Newt for RNC chair?
posted at 11:50 am on November 10, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
In the wake of its second straight defeat in national elections, the Republican Party needs leadership that can lead it out of the political wilderness. They may want to look at the last man to accomplish that for the GOP. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Newt Gingrich might agree to chair the RNC as the party tries to retool for the Obama administration:
Newt Gingrich has let it be known that, if Republicans want him, the former U.S House speaker is willing to serve as chairman of the national party and lead it out of the wilderness it’s blundered into.
The question is whether the 168-member Republican National Committee is open to the match.
“If a majority of the RNC thought he was needed, he would accept that appointment,” said Randy Evans’ Gingrich’s close friend and legal counsel. “He fully appreciates the urgency of the moment.”
Some wanted Gingrich to run for President in 2008, but this role would suit him much better. Gingrich has operated best as a philosopher for the conservative movement, someone who can both capture the essence of conservatism and put it into action. Gingrich has the skill to communicate to a national audience and an emeritus status that will have people paying attention when he speaks. As RNC chair, his political baggage becomes irrelevant, allowing him to focus on party- and agenda-building instead of running for office.
Most importantly, Gingrich understands the technological tools that escaped the GOP in 2008. American Solutions has established a very impressive grassroots structure for policy, which could easily be adopted and adapted to the RNC. As Patrick Ruffini has been arguing at Rebuild the Party, the RNC needs to close the technology gap with the DNC in a hurry. Gingrich could get the GOP to a terrific start in doing just that.
Selecting Gingrich would also underscore the priority for the party in the next two years. People have already begun talking about 2012, but we have another national election in two years. Unlike this year, Democrats will not have an overwhelming advantage in the Senate races, and they will have to defend the first two years of undivided government. If the Republicans can organize quickly, use a grassroots technological structure to identify and support candidates, and develop the successor to the Contract with America that can unite the disparate factions of conservatism around a few core principles and support candidates who will stick to them, Republicans might compete in 2010 and get control of one chamber of Congress — or at least cut significantly into Democratic majorities.
The RNC needs to find a man who has a track record of doing all of the above. Newt Gingrich certainly fills that bill — if he’ll take it.
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: « Previous 1 2
“Farmer_Joe on November 10, 2008 at 12:45 PM”
well, Ed and A.P. would surely agree with you!
:-)
Buckaroo on November 10, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I think Howard Stern did everyone a favor interviewing black people with John McCain’s platform and saying Sarah Palin was Obama’s running mate, IF the GOP will pay attention for once and actually LEARN SOMETHING!
I really respect Michael Steele so let’s not use him as an affirmative action candidate, he deserves better!
Let’s remember folks, blacks threw oreos at Michael Steele when he ran with an “R” attached to his name, the same people who have called Condi Rice and Colin Powell all kinds of nasty names but somehow forgot they’d called Powell a liar for the past 6 years just because Powell endorsed the Obamanazi.
Personally I think the GOP will refuse to learn a damned thing!
nelsonknows on November 10, 2008 at 12:49 PM
“Personally I think the GOP will refuse to learn a damned thing!”
gee, that sort of cynicism is so out of place on this blog …
:-)
:-)
Buckaroo on November 10, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Michael Steele is the man for the job period!
amex on November 10, 2008 at 12:53 PM
This is much the better place for Newt than running for office again.
irishspy on November 10, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Newt is the most logical person to do it. He has the gravitas and the standing to do it. Plus he will fight.
Jdripper on November 10, 2008 at 12:56 PM
I completely agree with this. To my mind there’s only one person in America that fits the bill . . . a former Republican strategist with brains and beauty . . . Jeri Thompson.
We really DO need to update the Republican brand while going back to Reagan style Conservatism.
JonPrichard on November 10, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Michael Steele is great! But, Newt is more of a fighter. And he is mad! I am at a toss up on this one. Love Micheal. But think Newt would be better. They won’t throw Oreo’s at Newt. Or would they?
sheebe on November 10, 2008 at 1:01 PM
completely agree with this. To my mind there’s only one person in America that fits the bill . . . a former Republican strategist with brains and beauty . . . Jeri Thompson.
We really DO need to update the Republican brand while going back to Reagan style Conservatism.
JonPrichard on November 10, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Good idea too. :)
sheebe on November 10, 2008 at 1:01 PM
If Newt apologizes for overspending and stops trying to take credit for a ‘balanced’ budget, and halts earmarks by Republicans he can have the job. If not his hubris will bite the conservative movement again.
