Yes he did.
Posted on 12/14/2010 6:03:10 PM PST by Second Amendment First
Some of the Republican Party’s most prominent donors reacted Tuesday with shock — and then fury — to Michael Steele’s decision to seek re-election, bluntly warning that they would not raise money for the party if the controversial chairman wins another term.
None of the contributors has a vote on the committee, but with worries about the debt-ridden party’s finances hanging over Steele, the unambiguous threats could further undermine the incumbent’s already-dim prospects for victory.
While nothing firm was planned, a number of the contributors said they had been in contact with one another since Steele’s announcement Monday night about what they could do to send a message to the 168 members of the committee who will decide the next chairman in January.
“If Mr. Steele were to prevail, it will further alienate the party’s major financial supporters and most active fundraisers,” said Wayne Berman, a top Washington lobbyist and bundler who served as the McCain presidential campaign’s finance chairman in 2008. “His arrogant style, cult of personality and embarrassing mismanagement are sources of great discontent with the major fundraisers of the party.”
Should Steele return as chairman, Berman added, it will spur many donors to do what they did in 2008 and “support the many successful third-party groups.”
Asked about his email traffic since the announcement, the well-connected Berman cracked: “The phrase I have seen the most of is, is he aware that denial isn’t a river in Egypt?”
Al Hoffman, a longtime GOP contributor in Florida who did two separate stints as RNC finance chairman in President Bush’s first term, was just as withering: “The donor community has virtually no faith or confidence in Michael Steele’s to be the keeper of the keys.”
Originally a supporter of the chairman, Hoffman said he and many of his fellow contributors would sit on their checkbooks in a Steele sequel.
“The long and short of it is I have a hard time finding any major donor who would trust him to straighten out the RNC and run a principled and ethical fundraising operation,” said the Floridian. “Whose going to give to him as long as he’s at the helm? Not me. My own slogan is now, Anybody But Steele.”
Hoffman said that, like Berman, he had been in contact with other fundraisers since Steele announced the news and that there was unanimity that a change was needed.
“I talked to a number of them and to a man they all say that Steele has hurt the party immeasurably,” he said.
Mel Sembler, another Floridian who also once served as the RNC’s Finance Chairman, expressed worry that if Steele continued atop the party it would make it more difficult for donors in the state to raise the $50 million needed for the GOP’s 2012 convention in Tampa.
“They’re spending money like drunken sailors up there,” Sembler said of the RNC, alluding to news accounts of how much the party was already paying to plan the convention. “And because of that major donors are concerned about how [the local organizers] will spend their money.”
If Steele stays in his post, Sembler predicted that contributors would “continue doing what they’ve done – continue going to these other organizations.”
Without the assistance of top donors, who can collect big checks and don’t require the overhead costs that go into raising low-dollar contributions, the party would have difficulty retiring what is at least $15 million in debt.
Even as Steele launched a re-election website and announced a campaign chair Tuesday, there were indications beyond the realm of the GOP’s donor class that the chairman had little support from beyond his core group of supporters on the committee.
Of about a half-dozen interviewed, not a single Republican senator was willing to get behind the incumbent. Most said that they were staying out of the intra-party contest, but all offered cool assessments about the sitting party chairman.
Asked about Steele’s decision to run, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) allowed that it’s “his prerogative,” before adding that “there are other people already in the race.”
Pressed on whether Steele would be a good leader heading into the 2012 presidential campaign, Thune, a potential White House contender, voiced what is on the mind of many in the GOP.
“There’s a concern about him stepping up the pace on fundraising,” he said. “That’s a valid one, obviously. I think he’ll have to address that or at least come up with a way of addressing that in his argument to continue in the job.”
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) went a step further, saying he was "looking for alternatives.”
"I appreciate his service, but 2012 is real important,” DeMint said of Steele.
A handful of the nation’s GOP governors, including Mississippi Gov. and former RNC Chairman Haley Barbour, have already indicated a desire for change atop the party.
House GOP leaders declined to discuss Steele, but aides indicated privately that they simply didn’t want their have their bosses seen as big-footing the committee.
So while Steele has a base of support on the 168-member committee, he begins his re-election bid with minimal support and wide opposition from his party’s leading donors and elected officials. To win in the face of such disapproval would be extraordinary.
But few outside Steele’s core group believe he can actually be re-elected.
The more likely scenario, fret Republicans who just want him gone, is that Steele seeks to use the leverage he holds with his base of about 30 loyalists.
If he can hold that bloc together, Steele may be able to cut a deal with one of his challengers in which he would turn over his backers in exchange for something, perhaps a role at the party’s convention.
At a practical level, though, it’s difficult to see how the RNC would function on a day-to-day basis if Steele returns. He’s already gone through a slew of staffers and he’s about to lose more.
In addition to the departure of Gentry Collins, the former political director who is now challenging Steele, both the RNC Chief of Staff and Communications Director are also likely to soon leave. Neither Mike Leavitt, the chief, nor Doug Heye, the spokesman, are active in Steele’s re-election. Those left in the building say that the chairman has largely isolated himself from his aides and is relying on a handful of personal confidantes with little high-level political experience.
Reviled by the GOP’s consultant and operative class, it’s unclear who in the party would want to work at a committee that, if the donors’ threats hold true, is likely to be even more diminished in 2012 than it was this year.
That the lingering ‘What to do About Steele’ problem still exists is deeply aggravating to Republicans who, after their gains in last month’s elections, believe the party has found its footing and has a real chance to take back the White House in 2012.
