Christie rumor du jour? Nancy Reagan’s personal plea on Tuesday night had a major effect on Gov. Christie. Consequently, he is now leaning towards a presidential run.
Does NO ONE say what they mean and mean what they say??????????
Remember Horton the Elephant?? Christie is showing to be a less than honorable man!! (Not to mention he is NOT a real conservative!!!!!!! What are Republicans thinking?!?!)
This kind of behavior…..maybe the Repubs are just too dumb anymore to win the WH?!?!?!?!?!!?
Sorry, Perry/Bush……….that will totally push Perry out of the race (one tough talkin’ guv is enough in the race). The media will dump the short lived affair with Cain and gush and blush all over Crispy Creme (as Levin calls him).
Perry’s integrity is really shameful. How is it, after the past 8+ days, one can support a man who has intentionally distorted the truth of his own actions (easy to trace) and make “ads” that are based on stupid (again, easy to trace) out of context statements. Those are CHEAP and lazy and immature tactics.
I’m embarrassed for the guy that he is acting so immature. Sorry Perry/whoever…
I like Christie, but he has to go through the same vetting treatment that Perry got and he has to go up against the Romney machine with little time to prepare. He’ll also have the same handicap as Perry……..Stepping on to the stage with huge expectations.
I guess it depends on whether he thinks Mitt can beat Obama and do the job.
12. “If Christie does get in, it is difficult (though not impossible) to envision a scenario where he does not win. … If Christie does not get in, it is difficult (though no impossible) to envision a scenario where Romney does not win.”
I don’t agree w/either statement.
I think Christie would be unlikely to win if he joined. He has no ground game–no organization. He has plenty of issues that conservatives won’t like–more than any other current candidate sans Perry. If Christie join one of three things will happen: (1) He will split the intelligent vote & give the game to Perry, (2) He will burn up fast after a strong entry, or (3) He will suck up the rest of the O2, creating a 2-man race w/Romney.
If Christie doesn’t enter the race Romney can still lose. A lot of people are disillusioned w/Perry, but may be willing to go back to him if he could appear to be more than a complete retard for a 2-hour stretch. A lot of people don’t like Mormonism and they’re desperately searching for any reason not to vote for Mitt. If Perry can present anything promising he’ll be a force in IA & SC at least.
The people crying for Christie to get in are the ones with a deep and personal hatred for all things Romney who have suddenly found that Perry isn’t the White Knight they thought he was.
Why does a moderate Conservative, Independent, Pragmatist, or economics-oriented voter perfectly happy with Romney need to consider big boy?
Christie has no deep personal desire to be President. That alone should disqualify him. This is the most powerful, difficult, and important job in the world. You don’t take it unless you want it with every fiber of your being.
For months and months and months and months Christie said no. If he says anything different now, its “might as well” – and that isn’t the kind of sentiment I want in the oval office.
I like christie, I respect christie – but I will do both of those a lot less if he suddenly becomes a fair weather candidate.
And if this party rejects Romney, who’s only real “sin” has been to require those with their own resources to purchase their own health protection, then I may very well start treating this party with the same disdain so many have treated the most competent candidate to run for President in quite some time with.
Don’t forget about Smack’s inside info from earlier today… Charlie Weaver and other senior Pawlenty staff reportedly flying to New Jersey to meet with Christie on Sunday to discuss plans of “his immediate future”…
The people crying for Christie to get in are the ones with a deep and personal hatred for all things Romney who have suddenly found that Perry isn’t the White Knight they thought he was.
PhilipRucker Wife no longer objects after Barbara Bush call RT @TheFix SIREN: Chris Christie “seriously considering” 2012 bid. http://ow.ly/6J8jm
8 minutes ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Philip RuckerWashington Post – National Political Reporter (DC)
jmartpolitico: No idea whether Christie ult runs, but ppl in Christie-world who used to say “zero chance” now say new decision soon.
41 minutes ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Jonathan MartinPOLITICO – Reporter (DC)
TheFix SIREN: Chris Christie “seriously considering” 2012 bid.
about 1 hour ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Chris CillizzaWashington Post – Blogger (DC)
People who say Christie needs to be vetted are missing the fact that superstars don’t get vetted. Their star power is enough to make people overlook their deficiencies.
It’s what made super pro-life people that I know vote for Obama. When I tried to talk to them about the issues, their response every time was, “So what? I like him. He inspires me.”
That’s how it will be with Chris Christie. Gun control? Immigration? Not a problem. He is the biggest GOP superstar we have (way bigger than Daniels, bigger than Ryan, bigger than Rubio), and that’s all that matters.
It will be very interesting if he takes the plunge, especially with the primaries moving up a month. This leaves Christie essentially with a 3 month campaign to build on the huge momentum boost he’d get from jumping in.
If this party ends up treating romney like ****, it deserves to lose every position it currently holds. end of story.
The most repeated lines against Romney are “mandate” (AKA, requiring people to pay for their own bill) and “phony” (which still doesn’t have a clear definition, and is about as meaningless as can be).
Reject Romney, and we’re stuck with two political parties – the Democrats, who don’t care about competence, and the Republicans, who don’t recognize it when it smacks them on the head.
But there’s more. “Vetting” from Romney, Inc. isn’t going to do much damage if the principle is a good attorney and quick on his feet and offers sound explanations.
“And besides, do you really want to argue that Christie is incompetent?”
I’ll argue he isn’t experienced enough.
I’ll argue he doesn’t have the economic experience Romney does.
I’ll argue a lawyer doesn’t necessarily make a good executive.
====
This race has a very personal aspect for me – I’m a person who seriously hopes to go into elected office one day. 15 or 20 years from now, I would much rather like to be able to face voters and tell them I want to follow in the mold of Romney more than in the mold of Perry or Christie or any other chump people are trying to throw at Romney.
Then again, maybe by that time, I’ll have lost the stomach to remain in a party that treats competent such experienced, competent candidates like crap.
And if this party rejects Romney, who’s only real “sin” has been to require those with their own resources to purchase their own health protection, then I may very well start treating this party with the same disdain so many have treated the most competent candidate to run for President in quite some time with.
Competency isn’t enough. The resume has never been enough for Presidential races. Inspiration, charisma, the ability to connect and ‘feel your pain’, these are all keys to winning Presidential elections. Romney has always looked good on paper but never inspired or connected. He just doesn’t have ‘it’.
Now, he could still win, George H.W. Bush didn’t have ‘it’ either and still won. But I imagine people connect with the blue-collar Christie far easier than the millionaire CEO.
I’ll argue he isn’t experienced enough.
I’ll argue he doesn’t have the economic experience Romney does.
I’ll argue a lawyer doesn’t necessarily make a good executive.
So you’re NOT arguing he’s incompetent.
Maybe the fact that Christie’s a lawyer doesn’t make him a good executive….but he’s sure proven to be a good executive anyway.
He’s cut the budget. He’s taken on the teachers’ unions, and most importantly – he’s moved the political middle to the right and he’s gotten support for conservative policy in a state like New Jersey.
Yes, well, as I’ve said, reject romney, and I may very well tell the GOP where to put “it”.
====
If Christie gets in, from my point of view, its a lose-lose.
Either he wins the nomination, in which case Romney never becomes President, and one of the few Politicans I can LEGITIMATELY look up to and idolize somewhat is thrown in the trash can of history.
Or Christie loses, in which case he never becomes President, never becomes the Republican nominee, etc…honestly, I like Christie (much less if he gets in, but I still like him), and I think he COULD be good nominee, ONE DAY. But not today.
Bachmann. Pawlenty. Perry. How much more of our talent are people going to permanently waste trying to dethrone Romney juts because he doesn’t make Limbaugh go giddy?
Romney could always point to the $60 million Todd Christie made when he sold his company to Goldman Sachs. Though it’s a bit of a stretch to hit Chris for that. Christie’s blue collar Italian/Irish Catholic authenticity is hard to malign.
Bachmann. Pawlenty. Perry. How much more of our talent are people going to permanently waste trying to dethrone Romney juts because he doesn’t make Limbaugh go giddy?
