Skip to main content

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (L) speaks at a campaign rally with Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in Exeter, New Hampshire January 8, 2012.   REUTERS/Brian Snyder
For New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, these were the good old days
The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll brings more bad news for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, starting with a whopping 12-point deficit in a hypothetical matchup with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whom he trails by a 53-41 margin.

At the core of Christie's problem is that his calling card—his appeal outside the Republican base—is vanishing.

More Democrats now view Christie unfavorably than favorably, with independents divided. Republicans, meanwhile, have a lukewarm opinion, with 43 percent viewing him favorably and 33 percent unfavorably. Overall, 35 percent of Americans see him favorably and 40 percent unfavorably.
It would be bad enough for Christie if he'd merely lost his appeal to Democrats and independents, but the fact that the GOP base remains lukewarm on him is especially bad news. If there's any sort of silver lining it's that among Republicans, he's clinging to third place for the 2016 nomination with 12 percent support, trailing Paul Ryan (20 percent) and Jeb Bush (18 percent). Nonetheless, there isn't much separating him from Ted Cruz (12 percent), Rand Paul (11 percent), or Marco Rubio (10 percent).

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton remains in a commanding position, leading a Democratic primary with 73 percent compared with 12 percent for Vice President Joe Biden and 8 percent for Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Back to Christie, it's worth remembering that this new poll isn't an outlier. In the past two weeks alone:

  1. NBC released a poll showing New Jersey Christie losing by 13 points to Hillary Clinton, a drop of 10 points in just one month
  2. The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll showed Christie's net favorability rating in his home state had fallen by 25 points from November
  3. And yet another NBC poll (this one conducted with The Wall Street Journal) showed Christie's net favorability rating dropping 23 points on a national basis.

Christie's central problem is that his claim to the Republican nomination was the claim that he had crossover appeal, but all these polls put the lie to that claim. Without a real strong base of a support within the GOP itself, that puts him in no man's land. Unless he can figure out a way to magically reestablish that appeal—or he faces a field as weak as the one Mitt Romney faced in 2012—Christie's national ambitions are doomed.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
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

  •  Finding out that his "crossover appeal" was based (18+ / 0-)

    on kneecapping would tend to make him less popular.

    “The future depends entirely on what each of us does every day.” Gloria Steinem

    by ahumbleopinion on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:13:45 AM PST

  •  Not a good look for Republicans (13+ / 0-)

    I think 2016 might be the swan dive off the balcony for that party on a national level. This level of implosion is beyond spectacular.

    "I hear you talk, but I don't hear you speak" - Sum 41

    by BigRedBlackGuy on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:13:56 AM PST

    •  And it's not even just the people imploding (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hawkseye, a2nite, SweetMartha

      The complete set of things that they've been running on is imploding. At the next election they're not going to be able to run against:

      Obamacare - Because far too many people will have coverage through it, and telling people that the Republicans will remove their healthcare will be a seriously bad strategy.

      Presidentin' while black - Obama isn't going to be running for election again, so their main rallying call of 'stop Obama' isn't going to get many votes.

      Climate change - It's been frigging snowing in South Carolina and Florida. Even the rednecks will have to admit that the climate is seriously screwy.

      Apart from guns for everyone, forced birthing and tax cuts, I can't think of any other policies that the Republicans are actually for. So we're probably going to see a lot more focus on those for at least the 2014 elections, if not 2016 as well.

      Good, quick, cheap. Choose two.

      by Danack on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 10:36:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Stick a fork in him (5+ / 0-)

    Next!

    "Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?" - General Jack D. Ripper

    by wilder5121 on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:14:00 AM PST

  •  power corrupts (4+ / 0-)

    and absolute power corrupts absolutely, case in point the christie admin, the bigger they are the harder they fall.

    save america defeat all republicans and conservatives

    •  Yeah, well.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nocynicism
      ....the bigger they are the harder they fall.
      Remember Humpty-Dumpty.
      Never knew Humpty's home state was NJ.

      I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

      by Lilyvt on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:38:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Awesome news, thanks Jed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXdem, TomP, MadGeorgiaDem

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:18:54 AM PST

  •  Wait 'til his own party rips him apart in the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RepackRider, TXdem, MadGeorgiaDem

    primaries.  Watch that support from the base evaporate even more.

    •  A point I have also made (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TXdem

      No way he will ever face a Democrat in an election that requires him to win a primary.  The most inept GOP politician in the world would drive a truck through the openings Christie has provided.

