Posted on 12/07/2008 6:36:08 AM PST by MinnesotaLibertarian
Though none of the candidates openly admit it, the Mason-Dixon Line has emerged as a key fault line in the race for the Republican National Committee chairmanship.
As the GOP wrestles with criticism that it is in danger of becoming a regional party rooted in the South, rather than one with broad appeal across the nation, the contest for chairman is shaping up in no small part as a referendum on just how much Southern flavor the party should have at the top in the wake of a sound electoral defeat in every other region of the country.
Since no one wants to alienate Southern RNC members in a race for insider support, the public debate has largely centered on the need to compete more effectively across the map. But some candidates are more pointed than others in discussing the need to escape the party's increasingly Southern image when electing a new leader at the RNC's January meeting.
"There is a perception that we are a regional party and that we are a party from the South because that's the region we're consistently winning today," said Michigan Republican Party Chair Saul Anuzis, the first declared candidate for the GOP's top political job. "I do think we need to have our version of the 50-state program that [Democratic National Committee Chair Howard] Dean had."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
So lets just get another rino in there.That has worked so well in the past.The republican party is well on its way to whig status if that happens.
Groan!
More anti-Republican propaganda from the Obamabots at Politico.
Exactly what did these twits at Politico have to say when the Dims got clobbered in both the congress and the presidency in 2000, and lost even more seats in 2004 and 2004?
Did we hear talk about the Democrats “being in danger of being a regional party” stuck in the liberal strongholds of the north east and the loony left bastions of San Francisco, Wash State and Oregon?
Hey, Politico, fortunes of political parties ebb and flow like the tides. Every political party goes up at the polls for some time, then goes down at the polls for some time, and then the process simply repeats itself. Been happening for centuries.
The Dims will overreach as usual, and Republicans will gain seats come 2010, and even more seats in 2012.
Guys, don't put money in Politico's pockets. Don't feed the monster. Don't click on any links to Politico.
The rest of the nation has been following the "rinos" and getting their butts handed to them, why not follow in the footsteps of those who know the secret to winning and governing along conservative lines?
Or, we could put a Northern conservative in there. However, I don’t think the region is all that important - I just thought it was an interesting point. It’s definitely true that GOP is seen as a Southern party.
Forget about the Northeast or West Coast; the GOP has been wiped out in the Midwest (minus the plains states), and is struggling to hold on to the West. They can’t win with just the South.
The GOP has lost one presidential elections in 8 years, and lost congressional elections in only the past 2 elections, and that means the sky is falling?
How much are you gonna bet that the GOP doesn't increase seats in the House come 2010? We almost certainly will.
I agree. There’s no reason to allow the Politico, Mort Kondracke, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker or any other liberal-leaning political hack define the GOP.
I don’t tell them how to run their party, they don’t get to tell us how to run ours. Our ranks are full of Judas characters seeking to define us in the image they’d like for us have.
Not to mention, the Southern states (of which I’m in one) don’t own the market on true conservative values. This site is based in California! True conservatives are all over this country - working, raising families, and contributing to society. Until these and other conservatives stop being afraid of condemnation for their values and the all-to-be-expected media thrashing they might receive, we might continue to see our values and viewpoints squashed under the current wave of socialist, secular political popularity.
I refuse to be afraid of Quayling or Palinizing, and neither should my friends residing in states currently blue.
There’s been a trend. There’s a lot more elections other than the Presidential election - Senate, House, Governor, state legislatures, etc. Also, a Republican hasn’t a won a majority of Midwestern states since 1988. Illinois and Michigan used to be pretty Republican state, and of course so were Ohio and Indiana, which are now slipping away also. I’ll admit my home state may be a lost cause...
How about finding the best person for the job, and the heck with this other bs?
Agree with all that.
Speaking as a conservative in New York here, where like 90% of my coworkers are liberal. They still mange to lose most political arguments with me though, because they happen to wrong on nearly every issue one can think of, and they are not used to anyone strongly challenging their views. We are.
I agree for the most part. Like I said, I don’t think a non-Southern chair will fix the problem anyway. However, this is still a long-term problem the party will have to deal with.
This is what matters.
We won both the House and the Senate in 2002 and 2004. Remember, before 1994, the Dims had controlled The House for decades. After 1994, we controlled the house for 12 years. If there's a trend, it seems we have done better in the last 20 years than we did in the 20 year before that.
I think a lot of those gains came in the South. The problem is, during that same time, other regions slowly slipped away. In the 1980, 1984, and 1988 Presidential elections, as well as the 1994 Congressional elections, we were able to hold a country-wide coalition together. That is no longer the case.
Lets not forget about all the transplanted conservatives from the north and west who now make up a significant portion of the southern voting force.My guess they were fleeing the oppressive taxes.
The RNC needs someone who can produce results. Period.
I agree. However, it’s worth noting that in order to produce results, they’re going to have to be able to make the party appeal more outside of the South. That doesn’t mean a Southerner can’t do the job, but they need to be willing to reach out. I think region is much less of an issue than the fact that we need to avoid anybody associated with the Religious Right. I can’t speak about anywhere else, but in my opinion that association is the biggest thing hurting the party in the Upper Midwest.
We shouldn’t hesitate to pick the most serious and astute advocate, no matter where he or he is from.
With the possible exception of “personally pro-life” Reid, the Democratic top ranks make no concession whatever to the notion that the leadership has to go beyond the base regionally or otherwise. Whatever else you might say about Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Emanuel, Dean, they are certainly good candidates for “Exhibits 1-5, Stereotypical Democrat Leader.”
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.