Limbaugh doesn’t even like Christie.
But in terms of how much talent we need to “waste” – as far as I’m concerned, just enough to knock Romney out of the running and beat Obama. That’s all.
I don’t think Christie is going to run, but even if he does, he won’t win. The sheer difficulty in cobbling together a national campaign and creatng the groundwork for it take months to accomplish.
Plus, and this is what would be most tragic, the moment Christie would stumble (and he will stumble because everyone does), the same types who are cheering him on now would turn on him. Those who are putting him on a pedastal will be damning him after his first mistake.
Romney could always point to the $60 million Todd Christie made when he sold his company to Goldman Sachs. Though it’s a bit of a stretch to hit Chris for that. Christie’s blue collar Italian/Irish Catholic authenticity is hard to malign.
I’m of the opinion that it matters far more where you came from than where you wind up.
47. “#18 Hey! The Mormon card played on a Christiie thread. Way to go.”
Several studies have shown Mormonism to be a real hinderance to election–a couple of the studies specifically involved Mitt. One lengthy study I read concluded that about 1 in 4 people that dislike Mitt for any policy reason have Mormonism as their root issue w/him. That study was from ’08 though. It is what it is. No one’s boo hooing the bigotry. Whatever your background, someone will be prejudiced against it. For example, Perry some people probably think Perry’s dumb just by hearing his accent. He happens to be dumb as hell, but even if her weren’t, some people would probably hold his accent against him.
“In the modern era, nobody who has to be begged, pleaded, supplicated, and finally kidnapped as Christie has, is going to make a good candidate.”
Oh, agreed – in fact, its Christie’s reluctance to run that disqualifies him right off the bat. I don’t mind ambition. ambition is good. If you aren’t ambitious about being President, I sure as heck don’t want you to get behind the resolute desk and start making decisions.
Maybe it’s that she doesn’t trust the GOP voter and what they’ve become. She knows that the GOP of today would never nominate her husband. Risking the party and country to a Rick Perry or a Michele Bachmann would be a disaster and she feels the party can’t take that risk. For some of the big wigs in the party, Christie may simply be insurance.
If Christie did change his mind I suspect it was weeks ago, around the time when he spoke to Rep. Paul Ryan about how one of them should run.
Not to mention he has dominated the race without even being in it. The free media, displaying republicans begging him to run, stands in stark contrast to some of the awful debates the GOP candidates have had to date. If he’s in, the roll out of the reversal was brilliant.
Christie’s blue collar Italian/Irish Catholic authenticity is hard to malign.
I would argue that the working class urban Northerner is one of the most important voters of the coming election cycle. A lot of these folks voted Democrat during the Bush era, voted for their fellow Irish Catholic John Kerry in 2004, etc. But they tend to be the folks hit the hardest by the Obama economy, they don’t suffer from the white guilt of the upper middle class whites in the suburbs, and they will have no problem voting against Obama provided that the GOP nominee is someone that “gets” them. Christie would be the first GOP nominee in a long time who could connect with these voters on a personal level.
Thank you. The anti-Mormonism shtick is a tired-old tripe that was beat to death then resurrected and beat to death again in the last campaign. I’m very, very sick of it.
Bob Hovic recently linked a survey- I believe it was from Pew- that should people are almost equally disinclined to vote for an evangelical, as a Mormon. Irony aside, this rings true. Evangelicals make up almost 30% of the population, but have no Supreme Court seat, are vastly underrepresented in Congress, and have only produced a couple Presidents.
I simply don’t see how I can vote for a party if it ends up treating Romney the way so many here want it to. Whatever personal admiration I have for the man aside, you can’t look at his resume, background, positions, or personal life and call him anything other than a clean, competent, qualified conservative.
To destroy a man like that in favor of a flavor of the month would literally be nauseating to me.
1) He kept every campaign promise he made as governor of Massachusetts
2) He was fully open and honest about once being pro-choice – the only major issue on which he has changed his position
3) He has stuck by his words and his actions when he truly believes in them, even when it would have been far more politically expediant to do otherwise.
WHAT, IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, LEADS YOU NOT TO TRUST HIM?!
Anyone who has observed Christie here in NJ knows he does NOT lack ambition. I believe the only reason he didn’t jump in earlier was due to a lack of a clear path to the nomination and family considerations. Early on Pawlenty was blocking his path as credible Romney alternative and Daniels was poised to enter with a ready-made campaign until his wife’s last minute veto. Barbour and his rolodex were looming. Question marks existed about Perry, Rudy, Palin, etc. And frankly, Obama and the economy are in far worse shape than anyone anticipated a year ago. And reports indicate the family has come on board.
Now much of the path has been cleared, without Christie having to campaign yet or spend a dime. The race has come to him, so having a change of heart now due to a dramatically different landscape is not disqualifying, but entirely reasonable.
Repeating the same thing over and over. No matter how many times we point out that there’s only one major change of position (abortion), the list of debunked flips keeps growing. But each debunked flip gets repeated over and over (i.e. people lie) and so we hear nonsense like how we can’t trust him.
“Now much of the path has been cleared, without Christie having to campaign yet or spend a dime. The race has come to him, so having a change of heart now due to a dramatically different landscape is not disqualifying, but entirely reasonable.”
No, its disqualify.
If the only way you take over the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world is when it appears to walk up and shake your hand, you’re a fair weather candidate.
and I don’t want your BIG toe inside the White House.
And it’s not just the north east. The reason Virginia and NC have become swing states is due to their growing suburbs, whose ideology reflects the suburbs of Philly, Ohio, and NJ more than the more rural evangelical regions.
I wonder how it must feel to be the Texas governor now. He too was urged to run yet the Republican Party’s fawning over Christie speaks to just how much they are turning their backs on him.
Hard to do the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world if you can’t win it. The ability to actually win is a factor in any decision, and Christie’s chances have only gone up throughout the year.
Kilburn, some friendly advice: if you are truly looking to get into politics in the future, you’d better grow some thicker skin. Politics is a contact sport, and nobody agrees with anybody else all the time. Consider this your chance to exercise real leadership and win people over to your side instead of getting furious and channel some sort of faux-righteous indignation.
74 – The flip flops. All of them. But it’s not even that. It’s how convenient they all were and then how he had the audacity to malign others as insufficiently conservative. The changes in position and emphasis. The fact that Mitt always manages to massage his views so that *voila* – they happen to be exactly in line with his desired constituency.
We’ve argued this back and forth for years.
Romney was pro-gay marriage in 1994.
it was Romney who forced Town Clerks to license same sex partners and change the wording on certificates from “husband” and “wife” to “Partner A” and “Partner B” BEFORE same sex marriage was even the law in Massachusetts.
We all know he was all “marriage between one man and one woman” in 2008.
Mitt was for a national health care mandate in 1994 – he told John Judis as much – and now loudly rails against it after having adopted a similar state level plan. I don’t know what the hell he really believes.
Same thing with gun control. He supported the Brady Bill. Then he lied about being a life-long hunter.
Immigration – he supported McCain’s bill, supported a path to citizenship, hired illegals to work on his lawn, did NOTHING about sanctuary cities in Massachusetts until a few weeks before his term as governor ended…and then (this is the part I hate) attacked everyone else on immigration.
He says he never raised taxes – but instead earned the nickname “Fee fee” trumpeted by Russert because he raised a billion dollars in fees.
He’s all over the place. I can go on and on and on. You’re not going to see it. I’m not going to change my mind.
All his changes in emphasis and tone always came at EXACTLY the moment they were most beneficial to his political aspirations. The man is a slippery snake. Even if he has a nice wife and family. And he’s not going to get my vote.
“Hard to do the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world if you can’t win it. The ability to actually win is a factor in any decision”
He should want it bad enough that, months ago, he said “I’ll give it my best shot”
The same thing Romney did when he entered at 5% in 2007.
The same thing Hucakbee did when he entered with less than that.
The same thing Bachmann, Gingrich, Brownback, and others have entered it with.
