Chris Christie scheduled to make rare trip to New Jersey tomorrow morning for a summit in Atlantic City.
— @Olivianuzzi
Asbury Park Press:
New Jersey's governor and potential GOP presidential contender is having trouble in his home state, this time getting his job approval rating higher than 50%.
A Quinnipiac University Poll released Wednesday shows 46% of New Jersey voters approve of Gov. Chris Christie's performance but 48% disapprove, his worst overall score in almost four years.
The last time Christie had a majority of respondents on his side was Jan. 15, 2014, when his approval was 55% vs. 38%.
"He was doing fine until one year ago, and then wham! Bridgegate hit like a 10-car pileup on the George Washington Bridge and the governor has yet to recover," said the poll's assistant director, Maurice Carroll.
Paul Waldman:
In any case, this all makes clear that Huckabee is going to be the candidate of cultural resentment. He wants to be the spokesperson for those who feel that they're looked down upon by the elites, and for years, what politicians like Huckabee have fed those people is a narrative that says, "No, you're the ones who are better, and it's the coastal elitists who are worthy of scorn. The places where you live are brimming with virtue, the cultural products you prefer are superior to those preferred by other people, you are the real Americans. Those bastards are nothing compared to you." I particularly like Huckabee's repeated invocations of the Harvard faculty, a stereotype that among his intended audience will simultaneously evoke insecurity and contempt.
There is without question a sizeable market within the Republican Party for this kind of appeal. The problem is that it isn't large enough to get you the presidential nomination. If it was, then Sarah Palin would be the most popular politician in the party. But she isn't.
National Journal:
"I prefer that we avoid these very contentious social issues," said moderate Rep. Charlie Dent, reprising comments he gave in the closed-door conference meeting. "Week one, we had a speaker election that did not go as well as a lot of us would have liked. Week two, we got into a big fight over deporting children, something that a lot of us didn't want to have a discussion about. Week three, we are now talking about rape and incest and reportable rapes and incest for minors. … I just can't wait for week four."
More politics and policy below the fold.
Cal. health officials say unvaccinated ppl (and those w/ babies too young to vax) should steer clear of Disney, airports, crowds #measles
— @LizSzabo
NY1:
As the heated tensions between Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch and Mayor Bill de Blasio appear to be cooling down, some officers who want to replace Lynch are now blasting him as a failed union leader.
"He pounded his fist, he gets red in the face, everything sounds great, rallies the troops behind him," said Officer Brian Fusco. "Unfortunately, when Pat steps away from the microphone, he steps away from the podium—that's where it ends."
Greg Sargent:
This blog reported this morning on voter reactions to Obama’s State of the Union speech. Here, from Democracy Corps, is the pollster’s comprehensive memo on the dial and focus group data that resulted from the sessions we discussed, which gives more detail and context.
Jonathan Bernstein with a thoughtful piece on gridlock:
Yet there’s no reason to believe that a winning party really represents popular majorities even on the issues on which it campaigned most vigorously, let alone on those peripheral to the election. Instead, we know that election results follow big-picture events, especially on the economy. The voice of the people should rarely be interpreted to mean much more than either “keep up the good work” or “throw the bums out!”
So we can pretend to think that Americans in 2008 all wanted health-care reform and vigorous action on climate change and marriage equality and stronger trade unions and gun control and whatever else the Democratic Party favored, and then believe the voters changed their minds in 2010, then reversed themselves again in 2012 and once more in 2014. Or we can acknowledge (for example) that people turned against Republicans because of an unpopular war and a terrible economy in 2008. We can then endorse a system that makes it difficult for any party to exploit electoral victories, given that elections are at least as much about timing as they are about voters' preferences on the issues.
Yes, a system that requires compromise means gridlock is possible. But Ezra overstates the electoral incentive for pure opposition to the president.
Igor Bobick:
The next occupant of the White House must have serious foreign policy experience, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) argued Wednesday, a qualification he seems to believe some of his potential presidential rivals may lack.
Funnily enough he seems to think it's a trait he himself possesses.
The 1 Senator who voted that climate change IS a hoax was Wicker of MS. Thus confirming the Arkansas saying: "Thank God for Mississippi."
— @billmon1
Brian Beutler:
The day after Democrats lost the Senate, and handed the Republican Party its largest House majority in nearly a century, President Barack Obama stood at a podium in the East Room of the White House and radiated something just short of defiance.
Nonplussed conservatives weren’t sure whether to be annoyed or thrilled—if Obama didn’t see danger for his party in the previous night’s returns, maybe he was stuck in the kind of bubble that cost Mitt Romney the presidency in 2012, and would weaken the Democratic position ahead of the next general election.
But Obama’s demeanor was rooted in two insights: first, the truism that midterm elections, and particularly the one just past, favor Republicans in a structural way; second, that an ongoing, durable burst of economic growth would eventually strengthen his political hand—perhaps to the point where Republicans could no longer afford to bat him about like a piñata without suffering at a national level.
Bloomberg:
The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad has broken ranks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, telling U.S. officials and lawmakers that a new Iran sanctions bill in the U.S. Congress would tank the Iran nuclear negotiations.
Already, the Barack Obama administration and some leading Republican senators are using the Israeli internal disagreement to undermine support for the bill, authored by Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Robert Menendez, which would enact new sanctions if current negotiations falter.