Yet even as they express irritation about Steele’s bid for re-election, some top Republicans are already thinking about the challenge they’ll have after he does ultimately leave.
“The damage will be there when he leaves, especially with respect to the major donor program,” said a longtime K Street fixture who has raised Republican money for decades.
Even those who weren’t willing to call for Steele’s ouster, suggested the party was in serious trouble.
"I think the RNC is at a very important inflection point and it’s time, for whomever the elected leader is, that he or she have the capacity and leadership ability to get the party out of the hole and back in the lead in fundraising,” said Lewis Eisenberg, a Wall Street executive and another of the RNC former finance chairmen.
“One of our problems is that SOME of the RINOs who don’t want the Republican party to win races with Conservatives are DONORS ~ large dollar value donors.”
Where is the comprehensive list of these “large dollar value donors,” “who don’t want the Republican party to win races with Conservatives?”
If such donors exist, I would expect them to support such things as agriculture subsidies, bloated defense contracting budgets, lax borders, higher deficits, etc.
I guess we could start with John McCain’s buddies. That’s a pretty good sized list.
Not only that, Hannity was agreeing with him and doing some major butt kissing.
“If Mr. Steele were to prevail, it will further alienate the party’s major financial supporters and most active fundraisers,” said Wayne Berman, a top Washington lobbyist and bundler who served as the McCain presidential campaign’s finance chairman in 2008. “His arrogant style, cult of personality and embarrassing mismanagement are sources of great discontent with the major fundraisers of the party.”
Notice that this attack on Steele is being mounted by Politico, a subsidiary of the DNC. And that these "donors" who are attacking Steele are corrupt RINOs of the worst sort. Wayne Berman is typical of the ones who are orchestrating this plot.
They want to get Steele out of the way so they can put in a real, corrupt RINO. They are really mad at him because he didn't go along with the plan to demonize the Tea Party, attack Christine O'Donnell, and smear Sarah Palin. Instead, he has been working with Sarah.
I was not a great Steele supporter, but I suspect that he is a decent, fairly conservative guy, who regretably agreed to play the game the handlers wanted, but finally got sick of it. So they want to broom him out and install a real leftist in his place, whom they can trust to do what he or she is told!
See muawiyah's comment #4 above.
Ping
If he had been good at the basics of his job we would have won a lot more seats. The ground game was not adequately funded or organized. The GOTV efforts are to motivate our “lazy” voters into getting to the polls. We won the victory we did because we have fewer lazy voters and the overwhelmingly unpopularity of Obama and the Democrats, but as you know there were a number of races we lost by a very close margin we may have won had the GOTV program had been what it once was.
Not since the Dole era.
Excuse me? How many stories did we have with the local party orgs panicking over the lack of RNC funds for the GOTV efforts due to very poor fundraising?
Yes he did.
Central control is doomed to be defeated by distributed localized resistance. The GOP will learn this the hard way.
The Romneybots want him out of the way too, and I'm not quite sure what that's about ~
ping
When they get rid of Steele they need to replace Cornyn and Hatch as fund raisers for the Republican Senatorial Committee too, I wouldn’t send a nickel to either of those RINO’s
I had a call today - told them NO! I said that I would wait and see what happened - like on this tax bill. I don’t want to pay higher taxes, but I also am opposed to the spending.
If we can pull it off, we can coalesce Ron Paul supporters, now that he’s been appointed to the job he was born for, with we Palin people, with Petraeus as VP.
This is a coalition that has perfect amiability and cause.
Michael Steele’s ego just won’t let him quit. They need to just elect someone else and get on with it. Nobody is donating the RNC now. We only donate to individual candidates. All of our friends are doing the same thing.
So why would we want to do what these RINOs want just to tag a couple of superannuated senators who are most likely going to find plenty of reasons to not run again.
Funny about the anti-semites, they just can't help themselves and don't stop at the Jews.
MICHAEL STEELE AND HIS COUNTRY CLUB BUDDIES KILLED EFFORTS TO REBRAND THE DEMOCRATS AS THE DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST PARY.
4 WORDS FOR STEELE; ON YOUR BIKE SUCKER
Steele is against a resolution renaming the Democratic Party.’
RNC showdown over ‘socialist’ resolution may be avoided
Posted: May 20th, 2009 06:00 AM ET
From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
Steele is against a resolution renaming the Democratic Party.’
OXON HILL, Maryland (CNN) — Members of the Republican National Committee appear to have reached a compromise that would let GOP leaders avoid a possible dispute over a controversial resolution that calls on Democrats to re-name their party the “Democrat Socialist party.”
Steele has come out against the resolution, calling it “not an appropriate way to express our views on the issues of the day.” One of Steele’s allies on the committee, Florida GOP chairman Jim Greer(THE CROOK WHO IS NOW DOING TIME FOR EMBEZZLEMENT), told CNN the resolution is “stupid” and “ridiculous.”
However, New Jersey committeeman David Norcross, one of the sponsors of the resolution, told CNN the language is being massaged so that Steele and others on the committee will be more receptive.
“The language is being changed so that the proposers and chairman Steele are on the same page,” Norcross said.
He said that as of Tuesday afternoon, the chairman of the RNC Standing Committee on Resolutions had changed the language to “condemn the Democrats’ march to socialism” instead of “talking about the ‘Democrat Socialist’ party.”
The change was made, Norcross said, so that members “wouldn’t have to fight about it, and I think everybody agreed.”
Wisconsin GOP chairman Reince Priebus, another Steele ally, expressed confidence the proposal will be tweaked in the resolution committee, and that it should pass without issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.