Ann Wagner picks up endorsements for RNC chair

[Chris_]

John Bolton endorses Ann Wagner in RNC chairman race

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/20/john-bolton-endorses-ann-wagner-in-rnc-chairman-race/#ixzz18i3M5B8t
Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton — who says he’s considering a run for president in 2012 as a Republican — is backing Ann Wagner for chairman of the Republican National Committee.

“Ann Wagner is a tough, no-nonsense conservative leader with the highest integrity, and has a long track record of raising money and winning elections,” Bolton said in a statement. “She’s also a terrific communicator who understands the role of chairman is to get the fundamentals right, but has the skills and gravitas to go head to head with Tim Kaine and the Democrats when needed.”

Daily Caller

WAGNER GETS WEST VIRGINIA

Former Missouri Republican Party Chair Ann Wagner will pick up a pair of key endorsements in her bid to lead the RNC today, from West Virginia RNC Committeeman Jim Reed and Committeewoman Donna Lou Gosney. Their support pushes Wagner’s endorsement total into the double digits – and perhaps more importantly, they give her the backing she needs in order to be nominated for the chairmanship.

Politico

Buh bye, Mike.  Thanks for nothing.

[Tucker]

Bolton's backing is enough for me.

The old guard GOP leadership has to go. Their thinking that it is a club and not a party is bringing us down to the level of the socialist left.

Steele has not helped change that way of thinking. Oh! Wait a minute! Steele is black. If I'm against Steele, am I a racist?

[DumbAss Tanker]

Not familiar with her, but I'm more than willing to take a chance versus a known quantity who has proven to be clearly ineffective. 

[ConservativeMobster]

OK this is gonna get me some fire but I can take it. 

Other than the booby bar business what exactly has Steele done to merit the criticism? 

[Tucker]

OK this is gonna get me some fire but I can take it. 

Other than the booby bar business what exactly has Steele done to merit the criticism? 

He supports the continuation of rule by the old guard GOP, who are not conservative. The Brandy and cigar power mongers are whats bad for this country.

Conservative leadership shouldn't try and win over the elitist rich, as they are mostly democrats anyway. The base of the Republican party is the hard working middle class. To the everyday working Joe, the image of the Republican party is that it is for the rich and only the rich. Steele does nothing to dispute that claim.

[Eupher]

I'd add to that by saying that as a fund-raiser, Steele has been largely useless. What has come into the Repub coffers has been despite what Steele has done instead of a response to it.

He connects poorly with people - in fact, he's been asked to STFU and get off the soapbox.

When you've got the chair of a political party - ANY political party - that can't connect with people and can't raise money, why not just start a third ******* political party and put the same bastard in charge of both of them?

The end result is the other major party wins.

No, Sarah Palin has done more for the RNC from her vantage point in Alaska than Mikey Steele has done from inside the grid.

[thundley4]

I would also like to add that I did not like it when he played the race card when he was being criticized for his performance.

[ConservativeMobster]

ok, well....I might be wrong 

I think his comments about Rush were stupid, and I would like Sarah to run for the position.  She would be ideal but ain't gonna happen.  I do like the fact that Steele got so much face time, though, for good or bad.  It burned some ass ya know? 

[DumbAss Tanker]

I divide the Conservative base into Social, Libertarian, and Fiscal camps, of course a lot of us have a foot in more than one, or even connect to all three.  I would add foreign-policy hawks, but there are some dyed-in-the-wool Social Liberals like Lieberman who are also foreign policy hawks. 

The old-line socially-Liberal GOP establishment which supports Steele and starting the GOP bargaining position in the middle, so they can end up halfway to the far left when negotiations end, are the 100% Fiscal Conservatives.  They have no interest whatsoever in Social Conservative values like right-to-life, or Conservative individual liberty issues (As opposed to corporate or business ones) such as RKBA or the trend of eminent domain law.  In fact, they seem to be ashamed to be associated with anyone taking a strong stand on social or Constitutional issues.

That's my problem with Steele.  He connects with one of the three components of the base, and exudes disdain or fear of embarassment about the crazy relative for the other two.  The fiscal camp does offer a fairly concentrated amount of wealth to support campaigns, but also the smallest amount of actual votes on election day and their contempt or indifference for the values of the other two camps is a strong encouragement for them to stay home. 

McCain 2008 for instance was mostly a Fiscal Conservative (With some redeeming qualities as a foreign policy hawk) but historically had put all the distance he could afford to between himself and the other two camps.  Only having Palin on the ticket with him got him anywhere north of 40%, because without her, a Hell of a lot of Social and Libertarian Conservatives would have just said '**** it, game over' and stayed home in November 2008.  He has put on a great show of changing his spots since then, which I personally don't buy since he has his pompous airhead daughter out flacking for the 'Wink, wink, not really' proposition, and attacking the Social Conservatives (Especially Palin) to build that meme.   

 

[The Hollywood NeoCon]

Bolton's backing is enough for me.

The old guard GOP leadership has to go. Their thinking that it is a club and not a party is bringing us down to the level of the socialist left.

Agreed, Tucker. Bolton carries a lot of weight in my family.

[saved87]

I divide the Conservative base into Social, Libertarian, and Fiscal camps, of course a lot of us have a foot in more than one, or even connect to all three.  I would add foreign-policy hawks, but there are some dyed-in-the-wool Social Liberals like Lieberman who are also foreign policy hawks. 

The old-line socially-Liberal GOP establishment which supports Steele and starting the GOP bargaining position in the middle, so they can end up halfway to the far left when negotiations end, are the 100% Fiscal Conservatives.  They have no interest whatsoever in Social Conservative values like right-to-life, or Conservative individual liberty issues (As opposed to corporate or business ones) such as RKBA or the trend of eminent domain law.  In fact, they seem to be ashamed to be associated with anyone taking a strong stand on social or Constitutional issues.

That's my problem with Steele.  He connects with one of the three components of the base, and exudes disdain or fear of embarassment about the crazy relative for the other two.  The fiscal camp does offer a fairly concentrated amount of wealth to support campaigns, but also the smallest amount of actual votes on election day and their contempt or indifference for the values of the other two camps is a strong encouragement for them to stay home. 

McCain 2008 for instance was mostly a Fiscal Conservative (With some redeeming qualities as a foreign policy hawk) but historically had put all the distance he could afford to between himself and the other two camps.  Only having Palin on the ticket with him got him anywhere north of 40%, because without her, a Hell of a lot of Social and Libertarian Conservatives would have just said '**** it, game over' and stayed home in November 2008.  He has put on a great show of changing his spots since then, which I personally don't buy since he has his pompous airhead daughter out flacking for the 'Wink, wink, not really' proposition, and attacking the Social Conservatives (Especially Palin) to build that meme.   

 

Dumbass Tanker, you wrote about the problems with strictly social Conservatives and fiscal conservatives but where do libertarians in? You mentioned them but never wrote about them. how do they win elections or contribute to the gop? i think ron paul is the last of the libertarians because i cant find them in the republican party. i know i would love to see ron paul as rnc chair because that's a classic conservativism at it's best. I know nothing about ann wagner, but i do know that michael steele was g-d awful.

[NHSparky]

i know i would love to see ron paul as rnc chair because that's a classic conservativism at it's best.

Oh, looky, kids--a new chewtoy!

You're not long for this world, m'boy.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Dumbass Tanker, you wrote about the problems with strictly social Conservatives and fiscal conservatives but where do libertarians in? You mentioned them but never wrote about them. how do they win elections or contribute to the gop? i think ron paul is the last of the libertarians because i cant find them in the republican party. i know i would love to see ron paul as rnc chair because that's a classic conservativism at it's best. I know nothing about ann wagner, but i do know that michael steele was g-d awful.

If I may quote myself:

...or Conservative individual liberty issues (As opposed to corporate or business ones) such as RKBA or the trend of eminent domain law.  In fact, they seem to be ashamed to be associated with anyone taking a strong stand on social or Constitutional issues.

For my $.02, Ron Paul is more of a Libertarian Party kind of guy than a Libertarian-school Conservative.

[Rebel]

I'm socially-libertarian, fiscally-conservative, militarily-don't **** with us. A RINO to me is a fiscally-liberal Republican. My social stances don't affect anyone's pocketbook.