Like I said, the sad thing will be that once he stumbles or doesn’t dominate absolutely everything, he’ll be brutally put down. The Bill Kristol’s of the world will bemoan that it’s Christie, not them who’s at fault and then their wandering eyes will focus attention on drafting someone else.
BTW, as far as I can tell, we’ve had no polling with Christie. For all the buzz around the New Jerseyite, we have no clue as to how he’d do in the New Hampshire or South Carolina or Florida primaries.
“Kilburn, some friendly advice: if you are truly looking to get into politics in the future, you’d better grow some thicker skin.”
I have thicker skin, or I could never have gone-it-alone against dozens of posters in the past on here.
My own skin isn’t the problem. I’ve been called every name in the book, etc. etc.
It doesn’t bother me.
My problem is my stomach….and in particular, the way it wants to shrivel up with the way some people here are treating Romney.
I have no illusions about the ease of being a politican…but I have a considerable amount of disgust for many of the sentiments people in this party seem to have right now.
Not only that but the guy worked extremely hard for Republicans in 2010. He raised money, made appearances and provided whatever assistance he could to a myriad of candidates seeking office. Did he have an ulterior motive? Certianly. He hoped they’d remember him in 2012 but it is almost sickening the way some in the party fawn all over these flash-in-the-pan anti-Mitts.
Romney was pro choice, pro gun control, pro gay rights…in other words, for just about anything that would help him get elected in MA.
He endorsed adoption rights for gay couples and ending DADT.
And supported the Bush amnesty plan just a few years before running for President…saying “it was a mistake” for Republicans to oppose it.
The idea that, on a principled basis, Romney changed his mind on all of that in the same timespan he began to run for the Republican nomination…I don’t see how anyone can buy that. Clearly Romney is someone who is willing to tell people what he thinks they want to hear to get elected.
I don’t know if its discomfort or serious, deep, anger at some people in my own party.
Of course the thought of having to give up on the GOP distresses me – I have no personal respect for Democrats, and I’ve traditionally despised third parties.
btw, Kavon – you might want to change the link on your name – your posts still link to the old “race42008″ url.
“You’ll do fine there. They’re in LOVE with healthcare mandates, too.”
I might oppose those mandates, except for the fact that I don’t like being forced to pay for something for someone who should be paying for it themselves.
Now, if you and your libertarian buddies want to stand up and put up the money to pay for all the insured so it doesn’t cost me an arm, leg, and firstborn son….then perhaps I will change my position.
I really don’t think it is helpful to be critical of Nancy Reagan. I hold her in very high regrard and I suspect that if it were Romney who said he wasn’t going to run, she’d urge him to do so as well. Urging someone to run is not ultimately an endorsement. I’m sure she wants to see a field of good candidates from which to ultimately select.
If Christie runs, she may well endorse him and that’s fine. I wouldn’t call into question her intelligence or competence just because of her selection. Each of us looks for different traits in a candidate.
On the plus side, these Christie rumors can’t possible go on for another year. At most, they’ve got about 2 more weeks.
In the case of Palin, her ‘drones will immediately pivot into speculation over a third party bid as soon as she not-announces. We’ll have to live with that until at least the general election filing deadlines of states representing 270 electoral votes have passed.
If what you say is true, Romney should say to the electorate “I’m a Methodist now”. Those simple words would likely do move to improve his chances than anything else he could say.
Romney was pro choice, pro gun control, pro gay rights…in other words, for just about anything that would help him get elected in MA.
He endorsed adoption rights for gay couples and ending DADT.
And supported the Bush amnesty plan just a few years before running for President…saying “it was a mistake” for Republicans to oppose it.
The idea that, on a principled basis, Romney changed his mind on all of that in the same timespan he began to run for the Republican nomination…I don’t see how anyone can buy that. Clearly Romney is someone who is willing to tell people what he thinks they want to hear to get elected.
112 – It’s also, you know, STUPID to imply that the reason the wife of the most legendary GOP president ever to grace this earth *possibly* doesn’t favor Romney (We don’t even know who she supports) might be due to her lack of enthusiasm for Mormons.
With no evidence whatsoever.
Some of you Mormon Rombots throw out the “bigot” charge as liberally as the Democrats employ the race card.
“He [Romney] is a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban.”
- Romney 2002 campaign website
“LJ at Race 4 2008 catches Mitt Romney reversing his position on the federal “assault weapon” ban in the space of less than two months. In a December 16 interview with Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press, Romney said that if elected president he would sign a bill reviving the ban, which expired in 2004. In an interview with Glenn Reynolds and Helen Smith over the weekend, Romney said he saw no need for new gun control legislation and would veto any that crossed his desk.”
“I am starting to think there is a better than even chance that Kilburn feels romantic love for Mitt Romney”
Nice try…but no.
====
No, my lasting support for Romney probably stems from the fact that, unlike most people here, I am not old enough to have the fond memories of the Reagan Presidency…in fact, I don’t think any of the four Presidents in my lifetime appear to have been all that stellar.
So, from what I’ve seen in my time alive, politicans – the group charged with running our country, and a profession to which I have a natural interest – have been a rather miserable bunch.
Romney appears to me to be the candidate MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE who might actually change that. He’s competent. He’s Conservative. He’s personally and professionally clean. He has a family that most people would love to have. He’s spent decades building up knowledge and experience in fixing things.
He seems to me to be EXACTLY the kind of person who could get in the oval office, do good, and actually restore people’s trust and respect for our government.
But of course, Kavon would much rather I just went and shot myself or slit my wrists.
Romney fans shouldn’t have any problem with Christie getting in the race. He’s a great GOP leader and no one to fear (unlike Perry, who is an idiot). I support Romney, but if Christie or Cain beat him, hey, that’s fine. As long as that person can beat Obama and perform well in the office of the presidency. Nothing wrong with a reluctant leader (cough, Washington, cough).
Give it up So-journer, you and Townhall can cherry pick all you want Romney’s record is better than most. And Romney as a non-professional politician has way more excuse for settling on his policies more slowly than Perry or anyone else besides Cain, another businessman, who is also all over the place in a few areas.
Romney is not a professional politician. That is his excuse. He made errors and he has progressively settled every single issue more conservative than he started. He comes from the most liberal place there is. You are obviously not from a place where conservatives are outnumbered greatly. Perry on the other hand is liberal in a conservative place. Now that is no excuse! He talks and thinks like a Democrat posing as a Conservative to get power.
Romney will not be elected for his politics. They are perfectly in line with the rest of the candidates anyway.
Romney’s strength is his business and finance experience and his impecable worldwide reputation for complete honesty. The 2002 Winter Olympics was saved by Romney’s reputation for honesty. His world wide reputation for honesty.
And all the fellow Rombots… relax. If Christie is better he will win. Christie isn’t better. He is very very liberal for a Republican. Much much more than Romney or Perry.
But he won’t appeal to the Independents or the middle because he has gone after unions big time. Independents and the squishy Democrats are not going to stand up to the unions. Only dedicated Republicans stand up to unions.
Christie’s appeal is limited. His experience is limited, has no executive experience at all, never even came close to creating a job of any kind. He has always worked in government as a minor figure…
And Christie is very offended at personal questions. He gets testy and down right rude if asked the simplest question. Such as why are you going after public school teachers while you send your kids to private school. What do you know about public school…
Christie blew up at that question. He lost it. I think it was a valid point. I agree that teacher unions are out of control, but Christi has no first hand experience with public schools and it hurt his creditbilty on that issue to get angry when asked a legitamate question. He was far too offended by the question.
That kind of anger will not wear well. He will lose people’s trust quickly. The circus is only entertaining for a while. It gets old to see people argue and fight all the time.
Christie will make Mitt seem all the more steady and reassuring. People are angry but also scared, more scared than angry now, I think. They will pick steady, sane and knowledgable over angry and out of control.
People flirt with hotheads, but they marry steady and sure.
Yeah, too bad the most of that comment is false. The only thing there he actually changed on was DADT, which he only changed because it was a time of war (i.e. the circumstances changed).
