That still leaves the question of whether Christie’s general combativeness will work very well during the nomination contest in other parts of the country. David Harsanyi says that attack “is his default position when challenged,” but it seems more accurate to say that it is just his default position. Jonathan Chait makes a fair point that this doesn’t hurt Christie among Republicans when the targets of his ire are teachers’ unions or public-sector employees, but it easily could make him hated inside his own party if he directs his attacks against Republican competitors. He’s already shown in his spat with Rand Paul how clumsy and tone-deaf he can be when talking about national issues, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he manages to alienate a large portion of the Republican primary electorate between now and the start of voting in 2016.
Over at Bloggingheads, Matt Lewis, riffing off Bill Scher's insight says this [14 seconds].
109 comments:
I do not see Kristiekreme doing well in the primaries. But of course it depends on the competition. If he is facing Santorm and Gingrich, well then he will do fine.
If Perry is not having back problems, he might be able to face him. I would like to see some more substantive candidates run. Walker would be good (if he is interested).
It was just yesterday I saw somewhere that Everybody Loves Christie so it would seem that the weird media dance has begun.
Gingrich would be just sad, and I'd be surprised if Perry dared to show his face.
Walker should go for it, what better time than now?
I was once log ago a big fan, but things have changed. He's now clearly a John McCain on Donuts.
I don't mind losing an election as long as the choice is clear because the GOP puts up a real conservative (none since Reagan who was more so in rhetoric than action), but to lose the election without even making the alternative clear to the voters is what I'm pretty sick and tired of seeing.
That sneaky liberal media.
I take Christy over any democrat but that's about the nicest thing I could say about him for now.
He is another McCain
Agreed, bago. I still think that if Hillary had been the nominee, McCain would have won...because he was more likable to many, even in the media.
We can wait a very long time for Jesus.
Then again, when Jesus got here he turned out very disappointing to many.
Maybe he wasn't the real Jesus.
I guess we will just wait a little longer.
I think Hillary would play him like a fiddle.
Lem, have you ever been to any of his rallies?
IF he can't guarantee NJ in a Presidential election, then there's no reason to go there. I'm tired of candidates that can't even deliver their own state.
I am a fat loudmouth guy from the Northeast.
Guys like us should not be President.
Christie is the liberal media's second most fave Republican, right behind John McCain. Since McCain isn't going to run for president, Christie moves to the top of the list.
He is nominally a Republican and not terribly conservative, apart from being sort of pro-choice.
The Dems are going to use War on Women to attack any and every Republican candidate and incumbent. It is a strategy that has brought them victory in the past. It also makes Christie a likely loser against Queen Hillary, which is why the media wants him to run.
A better candidate would be a Republican woman, or a black male. Someone with little baggage and a compelling story would be a strong candidate. Dr. Benjamin Carson comes to mind.
If Carson ran for office, Republicans could Alinsky any Democrat criticism of him using the "Racist!!1!" ploy against liberal critics.
Christie won't survive the primaries.
Yeah, but you're good at it :) Christie is really off-putting, to me.
In the eyes of the republican establishment it is all about appearing to be caring... likeable.
"Karl Rove understood that Republicans suffer from a "Caring Gap". It may be stupid, but in each race, George W. Bush managed to be a caring candidate going up against a stiff and out of touch Democrat. And then Obama was lucky enough to get John McCain and Mitt Romney, two men whose credentials and manners perfectly suited the old America, but who wouldn't be able to explain how the National Debt made them feel nearly as well as Obama or Bill Clinton could.
A sizable portion of the country doesn't just want someone good or someone who has the right ideas, they want someone to love them, to care about them and to make their relationship with government feel meaningful so that they can believe that it is love, rather than dirty money, favor-trading, vote-swapping, fanatical devotion to 19th century ideologies and humanitarianism that makes the fax machines, the hard drive platters , cars and cabinet meetings of government go round and round."
