J.C. Watts mulls bid for RNC chair
posted at 10:31 am on December 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
After the shocking loss in the November election, Republicans are once again considering whether to change leadership at the top. Reince Priebus wants a second term as RNC chair and still has considerable support for another go, but apparently some committee members have begun recruiting alternative candidates, among them former Congressman J.C. Watts. Watts tells Politico that he’s not sure he’ll run, but he’s interested:
Watts, an African-American conservative who served in the House from 1994-2002, said the GOP defeat on Election Day demonstrates that Republicans need to broaden their appeal to minority voters, and cannot continue on their current path if the party is to be successful in presidential races.
“My concern right now, and I don’t say this necessarily as a candidate [for RNC chairman], my concern is that as a Republican, every single Republican in America ought to be concerned about what has happened in 2008 and 2012,” Watts said in an interview with POLITICO. “In this business, if you’re not growing, you’re dying.”
Watts would not identify who is lobbying him to challenge Priebus, and reiterated that he has not made a decision to definitely jump into the race.
Watts also says that he believes the RNC needs to fundamentally rethink its “ad hoc” approach to outreach:
Watts complained that Republican efforts to reach out to minority groups have not been sustained or consistent during his 20-plus years as a politician, but rather are executed on ad hoc basis – usually in election years. In Watts’ view, and that of many other Republican leaders and party operatives, if the GOP doesn’t dramatically improve its image with black and Hispanic voters, it will not be able to win back the White House.
“These old, tired, pathetic models of saying, ‘Okay, in the black [community], when there’s a presidential election, we will form an African-American Coalition for [Mitt] Romney or [Sen. John] McCain,’ I’ll never do that again. That is a joke, that is so tired,” Watts said. “It’s window dressing to say, ‘African Americans for Romney’ or ‘African-American Coalition’ or ‘African-American Advisory Council.’ That’s insulting to the people that they ask to do it when you don’t put an permanent infrastructure in place to give it credibility.”
I think Priebus did a pretty good job, considering the state of the RNC when he first took over. The organization was deeply in debt, and fundraising was in disarray. The RNC didn’t have a credible GOTV effort in 2010 in the week before Election Day in those midterms, and ended up relying out outside groups to drive their message. They were better prepared in this cycle, but just got out-organized by Team Obama and the DNC.
That said, I’m a big fan of J. C. Watts for precisely the kind of insight he has here. Republicans cannot compete with the kind of lackluster effort that has been made in urban centers. It isn’t just the infrastructure that’s the problem, though; it’s also a lack of vision and specific policies from candidates and the party to put conservative principles to work in these communities to make the lives of voters better. We need both infrastructure and policies, on an ongoing basis, and not just — as Watts says — in the last few months before an election. Republicans have to make themselves part of these communities, not just occasional tourists.
Perhaps Watts won’t run for RNC chair, or the RNC will think someone else will serve better. They’d better find a way to put Watts in position to make his insights a reality, though, if the GOP wants to compete in future elections.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all
America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”
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
No comments. Likely response.
CycloneCDB on April 10, 2013 at 6:03 PM
I think this is a big waste of time by socons and I am one of them. Establisment Repubs are selling out the whole base and the whole movement on gun rights, fiscal principles, and immigration. Socons should just feel like one of the movement. Even if they affirm it; they will still sell you out; get used to it..
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:07 PM
Who in their right mind would ever think black voters would consider the GOP because of the gay marriage issue when Dems are feeding them affirmative action and food stamps while catering to every silly racial grievance they can come up with?
Mark1971 on April 10, 2013 at 6:11 PM
The gop is dead under the current leadership!!!!!
And no resurrection in sight.
God help us.