Voting likely starts in about 100 days or so. MWS, maybe Christie cracks loose some sort of path for Huntsman in NH. Christie doesn’t seem positioned well for Iowa. Who knows? We’re all along for the ride.
“There will be children born to same-sex couples, and adopted by same-sex couples, and I believe that there should be rights and privileges associated with those unions and with the children that are part of those unions.”
On same sex partnership benefits:
“Basically I see the provision of basic civil rights and domestic partnership benefits [as] a campaign against Tom Finneran. I see Tom Finneran and the Democratic leadership as having opposed the application of domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples and I will support and endorse efforts to provide those domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples…”
He criticized the Democrats as not being pro-gay rights enough!
“Bush, whose wife was born and raised in Mexico and who speaks fluent Spanish, also championed the legislation.”
Craig, Jeb most likely can’t be trusted on this issue as he obviously has bias relations. Question Craig: Do you think it is right, even moral, to put illegals before our our citizens? Subsedizing tuition breaks for illegals, while not doing so for our own, is unethical, plain and simple.
130 – The commenter who suggests that Nancy Reagan’s possible opposition to Mitt might be anti-Mormonism accuses ME of not understanding things.
Did or did not Romney license same sex partners and change the wording on certificates from “husband” and “wife” to “Partner A” and “Partner B” BEFORE same sex marriage was even the law in Massachusetts, as Sandy Rios asserts in her Townhall article?
““Bush, whose wife was born and raised in Mexico and who speaks fluent Spanish, also championed the legislation.”
Craig, Jeb most likely can’t be trusted on this issue as he obviously has bias relations. Question Craig: Do you think it is right, even moral, to put illegals before our our citizens? Subsedizing tuition breaks for illegals, while not doing so for our own, is unethical, plain and simple.”
“Basically I see the provision of basic civil rights and domestic partnership benefits [as] a campaign against Tom Finneran. I see Tom Finneran and the Democratic leadership as having opposed the application of domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples and I will support and endorse efforts to provide those domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples…
THIS is attacking a DEMOCRAT FROM THE LEFT on civil unions in 1994.
This is exactly like Mitt’s attack of Perry FROM THE LEFT on Social Security.
“For Romney’s 1994 US Senate campaign, he supported the Brady Bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period on gun sales, and a ban on particular semi-automatic rifles.
In a 2002 debate during Romney’s campaign for governor of Massachusetts, Romney said: “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them. I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”
As governor, Romney signed a 2004 measure instituting a permanent Massachusetts ban on military style assault weapons, to take the place of a Federal ban, which was then about to expire. The bill made Massachusetts the first state to enact its own such ban on specific semi-automatic weapons and some shotguns with specific accessories, and Romney supported the law with the comment: “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
As Governor Romney extended the term of firearm licenses from four to six years, reinstated a 90-day grace period for citizens renewing their gun licenses, and signed a law providing free replacement licenses.
When he supported the Brady Bill in 1994, Romney said, “That’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don’t line up with the NRA.”
Just before declaring his candidacy for the 2008 Republican nomination for president, Romney joined the National Rifle Association (NRA).”
Silly So-journer I didn’t say you were one. But do you deny the existence of Mormon haters? Did you see McCain’s Mom on C-span? I supose not.
Admitting the exsitence of Mormon haters is just reality. And a top reason I did not want Romney to run at all.
But after seeing the choices. How could he not run? We simply can’t let the Mormon thing get in the way of saving this country.
I just mused that Nancy might be, there are lots of people in her generation that have biases against different groups.
But Ronnie Reagan was a true blue friend, so I doubt it.
You getting so offened at the mere suggestion of the possiblity is, well, interesting I guess.
I didn’t accuse you of anything, there are reasons not to support Romney. But that is the one that everyone assumes first. And it is at the root of all the accusations of flip flops, that are completely silly and hypocritcal. It is the elephant in the room. I just said it outloud.
Sort of like Christie that way, I speak my mind, so do you, do you want me to be offended at what you say?
Jump!
===================
If he jumps, that will be the jump felt around the world.
Haven’t we gone through this before? Everytime he says no, five minutes later some idiot says he didn’t mean no. Maybe he can defend his backdoor tax increases. Does anyone really believe that you can negotiate with Reid and Pelosi? They’ll take everything including the clothes on his back. Also
states have to balance the budget by law. No such law at the federal level.
HA srry to say, but yall r all retards. all these people begging christie to get in, just want something to do in their meaningless lives, no offense. its nothing but entertainment for these peeps who want him in, they dont give a crap about making the country better, they want a good fight and interesting race is all, christie is fat, im not making fun of fat people, but seriously haha we havnt had 1 fat president. and he says he has problems with his weight, so y the hell would we let him run our country if he already has problems with his own weight!@!@ hello lol, think about it. he has a food addiction already. and plus he said NO over 30 times, that i counted lol leave him alone, ur making him eat more
HA srry to say, but yall r all retards. all these people begging christie to get in, just want something to do in their meaningless lives, no offense. its nothing but entertainment for these peeps who want him in, they dont give a crap about making the country better, they want a good fight and interesting race is all, christie is fat, im not making fun of fat people, but seriously haha we havnt had 1 fat president. and he says he has problems with his weight, so y the hell would we let him run our country if he already has problems with his own weight!@!@ hello lol, think about it. he has a food addiction already. and plus he said NO over 30 times, that i counted lol leave him alone, ur making him eat more.
That has been asked and answered. Get over it. Don’t vote for him. That’s fine.
But I see absolutely not difference between Romney and ALL of the others.
McCain compiled a dirty trick book that is devastatingly detailed on every work Romney ever said in his life and pulled anything even close to inconsistent.
Especially McCain was a complete two faced politician, who had not room at all to speak.
The only difference is someone took the trouble to make Romney’s every word accessible.
Why the focus on that? Because there is nothing else.
Romney is so squeaky clean they had to do that book to try to discredit him. It is a dirty trick book, and I hope they do one just like it on your candidate then you can hear the same old stupid stuff over and over and over and over… and no matter how many times you explain each and every word… it comes back for years and years and years…
Asked and answered, One hundred and fifty million times, move on this is not 2008. McCain isn’t running put away his dirty trick book and lets talk about qualifications and the future of our country.
My posts were in response to Matthew Kilburn’s comment, in which he said about Romney:
“He was fully open and honest about once being pro-choice – the only major issue on which he has changed his position”
Now, clearly that’s not true by a long shot, and it’s a little baffling to see Romney supporters try to claim that it is.
Romney changed his position on a number of issues aside from abortion – including gun control, stem cells, DADT, gay adoption and immigration. And in every single instance, the change was from a position that appealed to the MA electorate, to one that appealed to a Republican primary electorate.
This doesn’t require leafing through a campaign book from 2008 (which I’ve never read), it’s all in the public record.
Christie will not run,but even if he does as a Northeastern liberal,to the
left of Romney and Huntsman,he will never survive vetting.
Too many things against him.TOO many.
The guy has no record,no accomplishments,no success in anything,governor
for less than 2 years with nothing to show for.
Claim to fame:Couple well edited Youtube videos yelling at the woman teacher
and also yelling at another woman for asking him(paraphrasing):
“Hey slob,how come you send your kids in private school,you lousy hypocrite.”
Anyway,he has nothing to offer,he has one shtick:Yelling at women.That’s all.
I wish he runs,it will be ton of fun watching Sarah Palin clobber the fatso
like Barracuda ripping and shredding five times bigger fish.
By definition, Chris Christie is morbidly obese. He had to be talked into running for President of the U.S. If he really was going to be serious, he would have done something about his health choices. To think he wants to be the primary example to the world of what America is about (and they all think we are excessive in our spending, debt, eating, etc.), one would think he would do something about his weight. A 380-pound man has an average life expectancy of 52 years. Call me crazy, but I want a man who has made at least minimal efforts to be physically prepared for the rigors of the job. I don’t want to think that his VP choice has a very high probability of taking over before he can finish his term.