Not a black guy, Haz. Don't you know it's Womankind's turn? If they wouldn't savage her on her war record, and they would, I'd say Condoleezza. Any woman running would have to be at least tepidly pro-choice.
Republicans believe Christie can carry Blue States
Oops, sorry, I think I linked to the wrong webpage there.
It's great how the Democrat machine, I mean news media, love to tell Republicans who they should pick, and how those picks just don't work out.
A noisy Frigidare in a suit.
Barack popped the Frigidaire open and had a nourishing snack after that hurricane.
He is a Jersey Politician. All Jersey Politicians are dirty. There must be things in his background that the press is holding back for the general election.
If Christie is the Republican nominee there will be a final fracture of the party and a new party will arise just as the Republicans rose from the ashes of the Whigs.
I personally don't think he will run. He will be like Mario Cuomo who also had a lot of dirt in his back story and knew if he ran against the Clinton machine it would all be out and center.
Rove is going to use Jeb Bush as his wedge to run against Hillary.
I mean he married a Mexican and if it can work for Debasio in NY than maybe it can work in the national election.
He can just get his kid to wear a sombrero instead of an afro or something.
The GOP needs to put up someone who can make the case powerfully for smaller government. That will get the base, the tea party, libertarians and many independents. It may or may not convince enough other to win, but what's the point in winning if nothing changes. You have to at least give voters a choice that includes something promising, and if they don't choose it then we will just be where we are anyway, but we will know who to blame at least.
You guys are getting Christie, good and hard, whether you want him or not. You are in denial at the moment but the harsh cruel reality of electability will make him inevitable. Who's his competition, Cruz or Rand Paul? Not going to happen.
I think Trooper is onto something.
Romney vetted Christie. Whatever he found wont stay a secret for long.
I take Cruz over Christy any day of the week.
Some stuff Christie's done in New Jersey:
— Reversed a $2.2 billion deficit and brought it into balance without raising taxes, largely by reduced spending and eliminating wasteful and unaffordable programs, allowing for a projected fiscal 2014 budget surplus of $300 million.
— Brought about bipartisan pension and benefits reforms, saving the state $120 billion over 30 years.
— Streamlined government by eliminating 5,200 government jobs.
— Vetoed tax increase bills three times while cutting taxes for job creators.
— Reformed the nation’s oldest teacher tenure law by making it conditional on teacher performance in the classroom.
— Reduced property tax increases to a 21-year low and capped them at a maximum 2 percent.
Doesn't any of that count in his favor?
In a way I hope the GOP foists Christie on its despised base. That might actually goose the base to go beyond merely complaining that it won't vote for the latest RINO/CINO. One more such insult might finally motivate the base to abandon its tormentor and form a genuine conservative opposition party to the Montana Urban Schmendrik, ARM, phx horror show.
This talk and this discussion is way too early. Christie might well indeed make a nice ineffectual Republican in 2016 to sign bills and assuage liberals but he is not the immediate and most pressing answer. His tepid stance on ObamaCare doesn't fit with the 2014 midterms.
The Tea Party is needed in 2014 which comes two years before Christie's possible moment.
Chris Christie needs to drink some Tea before 2014 and show some leadership on that front before he's invited to lead the Party in 2016.
"Doesn't any of that count in his favor?"
No.
Embraced Obama right before the election like he was Spanky and Obama was Buckwheat.
Constanting attacking more conservative Republicans.
Flip flops on social issues at the drop of the hat.
Preferred candidate of Chris Matthews, ARM, phx, Ezra Klein, Rhino Republicans and others who do not have Republicans best interest at heart.
He will be a fart in the wind just like Rudy Giuliani who he resembles in a lot of ways.
Been there done that.
The choice of my enemy is not my friend.
Electability is how they sold McCain.
Electability is how they sold Romney.
We will not get fooled again.
When they lay down on the beach Barry insisted (for the very first time in his life) on being the top. No fool he.
Everything that Troop said.