PappyD61 on April 10, 2013 at 6:12 PM
Social issues aren’t the only planks that have been jettisoned. Support for the Second Amendment, opposition to tax hikes, a firm stand against amnesty, never voting to fund Obamacare, etc.
steebo77 on April 10, 2013 at 6:12 PM
DEAD
DEAD
DEAD
DEAD
PappyD61 on April 10, 2013 at 6:13 PM
+1
gwelf on April 10, 2013 at 6:13 PM
If the GOP loses just 10% of it’s social conservative backers, they will never win another national election. Can you imagine if the Dems were to evolve their
position on climate change or abortion to enlarge their tent? They’re not that
stupid.
rich8450 on April 10, 2013 at 6:14 PM
Exactly! The whole party platform has been sold out to the highest bidder. Why wouldn’t they turn on socons if they think it will bring them votes. Funny, will be interesting to see the southern strong holds turn that are largely social conservatives.
I mean if I am going to choose between Dem and Demlite might as well go with the party that gives out free stuff..
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:16 PM
I’m probably as socially conservative as it gets and I question why we do this. The dems don’t exactly run on partial birth abortions, insane spending and open borders but we know thats what they are for. We are not going to outlaw abortions but we can certainly get federal dollars out of it and require paternity tests and police reports for rapes and incest for the 0.01% outliers.
Go fiscal responsibility, go constitutional and get serious. The rest is fluff.
DanMan on April 10, 2013 at 6:17 PM
The GOP Establishment supports all the inroads to one big centralized federal government. The only platform the elites support is supreme power for them and complete obedience and compliance from the base.
hawkeye54 on April 10, 2013 at 6:17 PM
As long as the free stuff lasts. When that party is over, and it will eventually be over, there’s gonna be a whole lotta turmoil.
hawkeye54 on April 10, 2013 at 6:19 PM
The difference though is that if Dems did this, they wouldn’t lose any votes. No pro-abortion leftist will EVER vote Republican. After all, Obama was supposedly against gay marriage but that had nil effect. Leftists are interested in power, which is why they win elections and lie like rugs.
COnservatives are interested in principles which is why they lose elections.
theblackcommenter on April 10, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Why we do what? Like I have said a million times, most socons are socons in reaction to the liberal left. It is no accident that the moral majority rose to power some time after the Roe v. Wade decision. It is the left’s unwilling to respect the 10th amendment on issues and use the federal governement and the judiciary as their own private mafia that makes socons socns. If Massachusetts and California want to become Stalingrad; I could care less, but I don’t want Tennessee to be taken down with it. As long as Dems continue to push THEIR SOCIAL AGENDA through the court and the federal government on me; I will continue to fight by using my social values as a counter-balance.
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:21 PM
You cannot possibly be as socially conservative as it gets.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:22 PM
Also on the table for discussion:
RNC To Discuss and Vote On Common Core Resolution
MM’s commentary on this: Rotten to the Core: Conservatives spearhead drive at RNC meeting to stop Common Core
Her twitter for updates:
https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/stop-common-core
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:25 PM
There’s a moderate v. conservative war on Common Core as well: Jeb Bush has been enabling Erne Duncan on Common Core.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:26 PM
the social cons are the deadweight of the party and they’ve allowed the democratic party the power it now enjoys
the social cons should just shut the hell up and vote for the republicans instead of trying to hold them hostage
nonpartisan on April 10, 2013 at 6:26 PM
Awww look the troll is trying so hard…
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:30 PM
Example # 1 for 3rd Party.
portlandon on April 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Screw the GOP. Let that party die as quickly as possible. It is worthless (since we already have America-hating dems who represent everything the GOP slime are for). We need a conservative party that holds the Constitution in high regard. The GOP must go … and go quickly.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 10, 2013 at 6:32 PM
3rd party just means Democratic rule from here on out
nonpartisan on April 10, 2013 at 6:32 PM
so you’re willing to cede control to democrats forever?
social conservatives cannot win without the other parts that make up the republican party
nonpartisan on April 10, 2013 at 6:33 PM
I have to disagree with you here, AP. A tremendous amount of women are single-issue on abortion/reproductive rights. A tremendous amount of blacks voted for Obama because of his skin color. A tremendous amount of gays are only interested in SSM.