Newt is too willing to accept the media narrative of global warming. He offers conservative solutions which I like but is he going to let the media continually set the narravtive thennjust offer a conservative solution? What if the conservative pro free market solution is rejected by the people? Then what? The narrative has been set and conservatism is on the outside looking in. If Newt wants my support he needs to challenge the media narrative not accept it.
Theworldisnotenough on November 10, 2008 at 1:03 PM
I think that Newt is a good choice for RNC chair for all of the reasons that Ed mentioned in his piece. If the Republicans had bothered to listen to him for 2008 we might not be facing 4 years of the Obamination. As for his negatives they become a dead point if he is at the RNC.
Govgirl on November 10, 2008 at 1:04 PM
YES! Newt has vision, experience, gravitas, takes no prisoners, and is incredibly articulate – a quality we are desperately in need of.
Buy Danish on November 10, 2008 at 1:12 PM
i want newt NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mommypundit on November 10, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Newt for CIO.
Chief INTELLECT Officer
jake-the-goose on November 10, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Oh dear god no…..Newt is like the unflushable turd
LimeyGeek on November 10, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Newt as RNC chair? I can get behind that!
Sarjex on November 10, 2008 at 1:21 PM
What has Gingrich learned, and when did he learn it?
He let conservatives and political power leak away. At the tipping point, Newt was in his undies. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
Hubris is the political equivalent of Alcoholism.
If he has one, Newt needs to make a more compelling case for his Republican stewardship than “last man standing”.
Randy
williars on November 10, 2008 at 1:24 PM
I perfectly comfortable with Newt in that chair. He can bring back big donors, something else we desperately need.
angelat0763 on November 10, 2008 at 1:26 PM
That’s actually a very good idea — far better than this nonsense about running him on the ticket. Newt has far too much negative baggage to run, but I bet he’d be a hell of a RNC chairman.
rightwingprof on November 10, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Newt is the only high ranking/ex-high ranking that seams to get it. Plus the fact that he caused the GOP majority the last time and it wasn’t until he stepped down that things started falling apart. I say Steele should run for Senate again but with Newt running the RNC to support him as well as supporting other conservatives in the primary races.
- The Cat
P.S. I say again, cleaning house is for PRIMARIES
MirCat on November 10, 2008 at 1:30 PM
No freakin’ way! Gingrich is a policy wonk, not a strategist. During the Red River floods in North Dakota, he tried to attach a rider to the disaster relief bill to prevent Clinton from shutting down the guvmint and blaming Republicans. Clinton saw it coming and tooled Newt like a leathercrafter with a belt blank.
whitetop on November 10, 2008 at 1:32 PM
Quoting my own comment from the headlines:
Newt knows how to formulate a coherent, intellectually-crafted message that resonates with people, because he presents it in a way that shows that he HAS A PLAN. The biggest reason that Republicans lost is because they seemed to be a big mess of detached politicians in Washington with no real plan… the bailout only reinforced that perception.
Newt and his pie charts, bullet points, and topical anecdotes is exactly what the Republican party needs as its public face. Of course, the press might be successful in conjuring up the Newt-as-villian that they filed away in the late 90’s… we’ll have to see.
DaveS on November 10, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Newt would be great.
Personally, I would love to see him get away from FOX News (as a paid contributor) and start making the rounds of the other networks and represent conservative principles.
Wasn’t the interview with him at the convention by nbc priceless? We need to spread the Newt around.
hashman on November 10, 2008 at 1:35 PM
Michael Steele is part of the problem. He is already in the RNC
Former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele is a partner in a prestigious law firm in Washington, D.C.
But he’s hardly out of politics. As chairman of the Republican Action Committee, Steele is responsible for training the next generation of Republican candidates for office. But he hasn’t given up on the current crop, including John McCain.
Steele acknowledges his party has a particular problem with minorities.
“Our party has done absolutely jack to help them, understand and appreciate them. We’ve done nothing,” he said.
He claims to be optimistic about Tuesday’s election, but he’s already thinking ahead to the next race and how he hopes his party will evolve.
William Amos on November 10, 2008 at 1:36 PM
IMO, the future of the GOP:
Bobby Jindal
Tim Pawlenty
Eric Cantor
Ron Paul
Michael Steele
Mitt Romney
TightAggressive on November 10, 2008 at 1:44 PM
I think Newt would be great!!! I agree that the GOP needs new leadership in almost every role, but we need someone with vast experience yet a clear vision for the future for RNC chair.