In other news--got my Greg Abbott for Gov bumper sticker in the mail today. He's coming to my city for a meet & greet in a couple weeks and I think Imma go. And I just might volunteer to help with the campaign, which will be a first for me.
Bring it, Abortion Barbie.
McCain might have been president had he not walked into a Bushwacking. Maybe not.
Romney might have been president had there been an ethical press/media. Maybe not.
Troop, you probably voted for both of them. I admit I did. What did they do to fool us?
Ricpic, down that path lies division. It's with this party and now, but I suspect the clock is going to run out on us conservative oldsters.
There is this phenomenon that is just so funny and people fall for it every single time:
The Media--and "the buzz" give their blessing to some Republican -- and then lots of Republican donors get woozy and say, that's who we need...
Followed by electoral disaster.
In fairness, something similar happens on the left.
Remember how the media and the professional talkers thought Howard Dean was da bomb?
No, really, they did. Till he totally embarrassed them--then all the tapes were burned...
Scott Walker.
Chris Christie could be an everyman, but the National media will portray him as a heartless plutocrat who eats small children in his spare time. His temper, which seems favorable and quirky now, will make him seem like a loose cannon. It will be "Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" all over again.
Don't do it.
No matter what you think of Christie. After a big win Time mag just put his picture on the cover w/, "The Elephant in the Room." Classless. Just tryin' to get some buzz. Annie will like the cover and will certainly do a post on it. Also, classless.
FMF, is there any buzz in your parish about who is looking good? Are they determined 'not to get fooled again'?
Chick, I agree, it's about 2014, and as ACA unfolds, I'm guessing it will be pretty easy...
ARM, I don't think Christie can beat Hillary.
John they fooled us by pretending they wanted to fight against the Democrats and what they want to do to our country.
McCain made the right pick in Palin and then muzzled her while his campaign leaked and smeared her. Romney was such a pussy when it came to going after Obama he should play for the Dolphins or something.
Politics ain't bean bag. Nice guys finish last. Christie might be fighter but he won't fight for what I believe in. Just like McCain and Romney it will be more important to him that the right people will talk to him and invite him to their cocktail parties.
I don't think that matters to Cruz or Rand Paul or even Gov. Walker. We have plenty of good people to choose from without even mentioning longshots like Bobby Jindal or Niki Haley.
Let's leave this blundering bellowing blowfish to Jersey where he belongs.
(FMF, I'm going on the assumption that some Catholics voted for him the first time, but not the second.)
Christie will throw any social values under the bus in a minute.
He has no scruples about that. If you think he is seriously pro-life you are fooling yourself. Or that he would stand up to protect religious institutions from the latest social engineering fad. Not gonna happen.
As hard as it is to believe he will blow with the prevailing winds.
The gay marriage thing proved thar right there.
Christie will throw any social values under the bus in a minute.
Well, he hasn't folded yet on abortion. And in this just finished campaign, his "I'm pro-life, take it or leave it" stance was used against him and he won big.
Look at what the left want and who the left fear. The left fear Rand Paul and Ted Cruz - young fresh smart charismatic. The left's obsessive over-the-top collective fear and loathing of Ted and Rand should alert us to the fact that young fresh faces are what we need. When Rachel Maddow attempts to destroy - that's our cue.
Anyone know who ran against Chris Christie in NJ? Nobody does because the democrats didn't put up a fight. They know Christie is popular in NJ for various reasons - not all bad, but mostly because he's a rino.
The left see Christie as the opponent they want across from the old tired Queen Benghazi. They want the fat prop.
Another clue? - Christie comes with nasty baggage that is ignored, now, by the mainstream pro-democrat hack press, but will ALL come out when it's time to circle the wagons around Hillary. The left will also push a libertarian candidate in 2106 - watch for that. Notice "green" candidates are no longer on the scene.
Christie is John McCain on donuts. (lol -Bags- good one) and he is the chosen prop the democrats have pre-selected. We should reject that.
deborah said...