John the Libertarian on April 10, 2013 at 6:35 PM
There’s far more to the platform than the section AP quoted.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:35 PM
Yeppers troll is trying overly hard..
Quick Allah put out a bad picture of Obama or some butt porn so it will get distracted….
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM
I want a national divorce. The dems have already destroyed America and rendered what’s left the American Socialist Superstate. The damage they and their Indonesian have wrought is irreparable.
I have nothing in common with any of these leftist slime, nor with the GOPers who collude with them and want them to be in a separate nation. They can fashion whatever third-world hell-hole they want but I won’t live in it.
I’m not a social conservative, Einstein.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM
Well and then there is the LIV who vote for no other discernable reasons other than the fact that someone told them that Repubs were racists etc. etc..
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:37 PM
The section on the First Amendment and religious freedom is also relevant.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:37 PM
I think a lot of folks are missing the real issue. Conservatives are nearing a decision point on whether to stay with the Republican Party. Either the GOP takes action to reassure them that the party still shares principles… or all of the speculation about a new party (or two) takes on more credibility.
As for the yahoos who immediately clamor that that would just guarantee the Democrats continued power, my question is – exactly how do you think that would be any different than where things are now and seemingly would remain anyway, under GOP leadership?
fabrexe on April 10, 2013 at 6:38 PM
nonpartisan, who s/b nobrain, is liberal4life, claiming to be ‘objective’.
You are the biggest dummy on the board.
Schadenfreude on April 10, 2013 at 6:38 PM
The GOP has had some pretty crappy chairs: Giliespie, Mehlman, Duncan and Steele; but Priebus will probably go down as the worst ever.
We mock Debbie Downer, but even she isn’t dumb enough to alienate her own base.
bw222 on April 10, 2013 at 6:39 PM
Then you better be nicer to the socons.
Telling them to shut up and vote Republican isn’t an option anymore.
portlandon on April 10, 2013 at 6:39 PM
Actually DanMan has a point that needs to be considered, as a libertarian conservative I also struggle with where the line should be with government involvement in social issues. For the record I’m an Episcopalian by choice, just as other Christians are Baptist, Mothodist, or Catholic by choice. I don’t want “Baptist” legislation anymore than they want “Episcopal” legislation.
,therefore I always consider the fewer laws there are the better.
Tater Salad on April 10, 2013 at 6:40 PM
No, I think we are all aware of that that is the real issue. I just think that at this point that having the GOP ‘reaffirm” the party platform means nothing. Look, they haven’t just sold out the socons, they have sold out about everyone lately. It doesn’t matter what the platform says- the GOP establishment who are in power don’t care. They only care about swinging so that they can retain power and if that means stepping on grassroots, tea party, socons and any new conservatives to retain power – who cares what the platform says. I don’t think they get how shaky the party actually is, but I think come 2014 and 2016; they will- Of course, socons will get blamed, but it won’t only be us not voting for them.
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 6:41 PM
Then you should be against SSM, because it will only increase government overreach.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:42 PM
Life and marriage are not mere peripheral issues that can be set aside and retain anything approaching conservatism.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:44 PM
You’re right, I’m against the federal government taking any sort of stand on SSM; either to declare it as a “right” or the effort to pass a Constitutional amendment against.
Tater Salad on April 10, 2013 at 6:46 PM
The Dems never could have accomplished the destruction of the country without RINO help – from Specter and the Maine b!tches voting for the stimulus to Snowe and Collins voting bills out of committee to McCain and his sock puppet Miss Lucy supporting gun control and amnesty.
bw222 on April 10, 2013 at 6:47 PM
Kudos for at least pretending that this is a bug to you and not a feature. *golf clap*
Kataklysmic on April 10, 2013 at 6:48 PM
Good lord, the Republican Party is skilled at only one thing . . . walking on their privates with with golf shoes.
rplat on April 10, 2013 at 6:49 PM
I don’t think that’s been the direction of the language. The aim has always been to affirm marriage.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 6:53 PM
It already is affirmed via the current tax code, which is almost the only place marriage is dealt with on a federal level. I’m for the status quo; no change of the definition, nor constitutional amendment to affirm.