Go Newt!
Oink on November 10, 2008 at 1:46 PM
as a former dem now republican. I think Newt is the perfect choice. He is on point.
His brain with Palin in 2012, we can defeat Senator Government.
triple-p on November 10, 2008 at 1:48 PM
No. No. No.
Newt went off the reservation when he sat on the couch with Pelosi.
Next!
macummings on November 10, 2008 at 1:49 PM
I want all new blood………… we need to clean house and start new… bold conservative ideas and new faces. Sorry Newt!
luckybogey on November 10, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Newt would make an awesome RNC chair and he has a pretty good history when it comes to comebacks.
davenp35 on November 10, 2008 at 1:57 PM
In today’s Washington Post article.
Who Will Take Up the Gauntlet to Lead the GOP Out of the Wilderness?
Kokonut on November 10, 2008 at 1:58 PM
I still say get Michael Steele.
Kokonut on November 10, 2008 at 1:59 PM
Newt’s a good strategist but what the GOP really needs is a reincarnation of Lee Atwater.
highhopes on November 10, 2008 at 2:02 PM
I think that Newt would be a good choice for RNC Chair. Let’s not get too carried away though, if Newt had not overreached and overreacted the republicans could still control the house and he would still be majority leader (I know there might have been a lady there somewhere but that never seems to bother the dems). Except for Fred Thompson Newt is the best we have available for policy and position. Fred is probably better but I don’t think he has the sustained energy to do the job.
duff65 on November 10, 2008 at 2:05 PM
Lautenberg Amendment. Look it up. Newt snuck it into legislation without letting GOP House members even read it. He also has generally been anti-gun elsewhere as well.
No Newt is good news.
Kenno on November 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Gingrich did a great job organizing the “Contract with America” in 1994, only to let his personal peccadilloes get him run out of the House, and his successors (Hastert, DeLay, Boehner) lost their way. Gingrich is an articulate speaker and could probably do a good job in recruiting new conservative candidates for swing districts in the House.
The problem is, many swing voters will remember Newt’s personal baggage and may tune out his message. But if Steele (who doesn’t have personal baggage) stays on as RNC chairman, and Gingrich becomes his behind-the-scenes assistant for recruiting and training challengers for House and Senate seats, they could form a good team for 2010.
Some people are better king-makers than “kings”. Newt Gingrich is one of them. This time around, he won’t have to defend the Bush Administration, and the new Obama Administration and Congress will provide an ample supply of targets.
Steve Z on November 10, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Newt Gingrich seems to me the perfect choice for the job of Chairman of the RNC. A man of great intellect, vision, combative spirit, a track record of achievement, Mr. Gingrich also has great speaking skills and conservative credentials.
.
Lets hope his appointment happens!
DavePa on November 10, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Newt would be a better choice than most of what’s available, but he’s been doing way too much of the McCanian “bipartisainship” thing for my taste over the last couple of years.
Between that and his guzzling of the Global Warming kool-aid, I think there are better choices available.
jefferson101 on November 10, 2008 at 2:14 PM
BTW, I’m not all that gung-ho for Michael Steele either. I don’t have personal antipathy for him, but come on now. His accomplishments seem to boil down to having a high melannin content. He also seemed kind of wimpy running for Senate in 2006. I’m not so much anti-Steele–it’s hard to see how he could be much worse than the recent GOP chairmen. I’m more anti-Steele supporters–you know, the Frum types who think we need to “modernize” the party by getting a black chairman (and then, under cover of darkness, “modernize” it even more by throwing away our most valuable voters: pro-gun, pro-life, pro-cheap energy).
Kenno on November 10, 2008 at 2:18 PM
This is why the Republican Party will never win again. I thought that the Elites were the ones that never learn, But I see the peasants are wanting to make the same mistakes again too. All too many didn’t learn a thing in 2006, didn’t learn a thing in 2008.
Always wanting these old retreads; these old has-beens to run things. As a retreaded old has-been myself, I’m ready for someone new and vibrant. Someone that can communicate not only with political junkies like us, but with the American Idol fans. Newt is a smart guy, but he does not connect with 80% of the people of this no longer great nation.
It would be great if he wants to be a top level adviser, but it would be a huge mistake to make him the face of the Republican Party.
We need a leader and a communicator, with unassailable character, not a Professor with a past that most people don’t really understand, but do have some vague idea that there was some kind of disgrace.