Health groups (doctors, trainers, etc.) are going to come out with messages around Cristie (i.e. he is not a role model for health). It’s one thing to be overweight, but it’s another to be so obese. It sends a message that you didn’t care about your body enough to maintain it, so why would we expect you to care for the country?
“On average, health-care costs for obese persons are 42 percent higher than costs for individuals whose weight falls into the “normal” range. It costs Medicare $1,723 more a year for an obese beneficiary than a non-obese one. For Medicaid the differential is $1,021, and for private insurers it’s $1,140. In other words, obesity is helping propel the rise in health-care costs, which are fueling the long-term rise in the national debt.”
I’m pretty sure Christie will not compete much (think McCain ’08) in Iowa but instead make New Hampshire his must-win to Romney’s chagrin and Perry’s delight..
@Perry has RSVPd for 2 conservative forums in IA. Faith & Freedom’s with @ReincePriebus, and Family Leader’s. http://bit.ly/or6Fkh #iacaucus
2 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply
Chris Christie’s weight will be a net plus for him in this politically correct society. It will be seen as rude and mean-spirited to attack Christie for his weight and any such attacks will backfire and only operate to Christie’s benefit. In a vague sense, Christie’s weight in 2012 is very much akin to Obama’s race in 2008. Any attacks even remotely coming close to the subject will severely backfire.
Chris Christie’s weight will be a net plus for him in this politically correct society. It will be seen as rude and mean-spirited to attack Christie for his weight and any such attacks will backfire and only operate to Christie’s benefit. In a vague sense, Christie’s weight in 2012 is very much akin to Obama’s race in 2008. Any attacks even remotely coming close to the subject will severely backfire.
What is it with all the people who aren’t running. They think the world is waiting for their decision (sadly some on here and elsewhere give support to that)?!
Just say you aren’t running and move on.
I bet if Romney loses to Obama this year he will very quietly announce WELL BEFORE OCTOBER 2015 that he’s not running in 2016.
Mark my words in the next few weeks BOTH Christie and Palin will make a huge deal out of NOT running. Both will say they would have won but aren’t running due to their families. There is nothing surer.
Why isn’t Mr. Giuliani in the new banner at the top of the page?
Why is Huntsman closer to the center of the banner (assuming the center means the strongest candidates) than Gingrich (who is my personal idol)
If I’m a betting man, one of Chris Christie, Rudy Giuliani, or Sarah Palin will announce a run for the Presidency within 10 days. But only one. And I’m betting it’s Mr. Giuliani, not Mr. Christie. And there is a pathway for him with Cain and Perry splitting the right…Giuliani and Romney will split the center and Giuliani will win based on the layout of the primary calender at the point. I admit fully that I’m a hack for Mayor Giuliani and I wildly support him but if he doesn’t enter the race, I will stand firmly with Governor Romney. I have no interest in Governor Perry or the others on the far right. I will always love Newt and if he ascends into the top tier, I’ll have to make a very calculated decision between him and Romney.
I don’t see Christie entering. He just won’t do it. He’s got too much power in New Jersey to give up on the 30/70 chance he’ll get the nomination and then a 40/60 chance that he’ll win the presidency.
With all this attention being paid to Christie, nobody is going to paying any attention to Perry while he’s explaining what he really meant in the debate a week ago and why he isn’t just a squishy corrupt moderate. It’s like the next chance he’ll have to explain himself will be on Oct. 11 in NH. Damn!
It’s sad, actually, when you see a potentially good candidate self destruct because he listens to those around him who stand to benefit by an attempt and not to his own personal analysis. If Christie runs he will obviously give NJ voters the finger and will quit the Governorship……..like Sarah Palin. Only Christie has less experience in Trenton than Sarah had in Juneau. Christie has less experience than almost any candidate including President Obama. Christie has a very messy relationship with Bernie Madoffs mess. Christie has some very liberal associates inherited from the outgoing Dem Governor and some very liberal positions. Finally, Christie has some personal problems that will be glaringly apparent on national TV. Think William Howard Taft , with 325 pounds on national TV. sad commentary but glaringly visible on TV
It is sad, because Christie will crash and burn , NJ will revert to a Dem state next year and Christie will be a footnote and a memory. And he could be so much more
Christie’s a Catholic? I didn’t realize that. I’ve always thought it odd that, for 50 years, the intellectual heart of the conservative movement has been Catholic, yet we’ve never nominated a Catholic. NR has always been heavily Catholic. Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, all Catholic, and the up and comers in the party- Rubio, Ryan, Jindal- tend to be Catholic. In a party that now wins something like 60% of the white Catholic vote, in a bad year, we’re a little past due. You get the devout religiosity without some of the off-putting cultural cues.
It doesn’t surprise me at all. The Catholic Church is the preeminent conservative institution in the world. It practically defines the concept as perhaps the oldest continuing institution in the world. The Church has always had a vibrant intellectual life as well. Traditionally, conservative Protestant scholarship has focused largely on Biblical studies and apologetics. The Church- with a larger pool to draw from- has also had a lot to say about philosophy, science, anthropology, economics, etc….
I would love a 2-man race between Christie and Romney. Either way, we beat Obama, either way we get a competent, intelligent, executive. And any Romney fan who is genuine in their distaste of Perry should welcome a Christie entry as well. Regardless of what Rick Perry/Jeb Bush or whoever tells you, Perry will not survive a Christie entry. Yes, Christie is objectively closer to Romney than Perry ideologically, but we’re in the middle of a Cain boomlet- which means that Perry’s unlikely to benefit even if a number of TRUE conservatives immediately decide that Christie’s just another RINO. A week after a Christie entry, Perry will be hovering around 10% nationally. At which point, the media- including much of conservative media- will be writing his obituary. Which means that money will dry up. And the spotlight will be so intensely on Christie that, no one will notice even if Perry immensely improves in the debates. A Christie entry either will leave us with a 2-man Christie/Romney race, or possibly a 3-man race with Cain as the dark horse.
Another reason Romney supporters should welcome a Christie entry: Christie is not going to just run away with this thing. Christie’s a potential early flameout like any late entry. He lacks Perry’s natural geographic base. And there are serious questions about his qualifications (objectively, he’s scarcely more qualified than Palin was at this point in ’08). All of this means that there is a non-trivial chance (probably around 35%) that a Christie entry simply kills all of Romney’s competition, for good, without actually having the staying power to remain a threat. If I had to chart the possibilities I’d lay out something like this:
Possibility 1: 35% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals before fading himself. Outcome: 90% chance Romney’s the nominee.
Possibility 2: 50% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals, has some serious stumbles, but goes on to field a credible campaign with staying power. Outcome: 55% chance Christie’s the nominee, 30% chance Romney’s the nominee, 15% chance Cain/Perry is the nominee
Possibility 3: 15% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals, campaigns like he governs (flawlessly and with gusto). Outcome: Christie wraps this thing up before March.
Add it all up, and you still have Romney as a slight favorite and you’ve drastically reduced the odds of an awful outcome (from the perspective of the center-right wing of the party). Romney’s fans need to face facts: under no scenario, is Romney going to walk away with this nomination. He’s too vulnerable. Want to guess why Cain has suddenly rocketed in the polls? It’s not because he’s just so gosh-darned impressive. It’s because there’s a critically large faction of the GOP that is prepared to vote for anyone other than Romney and, with Perry faltering, they picked (as they’ve done repeatedly this year) the guy who’s star was currently shining the brightest. If Romney’s going to have a rival, Cain’s the guy Romney himself would cast in the role. But I’m not the only one who doubts Cain can sustain. As long as Romney’s rival is someone like Cain, with no establishment support or political clout, Perry will be remain a viable alternative. And at some point, he’s going to say something clever, and for a few moments here and there, he’ll manage to sound like he didn’t just swing down from the tree. At that point, all his structural advantages will come back into black- big state governor, lots of financial connections, no enormous ideological vulnerabilities, from a region of the country which dislikes Romney and has 40% of the GOP’s delegates.
