because he did it once before.

Steele would be better served if he went for an elected office and got some more national level experience. He’s to good to waste behind the scenes. He also needs to do this do calm some fears about him I read here. The guy started the shouting “drill,baby, drill” at the Convention but it seems a few are gun shy.

If Huckabees liberal “Reagan conservativism is dead” “the only thing that gets me a seat at the table us I’m a Evangelical” campaigning on any level gets play in four years, I will leave the Party and let it die a slow death.

Sultry Beauty on November 11, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Give it to Bobby Jindal!

That will give him time to shape of the party for the next election cycle and have it under conservative control in 2012.

Virginia Shanahan on November 11, 2008 at 10:02 AM

Oh as for Gingrich or Steele- how about which ever one actually joins the RNC first.

Virginia Shanahan on November 11, 2008 at 10:03 AM

I just love it that the votes are so close. I voted Steele, though I’d be happy with either one. Steele being someone fairly new in the party leadership was the tipping point for me.

Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 10:10 AM

I like Michael Steele, but is anybody with me on being driven crazy with his verbal tick of “the reality of it is…”? He must say that 10 times in every interview.

lionheart on November 11, 2008 at 10:18 AM

Back in 1990, reading one of Shelby Steele’s books made me realize that I didn’t have to be a Democrat just because I’m black. The title of the book is, appropriately enough, The Content of Our Character. The author is, indeed, an impressive guy.

Wonder if he’d like to be the RNC chair. :-)

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 12:46 AM

We’re making a big mistake by focusing on the RNC chair as the be-all and end-all for our comeback as a party and a political movement.

Does anyone think Howard Dean really led the intellectual resurgence of the Democratic Party? Can anyone identify him with a single policy idea? Did Haley Barbour do that as RNC chairman before George Bush was elected in 2000?

Of course not. The RNC chairman is a national spokesperson for the party, but most importantly must manage the nuts and bolts of fundraising, candidate recruitment and training, and funding of party building in the states. Newt Gingrich would be a great person to do all of this stuff because he understands how the party has been successful in the past and where the holes are now. He has been an observer and thinker for the last few years and suyrely can see where the Democrats have outpaced the Republicans in terms of organization and recruitment. He did an unbelievable job of recruiting candidates in the 1990s, which helped him build the majority in 1994.

We need a whole infrastructure of think tanks, blogs, interactive websites, and media operations to support and build a new majority. This is what Republicans did in the 990s and the Democrats just copied it successfully. Both Shelby Steele and Michael Steele, and Baldilocks herself, should be prominent players in that structure. It would be very novel indeed to have some black men and women at the forefront of the conservative idea movement, as Obama takes the reins of government.

rockmom on November 11, 2008 at 10:19 AM

I wish Michael Steele would run for President. I would vote for him in a New York minute. I think he’s an amazing man.

shoregulls on November 11, 2008 at 11:04 AM

William Amos on November 11, 2008 at 9:48 AM

I prefer Newt, but could point out specifically what is wrong with that Michael Steele quote, because I’ve read it a couple of times and I can’t see it. And I don’t buy the reporter’s restatement of what Steele said (”broaden,” “reinvention”).

Our demise is of our (leaders’) own making. And it will take us some time to rebuild. What is the problem with stating the obvious?

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 11:09 AM

Why can’t the RNC have them both?

Texas Gal on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

My first thought, also. There’s room and work enough for both. Gingrich, however, seems to merit some sort of “senior fellow” position, just let the man work at his own declaration and trust the outcome. No reason Steele can’t work WITH Gingrich, as long as the two of them feel fine about that.

S on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 AM

I like these opinions.

gzelmiami on November 11, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Does anyone think Howard Dean really led the intellectual resurgence of the Democratic Party? Can anyone identify him with a single policy idea?

Yes he actually did. He went against the grain of the democratic by not shoring up states the dems already had but taking on Republican ’safe’ states. He was ostracized by his party for this tactic.

scrubbiedude on November 11, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Gingrich supported the freaking bailout boondoggle. I know nothing about Steele, but if you support Gingrich you still need to back to conservative 101 school.

angelat0763 on November 11, 2008 at 11:28 AM

I had a post in one of the headline threads that I think might work well here.