      Orwell was an optimist.
      My Home Page

      by RepackRider on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:26:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Doubtful he'll even run (4+ / 0-)

      I don't see how he would survive the primaries.  He has no easy path to run to the far right, the way Romney was able to do to an extent.  Not exactly strongly religious, at least outwardly, does not invoke God in his speeches a lot,  for his state he supports a form of "amnesty" on Immigration which is the right-wing's litmus test du jour nowadays.  Also, iffy statements and policy decisions on a host of right-wing favorites, like abortion, marriage equality, etc.   Then you have the "hug and embrace" and the more partisan makeup of early primaries going for others would likely spell the end of him moving forward.  

      Of course, the unmasking of Christie as nothing but a corrupt politicians who rewards his cronies and punishes adversaries with abandon, which is the complete opposite of what he was trying to portray himself as, would make me WANT him to survive the primaries and represent the GOP in the general election.  Nothing like having a boorish, angry, vindictive, corrupt white guy going for the presidency against the first woman president in the country's history.  

    •  The fact we're even discussing Christie candidacy (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      merrywidow, Mogolori

      is disturbing. If he were a Democrat, he would have been hounded out of office by the local and national media by now, and his numbers would be in the toilet. Bet there are Democrats in NJ who still support him.

  •  He's done (7+ / 0-)

    I'm wondering if he will even survive his term as governor much less make a run for president.

  •  It's hard to know who is smiling wider, Hillary or (9+ / 0-)

    those in the GOP clown car.  Rand Paul may be in near incontinence mode because of his suppressed euphoria.

    Building a better America with activism, cooperation, ingenuity and snacks.

    by judyms9 on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:24:00 AM PST

  •  2016: another flavor-of-the month race for GOP? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXdem, a2nite, TomP, aaraujo, Aunt Pat

    the 2012 GOP presidential primary campaign was stunning in its weakness...with Republicans so appalled at its candidates that it begged for a new candidate every month...and when that candidate joined...they kept begging for someone else.

    It seemed that Republicans had a new frontrunner every month last time around (Romney, then Gingrich, then Bachmann, then Cain, then Santorum).

    It's beginning to look like "deja vu all over again" for 2016.

    Already, Republicans have had their first "saviour" fall flat on his face (Christie)...with another new "frontrunner" taking his place (either Huckabee or Ryan, depending on which poll you believe).

  •  The Next Rudy Giuliani (17+ / 0-)

    We'll be looking for CC on local cable commercials, hawking SlimFast, boner pills, and reverse mortgages.

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:27:55 AM PST

  •  Lukewarm base appeal... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Aunt Pat, MadGeorgiaDem

    "...but the fact that the GOP base remains lukewarm on him is especially bad news."

    Former Republican candidates with lukewarm base appeal include (but not limited to):  Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney...all losers at Presidential level....

  •   speaking of Joe (good form) (9+ / 0-)

    V.P. Joe Biden, former Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee

    Bob Gates said:
    “That Joe Biden was wrong on all major foreign policy decisions for last forty years.”

    V.P. Joe Biden said:

    Vietnam: I thought we should end the war in Vietnam and Bob didn’t

    Iran-Contra: I thought Iran-Contra was a disaster, Bob thought it was a good idea

    Gorbachev: I thought Gorbachev was an agent of change….Bob encouraged Reagan not to deal with Gorbachev as an agent of change

    Bosnia: I thought we should have more war tribunals in Bosnia… Bob thought we shouldn’t

    Afghanistan: I thought we should end the war in Afghanistan after we dealt with Al-Qaeda…. Bob didn’t

    http://www.cbsnews.com/...

    Nancy Pelosi said her GOP colleagues regularly talk disrespectfully about large categories of people; women and their judgment, immigrants and poor people or people who are out of work "there's a real disdain,"

    by anyname on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:34:27 AM PST

  •  Well.... (0+ / 0-)

    Christie is a scumbag Bum, capital 'B'.
    Period.
    And as such, is a perfect poster child for the GOP.
    What. A. Bunch. Of. Losers.

    I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

    by Lilyvt on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:36:12 AM PST

  •  Bullies always end up showing their true colors (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, Aunt Pat
  •  And with only 2 yrs, 9 months until the election.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aaraujo

    he has very little time to recover.

