[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
The Water Cooler Title: Chris Christie, The Ironic Tea Party Idol This is the moment that those who have been dreaming of a Chris Christie presidential campaign have been waiting for. Rick Perry is starting to look like a bust, enthusiasm for Mitt Romney remains minimal at best, none of the other Republican candidates has a prayer, and the GOP nomination -- thanks to the stalled economy and the low Obama approval ratings it has yielded -- is looking more and more valuable. And now Christie is set to deliver a speech at the Reagan Library tonight on "how the United States' role and significance in the world is defined by who we are at home." It comes as top-level GOP donors are turning up the heat on Christie to enter -- and as one of his Republican predecessors in Trenton, former Governor Tom Kean Sr., is saying that "the odds are better now than they were a couple weeks ago" that Christie will be coaxed into a presidential race that, not long ago, he said he'd sooner kill himself than contest. This will probably all blow over, of course. There have been periodic bursts of Christie chatter in the past year and they've all gone nowhere, and there's also no sign that Christie will use tonight's speech to launch a campaign, or even to drop any tantalizing hints about one. There's good reason for all of this. And yet the possibility does exist: What if all of the flattery finally gets to him and he decides to run? What would be most interesting about a Christie candidacy, if one were ever to materialize, is that it would expose something that many of the national conservatives who've been cheering him on have either chosen to ignore or aren't yet aware of: the significant gap between where Christie's record is and where today's GOP base is ideologically. There is plenty of irony here, because Christie is often described as a favorite of the Tea Party movement (which in many ways doubles as the base of the Republican Party). This makes sense, because most national conservatives see Christie mainly as a charismatic Washington outsider who is new to the national stage and who has made real noise -- and scored major victories -- battling public employee unions in a deeply blue Northeast state. He's also pro-life, a rarity for a big-name Republican politician from his neck of the woods. For the average Tea Party activist, there's obvious and powerful appeal in this profile -- especially in comparison to Romney and Perry. But as an actual candidate, Christie's profile would be more fully fleshed out, and his positions and past statements on several issues that matter deeply to national conservatives -- and that have not featured prominently (or at all) in the attention he's received for the past two years -- would come to light. For instance, the right would be forced to grapple with Christie's history on: Immigration : Last year, he lashed out at political leaders who "demagogue" immigration, argued that the issue should be handled by the federal government (and not individual states, like Arizona), and called for a "clear" path to citizenship for illegal immigrants now in the country. He went much farther in 2008, back when he was U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, telling residents at a town meeting that "[b]eing in this country without proper documentation is not a crime" and that his office had no business dealing with illegal immigration cases. Gun control: He ran for governor in 2009 advocating "common sense" gun control and endorsing the state's existing laws, including an assault weapons ban. Christie also played up the assault weapons ban earlier in his career, when he challenged two Republican incumbent state legislators in a primary, attacking them for opposing it. Abortion: Like Romney, Christie was once pro-choice, although his conversion apparently came earlier in his career (after his primary challenge to the GOP state legislators failed in 1995, a result that nearly ended his political career) and wasn't as obviously connected to an electoral motive as Romney's. Muslims: He pointedly distanced himself from national Republicans over the "ground zero mosque" last summer, and made headlines just a few months ago with a rousing defense of a Muslim man he'd appointed to a judgeship in New Jersey -- an appointment that Islamophobic activists on the right had been crying foul over. You can argue that some, if not all, of these things actually make Christie a more attractive as a potential candidate -- but only when it comes to the general election. Within the Republican Party, these positions and past statements spell trouble. And this is hardly a complete list; rest assured that the Romney and Perry campaigns have far more detailed dossiers at the ready. Right now, none of this really matters to national conservatives. But if Christie were to jump in the race? Perry's own example is worth considering here. He was talked up as the ideologically pure alternative to Romney -- the dream candidate the base has been waiting for. But once Perry actually got in, his own liberal immigration history and past support for an HPV vaccine for teenage girls in Texas were blown up by his opponents and the press, putting him on the defensive. And he's still struggling for the right note to strike on both issue. Watching the most recent Republican debate, it was sometimes hard to tell that it was Romney, and not Perry, who's supposed to have the big problem with the GOP base. And it might be even worse for Christie, who would bring more ideological baggage to the race. That said, there's another reason for Perry's struggles, one that may offer Christie a glimmer of hope: He's really bad at explaining himself. Take his statement during last week's debate that those who object to the children of illegal immigrants receiving in-state tuition "don't have a heart." This was needlessly defiant, something that made it much tougher for conservatives who disagree with his policy to give Perry the benefit of the doubt. There's reason to believe that Christie wouldn't make this kind of mistake. He's an uncommonly talented communicator, quick on his feet and adept at fielding any question, no matter how hostile, and shifting the discussion to an area where he's comfortable. You probably wouldn't see him suffer through a moment like this in a debate. So it's at least possible that Christie is a strong enough salesman that he could persuade the right to look the other way when it comes to his various crimes against conservatism. But there's no guarantee it would work out that way, and a decent probability that it wouldn't. Which is just one of the many reasons why Christie's speech tonight is probably not the start of anything bigger, no matter how many Republicans hope that it is -- or think that they hope it is.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 3.
#2. To: Brian S (#0)
Krispy Kreme Christie can jump (or waddle) in if he wants to but his record will drag him down the same way Perry's did and Romney's will. We the People will not let the elites, the MSM, & K Street stick us with another RINO this time, the stakes are too high and we're too organized.
That's why Obama will win a second term.
#4. To: lucysmom (#3)
Obama can do as good of a job at hammering the final coffin nail as Romney.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|