Skip to main content

Chris Christie will be the GOP.  And you are naive to think otherwise.

You can make the argument that tea-party conservatives just won't vote for him in a primary, but in a race with 2-4 solid tea-party candidates, some (Brownback) with money (Koch Bros.) and others who will do or say anything (Cruz, Rand Paul), he doesn't need a majority.

Further, the corporate masters of the GOP, the ones who want Keystone, who want their slice of the pie, will not tolerate losing.  They will back a winner.  And that is what the media have deemed Christie.  Even MSNBC was gushing about his "victory" (despite his making sure he's not on the ballot with Booker).  

And make no mistake, Christie is a true Conservative/tea partier.  He's just smarter and shrewder than some of the others and hides it better.  

More in extended...

History is on the side of Christie being the nominee.  Who have the Republicans nominated the last several election cycles:

2012  Mitt Romney, most moderate-perceived candidate, other than the bland Huntsman, the most moderate candidate in the race.

2008  John McCain, the RINO -- though us progressives know he's quite conservative. Despite his mavericky streak, he is perhaps the best argument for a Christie nomination - - his appearance as a maverick and occassional pragmatism on foreign policy masks a deeply conservative man.

2000 George W Bush - we forget that in 2000, Bush ran on "compassionate" conservatism and traded on his father's moderate legacy.  And in fact, was viewed by progressives as less conservative than McCain, who we knew held some pretty far right positions over the years.  See that trojan horse?

1996  Bob Dole - it was Dole's turn, but Dole, the father of the ADA, Senate compromiser, while conservative was a reasonable guy not at home in today's GOP.  If Dole were governing New Jersey, I'm thinking he'd be a lot like Christie.

1988 - George HW Bush - we forget that Bush on the ticket was Reagan's nod to the moderate wing of the GOP, and in retrospect, he was a lot more moderate than anyone the GOP has produced in a long time.

You get the picture - in the modern, 24 hour news era, the GOP has consistently nominated that candidate the media deemed the most "moderate", whether that was actually true.  It is clear that this is Chris Christie.

And I think anyone who argues otherwise is plain naive.  He is being anointed as we speak.

And I think he is a huge threat to beat Hillary in 2016.


Will Christie be the GOP nominee?

45%74 votes
54%90 votes

| 164 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I agree (8+ / 0-)

    Other GOP candidates (Cruz, Paul, Santorum, etc.) will split the Tea Party vote, and Christie will be left the last man standing. He will be the only (perceived) moderate in the field and will only need 20%-30% of the vote to win in most states.

  •  Probably but he'll lose the GE (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vita Brevis

    And what about Jeb? He might still run.

  •  I think that (7+ / 0-)

    you're likely correct, but naivete is in thinking he's a lock.

    Right now the GOP is suffering from the wounds of an internal civil war between the Tea Party and the establishment, one that was only seeing small skirmishes in 2012 -- and it's not clear the establishment will be the victor.

    It's very clear that Christie is the establishment's preferred candidate. And it's also very clear that in the 2012 cycle many Tea Party candidates were nominated over establishment favorites -- and those candidates had a very poor record of winning elections. (Akin, Mourdock, etc.) However, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul remain in the Senate and hold impressive amounts of power among the GOP caucus in both houses, keeping 'establishment' representatives like Boehner and Cantor under their thumbs.

    And AFP and the Koch brothers are seeking to punish those GOP Senators and Congressmen who had the affrontery to vote to end the shutdown.

    If the Tea Party triumphs in this civil war, Christie will not be the nominee.

    If Rand Paul is brought down by this plagiarism scandal, his supporters may coalesce around the unelectable Ted Cruz, and Christie may not survive the nomination process.

    And of course, there are hints of some very unpleasant skeletons in Christie's walk-in closet, if the stories coming out of the Romney camp regarding his vetting process are any indication.

    There are WAY too many variables to be certain of Christie's nomination, and it's certainly not naive to recognize that. It is, in fact, naive to think otherwise.

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 07:59:44 AM PST

  •  If they are smart they will go with (3+ / 0-)

    Christie, but I think we can beat him just as well as anyone else they put up. Failing that, I think they find a saner candidate than the Tea Partiers can provide.

