As everyone now knows, Charlie Smith did the unexpected last night in Denver and sent out a feel-good press release about unity and achieving common goals. After passing the proposed amendments yesterday, I thought for sure that he would be announcing his full-fledged candidacy for the CRNC throne. However, we are still waiting to see the first candidate enter the race. As of yet, I have not heard of any deals between potential candidates to mutually postpone announcements until next year (at CPAC usually), so I am going to assume that something else has happened. Now for two bits of insight (probably worth about two bits, too) on this move. Here is what I think happened, first of all. Until now, Charlie has simply been working the phones, and aside from having a few folks out in person (along with his local supporters), the commitments he has gotten were not all stout and unbreakable. One of the other potential candidates has to have stepped up and offered something sweeter (or just a better message) to some of them. If the phone commitments were not airtight, the endorsing state chair may have gotten cold feet and backed away from getting on stage during any announcement speech. Both of these more than likely combined to peel away just enough Smith support to keep him from making the impression he wanted via an announcement at home. No doubt he will suffer at least slightly for cooperating with the enemy (in Amanda Hydro's eyes), whether he truly wanted to work with reformers or simply advance his own cause.
The second insight I have on this is that by not announcing last night, this campaign will probably hold off announcements in large part until after the calendar flips to 2007. CPAC is the first opportunity to bring together the bulk of CRs in the land, and especially state chairmen, so formal announcements are still most likely to be seen here. Making an announcement with your supporters standing firmly behind you at CPAC can make a much better impression than anything else between now and then. Besides this, some of the state fed elections will already be over and done with, and being closer to the actual election, it is much easier to keep them on board for a couple of months than half of a year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Gotta love the spam.
Their contempt for the office of the Chairman should rightly disqualify all of them. All of them. They were elected to serve the best interestes of their respective states and they should have worked with Paul Gourley for the past two years.
And instead they've tried to screw up the clockwork at every turn. It's reprehensible and irresponsible behavior.
I can't say I agree there. Charlie Smith was an endorser of HPG back in 2005 and Ohio voted for Gourley as well (even though Siler was not a delegate at convention). However, when change is needed, and not coming from the current group, you take matters into your own hands. And that is what I think we are seeing. Yes, there are still a few holdovers fighting the battles of 2005, but there are several who simply want a change.
Post a Comment