Posted on 01/03/2011 9:41:05 AM PST by smoothsailing
January 3, 2010
Later today at 1pm ET, Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele will be facing off against several challengers at a debate. Under fire for months for spending too much and injecting himself into the public eye, Steele faces an uphill battle. Earlier today, Politico reported that over half of the 168 RNC members it surveyed said they would not vote to re-elect him.
Joining Steele at the debate will be lobbyist and former deputy RNC chairwoman Maria Cino; Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Reince Priebus; Saul Anuzis, an opponent of Steele's from his 2009 victory who is back to challenge him this year; and former Missouri GOP chairman Ann Wagner. C-SPAN will broadcast the event live on its website starting at 1pm Eastern Time.
In the Politico survey, Priebus had the largest share of support, but with only 35 members saying he'd be their first or second choice, he's still well short of the 85 he'd need to win during the first road of voting.
While Steele is likely to be the main focus of the debate, sponsored by Americans for Tax Reform and the Daily Caller, the topic of how to counter the Barack Obama fund-raising juggernaut in 2012 is sure to be another.
In an interview with Human Events, Steele dismissed the chief criticism lodged against him—that he's not raised as much money as his predecessor raised in 2002—by denouncing the comparison as unfair since during the 2002 campaign, so-called "soft money" was still legal and the RNC could take corporate money which it no longer can either.
During the debate, Steele will "name names" and "make it personal," a source close to the chairman told FoxNews.com analyst Chris Stirewalt. Presumably that is referring to various people that Steele has referred to previously only in the generic that he's said have encouraged large donors not to support the RNC.
He will need a lot of rhetorical firepower to try to answer a report in this morning's Washington Times that the RNC is starting off the 2011-2012 campaign cycle with more than $20 million in debt.
I watched the entire debate.
Steele is the best one of bunch. Cino is seriously flawed and the others are
I’m worried the RNC member vote might go for that horrid Ann Wagner. She will be a *delighted moderate* - precisely what is NOT wanted.
Steele has been through the wars and the trenches. He’s likely learned tough lessons.
As for the Reince Priebusguy, please see this article:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1210/Steele_ally_swipes_Barbour.html
I'd like to know how many of those 88 votes are staunchly "anyone but Steele." It seems he has the edge but as more are eliminated in the voting rounds those other votes may not go to him and part of that 80 he supposedly has now may not be in the bag for him.
Looks like it could be a squeaker. :-)
No doubt about it.
Thanks for the link!
“Why would an RNC member not support someone who has done what RNC Chairman Michael Steele has done? His accomplishments are historical:
•Winning a record number of Republican seats, 690 to be exact, more than any Chairman since 1938.
•During a time when his party did not control the White House, he raised more money than any other chairman, Republican or Democrat has; over $192 Million, even beating the 2006 Democrats by 47%. “
Good link, thanks for posting!
Maybe the RNC should have a policy that RNC members are prohibited from having paid contracts with the RNC. The definite conflict of interest undermines the confidence in the process.
Also, it appears, that only Michael Steele is the impartial broker in the 2012 presidential race.
That's sure what the article you linked sounds like.
Thanks for the link.
Maybe I’m wrong. I thought the RNC did not come through with the money promised until late in the game. That the RNC was shamed into support while DeMint and Palin were there from the beginning and tried to help even when she stated falling in the polls due to herself.
She is also pro abortion.
Yes Love one or the other.
You, know the Stupid Party.
Snatching defeat at the dawn of victory, instead of riding a bandwagon that we won last November and the people sided with us. But nooooh. The last 2 months centered on RINO squabbles, Lameduck bipartisanship for the Glory of Obama, and ... the favorite dessert, trashing Palin.
... in this case, with the alibi “we could have done better” and “we can surely win 2012 if we are all the standard RINOs”.
Immediate Results: MSM are all in praise of Obama’s November victories. BWAHAHAHA!
LOLOL! Stupid is what stupid does.
Yes I agree. It certainly looks that way.
Step down, Mike. Gracefully, with alacrity, and with courtesy.
It’s done. You are not where you need to be. You are not the right man for the job.
NEWS FLASH: REDSTATE ENDORSE MIKE PENCE FOR PRESIDENT!