  •  Joe Scarborough has a sad.......Ya shoulda checked (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, MadGeorgiaDem, a2nite

    him out before opening yer mouth Joe.....lol

  •  Christie doesn't have to worry about Clinton. (0+ / 0-)

    He has to worry about the actual Democratic candidate -- and that is probably more dangerous to him than HRC will be.

    HRC will be tired old school more of the same in 2016.
    A fresher, newer candidate will rob whoever runs on other tickets of that campaign attack.

    The bigger question is whether Republicans will even exist in anything like a viable form.

    If Christie does choose to run, would running as what's left of the Republicans make any sense?

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 08:46:54 AM PST

    •  The only way there will be another candidate (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lysis, MadGeorgiaDem, Jakeston, tomwatson

      for the Democratic party is if Hillary decides against running, which is probably unlikely at this point.   I mean, 73% to 12% (Biden) and 8% (Warren) is as commanding a lead as I have ever seen, from either party, unless it is for the re-election of a sitting president.  

      HRC gets 53% of the nod already, before she even gets to campaign on a likely massively populist platform, on a national minimum wage, on the 99% vs. the 1% income inequality, etc.   Plus, she looks even better against "other than Christie" (who is not going to be the GOP candidate) like "libido" Huckabee, Santorum, etc.  

      •  Biggest in history, and far bigger than in 2008. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tomwatson, Jeremimi
      •  Hillary doesn't have a "commanding lead" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dinotrac

        Who is she leading?  She's been running for ten years and there's no one else in the race yet.

        All this talk of Hillary v Christie reminds me so much of Hillary v Guiliani.  

        When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

        by Sun dog on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:18:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  She is leading Biden and Warren (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tomwatson, Jeremimi

          According to this poll, amongst respondents who intend to vote in the Democratic primaries she leads 73%-12% against Biden, and 73%-8% against Warren.   Who else do you have in mind who would take the advantage away from her?  A Democratic governor?  Maybe, just highly unlikely with at most a year away to be seriously in the primary race.  

          •  You're forgetting recent history. (0+ / 0-)

            At this point in the 2008 election cycle, President Obama was a freshman Senator who had just moved into his office.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:46:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  He was also the keynote speaker at the 2004 (0+ / 0-)

              convention.  So, going by that history, Julian Castro would be the one to watch for 2016.  Has there ever been a winning Presidential candidate that was a Mayor?

              “To the world you may be just one person, but to one person you may be the world.”-Brandi Snyder (in memory of my Nick)

              by YellowDogInGA on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:56:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  If that's the lesson you want to draw. (0+ / 0-)

                At this point, it may not matter.  Republicans show no sign of becoming a viable alternative and no other party is sufficiently established to take their place.

                That in itself should hurt Hillary's chances.  If the nomination is the defacto election, I would expect more people to try their hand.

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 10:14:02 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Warren has already bowed out (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Lysis, wuod kwatch

                  and all 16 female Democratic Senators have signed a letter urging Hillary Clinton to run.  

                  We are trying to keep control of the presidency in the party, which is of extreme importance (given the ages of Supreme Court justices Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg and Breyer.)  Usually a party that has two terms in the presidency loses next time around.

                    You might be right that it does not matter that much, given the current state of the GOP, but there are about 45% of the people on the GOP wagon, no matter what, so a charismatic candidate who pretends to be "fighting" his GOP brethren (like, say, Jeb Bush who claims to be at odds with many of the GOP statements on Immigration and other issues, and has a Hispanic wife to trot out) could still beat a light weight Democrat who will undoubtedly get a lot of dirt and smear thrown their way.   With Hillary, given her extreme long-lasting popularity with the entirety of the American people (almost at 70%) trying that in absence of any new smoking guns it appears to be next to impossible to pull off.   With a currently largely unknown Democratic Senator or Governor, who knows?          

                  •  How do you figure 45% on the GOP wagon? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    floridageorge

                    I could see a Jeb Bush having a fighting chance if his last name were Jones or Rodriguez or anything but Bush. Between his Immigration-friendly positions (like his brother), and his own family story complete with handsome young son, he would be formidable.

                    Is America really ready to elect another Bush?  The last time didn't end so well.

                    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                    by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 10:39:44 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  A candidate as tone deaf as Mitt Romney (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      dinotrac, a2nite

                      who angered most people with his 47% remark, who was a representant of the super rich guild (almost like a Rockefeller or British royalty),  managed to anger most Hispanics with his "self deportation" comments on Immigration who made no attempts at even pretend populism (GOP style,)  still managed to get 47% of the vote.  A candidate without Romney's tone deafness on the right side of immigration and with better oratorical skills could have made the contest a lot closer.  