If Christie enters, Perry will disappear within a month- effectively disappear- and Romney will have an opponent who is weaker than the idealized Perry, but also a reasonable alternative if Romney can’t put all the pieces together. The Romney guys should be screaming for Christie to run. It’s a no-brainer.
Love the news, just wished he would’ve deftly gotten into the race than what happened over the last month. Also, he should’ve chosen his words better on whether he would run or not. He’ll get some hell, but it’ll dissipate rather quickly. Only four months till IA, will be a wild ride.
You guys are like little school girls with a crush on that fat RINO.
What has he done? Yelled at some old women on you tube and caused NJ ‘s credit rating to be downgraded (he has that in common with the jug-eared beanpole in the White House)
he has done NOTHING in his career..nothing that would make him a good candidate for president, other than have a glib and combative personality.
Can you imagine him sweating on that debate stage with all those lights?
This could be a train wreck of massive proportions.
I say, bring it on!
Come on Crispy Creme Christie! Your fan boys are about to wet their pants!
Yeah, I think you’re right about that. Christe would kill off Perry, and as long as Perry is silenced, I’m happy. It’s no secret on this site that I absolutely hate that awful man.
If it comes down to Christie-Romney, I’m pretty happy.
Christie may face some backlash from Conservatives because I’ve heard he supported the Ground Zero Mosque. I disagree strongly with Christie, but I also disagree strongly with Romney on ethanol subsidies… so I’m a forgiving kind of guy, as long as there isn’t too much baggage.
If Christie gets in, Romney’s going to have to prove himself to be the best candidate. If Romney can beat Christie for the nomination, there is every reason in the world to think Romney is an exceptionally capable leader with true grit and gravitas.
Christie is an acceptable nominee to me at this point, but I am obviously a solid Romney fan, given his extensive experience in the private sector and his excellent command of what it takes to be president.
194-Nice analysis. I could live with a Christie nomination much better than a Perry nomination, mainly because of the corruption thing. Christie’s positions seem to exactly equal to McCains, which makes him less appealing to me than Romney. But Christie is a much better communicator than McCain. I still like Romney’s energy, optimism, business experience and stand on the issues better than Christie.
But Christie is a reluctant warrior at best, which will make it difficult for him even to get in, much less keep up the pace necessary to seal this thing.
Christie was my governor (I live in Maryland now, sadly). I voted for him. I made calls for him. I cheered for him. But it’s no foregone conclusion I’d even vote for him over Romney. Ryan, no question. But Christie? How will he handle foreign policy questions? Will he, like Perry, have trouble shifting from talking about what he’s done, to what needs to be done? Will he pass the “qualified” threshold, or will his resume- substantively quite similar to Palin’s in ’08- and his lack of familiarity with national issues, end up hurting him, if not with primary voters, in general election polls? Can he put together a credible, efficient campaign on-the-fly? I imagine we’d have answers to all those questions by December and if he’s leading in the national polls come Christmas, I imagine all of those questions will have been answered to my satisfaction and he’ll have my vote pretty much sown up. But there are so many questions, I don’t think Romney’s boosters should be panicking. Romney has a core of support. He can weather a flash in the pan. He’s weathered a half-dozen so far. Better, who might become a flash in the pan, then Perry who could conceivably win the nomination even if he is a flash in the pan.
I wonder why the only person Kavon hates around here is Kilburn. There’s a few obnoxious people here to dislike, and I just think it’s weird that Kavon chooses to pick on Matthew all the time.
Palin was a transformational figure in Alaska and accomplished more than any of the current candidates, a real reformer.
Alaska has a $12 billion dollar surplus and their credit rating was UPGRADED to triple A due to her reforms. Christie has a personality but no accomplishments that can come close to what Palin did.
Killburn represents the George W Bush style of politics, and our party has moved past that. The fact that Killburn is stuck in the 2004 Republican Party probably bothers Kavon.
Teldue. Checking the calander… Sept 30, 2011. 8:16 MST. I know the day is not yet over, but still no decision? Com’on. I thought she was superwoman. Or is she just toying with you?
First it was going to be july 3rd or 4th. Then it was going to be over labor day weekend. Then it was going to be by the end of September. Palin isnt running people…although I still wish she would get in and split the vote further.
And what’s the big deal re: Nancy Reagan? Her claim to fame is she looooooooved Ronnie. People commented on how she looked at Christie in the same way she used to look at Reagan.
Sure, she was charmed and twitterpated by Christie. We like him too. But Nancy’s a 90-something year old lady captivated by a personality. Maybe Christie should run, but not because Nancy says so.
On the other hand, I’m sure Nancy and other Christie supporters are concerned about Romney’s personal appeal to the average voter. This really is about politics, not applying for a job on Wall St.
The only explanation for this phenomenom is that Christie must be angling for a job with the next administration. Perhaps he’s holding out for VP. Romney/Christie would be a great ticket though.
I like Christie, but wish he would wait when he is more ready, more experienced and seasoned. I would hate to see his late entry and maybe not quite being ready hurt him for a future run. If Perry does not win, I believe this has hurt him and he is thru, I don’t want that for Christie. Stay out of the race don’t hurt your credibility now by running after saying so long, so dogmatically that you are not running. Wait until 2016 or 2020 and build your base, experience, favors, credibility, etc. Please wait. VP is a possibility.
She lives rent free in your head…it’s a sickness and you hate yourself for it. Ha!
What a sad and pathetic life you must lead, to be so obsessed with hatred for that good woman.
Yeah, someone polling in the top three without even announcing, with a built in support organization that numbers in the hundreds of thousands, the ability to easily raise the money from that vast support group, someone with the best political skills since JFK, who also has outlined policies and holds views that the majority of Americans agree with, someone with a stellar record of making the exact reforms we need at this time in Washington, someonme who has been out front leading the public debate for three years now…yeah, would that person run?
You guys need to check yourselves before you wreck yourselves.
IMO “Herb” Cain shot himself in the foot bigtime with his Blacks Are Brainwashed comment. It’s the comment of a loose-mouth, novice politician insulting the people whose votes he seeks. There are ways he might have said the same thing: Like I hope people who normally vote Dem will come and take a look at Pub policies and see what we have to offer.
I agree Cain needs to control his tongue (and temper) better, but I suspect he’s tired of being called an Oreo, Uncle Tom, house slave, etc….. just because he’s successful and conservative.
209. I’m not the moron. Anyone who has been saying she would jump in june. July. August. Sept. Deandlines she has set… and you still send her cash. Let’s just say a fool and their money is soon parted!
By the by, did anyone see Christie’s Q & A at the Reagan Library? The speech was great but the Q & A? My gosh. He’s more effective, rhetorically, in that type of setting than any politician in the media era. More effective than Reagan. More effective than Clinton. Huckabee and Rubio are the only politicians in the last decade who even belong in the same category. As you watch Christie in these types of settings, you’ll notice that he doesn’t just do tough well- he does emotional well too. I think it’ll be extremely difficult to reduce him to a mere bully. But here’s the funny thing. In ’09, Christie was the dullest man on the planet. His consultants said, “look, Corzine’s at 35% in the polls. Be dull and acceptable and the game is yours”. And it almost wasn’t. Lonegan gave Christie a real run in the primary. For two weeks in October, Christie looked like he was honest to goodness going to blow an unlosable race. Then the real Christie emerged and made a joke about his weight. And loosened up. And stopped being so scripted. And he won comfortably. If he runs, there are going to be a lot of people urging Christie to reverse himself on some his moderate positions to cater to the primary electorate. He needs to ignore them. He needs to be himself. Sincere and heartfelt, sincere and blunt, whatever the moment or issue demands. I suspect if he does that, he’ll be able to convince the primary electorate that, on the big things, he’s with them heart and soul.
the establishment is freaking out about Palin! that’s why this sudden push for Christie, just as I’ev outlined many times. (so foolish to doubt me) They know Romney would be feckless against her.
I am almost starting to feel sorry for the sharply creased, squishy, effete, elites in Washington…their days are numbered.