    Cruz and Paul will self-destruct before the primaries even get going, IMO. Those are two fatally flawed clowns.

    Guns are never the principal in the commission of a crime, but they are usually an accomplice

    by MadGeorgiaDem on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:01:06 AM PST

  •  He may well be (13+ / 0-)

    But you're naive (or maybe 'narcissistic' better describes it) to think you know, three years out, who will be the nominee.

    Christie certainly fits the pattern of recent GOP nominees in some regards. But so does Rick Santorum. And, to a somewhat lesser extent, Jeb Bush.

    But I won't elaborate, since you're a clairvoyant genius who already has it all figured out.

  •  You're basing future on the past (13+ / 0-)

    If this was the same old GOP I'd say people will fall in line and be good little diddys, swallowing pride and give it to Christie.

    But Im not so sure whatever the GOP is now will still follow those rules. Christie will have to fight very very hard and much will happen.

  •  Romney is an interesting case: (3+ / 0-)

    he spent most of his energies flipping back and forth between crazy rightwinger and reasonable moderate.  He had to denounce his own policies as a result.  Maybe a moderate will win the nom, but he's going to have to deny his moderation.  And being from New Jersey, basically.

    Besides, the real issue is, what states can Christie bring?  He's not going to turn NY or PA or DE red.  

    "One faction of one party in one House of Congress in one branch of government doesn't get to shut down the entire government just to refight the results of an election."

    by Inland on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:04:42 AM PST

  •  Shades of Rick Snyder here in Michigan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Snyder won the GOP Gubernatorial nomination with only 36% of the vote. Seriously.

    It was 4-way split (technically 5 ways, but Tom George was essentially a nonfactor) between Snyder, Mike Bouchard, Mike Cox & Pete Hoekstra.

    Snyder: 36.3%
    Cox: 23%
    Bouchard: 12.2%
    George: 1.6%

    I could easily see similar numbers for Christie against Paul, Cruz, Jeb, etc.

  •  for a moment there i read this (5+ / 0-)
    And I think he is a huge threat to beat Hillary in 2016

    And I think he is a huge threat to eat Hillary in 2016

    not sure which i more likely

  •  sigh (13+ / 0-)

    I skipped to the bottom of this ONOEZ-a-thon to make one point:

    Those of us who are clearly naive and need your enlightenment to help us see the world are not actually doubting Christie will be the nominee.

    The point is that after the bruising primary with hard core base-inciting tea-baggers Christie will be forced to go so far right all while on the National Stage as to wound him for the general.

    Romney was the "anointed one" with all the money in 2012.  And he won, as you point out.  But the Romney that emerged from the primary was not the moderate reasonable credible-threat Romney that came out of Massachusetts and the Salt Lake City Olympics.

    McCain was anointed in 2008- the year being described as "his time".  The McCain walked through the primary too easily and ceded the spotlight to the dramatic Democratic Primary.  In order to win this back and rally the base he had to veer so far right into uncharted Palinesque territory as to be utterly unrecognizable as the respectable political-mould-breaking war hero to the point where "Maverick" and "Mavericky" are now used pejoratively.

    Also, if we get Hillary, the political battlegrounds change.  HRC puts the GOP on the Defense in places like Texas and Arkansas.  Is Christie their best weapon against that?  Christie would run well against Dukakis or Kerry.  You are right.  But the only way they have to fight HRC would be to incite the base to levels we have not yet seen.

    Its needs to be China-White pure pharmaceutical grade Clinton-Hate mixed with racist misogyny wrapped in Obamascare draped with Benghazi topped with sexist Lewinsky references and served up piping hot EVERYDAY.

    Paul could do it.  Rubio could have it done for him.  Cruz could do it without trying.  Christie is not their gladiator in that arena and the primaries are going to be ugly for him.

    Good times ahead.  I am looking forward to it.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:05:15 AM PST

  •  No way (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, kcc, Aquarius40, newdem1960, SamSinister

    1. He treated Obama with respect in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. To us that's no big deal, but to a VERY large portion of the GOP electorate that's absolutely unforgivable.