                      Not sure if Jeb Bush intends to run, but if he sees a relatively "weak" Democratic field with mostly unknown names (if Hillary decides against running) he might, and try a more populist platform, demonstrating that he is "his own master" by publically rebuking elements of the tea party.  Let's face it, the only Republican who can win the general is the one who goes against the extreme right wing, and that is a tough needle to thread, as you have to go through right-wing dominated primaries.   Bush might be able to threat that needle if enough primary voters are convinced he, more than anyone else,  can beat a relatively unknown Democratic name for the presidency.  

                      •  A reasonable assessment. (0+ / 0-)

                        W was the most right-wing of the Bushes, and even he is almost a liberal by current standards.

                        The Bush name might carry enough weight in the party to let him get the nom, but I'm not sure.  The party seems to have run away from reasonable people.

                        But hey!

                        In the last two years I've been wrong about these things significantly more often than I've been right.  I can't figure the Republican party out to save my life.  Democrats are far more predictable.  Not completely, of course, but definitely more rational on balance.

                        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                        by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 11:25:15 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

            •  There are no high calibur candidates in the (0+ / 0-)

              pipeline....unfortunately.  Like a Barack Obama.

              We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

              by nocynicism on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 11:43:37 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  It's hers to lose, to be sure (0+ / 0-)

            But it's not because she's "leading" anyone.  Warren is hardly known outside of wonks and her constituents and she's not running.  She's someone who's said she's backing Clinton, for pete's sake and we measure Hillary's "lead" against her?  The polling at this point is just silly.

            Hillary's biggest supporters again want to assume that there aren't a lot of Democratic primary voters who would be open to someone else if another option was offered to them.  I remember the anger and shock in 07 when they realized someone else was going to actually run for it.  If anything, it helped open the door to beating her because her campaign came off arrogant as hell in Iowa.  I know they've learned a lot of lessons since then but she's still vulnerable if someone with appeal decides to go for it.  She still has to win the retail politics in Iowa to avoid the specter of "Here we go again!"  

            Again, it's hers to lose.  But the moment someone else is taken even halfway seriously as a candidate, all those numbers go out the window.  If someone else really wants it, she's going to have to win in a real campaign.  

            When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

            by Sun dog on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:54:21 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I am sure she'll face competition (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lysis, Sun dog

              Kucinich is probably going to run again, for instance.  

              But there really aren't any Democrats who are serious contenders that make any sense this time around.  The reason why Democratic primary voters chose Hillary to the tune of 73% over Biden and Warren is that no other Democrats come to mind aside from Biden and Warren.  

               And, as you said, Warren is backing Hillary (as the most liberal lion these days, I wonder why nobody thinks that is a very important endorsement from a true progressive,) all Democratic female Senators have signed a letter urging Hillary to run, so we are left with an all-male contender field out of the Senators, and there is only Hassan (N.H.) amongst Democratic governors who is female.

               The country is ready for its first female president, especially one as accomplished as Hillary.    Clinton's personal popularity is higher than it has ever been (around 67% to 69%,) and she now has the resume and gravitas to pull it off.  Parties with 2 presidential terms under their belts usually lose the next election, which is much different from the way the country was in 2008 (after a massive economic collapse and an unpopular president.)  There we actually benefitted from the country tiring of 2 terms of the other party controlling the presidency.            

              •  Kucinich isn't competition (0+ / 0-)

                I'm not sure she'll face any real competition.  I'm just saying, if someone appealing steps up and does a good job of filling the role of the fresh face, there will be a lot of support to pick up.  And there's nothing like the energy and excitement of an insurgent campaign.  If it gets into a thing like that, all her establishment cred and 'inevitability' can work against her just as it did in 07-08.  

                It's this aspect of her as a candidate that troubles me about her as the nominee.  There's a chance we could wind up with a Republican candidate given the perceived role of the fresh face- a chance for a new start.  It would be insane, of course, but reality has woefully little to do with how the press covers these things or how 'swing voters' cast their lot.  

                It's so early for us to be going back and forth on this.  I'm just hoping that the people who love Hillary as the nominee will keep their cool about the nomination and not go at it as if it's just her turn and shut up and get in line.   (I'm not saying you've been doing that here at all)

                Let's just see who shows up in Iowa in '15.  One step at a time.  