LegendHasIt on November 10, 2008 at 2:27 PM
As a Dem who will likely switch over I have to say I used to hate that blowhard Newt, until he got out of office, and now I love the guy… he’d be great. Him or Fred Thompson’s wife. I mean, Fred Thompson. Both great choices. Do this RNC!
Obamalama Deprogrammer on November 10, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Love your nick! I was a Dem. for years. Am now a Republican, going on 8 months. No regrets. Feels great with intelligent people. Just watch out for the trolls. :)
Welcome! Fred Thompson’s wife is very intelligent. And very pretty.
sheebe on November 10, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Steele is the man for the job, Newt sometimes runs his mouth and gets into trouble
KBird on November 10, 2008 at 2:34 PM
This still is a great nation. 46% of the population is not willing to lie down for Obama. If we can keep that 46% intact we can eventually win the civil cold war. Eventually at least 5% will be swayed by our unwillingness to surrender.
Kenno on November 10, 2008 at 2:37 PM
I’d much rather have Michael Steele running for something and Newt running the party. With Newt’s political baggage, he’ll be hard-pressed to get much past the primaries, considering he already has some level of name recognition and negatives.
Michael Steele running for Senate is a much better option in my eyes, as he’s a strong candidate, even in that bastion of liberalness, Maryland, where he almost knocked off Ben Cardin, and in a better Republican environment, would have.
webproze on November 10, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Guys, we don’t need a fresh face at the RNC. The RNC chairman isnt a public figure, he’s in the background
Newt is perfect
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Newt. No. Need new leadership. Leadership that can fuse social, small government and national security conservatives and keep the infighting to a minimum. Newt has too much baggage. He is a figurehead like Ted Kennedy, a preacher for the converted.
There is little chance the RNC will fix itself. These are the folks who pushed the moderate agenda. If you don’t think the RNC is part of the problem, then you probably think Newt is fine.
The old wood needs to be cleared out. Newt is simply the first trial balloon by the RNC to paint over rotted wood.
Angry Dumbo on November 10, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment. Lautenberg Amendment.
Kenno on November 10, 2008 at 3:31 PM
If Newt isn’t our Presidential nominee in 2012 it would be a monumental mistake. That man needs to be President. Why would you want our most talented policy thinker in a purely political position?
Since taking this position would prevent the dream ticket of Gingrich-Jindal from happening in 2012, I would consider it extremely sad. Even tragic.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Congrats on not knowing what you’re talking about whatsoever.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:42 PM
You all cry about his political baggage, yet America just proved that it will elect a friend of terrorists and radicals.
Newt is the smartest and most capable Republican alive.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:43 PM
I’m surprised that no one has yet suggested Ron Paul, although he’s the only one on these lists that is currently holding elected office.
Although he wasn’t my preferred candidate for the Republican nomination, Paul demonstrated, like Howard Dean in 2004, an understanding of technology in his campaign that the Republicans sorely need.
So here’s my team:
Ron Paul – Chair, COO
New Gingrich – Vice Chair, Message Development
Michael Steele – Vice Chair, Community and Candidate Development
Get these three working together, and you have a chance in the years to come.
The Wild Duck on November 10, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I’ll give you the global warming thing. However his bipartisanship is of a totally different brand than McCain and Obama’s.
Gingrich looks for issues that ACTUALLY DO unite the entire country. The Platform of the American People comes with poll numbers next to each statement that overwhelmingly favor the statement (such as how a vast majority of the country wants Official English, etc.) Newt actually proves that America’s Republicans, Democrats (the actual people, not the pols), and independents are united around conservative principles more than people tend to think.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Yeah accept Newt generates new bold conservative ideas on the daily. Look into his recent work more. Watch his youtube videos. Learn a thing or two.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Also Newt is a big fan of both Jindal and Palin, so if he runs for President we can almost guarantee that he’ll get our youngsters involved big time.
Say no to this RNC chair stuff. Newt is above that.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 3:53 PM
There are THREE areas that the RNC must improve in:
1) Communication with media / Face of the Party /Youth
2) Philosophy and policy formation
3) Technology/internet/grassroots/fundraising
Newt has 2) dwon, and understands the extreme need for 3), but has baggage including ego in regards to 1).
Who hits it on all three? I don’t know if Steele hits number 3). Does Mattera hit 3) and can he handle the media requirements of 1)
If we get someone with 1), we can always have Newt in the background working policy 2) and a 3) type there too.
Any suggestions?