I say, advertise principle. Democrats are an alliance of co-belligerent special interests, all fighting against the principles the country was founded on. Republicans need to stand on principle, realize that the Conservative Economic, Security, and Social stances are all part of the same philosophy.
A strong military, and an assertive foreign policy (coupled with mutual free trade) are vital in protecting our liberties. We have not secured freedom so long as tyranny exists for others.
Economically, it is a fantasy that we can raise tax revenues by raising the top tax rates–it won’t happen. We might be able to raise revenues some by cutting the top marginal rates, but that is not certain. At this point, the only way to actually raise revenues with certainty is to increase the marginal tax rates in the lower tax brackets, and eliminate tax credits and deduction, which I don’t think many want to do. Borrowing is only reducing our investment and slowing economic growth. The only solution is to stop the growth in spending–the more we ask government to do for us, the less total ’stuff’ each of us will have.
Contrary to what a lot of libertarians like to claim, the Social Conservative policies are all about liberty. It is not about forcing morality on the country, but keeping the government from forcing immorality on the people. Federalism and limited government are important to stress here–we need to stress that every denunciation of immoral behavior is not a call to legislate against it, but a call for individuals to do better.
It all ties in.

Count to 10 on November 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM

So, which one gets us the closest?

Count to 10 on November 11, 2008 at 11:35 AM

Our demise is of our (leaders’) own making. And it will take us some time to rebuild. What is the problem with stating the obvious?

baldilocks on November 11, 2008 at 11:09 AM

The danger is a fine line. We risk not standing for what we believe in simply in the belief that if we copy a successful opponent that will give us what we need for victory. The democrats didnt copy the GOP’s message after defeat in 2004 they simply came up with a whole new plan.

We need a whole new plan not just a copy of the democrats plan.

William Amos on November 11, 2008 at 11:36 AM

Steele/Palin 2012.

Christine on November 11, 2008 at 11:41 AM

so much racism…

*lowers head*

neal7 on November 11, 2008 at 11:44 AM

If this means we can stop with the Newt for Prez pap, then yes, by all means, nominate him to chair the RNC.

Too bad he’s a AGW kool-aid drinker.

spmat on November 11, 2008 at 11:56 AM

It’s just must be too soon for me to get enthusiastic about this yet. I don’t see Mr. Steele as being strong enough of a force and Newt almost being too strong. Is the RNC chair to pull in more voters or to put forward conservative ideas? Or both. I think I would like to go back and review Haley Barbers term in the position I remember thinking he was an asset, add to that he seems to be a good governor, those are the qualities we need. But that was a while ago and maybe I am just looking through a rose colored rear view mirror.

Cindy Munford on November 11, 2008 at 11:58 AM

Saltysam on November 11, 2008 at 8:41 AM

You hit the nail on the head! Conservatism is about principles. You don’t give those up to win elections, we need real conservatives that can articulate those beliefs.

kongzilla on November 11, 2008 at 12:02 PM

When asked why he would do a commercial with Nancy Pelosi on global warming Newt explained that it was to get into the conversation, then present ideas on both independence and more reasonable ways to safeguard the environment. I believe it was a Hannity radio interview.

Cindy Munford on November 11, 2008 at 12:11 PM

We need the best, most conservative choice for this position. RUSH! And if he won’t do it, then FRED!

ErinF on November 11, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Steele is my pick for whoever the face and philosophical director of the RNC will be. That appears to be the GENERAL CHAIRMAN as opposed to chairman.We need qualified conservative diversity on our frontlines at this moment in time.

The General Chairman usually provides overall direction and philosophical moorings, and acts as the public face of the party doing media and speeches, etc., and also is available probably for big-money phone calls and events — but the Chairman, with an Executive Director under him, is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the RNC

I still think Newt or Saltsman could effective do the Executive day to day operations from behid the scene. both have a track record of leading successful ‘revolutions’

We all know Newt’s but Saltsman is no johnny come lately.

His track record as a state party organizer could prove appealing as well, Saltsman coordinated the ground game that lead to the embarrassing defeat of Al Gore’s home state in the 2000 general election. As Huck’s former go-to-guy, Saltsman also passes the litmus test for many social conservatives. And of course, he managed one of the most surprisingly-successful campaigns of 2008 with virtually zero money.

If the GOP can get over their Huck phobia, they may discover that Saltsman could be the ‘Dean’strategy wise, who will be able to deliver the best bang for the buck from behind the scenes. He also scored a huge endorsement from Bill Frist who is twisting arms and calling in favors to garner support for him.