Tater Salad on April 10, 2013 at 6:58 PM
The aim of the language in various resolutions has been to affirm the status quo, if you were, in the face of those who want to redefine it. It’s not enough to sit back and say I’m for the status quo.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 7:12 PM
They sold me and my fiscal brethren out during Bush’s first term and haven’t tossed me a bone since. Don’t worry though, there’s plenty of room in the back of the bus for all of us. :)
alchemist19 on April 10, 2013 at 7:34 PM
What if “those who want to redefine it” are the voters, as in Washington, Maine and Maryland this past November?
cam2 on April 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM
There was a rep I forget his name on Greta who was asked why the don’t sopeana the survivors of Benghazi and he said “Ask leadership”. you can bet your bottom dollar that Obama told Boehner to lay off on Benghazi or else and he caved.
Conan on April 10, 2013 at 8:15 PM
Don’t worry.. I’ll sit by ya honey.. :)
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 8:20 PM
Tell these Big Government Social Cons to take a hike.
We all know they’d love Obama if he were anti-abortion and hated gays. They’d be fine with the socialism.
DRayRaven on April 10, 2013 at 8:36 PM
You need to get together with nonpartisan; you are as ridiculous as that troll.
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 8:43 PM
Yep, and this is also going to be the key to gaining the votes of all those traditionally minded Catholic Hispanics.
Mr. Arkadin on April 10, 2013 at 8:50 PM
And the number of times that Republicans have gone into black neighborhoods with their message on social issues is…?
The problem with Republican outreach to minorities is that it often takes this form.
Stoic Patriot on April 10, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Didn’t they just reaffirm them at the Republican National Convention last August? They kept all the social issues in the party platform.
http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
The problem is the moderate squishes who want to cave in and “compromise” with the DemocRATS, and the establishment types who encourage them in their squishiness.
This social con is very close to leaving the R Party altogether, and becoming an “independent” voter.
JannyMae on April 10, 2013 at 9:02 PM
Yes, because if you support traditional marriage then you HATE GAYS, and you don’t care one iota about fiscal issues.
When we all take a hike because of dishonest a-holes like you, good luck winning another national election.
JannyMae on April 10, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Amen!
JannyMae on April 10, 2013 at 9:06 PM
I have just given up talking to people like him. I could tout my wonderful gay cousin whom I love immensely, but then it looks like I am using the “some of my best friends are gay” line. It ultimately doesn’t matter because people like DR have us all pegged in his little mind and no amount of arguing with him is going to change his mind. He has said much worse on AceofSpades about socons, so this is him being nice.
melle1228 on April 10, 2013 at 9:10 PM
Yes, they did. After observing the waffling of the last month or so, this letter is holding their feet to the fire.
Schlafly wrote a letter to Priebus on March 1st. She signed this one, and I’d bet she was a prime mover in writing it. She’s never been one to sit back while the moderates waffle and weave.
INC on April 10, 2013 at 11:01 PM
The beauty of anonymous posting is that you can post such ignorant drivel with a clear conscience. Someone of a more intellectual bent would curb their typing as they considered the demise of the Whig party as the Republican party seized the Presidency from the Democrats by the 2nd election… less than 8 years… and forever smashed one of the planks of the Democrat party… SLAVERY.
And even though the Democrats fought against the Republican Civil Rights through segregation and the KKK, they completely lost that ideological battle until they had nothing left but to try and rewrite history to hide their shame of defeat.
So I would be careful about cheering the demise of the GOP…
Unless you’re one of those idiots that refuse to learn from history…
dominigan on April 11, 2013 at 1:24 PM