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Not gonna happen. He has WAY too much baggage. I personally would work overtime to stop that.
He is not the one for leadership of the country. His opposite is Dean if anything.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 4:04 PM
I agree. Newt is strongest on policy formation.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 4:20 PM
A Letter to the Republican Party
In the aftermath of the 2008 Presidential Election, through which Senator Obama was elected President, there is some discussion surrounding whether the Republican Party must become increasingly liberal in its ideology and political platform, in order to maintain compatibility with the electorate, and thereby position itself to achieve victory in future national elections.
In consideration of this strategic question, it must be observed that there are three pillars inherent in the Republican Party and its traditional voters; to wit: fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious conservatives, often referred to as social conservatives and/or values voters. Shifting the Republican platform essentially means transitioning away from morally upright positions on issues including abortion, embryonic stem cell research, homosexual marriage, and other pro-family issues of principal concern to religious conservatives.
As a Christian, and in political vernacular, often referred to by political commentators as an Evangelical, it is imperative that the Republican Party understand political support from a Christian perspective. First, it must be observed that Christians are those who have been born again through faith, that is, belief in and reliance upon Jesus Christ, the Son of God, for salvation in accordance with the Biblical commandment to believe in His name. Secondly, Christians are followers of Jesus Christ; and in this respect there is no higher priority than obeying His commandments. In this respect, it must be realized that Christians view all matters in life, including family, culture, and political matters from a Biblical perspective. The Scripture is the only prism employed to guide and direct attitudes among Christians; and there is no option to compromise on Biblical precept or principle, regardless of the repercussions. Christians obey God, and leave the consequences to Him.
Christians view themselves as Christians first; and secondly, as Americans; who love God, and country, in this respective order. Christians are not wedded to any political party, but rather abide by the timeless principles of God, as conveyed in the Bible, and strive to correctly apply these principles in all aspects of daily living, including in political affairs. It is Biblical precept and principle which guide political views and positions on issues. Please understand that this is not a matter for debate or negotiation, but rather a representation of truth and fact in the life of a Christian. Christians will not compromise on principle, because they cannot. Doing otherwise is sin. Hence, and there is no disrespect intended in the forthcoming comment, Christians will not under any circumstances abandon their positions on abortion, marriage, and other life issues. To suggest or believe otherwise is politically naïve and erroneous. Christians will not commit personal or collective sin for the sake of political gain or expediency. Hence, should the Republican Party pursue a course of diminishing or vitiating its pro-family platform, it will effectively abandon the Christian community in America, one of the three pillars of their national constituency, and their tens of millions of votes. Additionally, it should be recognized that Christians are not myopic, and hold strong, patriotic views on other important national issues. Christians support a muscular defense and security policy; the post 9/11 pre-emptive and offensive war policy to protect the nation; fiscal responsibility and low taxes; protection of gun rights; and school choice.
From a political perspective, it is noteworthy to mention that according to polling by the Christian Coalition, only 50% of Christians are registered to vote, and only 50% of those registered voted in the national election. This is a tragedy, and an irresponsible act on the part of the Christian community. Bluntly stated, from a Biblical perspective, it is sin. Christians have responsibilities as citizens of this nation; and the failure to vote, and thereby, participate in the political process is inconsistent with the “good stewardship” Scriptural principle. Nonetheless, this circumstance presents a tremendous opportunity, for the Christian community, and the Republican Party; that being, to focus attention, resources, and effort toward registering millions of Christians to vote, and to motivate them to exercise their God-given civic duty. Republican Party leaders, and strategists, together with leaders of the Christian community, would be well-served to converge on the goal of dramatically increasing voter registration among believers. It is in the interest of Christians, who love this nation, and the Republican Party, which seeks restoration to national political leadership, to do so. Accordingly, there is no need for the Republican Party to abandon its traditional platform, or Christians, in its quest for political success.
SheetAnchor on November 10, 2008 at 4:26 PM
This would be the best news since 1980. Newt is one of the very few who could actually get the job done. I’ve stated many times that the R’s started their downhill plunge when they let the corruption ridden Dems run Newt out of Congress over a hang nail. Or we could just sit back and watch our country disintagrate before our very eyes.
Griz on November 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
Yeah, sorry, Newt is just too much into the business of “green” this and “environment” that for my taste. There is nothing wrong with being green, per say, but to be too vocal about it when liberals are using it as anti-corporate propaganda; it doesn’t bode well for one’s conservatism.
Levinite on November 10, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2