Should he continue as RNC Chairman?

Rivalry Side A | Politics | Parties

Should he resign the Chairmanship?

Rivalry Side B | Politics | Parties

Should Mr. Steele resign? Is it time to let someone else take the reigns of the RNC?


Posted by in Politics / Parties on 4/02/10
Debate Leaders
  1. LIBERAL (3 votes)
  1. mama kaz (1 votes)

Side A fans: (3)

Neutral Fans: (1)


Side A Comment

mama kaz - 4/4/10 @ 9:38 AM:
Maybe if the Republican party had Hollywood and the unions behind them they wouldn't be in such bad shape. I think Steele came into this with a big mess to clean up. (Sound familiar?) Maybe that excuse can only be used by the democrats. I don't think we should be criticizing him when our federal government is showing complete fiscal irresponsibility. It's true that a presidents budget is complicated but that is all the more reason to not overspend and we should be making hard cuts to all parts of our budget. Instead they are trying to push through more expensive programs and spending more than ever. We just found out we have to pay another 900 dollars in taxes this year so we will be trimming our budget at home in order to pay it. We're not going to go out and buy a big screen tv. Even with all the cash the dems have I suspect they are the ones who should be worried. I think both parties are in trouble and we may finally elect some uncorrupted independents in the near future.

Side A Comment

The Boss - 4/3/10 @ 2:32 PM:
While I haven't looked into the use of the money spent by the GOP; we are talking about millions here, not trillions. Am I supposed to stand here and crucify Michael Steele for spending more than they took in (Which is unacceptable and doesn't put the GOP in a good situation for the November elections) when the White House is spending at least 1.59 trillion more than they take in for 2010. Should Obama step down?

There are a couple of things I don't agree with in regards to Michael Steele and how the GOP has handled elections in the last year but I'm not ready to crucify the man. Then again, if I looked into the use of the money my perspective my be altered a bit.
LIBERAL - 4/3/10 @ 6:22 PM: Rival | Side B
Kaz, there are a few things you must consider. One being that a budget ran by a president is far more complicated than that of an organization like the RNC. Two being that when the government is in the red we still have the ability to purchase products, support our military, and send out checks for senior citizens on Medicare or Social Security. The RNC does not hold that privilege. When it is out of money it does not hold credit to pay for television ads, billboards, etc. And last, but certainly not the least, taxpayers always have to pay taxes. You can choose not to pay taxes because you don't like how the government spends it, but that can lead to something ugly called an "audit". The RNC does not hold this privilege either. It must depend on the money of its donors. Which means you are in a position where you must spend funds responsibly, especially if you wish to expect to receive more funds from donors, or else you lose their faith. And if you lose their faith, you probably lose their support (money)!!

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 4/2/10 @ 9:52 AM:
This is not to be an argument between the major parties. I don't care to hear about all of the discrepancies by either party. If you're not the least bit naive then you know that both parties have used this type of behavior to "enlist" people to join their cause. I'm not judging these people for their behavior, because it's just not my place to do so. What I am saying is how can the RNC justify allowing a man to stay on as their chairman who spends their money so frivolously that they are closer to being in the red than having the necessary funds to compete with their rival party this fall.

During Mr. Steele's chairmanship the RNC has raised over $96.2 million, but has spent over $106.9 million! With a $13.4 million dollar deficit the RNC seems less poised to take on their democratic counterparts this fall when they already seemed to have enough going for them. With the deficit included the RNC has enabled the DNC to have a $25 million dollar head start on funds that can be used this fall. In a time of responsible spending and fiscal accountability how is it possible that others can stand behind Mr. Steele when he so blatantly is prepared to accept expenditures within his organization that do not help his party's reputation. Though he likely will not be ousted by his own organization, as it takes a 2/3rds majority vote to remove him from his office, should he do the right thing? Should he resign and allow someone with a better sense of fiscal responsibility take the reigns, or should the RNC just tolerate these types of expenses, though they could clearly use these funds for more important issues. Like defeating the democrats this fall for a number of seats in the senate and house.
LIBERAL - 4/2/10 @ 9:54 AM: Ally | Side B
Sorry. Forgot to add my source.

Source ( )
Add new comment:

You must either login or register before you can comment.

Side B fans: (1)

You need to be logged in to do that!
Login with Your Facebook Account:
Already have a JealousBrother account? Login
Register for a JealousBrother Account! Register