    2. His record on gay rights, while just-okay from our point of view, is also unforgivable for the Taliban wing.

    3. It's not his turn. The Republicans always nominate a candidate with some plausible claim to "it's my turn". The only exception was 2000, and then Bush had the once-in-a-lifetime advantage of being the son of the last Republican president, plus the guy who really was next in line, Dan Quayle, was an exceptionally terrible candidate. There are a few different potential candidates who can claim the it's-my-turn mantle in 2016 - Rick Santorum is my guess for the one with the strongest claim - but Christie is not among them.

    4. Far less important than all the rest, but his being from the East Coast is probably a net negative on top of everything else.

    Certaines personnes disent qu'il y a une femme à blâmer, Mais je sais que c'est ma faute sacrément.

    by RamblinDave on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:05:32 AM PST

    •  But don't forget (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the GOP bigwigs tried to recruit Christie to run in the 2012 cycle.

      Christie refused.

      So Christie has as much of a claim to "it's my turn" as anyone else...even Jeb Bush.

    •  Oh goody, it's Santorum's turn (4+ / 0-)

      I suspect the rest of the nation is not ready to turn the clock back to 1320.

      “Americans are fighters. We're tough, resourceful and creative, and if we have the chance to fight on a level playing field, where everyone pays a fair share and everyone has a real shot, then no one - no one - can stop us. ”-- Elizabeth Warren

      by Positronicus on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:17:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Positronicus, RamblinDave

        Christie will have to win some primaries and caucuses before he gets the nomination.  Which ones?

        I see the calendar being more advantageous to other candidates.  That Iowa caucus could be improved for Santorum over 2012 when he won it in a squeaker (albeit belatedly announced).

        Santorum is what the groundlings in the Repug party want.  Let 'em have it!

        •  New Hampshire perhaps (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          He'd need to spend some serious time in Iowa, while still be governor of NJ, which I just don't see happening. Santorum seems to faring very poorly in opinion polls of likely Republican '16 voters, but I think he's got an advantage in Iowa to get a plurality for first place. I hate to put t this way, but Ryan would knock C C right out of it on looks, naïve to think that wouldn't be a huge factor. I keep hearing about Rand Paul, but there seems to be little "there" there, beyond making speeches to far right audiences? Based on what I've seen as of right now (anyone else remember President Giuliani?), I'd put my stake on a Christie - Cruz showdown, with Cruz winning; his American citizen mother will trigger an "I qualify for the job, sue me if you don't think so!" situation. No one will.

      •  Santorum has the opposite problem of Christie. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Losty, RamblinDave

        Upthread I suggested Jeb Bush could claim both his turn and reasonably electable, but Christie could only claim the latter.  Likewise Santorum could only plausibly claim the former.

    •  Christie also has the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Be Skeptical, Losty

      advantage of being quite well known nationally. He won't need an election cycle to introduce himself to the party.

    •  They USUALLY vote for "next in line" (0+ / 0-)

      But it may be different this time.  I don't think anyone from 2012 is really seen by them as viable. Santorum? No, they are not that stupid.

      •  I think they ARE that stupid (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SamSinister, RamblinDave

        but polls indicate that he gets a poor reception as a return candidate, which kind of puzzles me but there it is.

        •  Remember 2008 (0+ / 0-)

          McCain was essentially in the same position Santorum is in now, and he looked weak at the outset but caught fire just in time.

          As for Chris Christie, let's remember what happened to NJ's last Republican governor. The DC establishment and the press absolutely adored her...but no one else did.

          Certaines personnes disent qu'il y a une femme à blâmer, Mais je sais que c'est ma faute sacrément.

          by RamblinDave on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 04:20:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Will believe it when Karl starts funding him. (4+ / 0-)

    You may be right, but already there are attempts to knock it down/out.

    They know they've got to hit hard and early.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:07:01 AM PST

  •  You also assume Hillary will be our nominee (5+ / 0-)

    Will Democratic primary voters hand over our party to yet another friend of the plutocracy, after years of falling wages and income inequality?  Remains to be seen, but she won't be getting my primary vote.

    Christie has a hair trigger temper and I think his bullying and badgering will grow very old during the GOP primaries and unacceptable during the GE.  He may get the nomination but he's not a lock to win it all.

    you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

    by Dem Beans on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:07:39 AM PST

    •  Are there any plausible possible Dem candidates (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dem Beans, aggieric

      for prez in 2016 who are not friends of the plutocracy?  I favored Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008 because I felt she was too tied to corporate interests.  I soon found out that so was BO.  

