…Even I don’t blame him for the loss of NY-20.

The problems there weren’t Steele and the RNC. The problem was that Jim Tedisco was a crummy candidate who ran a horrid campaign. (Of course, the fact that NY state voters are yellow dog democrats doesn’t help.)

Basically, I blame the NY GOP, and the closed selection process that allowed such a flawed candidate to be chosen.

Of course, now that Tedisco has lost, I *will* blame Steele if he allows Tedisco to be the candidate again in 2010.

But, for now, the blame on this one lies elsewhere.

As it is an issue of blaming for him raising the profile, staking his future on it, and then losing it.

I think he is and will be hoard nosed and will push the party forward. We need to pre-empt the on coming attack and back this guy. Even if we want some one else we need to at least seem to be unified. We can air our dissatisfaction to each other but we need to be unified in our objective.

I personally believe it would be a travesty to throw him overboard. The Party still has a problem with the brand and a credibility problem with it’s base, some of which Steele has been negligent in his failure to address…but that credibility gap is not limited to the chairman. It’s a systemic problem that involves the very committee members who are currently involved in a subversive attempt to undermine him and throw him over board.

I’ve been impressed with his house cleaning since he got there and what I see now is sour grapes from the RNC members who have watched their well placed cronies in the organization, (the very people who led us to this current state of affairs) sent packing…and their out to take Steele’s head and put their people back in position.

Steele needs to be given a chance to turn things around. I personally am not happy with the lack of coordination and message from the RNC, and I think they need to be working right now on nationalizing this election against the Democrats and their federal agenda and I’d like to see a little contrition from the Committee for propping up squishes like specter when he was up last time…but I don’t think he should be undermined as is currently being done!

The “Big Tent” analogy isn’t the correct one…the correct one is a MAGNET…we need to be a MAGNET that draws these independents in who are sick and tired of what’s going on in Washington—Fred Thompson

Senate Conservatives Fund House Conservatives Fund Michael Williams for Senate

Marco 2010 Toomey US Senate SarahPAC

what they want. If the DEMS hope to turn this loss (which happens in a democracy) into more Republican infighting, let’s not do it. Let’s just accept Steele as our leader, make sure he has the support to represent the party properly and move forward. Keep out disagreements private.

If they are gunning for you, don’t give them the ammunition.

You exorcise demons, unless you like your demons fit and trim.

Steele hasn’t had time to really make his mark yet. You forget that we’re only 100 days into Obama’s presidency and he still has a 60 percent approval rating. The Republican Party has not yet had time or a chance to re-establish themselves as an alternative to the tax and spend, big government Democrats, primarily because the Democrats are still riding high on their victory a few months ago. If anything, even though the GOP lost this seat, it is somewhat of a positive trend. The Dem won the seat the past two cycles, and Obama won, by several percentage points. Tedisco only lost it by a few hundred votes. By 2010 and 2012, after they have more time to absorb how Obama and the Dems are flushing our future down the toilet, this district, and others, will be ready to go back to the GOP. 2010 is Steele’s real test.

What this election highlights is the difficulty that Republicans have in finding candidates who can run credible campaigns to get a majority of the votes.

It doesn’t matter what the polls say about general agreement with or against Obama, Democrats, Republicans. In the end, its about who wins all the House and Senate contests. Right now, the Democrats have strong majorities, and the only way we’re going to change that is to win more races. And we’re running uphill because of incumbent advantages.

Which means we need to be able to field candidates and run winning campaigns - and we’ve got 435 separate House contests and 33/34 Senate contest in 2010; one size is not going to fit all. Without this kind of in the trenches effort, the Democratic tumbrills are just going to roll along towards the inevitable historical outcome.

Diffuse dissatisfaction (or tea party enthusiasm) is just a substrate in solution, but without condensation nuclei (i.e. candidates) no visible changes will occur.

Apart from the message about our need to find strong candidates, the outcome of this race will have little impact on our nation, apart from entertaining the political equivalent of day-traders.

shows us it is not the platform but the candidates at fault.

Good point.

The fact that it took Tedisco a month to come out against the stimulus, even after all of the house republicans voted against it, is why Tedisco lost.

I do not support the committee members that may have a problem with Steele. Makes me like Steele better than normal.

These committee members are the same folks we have had for years that shoved moderates down our throats. They do not want anyone that may cause a controversy.

The time for moderation is over. I would rather have most of the committee members replaced than Michael Steele.