                When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

                by Sun dog on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 01:05:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I agree - too early (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sun dog

                  However, one year is not a long time for some unknown Democrat to appear out of nowhere (well, Senate and governor mansions aren't "out of nowhere") but right now nobody comes to mind out of the usual groups even remotely up to the Obama-exciting-fresh face role.  

                  Kucinich isn't real competition, and if he is the only entrant other than Hillary the race would be over quickly.  However, Kucinich would be able to insure that Hillary go a strongly progressive path during debates and in the run up to the primaries, because he would be talking primarily about global warming, the 1% vs. 99%, income inequality, minimum wage increases, etc. and she would hardly be able to come in with different, contrasting takes on those issues without losing many Progressives.  

      •  Hillary and a populist platform ain't happening (0+ / 0-)

        If Bill and her neo-lib Wall Street backers have any say.

        Besides, if Dems lose the senate, they'll move to the right.

        •  I highly doubt that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lysis

          She ran on a mostly populist platform in 2008.  She is extremely likely to support a national minimum wage increase for the 2016 race, will make gender equality a staple of her campaign(obviously,) it would be very surprising and out of character if she didn't go after income inequality (and the 1% vs. 99%) in the general,  she'll be the opposition voice to the GOP nominee's calls for repeal of the ACA, abortion restrictions, support of anti-marriage-equality bills, global warming denial, etc.    

          http://www.thedailybeast.com/...

          Elizabeth Warren is urging Hillary Clinton to run for president (and obviously if Hillary runs Elizabeth Warren will give her full throated and complete support.)  She not only signed a letter from all Democratic Senators urging Hillary Clinton to run, she also

      •  The biggest difference I see between now and 2006 (0+ / 0-)

        is that Hillary's 8 years older and she's not in the Senate.  At that time, President Obama was a freshman candidate for the Senate and 2008 was to be HRC's coronation as the Democratic candidate for a desultory run to an inevitable Presidency.

        I can imagine Biden wanting to run, but he's even older than HRC (he would be about the same age as Reagan was when he started his second term), and does have history against hime:  George H.W. Bush is the only sitting  Veep to be elected President in the last 175 years.  I think he would have the same kind of appeal that Reagan did -- down to earth people person, very likable in a way that makes you think he's on your side.  

        Warren I can't even imagine, though I'm sure she would play well to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

        My bet is there's a rising start or two ready to pull an Obama, and HRC will again be on the outside looking in.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:42:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Obama was clearly the up and coming superstar (0+ / 0-)

          in the Democratic party.  I don't see who this new rising star is supposed to be, swooping in within a year's time (say, by mid 2015) and take over.  A Democratic governor?  Cuomo?  Patrick?  Beshear?  O' Malley?  Just not seeing it.  Amongst Senators we are looking at who?  Warner, Booker, Heitkamp?  Aside from the fact that none of them rise to the "upcoming" star level that Obama enjoyed, the most touted stars are those who manage to be successful in "hostile territory", typically red states like Heitkamp, Bullock, Beshear, but they do so by adopting a centrist posture, typically opposing any gun control measures, iffy on marriage equality, etc.    

          Clinton has a stint as a very popular Secretary of State under her belt, her credentials are hard to beat at this point, by anyone in our party or the GOP.  She is also extremely popular personally (65% to 69% personal popularity when asked in any poll, highest for any politician, active or inactive, alive.)

          In 2008 the country was ready for a change, having had their fill of W and his GOP cohorts amidst the greatest recession of our lifetimes.  This time we are trying to continue party control of the presidency when that is usually not how voters go after two terms in one party's hands (poppy Bush right after two Reagan terms was is an exception, not the norm,) which is different from where we were when Obama took the presidency.

        •  Not a wise bet (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jakeston, Lysis

          There's no Obama out there this time and Hillary's arguably stronger in 2016 then she was in 2008.

          Face it, she runs, she'll win the nod in a walk. Likely she'll only get token opposition,  if that.

          •  Maybe so. It will be interesting. (0+ / 0-)

            Perhaps the real news is that the Democrats have such a shortage of good Presidential candidates.

            Though I have all but written Republicans off as a viable party, might that encourage somebody -- whether Republican, other party, or even independent -- smell an opportunity to run?