      That said, I do think that Hillary is our best bet for 2016.  And, I don't think that Christie's belligerent bullying and bellowing in a general election showdown with HRC would go over well with the female population.  Too many females get enough of that at home, where they may be too intimidated to fight back.  So, they may decide to take it out at the polls.  Including downtrodden, cowed GOP women.

      •  Elizabeth Warren. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Losty, awcomeon, my2petpeeves

        Hillary may be our best bet, what so what?  If economic conditions don't change we're screwed as a nation.

        I favored Obama in 2008 for the same reason, and good god.  It turned out to be no choice at all.

        you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

        by Dem Beans on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 10:24:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I love Warren but (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          awcomeon, Jeremimi

          She's not a good general election candidate

        •  Senators Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth (0+ / 0-)

          Warren would be my dream candidate(s).  However, I doubt that either of them will run.  If they did, the msm would begin tarring him/her immediately as a "left-wing" extremist, while hourly anointing "moderates" (hah!) like Chris Christie and Jeb Bush.  

          I wonder how thoroughly they will "expose" the bully from NJ's skeletons in his closet.  I despise our lame-stream national media.

      •  Gillibrand, O'Malley and Cuomo (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        awcomeon, SamSinister, Dem Beans

        Cuomo will have problems with factions of the party base.  O'Malley may not be exciting enough.

        I'm predicting Gillibrand vs. Rubio.  Because their respective fundamentals are the strongest for their party and I don't chase passing fads.

        First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

        by Cream Puff on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 11:22:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I like Gillibrand, don't know much about O'Malley, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cream Puff

          (need to learn more), and am beginning to increasingly dislike Cuomo.  I think Gillibrand could win against Rubio.  Hope you're right.

        •  Cuomo makes Romney seem likeable (0+ / 0-)

          You seem to be a bit northeast centric there.  Most Americans haven't heard of any of them.  

          What you really need is a candidate that will run strong in the Midwest swing states.  What about Brown?  No state more important than Ohio.

          •  Brown is great (0+ / 0-)

            One of the best and most valuable Senators we have.  I think he'd make a good president.  I don't however, think he could win the primary or the general.  He just lacks the national profile, singature appeal and possibly retail skills (note: his retail skills and economic knowledge worked on me when I heard him live, but I'm not a typical voter). Since he's so valuable in the Senate, I'd rather he stay there.

            I think it's simply a coincidence that 3 of the 4 possible heavyweights are from NY and that all are from the Northeast.  I'm not a regionalist; If there's somebody better from elsewhere I'm all ears.  I've heard good things about the Udalls and the Castros but don't know enough about them to form an opinion for 2016.

            First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

            by Cream Puff on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 06:44:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nobody comes close to Hillary. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jeremimi, Check077

      She is extremely popular in the party, even among many who favored Obama in 2008.  The more open question is will she run, but if she does the nomination is hers for the asking even more so than it supposedly was in 2008.

  •  What is it about prognostication that it has so (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raptavio, gramofsam1, tardis10

    many adherents?

  •  Way too early to know. (9+ / 0-)

    Rs are a southern party.  The emdia has annointed Chritie, but the Cruz wing will not.   After so many RINO (from the tea party perspective), they will fight hard to defeat Christie.

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:09:31 AM PST

  •  Depends. If there is not (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darmok, raptavio

    the gaggle of far-righters that there were last year, and the right unites around one candidate (eg Ted Cruz), then Christie doesn't have a chance, particularly if Jeb also gets in.  Christie's only chance for the nomination is if he is the only perceived "moderate" in the field, and there are alot of firebreathing assholes.  That was the scenario that Romney threaded last year.

    With the Decision Points Theater, the George W. Bush Presidential Library becomes the very first Presidential Library to feature a Fiction Section.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:11:53 AM PST

  •  I suspect you underestimate how much (14+ / 0-)

    they hate him for touching the black guy.

    Also, skeletons are going to come tumbling out of that closet in ways we've not seen in quite a while.

