I don't follow. He's unwilling to help the GOP gain a Senate seat - How does that qualify him to be chairman of the party? He certainly has the right not to answer the party's need and run in MT, but if he's putting other, personal priorities first -- which he's perfectly free to do -- why in heaven's name should he be made head of the party?
You mean, he's not helping us to win a Senate seat the the GOP desparately needs - - - and that makes him "right where he needs to be"? The logic escapes me. You're implying that we don't need to win the MT senate seat. That shows more confidence than I have that the GOP is going to pick up enough seats elsewhere.