I was beginning to understand the often ferocious disdain for Romney and his ” perceived ‘ Flip Flops ” After all, you shouldn’t be allowed to change a 1994 position in 2011. You shouldn’t be allowed to change a 2002 statement in 2011. You shouldn’t get away with it. But, then new light has come to the stage and illuminated the true definition of Flip Flop. It is , indeed, time sensitive.
Rick Perry wrote a book in the fall of 2010 with a dozen or so written positions that he is now carefully, but under distress, abandoning and changing.
Chris Christie has a web site filled with his own statements about his own Presidential candidacy. These are over the last six months.He is now thinking of a belly flopping
( sic ) Flip Flop
Many Republicans were quite happy with the Mass health Care plan in 2008. They have now Flip Flopped in 2011, even though the plan is unchanged
Sarah Palin quit the Governorship of Alaska and has been taken over the coals by many for quitting. These same folks are urging Chris Christie to quit. A classic Flip Flop.
We are working towards the ultimate Flip Flop. Say something on Monday and Deny it on Tuesday.
Lost in this is the now somewhat aging context in which Romney was accused of ” Flip Flopping. The term had relevance when it was new….but it is now old and abused and
supplanted by newer and much more profound examples of the verb…..to ” Flip ” and then, to ” Flop”
If somehow we could sell a Christie/Rubio ticket, Obama would end up looking like an especially fastidious actuary in comparison. Of course, I have no idea how a ticket with that little experience would play, even if both men sounded well-informed, competent, etc.
Christie represents the last great white hope of the scheming crony capitalists in D.C and their corrupt cabal of bought and paid for politicians. What ever will the K streeters and big money fat cats do if someone really reforms the place and represents the people instead of the special interests willingly greasing the wheels for a spot on the gravy train? The horror!
She is the one thing they can’t abide…a truly honest person who can’t be bought.
#194: MEM, that was a lot of words wasted. The hardcore Rombots don’t support him because they want a center-right candidate. They support him because his election would help legitimize their Mormon religion.
If Palin does indeed run, how will this “hel” she intends to bring go down?
I mean, who is suspporting her? Most of the GOP voters polled don’t want her to run. And I don’t buy they are being programmed to think she won’t run, so they are tuning her out.
No political figure short of Obama has received as much media – good and bad, as Palin since bursting on to the scene. The last year has seen her policial value wan and as we speak, the GOP may like her, but they don’t want her as President.
So how does she change a race in which no will be supporting her, short of a 5-10% of Republicans?
Kavon,
To be fair it seems to me like incoherent political philosophy is a bit of a trademark of American conservatism. I think it’s a product of our two party system which forces everybody into only two camps. Classical liberals and classical conservatives and every other brand of conservative are smashed into one blob, brought together to fight the common threat of neo-liberalism and quasi marxism. A lot of folks only know their on one side or the other and think that this is all there is to it. Therefore, they grab a little of this ideology and that ideology all on the right side of the aisle and declare themselves to “True Conservatives” plain and simple. MattK is hardly alone in that, I think possibly more people do this than don’t, especially the talk radio crowd. Actually, MattK shows a little more independence from orthodoxy than most – even though this leads him to sound distubingly similar to the American Party of the 19th cent.
#225: Juan Williams? You are using Juan as a source. Nice guy but so consistently inaccurate, he makes Craig seem like a steadfast, resolute and honorable poster.
MattK has a coherent political philosophy. He is a statist who wishes to use big government power to force all of us into his fetishized version of the 1950s, socially and economically.
This has been quite a thread. I’ll try to stick with Christie.
I will be very surprised if Christie actually enters the race. He is known for being a straight talker. I like that about him. Very much. No other potential GOP candidate has been so emphatic in denying running. Changing his mind now would damage his credibility, in my opinion.
The concerns about Christie’s weight are in some ways legitimate, and in some ways not. His weight as it affects his health is legitimate, but to say “if he can’t take care of his body, how can he take care of this country” is hogwash. I know a lot of fat people who work hard and are patriots. One can be a good president and be fat. However, we live in a TV age, and while it’s not right, people are judged on their appearance all of the time. It is a possibility that Christie’s weight could influence the votes of some of our more uninformed voters.
Would I support Christie over Romney? Absolutely not. Romney remains the most qualified, the most competent, the most balanced candidate we have. However, if Christie were to win the nomination, I could support him, most definitely. He is not the most conservative candidate on the GOP side, not even close. I would disagree with him on several issues. But I have no doubt that he would be a good leader, something we sorely lack in the White House at his time.
Sarah Palin said that by the end of September she will make a decision.
She never said when she will announce!
This is what she said last night on Judge Napolitano:
“I hold my political cards close to my chest and I’ve certainly learned lessons along those lines and I’m going to continue to do that until I’m ready to make an announcement”.- SARAH PALIN
Relax Dougie…if you have this all figured right – she should be inconsequential to you!
Heck, she’s just a snowbilly from a little town!
heh heh
this might be easier than I thought
not even going to see it coming…
Doug is going to be like that gal from New York who couldn’t believe Nixon won…she didn’t know a single person who voted for him. It’s a bubble of ignorance I’m content to let them live in.
Steffen W. Schmidt, a political science professor at Iowa State University, said the pressure on Perry to produce a competitive fundraising sum is heightened by continued speculation about the presidential intentions of New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie.
“Perry needs to squash ’Christie fever,’” he said. “It is a killer for Perry, that even with him in the race, the GOP is still looking. If I was a Republican fat cat, I would sit on my political money until the dust settles.”
Rather fun, but weird (in the sense that I never thought I would see this) picture of Mitt and Huck chatting before taping Huckabee’s show today. Politics does indeed make for interesting bedfellows. There was all kinds of animosity between the camps four years ago… perhaps bygones are bygones???
MattK has a coherent political philosophy. He is a statist who wishes to use big government power to force all of us into his fetishized version of the 1950s, socially and economically.
Yes, this is correct.
I was trying to think of a current day politician who actually espouses what Kilburn believes and I just couldn’t do it. How does a 17 year-old become the last Kefauverite anyways?
Metro that sounds about right (except for the term Statist which I think tends to be an intellectually simplistic term devised by libertarians with a one dimensional view of the world, but I digress), so I don’t really get Kavon’s complaint that his ideology is incoherent. It’s more coherent than the borderline economic anarchism combined with robust militarism and strict Social Conservatism that is defined as the three stools of “True Conservatism” in America today. I think MattK attitude toward immigration is downright scary, but he seems as consistent as most.
This will be a big boon for Romney, especially in Iowa. Romney is very competitive there and any semblence of harmony and acceptance by Huck will be beneficial. If Romeny comes in thisclose to the winner – or wins outright – he’ll be well on the way.
The incoherence come from the fact that he is a pro-union, anti-free trade, ultra-pro lifer who worships Mitt Romney of all people. I don’t want to delve to deeply into the bones of ideology.
After years of running and spending $50 millions of his own money,
we know where Romney is in so far meaningless and worthless polls,between
17%-23%.Nothing to brag about.
Sarah Palin is not running yet.So we don’t know what her numbers will be
once she start vigorous campaign.
We can only make predictions according what we know and what we think.
My prediction:
Once sh’s in the race Sarah Palin will easily surge in front and be #1.
Christie’s personality transcends his weight with his charm, IMO. However, as you point out, health and energy levels could be a concern. He’s a very intense person. He was taken to the hospital with an asthma attack recently. Maybe he’s on prednisone, which causes weight gain and other problems in most people. The stressful demands made on a POTUS are something to consider in Christie’s case, who may suffer from health problems we don’t yet know about but would have to become public knowledge.
So has anybody mentioned his statement ridiculing those worried about Sharia law? I like him for that, but it seems like it could hurt him among those looking for the perfect “True Conservative.”
Actually, to all those people looking to Palin for an announcement today…she said it would be unfair to her supporters to string them along past September if she wasn’t running. Go back and listen to the video. If she’s running, she ain’t stringing anyone along.