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

    by dhonig on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:11:56 AM PST

  •  Not only can Christie win the nomination (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Be Skeptical, Losty

    If he defeats the Tea Party he'll be ideally positioned to run as a moderate in the general election.  I think he could run well in the northern Midwest just as he has in New Jersey.  Lots of the same kind of Democrats in the Midwest.  

    Christie knows how to talk the talk to the middle aged middle class.  Does Hillary still remember we're out here?

  •  tea partiers might (0+ / 0-)

    split the vote of the conservatives. But won't other moderate republican entries do the same to Christie?

    Too early to assume that it'll be him alone against a gaggle of similar candidates.

  •  I would be fine with that. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I don't think he wears well, which is a double bind for him. His reputation is for being pugnacious and insulting, which attracts some people but repels others. If he softens his approach all the mouth breathers will complain that he's "lost his edge" is selling out, etc.

    Here's my fearless prediction. I think a lot of TPers like Cucchinelli and will encourage him to go ahead and run for President even though he didn't prevail in the Governor's race. He likes to skip steps and leap frog anyway, what's he got to lose? I encourage him, because the more TPers the better for dragging the Repubs to the far right and making sure that one of their number gets the nomination this time. I simply do not think the TP wing will sit quietly for another Romney/Christie type when they collectively think this is their moment.

    How about a Cruz/Cucchinelli ticket? Sorry Marco, Sorry Chris, sorry Rand, sorry Jeb, sorry Paul, even you guys have too much of a sanity veneer. The Repub base WANTS someone without the veneer to "tell it like it is".

    The Ron Paul "nullification" references were the first notes of an entirely crazy primary season and general election for the Repubs where they will just let it all hang  out finally.

    “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

    by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:15:53 AM PST

  •  Oh, I'll definitely be revisiting this diary for (7+ / 0-)

    a laugh in a couple of years.

  •  2008 Giuliani (9+ / 0-)

    More than a year before the 2008 election, McCain wasn't the likely nominee (in the eyes of national media), Giuliani was. Big money and the media were behind G, not McCain. G ended up getting 3% of the vote in the Iowa caucus.

    •  New Jersey isn't New York (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stude Dude

      Christie looks like a guy who eats food served on a stick (state fair reference there).  Giuliani acts like someone who knows what's good for you and the last thing people in the Midwest want is someone from New York telling them what's good for them (note to Hiillary better watch that).  

    •  And the media kept trying to make him happen! (4+ / 0-)

      I remember when he would campaign in a state for a while, his poll numbers would tank, and he'd give up and pull out of the state and act like he meant to do that.  His campaign finally tried to say that they were putting all of their effort into Florida, and then Giuliani would ride that momentum to victory in all of the primaries after that.    

      What the hell?  So giving up on states he can't win -- which were, before Florida, all of them -- would lead to victory?  

      And the TV talking heads kept trying to say it was a brilliant strategy!  

      Then he lost Florida too.  

      Good times.

    •  Precisely. And that was DECEMBER 2007 aka 2015 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, dufffbeer

      What's naive is to think ANYBODY "will" be the nominee for either party this far out. It's not just naive but borderline delusional.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

      by anastasia p on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:10:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well somebody has to be (0+ / 0-)

        At this point in 2005 it wouldn't have been hard to predict it would be one of Edwards, Obama or Clinton.  Those wild swings in the months preceding Iowa are usually just generic caucusgoers catching on to what DKos junkies have been seeing in the candidates for 6 months.

        The GOP field seems more wide open now but they're traditionally much more predictable.

        The R front 3 will be Perry, Christie and Rubio.  Paul may emulate his dad's high floor and low ceiling, but he's not going anywhere.  Cruz's unlikeability and needless antagonism will sink him quickly, probably before the first primary (if he chooses to get in).

        I'd bet even money on Hillary Clinton not running, for somewhat complicated reasons.  If that's the case, we've got Gillibrand, O'Malley and Cuomo.

        First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

        by Cream Puff on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 11:32:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Did the national media ever explain... (0+ / 0-) they thought the candidate of New York's Liberal Party (yes, that's Giuliani) was going to win a national GOP primary?  
      I honestly don't remember any sensible pundit suggesting that he had much of a chance at all, unless he reversed course on pretty much every issue.

  •  Yep, insult in the headline (6+ / 0-)

    You probably thought it was such a clever way to get people to be receptive to your point.

    Seriously though, if you can't accurately predict/anticipate how your own diary would be received, I'm not sure how much weight we should assign to your 2016 prediction.

  •  Well, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice, kcc

    Not that I disagree, but there is still a lot of time between now and the end of the primaries for 2014.  A lot can happen.

    And Christie has to survive that primary.  Mitt did it, but pretty much just because he was the "Last Man Standing" after the spectacular flame-outs of each of the other candidates.  Imagine if the primaries had been held while Bachmann was on the upswing, or Cain?  For a brief time, each of those other candidates was ascendant.

    Time will tell.

    •  I think 2012... (0+ / 0-)

      ...was the perfect example of the GOP coming around.  Every recent cycle we have predictions that the GOP will nominate a wingnut who appeals to the rabid base, but every time the forces in the party that actually want a chance of winning the general prevail.

  •  More than ever The R Party is the Southern party (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wilderness voice, BadKitties

    Youre suggesting large numbers of the South of the Mason Dixon Line crowd will vote for someone they'll view as just another rude big city Yankee. They wont trust him to represent their genteel 'values' (rancid racism, sexism, homophobia, you know the drill) and wont vote for him.

  •  The only part of this I agree with is in a general (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice

    CC would stand a good shot of defeating HC.
    But we arent ever going to know.

  •  He couldn't get through the vetting process (6+ / 0-)

    for VP. His skeletons-in-the-closet will be fodder for the Tea Party. He's reached his high water mark.

    I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

    by jhecht on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:27:02 AM PST

  •  Said the same about Giuliani (3+ / 0-)

    Remember America's Mayor?  Yeah, neither does the Republican Party.  I'll give you a hint:  "A noun, a verb, and 9/11."  

    If I had to bet money, I'd say Christie won't be the nominee.

    •  The TEAA+ party is convinced that "moderates" (0+ / 0-)

      have been their downfall they will fight Christie but will goose-step in line and vote for him.  I think Mitt lost votes for being Mormon. ...Christie won't have that problem.

      "Republicans are the party that says that government doesn't work, then they get elected and prove it."-- PJ O'Rourke

      by nocynicism on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 10:11:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Although I see where you're coming from, I think the number of votes Romney lost for being a Mormon will probably be equalled, or exceeded, by the number of votes Christie will lose for publicly praising Obama.  The tea party voters might fall into line if he's the nominee -- but I think it's highly doubtful that he'll be the nominee.

        This reminds me of the hype surrounding Rick Perry -- the press thought him getting into the race would be a huge deal, but he flamed out pretty quickly.  Christie is smarter than Perry (a crumpled Snickers wrapper is smarter than Rick Perry), but he has too many issues and I think primary opponents will latch onto them and beat him over the head with them.    

        He's a big guy with a larger-than-life personality, and that makes for good TV.  But although the media loves that, it's not good for ratings if the nomination is locked up too quickly.  And a good, nasty, drawn-out fight is good TV too.  I think they'll build Christie up from now until enough other candidates jump into the race, but then they'll help knock him back down once the other primary candidates have drawn too much blood.  

  •  I agree. Just as Romney was the nom last time.... (0+ / 0-)

    ..the seeming only adult in the room during the primaries. Of course, Richie Icognito is an adult as well, so that adult stuff only goes so far....

    Please know I am not rude. I cannot rec anything from this browser. When I rec or post diaries I am a guest at some exotic locale's computer. Ayn is the bane!

    by Floyd Blue on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:29:09 AM PST

  •  As of today, no doubt he's the likely nominee (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice, nocynicism, Losty

    but meh.

    He's in the same sinking boat McCain and Mittens were and actually I think in a worse position.

    The Republican clown car that is the GOP primaries will only have more passengers. Christie will either have to disavow all of the Tea Party extremism or participate in what is sure to be some memorable debate moments that will make the 2012 debates look like a snoozefest.

    And if he prevails, then what? He'll have to backtrack on everything he'll have said to get him there. I can't wait to see his temper explode. Not Presidential by a mile.

    We view "The Handmaid's Tale" as cautionary. The GOP views it as an instruction book.

    by Vita Brevis on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:31:23 AM PST

  •  And he'll lose the general (0+ / 0-)

    If GOP is still running on "repealing Obamacare".

    1. Books are for use.

    by looty on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:38:59 AM PST

  •  Over it! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice

    The pre-anointing predictions "Our Official Candidates", complete with scolding sanctimony, really needs to cease.

    It's a lot of things, but I'll be polite and simply call it unhelpful, whether it's run here or anywhere else.


    This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

    by lunachickie on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:40:41 AM PST

  •  Christie nomination is worst case for Dems, so (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Be Skeptical, Stude Dude, Jerry056, Losty

    it's best to be prepared for it.

    This preparation should have started a year ago, but better late than never.

    •  Hmm. (0+ / 0-)

      Christie might be a lock for the angry white male vote if he can spin the "Eeek he touched a black fake President!" thing, but even if he could, that's not enough anymore.  And I wouldn't be surprised if he alienated his donors eventually.  (He strikes me as being nobody's puppet, which would be a good thing, but in his case it just means he's come to his asshole-ness all on his own.)

      As others have said, the guy's got too many skeletons in his closet.

      I'd argue that a Huntsman-type, "reasonable"-seeming Republican would be a worst case for Dems.  Of course, he'd never make it out of the primaries.  

      That's not to say we shouldn't be prepared for every eventuality -- we should be prepared for everyone from Huntsman to Christie to Jeb Bush to Barbara Bush to any Palin -- Sarah, Bristol, Truck, or Michael -- to Richie Incognito to Ted Nugent.  But let's not work ourselves into a panic either.

      Besides, how do you know the preparation didn't start a year ago?

  •  States with open primaries will help Christie (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    That includes a lot of the big delegate and more politically moderate states.  It won't be a pure Teapartier GOP that will cast ballots.

  •  Freepers already shouting that they'll (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stude Dude, SamSinister

    stay home if Christie is GOP nominee in 2016. They're saying that they will only vote for Palin or Cruz, and that "We need to get behind Cruz NOW."

    FWIW. There's a lot of hatred over there for Christie, as well as what they're calling "GOP-e." (Establishment)

    But I don't think they have the numbers to successfully elevate Palin or Cruz to the nomination, much less the White House. They just make a lot of noise.

    "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." -Susan B. Anthony

    by BadKitties on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:49:30 AM PST

  •  Can he pull in "Christie Democrats" nationwide? (0+ / 0-)

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:49:39 AM PST

    •  Hopefully not, if his pro-life, anti-LGBT, and (0+ / 0-)

      other "conservative values" are brought up repeatedly. He DID try to defund Planned Parenthood, didn't he? All this election coverage is getting blurred together :(

      "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." -Susan B. Anthony

      by BadKitties on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:55:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  christie is a real threat (4+ / 0-)


    something about him is appealing and once he loses weight, he will be more appealing

    i am a native of new jersey.  i get him in some way i can't describe.

    he will be harder to beat than people think.

    •  agree (4+ / 0-)

      GOPers fall in line, whatever differences the party is struggling with, once they have a nominee they will get behind the pick and stick with it. there will be noise on the fringe, but not much more than that.

      the thing you "like" about Christie is the willingness not to back down from a fight. voters in both parties respond to that, and Obama's choice not to strike that pose earlier on in his administration is one of the reasons some progressives got frustrated with him. he improved on that score during the last shutdown fight, but made a mistake in not doing it from the begining, especially with the stimulus as his first action as president.

      but lets remember something, HRC is not exactly one to back down either. if she can demonstrate that toughness, tie Christie to the extreme nonsese of the GOP and force him to either defend it or run from it, if she can eloquently defend the Obama legacy as something worth continuing, she can run on her own immense experience as the clear best choice.

      Christie is a possible threat because he's the only GOPer that HRC doesn't destroy in the general. for that reason alone the GOP establishment will make sure he gets the nomination. if by chance they go with Cruz and some nutbag as his VP pick, it will be Goldwater '64 all over again.  

      •  i think he has that ny/nj directness (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        we don't have time to pussy foot around.

        hence, he said to the rethugs after hugging obama: hey, this was just the thing to do under the circumstances, so shut your pie hole.  

        we like that.  don't waste my time with bull.  get to the point.

