So Who is really running the republican party?

United States
March 1, 2009 7:10pm CST
Many people have been asking this question after the last election. There seams to be a split between the memebers of the RNC, and the majority of republicans. Michael Steele is the actual leader of the RNC, last night on CNN when asked about who really ran the RNC said he did. But, many believe that Rush Limbaugh is the leader, and has more support than any other republican. Who do you think is really leading the republican party?
2 people like this
8 responses
• United States
2 Mar 09
Michael Steele is the leader of the party. But that does not mean that ALL the voting public that is republican have to blindly follow him. Personally I am a conservative. I agree with Steele on somethings, disagree with him on somethings. And I completely dislike Rush. He is an entertainer. Not a politican or political figure. He is a radio host. Sometimes he has some important things to say but it often gets lost in all his hype, showboat and over sensationalized anticks on the show.
3 people like this
• United States
2 Mar 09
Thanks for your response LIL. I agree with your response, I just wonder why so many think that Rush is running the party (and I am sure his comments this week at CPAC aren't going to help). I agree that Rush is an entertainer, but his hold over his listeners is cult like. You really have to wonder how far he would go to prove a point, and get attention.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
2 Mar 09
Hello Greatdebater, Factions are prevalent in all large groups. Are you implying that the Conservative/Blueblood faction is a new phenomenon? If so, it is a somewhat disingenuous supposition. Who leads the party? Steele currently does. His job is to work the fundraising and begin the hunt and subsequent vetting process for future candidates. Rush has long refused to even tip his hat in a GOP primary because he acknowledges that he is not the party chair, meaning that it isn't his place to attempt to affect the outcome. Rush is a private citizen who is committed to Conservative principles, and the chairmanship (Steele) is all about the details of running and growing the party. The party chair's job is immensely frustrating. Just as Howard Dean who found himself in the maddening tug-o-war between the George Soros faction and the Clinton faction. So, I guess we could ask who is running the DNC? There seems to be quite a rift shaping up between the Socialist Dems and the Bluedog Dems, as well as a rift forming between green rep's and the Pelosi strong arm. So, is Pelosi running the party? Is Obama running the party? Are the Clinton's still running the party? Is George Soros running the party? The answer is that each controls their own little faction within. The DNC ebb & flo goes back as long as the history of the party. And, so does the GOP's. I'm happy to report that at least the GOP only has two factions, which is a real blessing! As far as hashing out the sordid, factional contests: I remember as a wee lass being taught that "It's best not to air dirty laundry." It always ends up stinking!
1 person likes this
• United States
2 Mar 09
Thanks for your response Lady. As you put it, there is a difference between actually running the party, and leading the party. This is just like any sport, as long as the team is winning no one really cares who is the leader, and who is the followers. But, when you are losing, everyone questions the leadership, and people usually start to get pink slips, and talk about change. I agree that there are many factions to both party, I just wonder why it is that no one ever blames Rush when republicans lose, but they give him credit when they win? He has seen the ups and downs of the party, and seams to be the teflon Don of the republican party.
2 people like this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
2 Mar 09
Hello Greatdebater, Let me preface this follow up with two brief points: 1. I disagree with Rush Limbaugh on many points and issues. 2. There is a plethora of erroneous assumption among the left on the substance and objectives of talk radio. Having said that, I'll move on to address your reply. Although, before specifically addressing the "teflon Don" question, I'm compelled to inquire about your statement below. "but they give him credit when they win" Who gives Rush credit for what? Are you saying that Rush is credited with election wins? If so, I'm going to have to ask for corroboration. Granted, I do not listen to Rush daily, sometimes I don't catch a moment of his show for weeks on end. Though, I have no recollection of Rush ever having been credited with election wins. The appropriate clarification may better be that Rush and many others are credited when Conservative principles win. And yes, there is a signficant difference! The whole Rockafeller faction of the GOP are, for the most part, adament opponents of Conservatism. Meaning that they dislike Rush (et al) as much as most on the far left do. As to the "teflon don" question. You ask: Why doesn't anyone blame Rush when Republicans lose? Because Rush doesn't represent Republicans. He is one of the venerated spokesperson(s) for Conservatism -- a political ideology. When Conservatism wins, like it did over the issue of the border fence legislation (due to millions of angry phone calls to D.C.) then Rush, and all other Conservative ideologues are given due credit. Limbaugh & Obama definitely have one thing in common. They are both "community organizers". Rush's kind of community activism just happens to be directed behind a capitalist microphone. Obama's kind of activism just happens to be directed behind situational legislative lobbying. They both have hugely benefitted (financially, societally, reputation, etc...) by mobilizing people and by shaping public opinion.
