PDA

View Full Version : Martinez is new RNC Head - not Steele


samsung101
Nov 13th, 2006, 09:29 PM
All I can say is that Bush better give Steele a good position
in the Cabinet or White House. To lay him out there all weekend,
and have him asked about it on tv, etc., and then pull out
Martinez. It's disappointing. Not fatal, but, a disappointment.


Although, many on the far right are annoyed with this already...
rightly so, he is not terrible. He is blase.

He is Hispanic.
#1, 2, 3,4, 5 reason he was picked.

#6 reason- he's from Florida. He is close w/ Jeb Bush.
Reason #7 through #100, - he's hispanic.


He is the signal, in my view, from the RNC, of the all out
push for a few more percentage points needed by Hispanic
voters in 2008 in a few states.

He will be a darling of the spanish language publications and
tv stations- which are huge.

He is a good fundraiser, and campaigner.
He is a great American self made story.
He has been a so-so senator.
He's weak on immigration reform.
Strong on the Iraq War issue.
Weak on fiscal responsibility.
Fact is though, he won as Senator. So,
sorry, Michael, guess losing doesn't help
much in the long run. They wanted someone
who understood Congress more.


Steele deserves a big spot. So, if a Cabinet role comes out of
this instead. I'll take that. HUD or Commerce or Labor or Transportation
or FEMA or Homeland Security. He can't do worse than Chertoff. A man
I've never warmed up to. Ridge did a good job, and Chertoff has been
medicore at best. The guy can make millions in the private sector,
but, I hope the GOP nabs him for a top spot somewhere. Steele
deserves a shot at a big spot.

Oddly, I read on 3 conservative websites last week they were not
happy w/his choice, including the Wall Street Journal. Why? They
saw him as medicore, and not a good fundraiser, and not a person
who knew the Congress well.

Wannabeknowitall
Nov 13th, 2006, 09:45 PM
I guess Bush's history of putting people in position where they are underqualified is that obvious to put Steele in a high cabinet position.

Steele was Lt. Governor for four years in Maryland.
That's all he's done.
The only black person that deserved their job in Bush cabinet was Colin Powell and he was made into a scapegoat.
I don't expect any different if Bush brings Steele in.

samsung101
Nov 13th, 2006, 10:39 PM
Martinez' selection is all about immigration and courting the
hispanic vote in the 2008 elections.

I get it.
I don't necessarily like it.

Disappointing. It's not bold or innovative, it's okay.

Loyal guy, Jeb and George pal, key state background from
Florida, hispanic.

Most are not happy w/this in the conservative blogosphere or
on radio.

They want a new face in Congress, White House or RNC sooner
than later....Steele, Santorum, Largent, somone...


(1) I do not oppose expanded guest worker programs.
Only thing, I have no illusion anyone will leave once here.
It's just a guest worker to citizenship plan for 20 million.

(2) I know we cannot deport 20 million people (it's not 12 million).
But, we should weed through this group and get as many criminals
and fugitives as possible out who are in that group, and there
are many. False ID's and all. Citizenship is a gift, not a right.

(3) I think we should put billions into a better border first.
Walls, more enforcement, protection for residents and property
owners along the border, and a real meaningful border.

(4) Martinez favors massive amnesty and programs. The GOP
had 6 years to get plans through. Bush's 1st policy push in
office was for worker programs and amnesty. Then 9/11 happened,
and it went on the back burner. He still favors this. He didn't
change his views on any of this.



For all the GOP'ers whining about Bush being too soft on immigration,
the Congress failed to do much about any of it. Even the hardline
GOP'ers who wanted tougher stances, didn't push to get much thru
at all. Filibuster men and women, you had your chance. You blew it.
6 years, you didn't get it done. Whose fault is that?



(5) Martinez is a nice way to tell the GOP base, too bad, it's going
to happen w/ or w/o you.

Pureracket
Nov 14th, 2006, 02:22 AM
Actually, I think Martinez was the smarter choice. Courting black voters has traditionally been a lost cause for the GOP. Courting Hispanic voters, on the other hand, has generated more success. In 2004, according to CNN's exit polls, 40% of Hispanic voters went with the Republicans. That percentage dwindled this year to a mere 26% for the GOP. Their reliance on immigrant-bashing during the campaign likely turned some Hispanic voters against the GOP. The way the GOP sees it, the growing Hispanic vote is a more pressing target than the staunchly Democratic black vote. If the choice was between Steele (an appeal to black voters) or Martinez (an appeal to Hispanic votes), the more strategic choice was Martinez.

Of course, if they were interested in courting Hispanics, perhaps they should have gone with a Hispanic member of Congress that isn't an ultraconservative swimming in Abramoff money.