Issue: No need for primary debates? Grassroots are stupid too!
Indeed.
And let an blatantly unbashed Pro-ROMNEY/BUSH-ANOINTED/HUCK RINO RNC Chair RISE in preparation for 2012!
“..And let an blatantly unbashed Pro-ROMNEY/BUSH-ANOINTED/HUCK RINO RNC Chair RISE in preparation for 2012!
...”
Oh, Hell no...rather see Sarah there. Need a street fighter in that position, not a compromiser.
Earlier today, Politico reported that over half of the 168 RNC members it surveyed said they would not vote to re-elect him.Oh yeah, I always rely on Politico. /sarc
Holly Hughes, RNC committeewoman and a Michael Steele ally, circulates an endorsement e-mail to RNC voting members....
................................................................
Follow the Money…
Ask yourself, “Who is trying to get RNC members to vote for a certain candidate for RNC chairman?” Then ask, “What is their motivation in supporting that candidate?” Why would an RNC member not support someone who has done what RNC Chairman Michael Steele has done? His accomplishments are historical:
•Winning a record number of Republican seats, 690 to be exact, more than any Chairman since 1938.
•During a time when his party did not control the White House, he raised more money than any other chairman, Republican or Democrat has; over $192 Million, even beating the 2006 Democrats by 47%.
Is the current opposition to such historical accomplishments sour grapes because their candidate for RNC Chairman lost last time, presidential politics, or as a result of the loss of lucrative contracts?
Sour grapes is understandable; we are all passionate about our candidates, but the wisdom in such opposition is questionable.
Presidential Politics? Sure, it makes sense that certain candidates contemplating a run for the presidency would want to control the RNC and have their person as RNC Chair. Such a candidate however, would not want Michael Steele because he will be an honest broker and provide an even playing field for all those running. There does not seem to be any clear front-runner yet in the next presidential race. And, let us face it, whoever is chairman, the Republican nominee will be the one running the RNC in a short 15 months. It would be so much better to have someone who will be neutral in the presidential campaign running our party for the next 15 months.
But, sometimes support for a certain RNC Chairman candidate is a matter of simply “Following the Money and thus the Power”. In other words, if you take my contract away from me, RNC Chairman Michael Steele, or get in my way and won’t give an advantage in the presidential race to my candidate (by whom I am paid or may have an opportunity to be paid for supporting), I am going to seek revenge on a daily basis until you, Chairman Michael Steele, are gone! It is simply fascinating how a million dollars or a possible presidency can motivate people. These are High Stakes, and includes those high up who insisted that large donors should not contribute to the RNC under Steele. You have to ask yourself why? Consider that it could be because they knew Steele would have spent the money on candidates in 2010, when their real goal was to preserve the money for the 2012 presidential campaign. In other words, they cannot control Steele, so they want to replace him with someone they can.
Anyone with their finger on the pulse of the party knows that there are a number of vendors, a.k.a. “consultants” angry over losing lucrative contracts. I encourage the members of the press to ask why they don’t want Michael Steele running the RNC?
Who recruited any candidate other than Michael Steele and why? Who are the consultants the various potential presidential candidates have hired and how are they trying to influence the RNC election? Just what is his or her motivation in supporting anyone other than Michael Steele? Lost contracts or presidential politics? It certainly cannot be because of Michael Steele’s unsurpassed record of accomplishments set forth above.
Maybe the RNC should have a policy that RNC members are prohibited from having paid contracts with the RNC. The definite conflict of interest undermines the confidence in the process.
In fairness, why am I supporting Michael Steele?
•He has proven he can raise money in difficult times, including hundreds of thousands of new donors.
•He, along with all of us, was part of the largest Republican sweep in over seventy years.
•He has provided unprecedented visibility to the RNC for our cause. Ask any common voter to name a previous RNC chairperson.
•He was a key figure in Republicans expanding the tent and attracting new minorities and younger voters to our cause.
•He will be a neutral player in the presidential nomination process, giving us all an equal footing to select our candidate.
•He is the individual best positioned as RNC chairman to lead us objectively in the next election and to promote our common goals, my reason for being an RNC member.
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.