I don't think Christie can beat Hillary.
Hillary's chances are very difficult to judge at the moment. She did poorly against Obama in a race that she appeared to have locked up at the start. She is not a natural politician like either Obama or Christie. On the other hand as the first woman presidential candidate she will have a lot of very passionate support.
2106 - 2016.
Lem - Karl Rove can go pound sand. He is the one who is out of touch.
Christie-Susana Martinez in 2016 for the win.
She went to NJ to campaign with him and he ended up with 51% of the Latino vote; in 2009, he got 32% of that vote.
Deborah:
I seldom discuss politics with parishioners. Keep that in mind when I say, I haven't heard any "buzz" in my parish about the 2016 presidential election.
Spanky and Obama was Buckwheat.
Christie is certainly Spanky, but Obama is more Alfalfa.
deborah said...Chick, I agree, it's about 2014, and as ACA unfolds, I'm guessing it will be pretty easy...
Maybe, maybe not. It's cart before horse thing. The 2016 election will be tempered by 2014 no matter what.
I think the left keeps talking up 2016 to get people's minds off a potentially stronger conservative Congress and Senate in 2014. To the extent that Republicans fall for such "we need a savior now," they are playing into the Dem's game (witness ARM and Inga urgent urgings).
Q. What the hell was BHO doing in 2005 (three years before 2008)?
A. He was busy mouthing off against Bush in the Senate.
IMO, any Republican candidate running for anything now has to at least be moving their lips about Obama's lies and promises re ACA or s/he's worth very little.
Christie will throw any social values under the bus in a minute.
Not to defend Christie, but we need to stop looking to the State to defend or even comment on "social values". It's the big-government notion of the State as some sort of morality-protector that will lose elections for so-called conservatives.
I do think that Christie will appeal to many California Independents fed up with Washington politics, but likewise, his nastiest opponents will be California Democrats who will feel existentially threatened by his stance on State Public Employee unions. And they are extremely well-funded.
I don't disagree Palladian. But the thing is Christie will not stand for what he says he does. He will throw the pro-life people under the bus. You know it and I know it.
When he says something I know it what works for him now. When somebody like Rand Paul says something I think he means it.
Plus where is Chris Bag o Donuts on privacy. I bet he will be all for it for a mother aborting a nine month old baby but be perfectly willing to read all your emails and listen to all your phone calls.
I don't see Chris Christie as someone who would stand tall to protect the Constitution.
People are getting pretty fucking fed up with the NE'ern corridor GOP'ers dictating to the rest of the country. Christie has shown himself to not be a conservative regardless of how he thinks he is or characterizes it. He isn't. However, do I think he would have a good chance at winning? Yes and right now, I'd take that over Cankels.
Christie is an infarc in an expensive suit. He'll have health issues during the campaign.
The R bench is decent. Allen West, Scott Walker, Mitch Daniels, Sarah Palin, Niki Haley, etc.
But not Christie. No way.
Ampersand, Lazio reference, love it. That is exactly what I was thinking when I said Hillary would beat him. His bluff pseudo tough-guy act isn't going to work on her. She plays the game too well.
I know ARM, but she's gotten a lot of experience as SecState and played ball with the administration. She's proven herself to be a team player and has presented a softer image. It depends if any new dirt can be dug, or if she makes a huge error in judgement. Or falls again. The wrong kind of fall could put her out of commission. Or if Obama double-crosses her lol.
Thanks, Fr. Fox.
Chick, I get you. Also, yes, I was thinking how well Christie's message would resonate with some voters sick of bloated unions. So how much better would Walker do?
Has he been talking up opposition to ACA? Because you're right. Anyone planning a run should be talking it up.