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
2 Mar 09
'I'm happy to report that at least the GOP only has two factions, which is a real blessing!" Are you saying that although the Clintons may be running the Dems, There is no possiblity that an x pres or Sara Palin may be among those taking a leadership role with the Repbulicns? And what about the Republicans who are willing to be nonpartisan? Have Arnold Schwartzenagger, Arlen Spector, Olympia Snow and Susan Collins no place in the Republican party? Doesn't seem to me that they fit in with Russ Limbaugh and I doubt they will fall in lock step with Michael Steele either. I think that right now there are many more factions in the Republican party than there are in the Democratic party.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
2 Mar 09
Michael Steele is the leader of the Republican Party. Rush Limbaugh is a commentator, comedian, entertainer. He has a big mouth and strong views. He has not been voted into anything. He is a supporter of the conservative movement.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Mar 09
The RINOs.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
2 Mar 09
"Michael Steele! You be da man! You be da man," according to Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann. Of course, some will say it's Sarah Palin, others will say it's the House and Senate Minority leadership and still others believe, as you mention, that Rush Limbaugh is the "real" leader. I let them continue to speak in their own unique ways! Annie
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Mar 09
Yup, Michael Steele is the best thing that ever happened for Democrats. May the RNC never win another election as long a that RINO is running it. He is to the Republican Party what Child Molesting Priests are to the Catholic Church.
1 person likes this
• United States
3 Mar 09
WOW, Para that is a little harsh wouldn't you say? I am not the biggest Steele fan, but you just put him in an entirely new catagory. Good thing you said that, and not me.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
2 Mar 09
Well the republican party is run by its members. Michael Steele is the leader, and will likely control the direction of it, but it's the voters and members of a party that really control the direction since they are the people who elect our governors, mayors, senators, etc. Rush Limbaugh does not run, or lead the party. He's an entertainer. Many republicans actively hate him. The people who I constantly hear saying that he runs the party are democrats, and they do that to make the uneducated folk believe that all republicans are extremists. I have yet to hear a single republican claim that Limbaugh runs the party.
1 person likes this
• United States
3 Mar 09
Taskr, the reason I posed the question was his response at the CPAC gathering last weekend, and the fact that Michael Steele called him an "Entertainer". During the election last year I heard many republcaians saying that George Soros, and Michael Moore ran the Democratic party. I guess that we all just assume that the loudest mouth in the fight is leading the battle.
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
2 Mar 09
Officially, it's Micheal Steele. I know a few republicans right off hand that don't even listen to Rush. Rush is a mouthpiece, not a leader. The ability to express one's opinion in such a way that you keep the sheep coming in doesn't always make one a leader. He's a favored commentator by republicans, basically.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
2 Mar 09
Officially the head is of course Michael Steele. But who is the figure head? The problem is, there doesn't seem to be one. The Republicans core problem is they have for the most part, collectively forgotten what true conservatism is. With very few exceptions, though they claim the oposite, they are really not too much different than the Democratic party on the overall aproach of government. they claim to be the party of limited government and constitutional liberty. Yet, look at voting records, look at the last president and you see only a slightly less handed aproach to all of that. They pushed through unconstitutional and totalitarian legislation such as the patriot act, T.A.R.P. and F.I.S.A. they talk about fiscal responsability, yet all voted on various pork projects. They voted no (except for 3) on the latest stimulus package, yet nearly 40% of the pork barrel pieces of it were drawn in by republicans. They talk about civil liberty and states right, yet very very few have ever decried the presence of homeland security/border patrol checkpoints on our highways in some cases 75-100 miles from any border. they talk about not compramising our rights for freedom, yet pushed for legislation that allows for uncharged detention of even u.s. citizens and other nearly orwellian policies like REAL ID all in the name of preventing terrorism and called people unpatriotic for not supporting it. Face it, the Republicans are not what they used to be and the Democrats are in some cases even worse. [b] Both parties are oblitterating any trace of what this country is supposed to stand for and the principals it was founded on.