        •  exactly (0+ / 0-)

          there is a chance that his style won't play well in other parts of the country----there is a reasons that NYC area candidates haven't been going very far in this process in a while.

          my big question is what is his issue---what does he run on? does he trot out the usual GOP crap that rich people taxes have to be cut and therefor lets cut Soc Sec & Medicare? what does he try to do with Obamacare? does he join the repeal crowd? does he hire Bush 2 people to advise him on foreign policy? does he claim that Obama and Clinton haven't done enough to set up war with Iran?

          if he does he's Mitt Romney all over again. if he really has a policy/political break with the things that have defined the GOP, it will be interesting to see how things play out on the GOP side. whatever excitement they may have about him right now could disappate very quickly when he tries to get GOP voters to accept that they have been wrong on a lot of issues.

    •  And I'd guess the reason you get him (0+ / 0-)

      plays pretty much the same from Pennsylvania through Iowa.  He's got a way of saying what people think needs to be said even if they don't agree with his policy positions.  As 100% fed up with Congress and Washington as people are today, an outsider has an advantage.  I can't say how people are going to react if they see more of Hillary again.  They may like her or they may rethink and say "Oh, no, not more of that same old same old Washington b.s.".

  •  Actually, history says it will be Santorum (0+ / 0-)

    Every nominee you list came in 2nd in the previous open GOP primary, except for George W Bush.

  •  3rd Party Alternative (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aquarius40, Losty

    If Christie does in fact get the nomination then I would lay odds on a well funded, far right 3rd party candidate.  The good thing is it would only hurt the R's as they would split that vote.  TPs won't go away and they have funding to cause chaos if nothing else.

  •  Beware to neolib Dems who try to help him (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Grabber by the Heel

    They will face the wrath of their party's base.  

    Any neolib Dems who think kissing Christie's arse is a good idea had better forget it.  

    This election was another example of how Blue Dog/Corporate Dems are continuing to fail and are weakening the party.   Terry Mac's squeaker in VA is proof voters are fed up with corporate control of government.

    If cutting Social Security & Medicare benefits for low income seniors is what Democrats do after they win a budget standoff, I'd hate to see what they do after they lose one.

    by Betty Pinson on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:02:17 AM PST

  •  I tend to agree (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    though his record and any skeletons in his closet are going to get at least a little more scrutinized than they have been.  

    But he has a quality that a lot of people like (even though many don't) that I think is a problem for Hillary. He comes across as real and passionate about his stances, which is ironic because he is in every way a typical politician in strategy and tactics.  To me, Hillary often comes off as too scripted and measured when she speaks.   Maybe she'll correct that between now and when she really starts running, but it will not be easy for her as that's just not her personality, and it most definitely is his (that in-your-face, straight-talk express stuff).

    Right now, Christie is the media's Obama on the right.  Just look at last night's coverage which spent less time on the re-election and more on his 2016 prospects.  The media was accused of glossing over Obama's qualifications and record during 2008.  Similarly, the media has been very easy on Christie's record in NJ as well (as that backhanded NJ newspaper endorsement of him showed) so it will be interesting to see if they turn on him now that he's off to the races or if the love affair continues.

  •  I agree 100%..... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and you know what, he's got a lot more charm than Hillary when he chooses not to be a bully.

    Any way you slice it, it will be Wall Street (R) versus Wall Street (D), and if you think worker rights and standard of living matter... then as they say in NJ  fegettaboutid!

  •  Christie will be the one who wins the primary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    He will eventually turn up the rhetoric on the dems and all the hand wringing over the hug he gave Obama will go away. Christie is a repugnant man and eventually the tea party folks will coalesce around him. The tea party in my opinion has been shown that they are no longer truly in control. They are going to want to back someone who can win so  they can turn and say "he won because of us.” They don’t want to  lose the little clout that remains.  

  •  history is on the side of Christie, (0+ / 0-)

    after two terms of Wilson, the nation went to Harding, Coolidge and Hoover- similar trend likely after Obama.

  •  I think Christie will be the nominee (0+ / 0-)

    But his mouth may torpedo him.

    He is likely to lose his temper on camera and self-sabotage.

  •  My guess is that it'll be Michael Bloomberg. (0+ / 0-)

    Governors tend to be winners and NYC Mayor counts.

    He'll be tough to beat.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site