What has Hillary ever succeeded at? Her primary accomplishment was a failed marriage to a guy who became President. She tried to do healthcare to a major flaming failure. She carpetbagged to Senator in NY and did absolutely nothing there. A failed run at President despite being the overwhelming favorite going in. A disaster at Secretary of State with nearly every relationship now worse, and capping it off by letting brave men die and lying about it afterward. An intelligent, discriminating electorate would have no problem picking Christie over her, but that's why it's a long shot, and girls voting. Women are not the problem, but girls are a big one.
Hillary has succeeded at having ovaries, being a fan of Cloward and Piven and being funded by George Soros and a handful of Arabs.
And leaving good men for dead in Benghazi, her signature achievement.
Meth! You cantankerous contrarian :)
Yes, Haz. There's portly and rotund, but Christie is Chris Farley heavy.
The electorate has a very, very short memory. If the media talk her up, she's probably in.
Maybe I'm the only one who believes it, but I don't think Bill would have made the presidency without her. That's a big deal. She knows politics inside and out. The liberal media is probably going to single-handedly get her elected. UNLESS maybe, they LIKE the other guy better.
I remember Scarborough sitting with a group of guys one morning, including Mike Barnicle. And they were all agreeing that Hillary wasn't likable. But the females journalist will do their damndest.
Can someone explain to me why I should have more faith in Cruz's, Rand Paul's or Rubio's abilities to govern, if elected, than in Obama's when he was elected in 2008? None of these men have particularly deep resumes, and none have executive experience running a large enterprise. Cruz has a bit more high level experience in government than the other two, but hardly anything worth getting excited about.
Right now it sounds like a lot of desire to win for the team. But what happens if you win? Walker, Daniels and even Christie (whom I loathe) actually have experience governing large organizations. They present a much better cast of potential Presidents than the other three.
There should be a an Itrade play on what Christie's weight will be on election night 2016?
What has Hillary ever succeeded at? Her primary accomplishment was a failed marriage to a guy who became President.
These days that makes her over-qualified. It's not at all funny, because it's completely true.
Has he been talking up opposition to ACA?
We weren’t told the truth about ObamaCare: Christie
I have executive experience.
It's impossible for me to cheat on my wife.
Surprisingly, nobody ever died from my incompetence.
I believe in small government.
I'm over 2% pure woman.
My BMI is only 2 digits.
Vote for me.
I am happy America decides.
If America decides, which of course since Democrats cheat is naive, then I hope she decides well.
Ignore the Shaq endorsement at your peril (prognostication-wise) as goes Christie.
Christie had bad press as far as I am concerned. Not endorsing in VA. Being a late prick. Fat and shitting (literally) too much taking up time stinking (literary-wise) up the joint.
Oh yea, and I look equally good in a pants suit or a skirt. Let's see either Christy or Hillary pull that off.
Vote for me.
Nope, you are over-qualified.
Oh yea, and I look equally good in a pants suit or a skirt. Let's see either Christy or Hillary pull that off.
With that you can nail down the cross-dresser vote. And you'll definitely win the porn 'stache vote.
But you're still over-qualified. Can you do something to be a little less competent, so you won't make other recent Presidents look so bad?
"Christy or Hillary"
Ha, that's funny.
"Can you do something to be a little less competent?"
I pledge to show up to all debates high, drunk, or both just to make it fair. I'll go bar hopping with Toronto's mayor so nobody can claim fraud.
I generally dislike those who choose, of all things, to use their smarts towards unsmart endeveavors.
Fools.
Reminds me of me.
Now I really hate 'em.
Thank you "Tombstone."
Not to mention that with his weight and personality the moniker "Fat Bastard" fits a little too perfectly. And unlike Urkel, people will feel free to use it, as fat people are among the few that can still be abused publicly.
I pledge to show up to all debates high, drunk, or both just to make it fair. I'll go bar hopping with Toronto's mayor so nobody can claim fraud.
Alright, I'm sold. You've got my vote.
But you should probably go all the way back to your original bit: naked, drunk and frisky.
I love the Urkel analogy - it just fits:
"Did I do that?"
Once I drunk, naked and frisky usually shows up, invited or not.
