Michael Steele to Run for Governor (in Future)
Mar 17th, 2008 by Micah Tillman | 4 Comments |
I don’t know if this is news or not, but I just heard Michael Steele say (on [Comcast's] News Channel 8 here in the DC area) that he intends to run for governor in Maryland (as well as for Senate) in the future.
He framed it as a question of when, not if.
(Steele reminds me a bit of Howard Dean. Put in charge of a party organization after losing an election. Though I got the sense that Steele was being kept at the center of things so he could easily run for office again. I wonder if the Dems would let Dean do the same.)
The differences between Dean and Steele is that while Dean was a pariah who often did not come off as very mature, Steele is loved by the GOP and lost not because of not having what it takes but for being too conservative in an ultra liberal state. Steele would be overwhelmingly supported in a state like Kansas, Steele is true blue conservative in every respect and that just is not winning material on the arch liberal North Eastern seaboard.
Steele is articulate and very genuin, I think he has a huge future. Unfortunatly he is caught in the Duncan Hunter trap, being in a liberal area and unable to get past his region being unfriendly to his beliefs. Again, if Steele was hailing from Kansas, he would be already running for President. Thank goodness Huckabee and Jindal come from states were they can and have advanced themselves otherwise we would be stuck with the Rudi McRomneys forever.
I have always gotten the impression that conservative GOPers love Steele. I was unaware of the Dems’ feelings toward Dean. But that would explain the vague sense that I had gotten that Dean was being stored away permanently by his party, while Steele was being put in a safe place for easy access in the future.
I’ve heard good things about Jindal, but I’d rather not have to deal with Huckabee. I don’t think Huck understands the political/personal distinction well enough (I heard him say something about making the Constitution conform more closely to the Bible) to be entrusted with national leadership.
But, then again, most politicians don’t . . . .
I think Dean got a leadership post because the party knew they needed his netroots sense to raise money in a post McCain Feingold world were small increments over the internet were essential, and to keep him away from running for office again.
And I understand your sentiments on Huckabee, but those comments that got him slimed by the media were out of context with his message as a totality and he would be the first to say so. They were awkward and thus easy for the liberal media and Romney surrogates to twist. Looking at his record all I see (with a few exceptions) all I see is excellence in governing a state out of the Clintonian wilderness they were lost in. I am still very angry how an amzing candidate with no money was cast aside by by conservatives accepting the media stereotypes so as to support Flip Romney. Huckabee’s novel approach of communicating conservatism to the regular guy is something we needed badly and people tried to make it out to be liberalism. What is shocking is that Huckabee had a far more conservative record as Governor than Ronald Reagan did in Cali.
And yes, the GOP is holding Steele in reserve because they (we) need his amazing articulation skills and un-GOPesch background to bolster the parties message. Every chance I have seen him has been outstanding, he is a hardcore conservative, which dooms him in his state unfortunatly. If only he lived in Kansas :(.
You think Steele will move?
H. Clinton did it, after all.