Rensen on November 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM

Come on guys, Proven Results vs. a really nice guy.

stenwin77 on November 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM

If Huckabees liberal “Reagan conservativism is dead” “the only thing that gets me a seat at the table us I’m a Evangelical” campaigning on any level gets play in four years, I will leave the Party and let it die a slow death.

Conservatives needs to get over their Huckabee derangement syndrome.. NO ONE has worked harder to make this party relevant to the Joe’s and Titos of the base. He led the way on the economy in the primaries, and by the end of the campaign everyobdy on both sides were talking about ‘kitchen table economics.’

Even our newly promoted crongressional leaders are borrowing from his playbook. Did nobody hear Pence and Cantor on FNS? ” I’m a conservative, but I’m not angry about it!’ Huckabee 101.. they have the sense to use what works.

I don’t know how anyone gets away with saying Huck is advocating a move away from Reagan conservatism. Huck is such a proponent of thre legged conservatism that at some points in the primaries, people were asking if he WAS the next Reagan, much to the consternation of his opponents.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/is-huckabee-the-next-reagan/

The conventional wisdom is that the former Arkansas governor is starting to get traction because of his views on social issues. While that is undoubtedly a factor, it is also the case that Huckabee for several weeks has been hitting hard on the issue of restoring American sovereignty and resisting the advance of United Nations-led global government. Meantime, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain, and Mitt Romney have been tiptoeing around the issue, refusing to address or confront the problem that is on the minds of millions of Americans―the decline of America as a sovereign nation and the growing power of international institutions and foreign judges over our lives and destiny as a nation.

The Family Research Council’s recent “values voters” event in Washington, D.C. received extensive coverage. But Huckabee’s strong denunciation of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which is now up for Senate ratification, was generally ignored in the press coverage. He not only attacked the treaty and its provision for an international tribunal to judge America’s conduct on the high seas, but he urged the impeachment of any federal judge who recognized international law above the U.S. Constitution.

“Any federal judge who uses some international law as a precedent to make a court decision ought to be impeached,” he said to strong applause.

If the GOP continues to cannibalize its best assets instead of finding ways to incorporate them into a new winning strategy, it deserves its years in the wilderness.

Rensen on November 11, 2008 at 1:37 PM

I agree with Phildorex. Zo is my man!

infidelgranny on November 11, 2008 at 1:55 PM

Gingrich would sink us. Steele is the future:
http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2008/11/no-gingrich-for-rnc-chair.html

orfannkyl on November 11, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Gingrich supported the freaking bailout boondoggle. I know nothing about Steele, but if you support Gingrich you still need to back to conservative 101 school.

angelat0763 on November 11, 2008 at 11:28 AM

No he did not.

In late 2008, Gingrich voiced his strong opposition to allowing American taxpayers to bail out several failing financial institutions. He described the $700 billion bailout plan as “just wrong” and that “it’s likely to fail, and it’s likely to make the situation worse over time.”Gingrich further iterated that the bailout was “essentially wrong” in other appearances on Fox News on September 23 and 24, 2008. Some commentators have suspected that he undercut John McCain by rallying the conservative elements in the House to vote no on the bailout.

scrubbiedude on November 11, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Why can’t the RNC have them both?
Texas Gal on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

do we have to have either? why do I feel foisted upon! help!
gingrich is good on philosophy but a RINO when push comes to shove. Michael Savage is right about Gingrich. Love/hate.
steele, “is the future”, maybe but not if he’s a RINO too. McCain payed Reagan lip service too.
Bachman? Jindal? Jindal can do more than just Governor. Gimme a break. Jindal. Read his bio.

anti-boomer on November 11, 2008 at 3:12 PM

Just got this from Hip Hop Republican:

Link:

http://www.draftmichaelsteele.com/forward?path=node/1

Sign up

jcheney on November 11, 2008 at 3:32 PM

If we’ve learned anything from ‘08, it’s that image matters. Steele is far superior to Gingrich in that regard.

We need hip. Gingrich is not it.

ericdondero on November 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM

Why can’t the RNC have them both?

Texas Gal on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM

Evidently they may. MM picked up this from Mary Katharine Ham:

Bill Sammon’s sources tell him Steele may announce as soon as Thursday, and is courting the endorsement of Newt Gingrich, which if landed, would do much to scare off the incumbent and possible challengers:

The source also contradicted a report in Tuesday’s Washington Times that Steele and Gingrich were competing for the RNC post.

“There is no fight,” the source said. “This tension between Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich is totally fabricated and, in fact, Gingrich and Steele are working together to create a new strategy for the direction of the GOP.”

In a statement issued by the former House speaker, Gingrich said he was not interested in seeking the post of Republican party chairman.

“A number of people have asked me to consider running for Republican National Committee chair. They have been very flattering, and I am very honored by their support,” he said.

MKH goes on to say:

I like the direction this is heading, if correct. Michael Steele is an eminently likable guy who can communicate conservative values and ideas with competence and charm, and has always inspired the base. He comes without the significant political baggage of a Newt chairmanship, but will undoubtedly be bolstered by Newt’s ideas, as Gingrich has signaled that he wants to be very involved in the remaking of a party that could use some new ideas.

INC on November 11, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Most recently, Chip Saltsman was the campaign manager of Governor Mike Huckabee’s Presidential campaign and organized one of the biggest political upsets in modern history.

Before joining Huckabee’s campaign, Saltsman was the chairman of the Tennessee Republican Party and was responsible for causing Al Gore to lose his home state in 2000 and helping Republican candidates win races at all levels across the state.

With the Republican Party beginning to lose its way and conservatives craving honest and effective leadership, Chip Saltsman is the man we’re looking for.

That’s why we need to draft Chip Saltsman for RNC Chairman! Chip has continuously proven himself to be an effective leader capable of making even the most well funded opponents have to fight for their political lives.

With Chip Saltsman, a man who truly believes in conservative principles, as our party’s chairman, conservatives will have a renewed voice in our party and the establishment that’s put us in this mess will finally be held accountable.

Chip Saltsman is the most qualified, most prepared, and most experienced person for this job and we deserve him as our next Republican Party Chairman!

jparks1972 on November 11, 2008 at 5:07 PM

WHY OH WHY does anyone even bother referencing stuff from the WaPo??? PLEASE tell me why?

Are we all too stupid to know the difference?

Jeepers…

Just this afternoon Newt set the record straight on Hannity…. Gingrich was asked by the reporter if he was going to run for RNC chair…. Gingrich said “No”…. and the reporter said, “Well, that’s a ‘yes’ to me,” and he ran with it.

Let’s all stop being so stupid in believing this crud.

seanrobins on November 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM

Steele did run some good out-of-the-box ads when running for Senate. I will give him that.

Punchenko on November 11, 2008 at 9:30 PM

The answer is obvious – Newt as chair, Steele running for Governor of MD.

sleepyhead on November 11, 2008 at 11:25 PM

The reason Newt doesn’t deserve it! He is willing to give it up to Steele. If he wanted to fight for it, I would back him. Steele is fighting for it, so I presume he is willing to take the arrows and defend Conservatism. I will follow anyone, defending freedom.

lwssdd on November 12, 2008 at 2:04 AM

Losers. Fresh meat please. These guys have been ousted, and flipped over easy. I’ve about had it with Gingrich. Go up on top of DiamondHead and write another book Newt and stay there. All the expert republicans LOST, LOST!! We’re down 28 more seats and lost the White House. Wake the F up!

johnnyU on November 12, 2008 at 4:48 AM

Apparently few have ever looked at Steele’s record of supporting affirmative action, supporting Roe V Wade and Assault Weapons Bans. Michael Steele seems to be a nice guy but those three strikes makes him disqualified for me to vote for him for ANYTHING.
As for Gingrich, he’s also become what is wrong with the RNC; Let’s remember folks, Gingrich supported Shamnesty before he decided not to support it AFTER we conservatives crawled all over the GOP. Anyone who sits on a couch with Nazi NAMBLA Nancy Pelosi, Sphincter of the House and spews Global Warming propaganda needs to go back to having William Forstchen writing books for him.
Trying to find a genuine conservative makes one feel like Diogenes. Too bad the GOP won’t touch Duncan Hunter with a 10 foot pole.

nelsonknows on November 12, 2008 at 5:12 AM

Newt had his chance with the “Contract for America”. He didn’t get it done then I don’t see why he would be a good choice. Give Steele the chance.

working_man on November 12, 2008 at 9:45 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5


You must be logged in to post a comment.