And I am referencing perhaps the best blog comment ever, and certainly the best one I ever read.
I don't give a shit - I'll walk right in here butt naked, drunk, and frisky. Where's the jacuzzi?
It was in reference to nothing, as it was the first comment on the thread. Pure genius.
Not that this really matters. It's all slipping away into pure thug tactics from the left. Nothing like the threat of violence to get a point across. Pure brownshirt tactics.
I challenged myself to use "towards" as I typically, some might say sadistically, demand all I read be "toward" and nothing less, saving the world via one less letter wasted has been a motto suggested (by myself?) which having adhered to works.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he manages to alienate a large portion of the Republican primary electorate between now and the start of voting in 2016
He managed to alienate me, and I used to be a fan of his.
He is doing an excellent job of setting himself up as the official party-establishment candidate, though. Rubio blew his chance for that one with the amnesty boondoggle.
Hey - President Stompy Foot has issued an non-apology apology.
No promise that people will get their old policies back.
"We weren't as clear as we could have been"
"If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it. Period."
"I'm sorry if you believed what I said was true."
@Icepick: Re that old Lem thread you linked to at 8:50: It appears to be a very good snapshot of Inga posting as "anonymous" -- inciteful to say the least. Spinelli will enjoy her work.
And Lem, there are some comments there that probably should be deleted.
Icepick, that thread had Crack bagging heavy on Meade, but hasn't Mead bought him off recently? I heard that somewhere.
Icepick, that thread had Crack bagging heavy on Meade, but hasn't Mead bought him off recently? I heard that somewhere.
So it nhas been claimed, by certain race obseesed Yankees I know. (Are there any non-race obsessed Yankees? It's like a chronic health issue with the entire breed.)
Let sleeping dogs lie, EPR.
Michael Haz said...
Hey - President Stompy Foot has issued an non-apology apology.
Comments at the NBC site are brutal as I'm sure they would be anywhere except the Daily Dish and TPM. LOL
Otter explains Obamacare to Flounder.
Let sleeping dogs lie, EPR.
I thought Lem had a policy of deleting things like that. I think even Althouse does.
I would insist Lem delete if Inga ever tried that with me.
100 comments? This thread is getting a little portly.
:) Bago, you can also run on your environmental and gay marriage stances.
Lydia, Martinez looks pretty good. Not too young. Several years as AG. It would be interesting to see her go head to head with Hillary. I see NM accepted medicaid expansion, but I don't know the time-frame. I think they're quite poor.
Too bad you don't have a Barry Goldwater. Rand Paul is likely that candidate but he knows he has to suck the christianist cock, even though he hates the taste....which in the end....won't fly, in the final vote, and with the important states that actually have the populations.
So you will be stuck with fat bastard or ted cruz. Cruz will win in the south and midwest primaries and fat bastard will win in the states with the actual populations...except Texas natch.
Fat Bastard could beat cankles but Cruz could not.
So then what?
tits.
I don't think a gentleman should call Hillary "Fat Bastard", besides that more accurately describes Slick Willie, which was also accurate in the Oval office on Pizza night.
Titus said...
Too bad you don't have a Barry Goldwater. Rand Paul is likely that candidate but he knows he has to suck the christianist cock, even though he hates the taste....which in the end....won't fly, in the final vote, and with the important states that actually have the populations.
So you will be stuck with fat bastard or ted cruz. Cruz will win in the south and midwest primaries and fat bastard will win in the states with the actual populations...except Texas natch.
Fat Bastard could beat cankles but Cruz could not.
So then what?
tits.
I'm going to chirbit this tomorrow along with whatever Titus adds to it.
"Race obsessed?"
Hey I thought we are talking about the Presidential race here. How does that qualify as "race obsessed."
I also think Fat Bastard is inappropriate.
How about Mr. Creosote?
Fat Bastard could beat cankles but Cruz could not.
What about both?
I like Martinez as a VP candidate.
Post a Comment