            I don't know who it would be, but I don't follow either party's internal politics very closely.  The only "rising stars" outside of Christie that I'm aware of for Republicans would be better described as pall bearers.  

            Ted Cruz? Rand Paul? Seriously?

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 10:35:50 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  LOL at pall bearers. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dinotrac

              Cruz, Paul, Mike Lee, Huckabee, Gohmert carrying the casket, Palin and Bachmann reading the eulogy.  

              Someone like Jeb Bush, positioning himself as some sort of maverick against the tea party (he told the GOP to "stop acting stupid") while still featuring enough conservative credentials to be acceptable to the lot, would be an obvious danger to a "fresh, new" Democrat with no real experience on the national stage or name recognition.   That is especially true with Obama's own popularity not as lofty as it once was, so he will likely have less pull on the general election as would be the case if his popularity were at a high level.  

      •  But as soon as she says she is in.... (0+ / 0-)

        ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK..to make the election close so they can try to steal it!!!!   GOP playbook 101.

        We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

        by nocynicism on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 11:39:21 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  It's amusing how misleading the Dem field is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lysis, Matt Z

    Warren has categorically said she's not running, and Biden, if he does run, has no intention (or hope) of becoming president. He'll be participating for no other reason than to make sure nobody lays a glove on Hillary during the debates.

    At least polling on the GOP field is an accurate picture of who the players are.

  •  Not gonna have Chris Christie to kick around (0+ / 0-)

    Unlike Tricky Dick, I think it's true with Christie.  His chances for the nomination were way overblown to begin with.  Now he's just a distraction that doesn't really impact anyone besides his constituents.  It's just too bad this didn't come out before the last election.  

    When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:13:13 AM PST

  •  Toast. Sandy money misappropriated, that is what (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Mogolori, Lysis

    will end it all because the other candidates will kill him over that IF he does not have to resign or go to jail

    "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

    by merrywidow on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 09:27:17 AM PST

  •  Esquire started a countdown clock (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mogolori, gf120581, Matt Z

    "Introducing the Christie Countdown Clock"

    Chris Christie is a dead man at the microphone. Just follow the money.
    By Scott Raab

    http://www.esquire.com/...

  •  "We are going to take back the house (0+ / 0-)

    and have a permanent majority." - Me last October post shutdown.

  •  Please proceed Governor (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    As corrupt as Agnew, as evil as Nixon. It's like watching a high school drama club presentation of All The President's Men.

    Ya look like the Hindenburg, ya crash like the Hindenburg.

    Peace on Earth was all it said.

    by BobBlueMass on Thu Jan 30, 2014 at 10:59:09 AM PST

  •  Christie was never more than MSM invention (0+ / 0-)

    Well before the now never ceasing scandals enveloping him, potential match-ups with any prospective Democratic presidential candidate, much less Hillary Clinton, were always over dramatized.  

    Simply because a few national polls might have indicated a closer race in terms of raw numbers did not make him any more viable.  Remember that he would have had to have bested Hillary or any potential Democratic nominee in at least a few traditionally leaning Democratic states, and that was never going to happen, simply because in those presidential years left leaners always return to the fold.

    Moreover, he would never have carried his own state against Hillary (and likely any prospective Democratic candidate) in 2016, as witness the statewide poll taken among New Jersey denizens on the very day of his wide victory last November.  New Jerseyites even then preferred Hillary.

    One of the great axioms of American politics, that should be memorized particularly by all beltway media commentators, is that if a prospective presidential candidate cannot easily hold his or her own state, then said candidate is surely doomed before even starting the national campaign.

    In Christie's case, simply too much was invested, and not just by way of the GOP Old Guard and the moneyed interests under their purview.  This was all about a preconstructed narrative, meant to give legitimacy to a party long ago moribund on the presidential level.  It was meant to make a wider audience believe that Christie could go the distance, rather like Rudy Giuliani before him.  But both were in truth fantasy candidates for the MSM and the beltway punditocracy.  Neither could be seen as viable in the clear light of day.

    The MSM had so much invested in preventing through the elevation of Albert Gore a "third Clinton term," that they could become active participants in the obvious coup d’état of 2000.  But that time at least they could advance a presidential son, with a large state Southern base--and who was then still himself possessed of political power.

    This time round, even among their second and third tier of prospective candidates, the GOP literally has no one currently in power that is even remotely viable.  That is why the Christie narrative has been so difficult for the beltway pundits to disavow.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site