Skip to comments.
Racicot to leave post at RNC to move to Bush 2004 campaign (Ed Gillespie to replace him)
AP ^
| 5-5-03
| RON FOURNIER
Posted on 05/05/2003 3:46:54 PM PDT by GraniteStateConservative
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:42:24 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Republican National Committee chairman Marc Racicot is expected to become chairman of President Bush's re-election campaign and the leading candidate to replace him as party leader is Washington lobbyist Ed Gillespie.
Racicot, the former Montana governor who was one of Bush's more forceful advocates during the 2000 Florida recount, could assume the campaign post as early as July when the Republican National Committee meets for its midyear meeting, said several Republican sources who spoke on condition of anonymity.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: edgillespie; gwb2004; marcracicot; regimechange; rnc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: montag813
Ditto!
Is a percentage point from the log cabins worth alienating your base, Marc? You're an idiot!
41
posted on
05/06/2003 12:37:40 AM PDT
by
Rockitz
(After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
To: GraniteStateConservative
First, Racicot was one of the most eloquent spokespersons either political party has had in the recent past. Very smooth, extremely convincing, and eminently reasonable. By and large, the GOP has these semi-articulate jokers who can't hold their own with their Democrat counterparts. Which brings me to Gillepie. I have not been impressed with this guy from whatever I've seen and read of him. He seems fine as a behind-the-scenes power-broker but we need a charismatic, effective spokesperson. That person would be Ralph Reed.
To: Rockitz
And Marc conceded what to the Log Cabin Republicans? Nothing. That's right. You're getting worked up for no good reason. Racicot handed McAulliffe's a** to him in the debates they had. He is a definite keeper.
To: montag813
Gosh, you are really clueless. The RNC under Racicot bucked historical trends that consistently showed the party out of power wins seats in the President's first midterm election. To regain control of the Senate was a historic achievement and allowed Bush to regain control over his domestic agenda.
---
The last time that the party in power gained House seats during the President's first midterm election was 1934.
Avg. loss of Senate seats for party in power during midterm elections: 4 seats.
To: PhiKapMom
Because I wanted to put Gillespie's name in the title (and add the word RNC) so that people could search for his name or Racicot's and get the article-- and thus not post a duplicate. I couldn't do that and keep the original title because there is a character limit to FR thread titles. Besides, I found out about this from the CNBC/MSNBC crawl and the crawl makes it look more definitive-- maybe their sources have confirmed this. NBC News has great sources.
45
posted on
05/06/2003 5:15:30 AM PDT
by
GraniteStateConservative
(Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
To: Contra
Why would you think that? He's publicly feuded with Bush over defense appropriations. I have no doubt that Bush would support Watts should he replace a retiring Nickles in OK, but he's not going to be chosen as VP to replace a retiring Cheney or become chair of the RNC. Those jobs go to friends of Bush.
46
posted on
05/06/2003 5:18:02 AM PDT
by
GraniteStateConservative
(Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
To: Sonny M
This isn't rocket science. He basicly said that it was stupid to wait for weeks and weeks with the UN. That was a decision made by Bush (after consultations with Blair and Powell, mostly) and it allowed us an opportunity to try to get what we wanted from Turkey-- which never happened, but we needed the time to try. These people that suggest we were ready to go in last fall are silly. We needed every day that we had. We even went in earlier than we expected because of the "target of opportunity." It is true that Newt serves on that board, but it's not true that Bush approved his speech before it was given. For that reason, it was the wrong thing to do-- or at the very least, Newt should expect to deal with the consequences of his actions.
47
posted on
05/06/2003 5:22:55 AM PDT
by
GraniteStateConservative
(Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
To: fieldmarshaldj
Casper was on Hannity and Colmes last week. He looked refreshed and vibrant. He did sounded very firm in his beliefs as well.
To: ConservativeMan55
"He did sounded very firm in his beliefs as well."
Oh great! I'll never live this double negative down!!!
To: ConservativeMan55
To: PhiKapMom
You don't want Newt -- too devisive and too much of a lightening rod not to mention he cannot keep his mouth shut when he should!Its his zipper that he couldn't keep shut setting back the GOP revolution.
51
posted on
05/06/2003 7:32:58 AM PDT
by
VRWC_minion
(Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
To: jagrmeister; montag813
My wise father once said, "If you mess with a turd, you'll get Sh!+ on you." Racicot has messed with these turds one too many times and he's handled PR with regard to this extremely poorly, thereby alienating his base.
52
posted on
05/06/2003 10:33:14 AM PDT
by
Rockitz
(After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
To: jagrmeister
Gosh, you are really clueless. The RNC under Racicot bucked historical trends that consistently showed the party out of power wins seats in the President's first midterm election. Racicot reponsible for the election? HAHA! Bill Frist may have something to say about that. Racicot only became RNC head 9 months before the election, and didn't even have his whole staff in then. The NSCC is responsible for the Senate takeover...believe me, as a consultant who worked with them. They coordinated it brilliantly with Rove and the campaigns. Racicot had nothing to do with it.
To: savedbygrace
"Bring back Haley Barbour."
Concur. He was the most effective chairperson in my lifetime. (30 yrs. old).
Soft-spoken, persuasive, and informed. He ran rings around his DNC counterparts. Although I can't remember exactly who they were. . . governor from CO maybe? a little help?
Trace
54
posted on
05/06/2003 12:15:01 PM PDT
by
Trace21230
(Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
To: rs79bm
Traditions says that the presidents names the chairman of his party. The chairman of the "opposition party" is technically chosen by the national committee, but in 2001, the outgoing beloved Democrat President Clinton essentially named his own DNC chair.
To: GraniteStateConservative
My understanding is that Watts wants to earn big money and has no interest in returning to elective politics because the pay is too small for his needs.
To: Theodore R.
My understanding is that Watts wants to earn big money and has no interest in returning to elective politics because the pay is too small for his needs....and he has too much integrity to make the big bucks as a US senator, which, of course has been done in spades by many others.
57
posted on
05/06/2003 1:25:33 PM PDT
by
Rockitz
(After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
To: Theodore R.
I don't think J.C. is going to stay away too long. He already stated in an interview that even after just a few months out of office, he already misses it. If Nickles retires, the national party will practically grab J.C. by the collar and drop kick him into the race.
58
posted on
05/06/2003 2:17:37 PM PDT
by
fieldmarshaldj
(~Remember, it's not sporting to fire at RINO until charging~)
To: BenR2
"GWB is NO conservative."
You've got that right!
59
posted on
05/06/2003 3:17:02 PM PDT
by
Sid Rich
To: fieldmarshaldj
The same people pushing Watts for the Senate could also be the ones convinced that Steve Largent would coast to the OK governorship.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson