Will he or won't he? Robert Gibbs to become Chairman of the DNC?

Speculation Of White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs Leaving To Become DNC Chairman

With Rahm Emanuel leaving the Obama administration to run for Mayor of Chicago, and speculation that David Axelrod will leave to work on the Obama re-election bid, would Robert Gibbs leaving to become DNC chairman be net good, neutral or bad for the Republican Party heading into the 2012 presidential election?

Politics, Politics, Politics

From the "it ain't about the American people, it is all about the re-election" file, this mission, if Gibbs should decide to accept it, would be about the political maneuvering that is beginning to take place in advance of the 2012 presidential campaign which will start in earnest after the mid-term elections are over this November.

Now I for one would not mind Gibbs moving away from the podium, because as it stands now when either he, or his boss are on the air, I have an actual, involuntary hand movement forcing me to either change the station or shut the volume off. I would rather be watching or listening to reruns of this years New York Mets games than to President Obama's pontifications. Now that's saying something.

You can only hear the same blame game so many times before you just can't take it any more. I would venture to say that forcing detainees to listen to either one for an extended period of time (over 3 minutes), would be determined to be cruel and unusual punishment and outlawed under the Geneva Convention.

That said, would a move by Gibbs to the DNC be a strategically smart move by the Democrats, therefore making it a net negative for the Republicans? Or is the chairman position irrelevant and not an issue at all?

Pros and Cons of Robert Gibbs as DNC Chairman

When, in the past, you had a DNC chairman like Howard Dean at the helm, he was the gift that kept on giving for the Republican Party being a charter member of the Gaff of the Day Club. There are few out there like Dean, and it would have to be assumed that Gibbs would be much smarter, somewhat less polarizing and much more effective in the position.

For the White House, the pros would be that it would have a man in the position who ostensibly would always be on the same page with them, and who would work to unite a base that seems to be suffering with battle fatigue. The voters that came out for Obama in the last election have been steadily slipping away, either losing interest in the process such as a demographic like college students, or who have become disillusioned with a President who has not been close to the type of leader that they had signed up for. This voting block would include the independent voters.

The negatives for the White House, aka positives for the Republicans and conservatives, is the deteriorating relationship that Gibbs has with the mainstream media, a group that the Obama re-election team badly needs to be on board. One would be hard pressed to imagine a scenario where one man such as Gibbs could keep the MSM away from biased reporting, but you never know.

Finally, the negatives according to Ed Morrissey at hotair.com are as follows: "What, exactly, are his qualifications to run the DNC? Apparently the Democrats prefer to roll over to a White House that already has them on the road to ruin, allowing Obama to pick yet another completely unqualified party leader to speed that march to double-time."

Stay tuned.