“I don’t want to delve to deeply into the bones of ideology.”
You’re no fun at all. . You’re right his commitment to Romney is a bit strange – and he’s a Catholic too, so it can’t be explained away as him supporting a Mormon. The best explanation is that he picked him as a teenager, a lot of us probably didn’t make sense in our politics back then.
You asre being disingenous to count the money spent in the 2008. However, even if you do, Romney was an unknown, who didn’t have the prominent oppurtunity (VP selection) Palin was afforded. So for an unknown Gov in the last cycle to emerge as the frontrunner in this cycle, it’s not a bad amount of money. Politics is expensive. Palin is going to need boatloads of cash to re-work her image and negative, if she decides to run.
All this delay of game, however, only reduces her reputation, in my oipinion. You might hold to the romantic, Hollywood idea of her sweeping in and riding a wave, but that is doubtful to occur. Even Obama, how was best positioned to do that in 2008, still had a long fight on his hands with Clinton.
By delaying her decision and to keep playing with dates, only makes her look like a dodger and oppurtunist. Besides, she doesn’t want to get all “shacklely” (new Paliism no doubt) by being President.
The only reason she keeps her political cards close to her vest is because she’s not holding a winning hand.
Metro: From some post above. I believe you said Mormons want Mitt in order to validate Mormonism. I’m sure that many LDS believe that. Minorities love to vote for their guy. Catholics voted for JFK. Blacks for Obama. I see it differently. Has Obama helped improve respect for blacks? No.
I’m voting for Mitt because I don’t see a better alternative; but because I’m LDS I kind of wish he weren’t running. If he were to win the nom, the billion dollars Obama’s promised to raise will surely be spent dredging up every nutty thing possible against Mormonism. If Mitt were POTUS, any failures (and he could have many despite his best efforts considering the state of things) would certainly be used to reflect poorly on the church.
Romney’s and Huntsman’s candidacies may have helped the CJCLDS in some ways, but a win? Not necessarily.
You asre being disingenous to count the money spent in the 2008. However, even if you do, Romney was an unknown, who didn’t have the prominent oppurtunity (VP selection) Palin was afforded.
==============================================
Yes,Romney was an unknown,so was Huckabee.
See what I mean when I mention $50 million?
“I don’t know anybody screaming, demanding, that Sarah get in”.
======================================
How about millions of her supporters?!
Are you that lefty,loony lady from upper East Side Manhatann that never knew
anybody who voted for Nixon,therefor she refused to believe that he won
the presidentcy?
I appreciate that you see it as pandering. And that is what the people who hate him think.
But I see it as a businessman realizing he wants to be a politician and figuring out what his positions really are.
In my view, it looks to me like Romney got into politics not to hold any office but to be the one who got to stand up to Ted Kennedy and challenge him to his face.
His first campaign was a protest campaign against Democrat orthodoxy and Ted Kennedy corruption. He could not have ever believed that he, a totally unknown, would win against Ted Kennedy.
So he was sloppy, and he said whatever. He was never going to be a US Senator so, whatever, he got to give Kennedy a run for his money and show that Kennedy was not as popular as everyone thought.
Then he did so well they drafted him (like they are trying to draft Christie) to run for Governor. I doubt he believed he would win that one either. And he still didn’t think it was important to be rock solid on the issues and was sloppy. That isn’t good, but that is what I see.
Then he won.
And then he looked at what he said and felt compelled to do what he said. But on abortion he had a choice. Break his commitment to not let his personal feelings about abortion effect his public policy or in reality support abortion. When it came time to put his name down saying abortion was okay, he couldn’t do it.
He decided he could live with breaking a campaign promise easier than signing his name to a paper that resulted in abortions. He couldn’t be personally responsible for killing babies.
After that, I think he revamped his policy positions. And in every single instance he became more conservative. Because those were the positions he could sign his name to.
That is when he decided he could run the government and fix the problems better than anyone else.
I think Romney had a learning on the job experience with politics. He now understands how important his words are.
But I also think he is naturally very polite. And he can’t bring himself to condemn someone or something without first pointing out positives. It is an odd quirk.
If you notice, he always says, I respect this thing about Obama… or school policy… or something but I condemn this part of it…
I don’t think it is wishy-washy I think he was raised not only look for the bad but always always notice what is good first. Because that is how I was raised too.
I actually don’t have the self-discipline to do that. But Romney almost always does.
#260 TEX: “Are you that lefty,loony lady from upper East Side Manhatann that never knew
anybody who voted for Nixon,therefor she refused to believe that he won
the presidentcy?”
No, “Tex,” I am that straight-thinking, hard-core conservative lady from So. California, who descends from early Oregon pioneers. Like Sarah, I’ve been hunting, fishing, mountain-climbing, and with Mr. K.G. have run a business for over 30 years. However, before that I was an English teacher, soooo….like I’ve said before, I loved Sarah in the beginning. Her screechy voice and poor syntax disqualify her if nothing else. A person who says “shakle-y” on national TV cannot be POTUS. We’ll never have another Andrew Jackson.
I run in conservative circles here and in AZ, TX, UT, WA and ID. I only know one person who likes SP (from Midland) and many who find her as appealing as fingernails on a blackboard.
Yes, she has her supporters and that’s fine. But the country is not clammering for Palin the way they are Christie. Granted we know Palin a lot better and Christie very little. Palin charmed our socks off in the beginning but………..
Maybe the same thing will happen to Christie. I dunno. But Sarah will never be POTUS.
Running around few states you know only one person who likes Sarah Palin?
Your friends are bunch a liberals and RINOS,that’s why.
I
You don’t like phisycal sound of Gov. Palin voice?!
It looks like I now need to really take a close look at Christie. He looks like someone I could get excited about, rather than just voting and supporting the last man standing (i.e. Romney).
What has been so interesting to me is the Romnots vs the Rombots go at it. Such a vastly different perception of the same candidate is fascinating. The anyone but Romney camp think he is the dirties, slimiest, can’t trust him, most liberal ever; while the Rombots are petitioning him for sainthood (possible hyperbole here, but not much). It’s made me smile quite a bit today and in the past months.
Guess what, your both closed minded. Romney is opportunistic and will twist what he says further than most politicians. His criticism of other candidates last round really turned me off when so many other criticism of that same vane could have been just as easily and probably justly been fired right back at him. In that regard, Andrew and Sojourner are exactly right.
However, petunia is right in that most of the facts you two spouted were more propaganda then facts similar to the McCain attach that Romney supported a timetable to end the war. There is no question that Romney is more a pragmatic moderate, but still well on the conservative side of the fence.
On gun control: he supported the Bradley bill because of the waiting period. Why did he change, because technology changed such that a background check could now be done instantly, whereas before it took days. A moderate, pragmatic view in that he thought it necessary to keep guns from those who wouldn’t pass a background check. If you believe government impediment to purchase a gun at any time is a gross infringement on the right to bear arms, than Romney is not your guy. If you think that some measures need to take place to keep guns from “The Crazies” as Romney said is OK, than Romney is your man. I just do not see him trying to undo the 2nd amendment. From all that he has said, he feels it should be a right as long as you are not a criminal or a “Crazy.”
On gay rights: its more murky, but the context has changed drastically since ’94. Gay marriage wasn’t even on the table back then, discrimination more so. It appears he didn’t have many qualms about recognizing something like a civil union back then, its hard to tell. Definately shows moderate to liberal stance back in ’94. Enter 2002 governorship. I didn’t read the town hall article, but I’m pretty sure the marriage license didn’t change from Husband and Wife until after the ruling. He did kind of fight the issue until the ruling, but for many it was not enough as can be seen here in this link http://www.massresistance.org/romney/gregg_jackson_122007.html. Looking at the presentation the state made to the Justices of the peace along with Romney comments on the radio show, it more looks like the state (i.e. Romney and his counsel) concluded it would cost too much in litigation if state representatives didn’t comply. He we see the pragmatism and that it wasn’t the most important issue to him at the time. Some argue that since the legislature did not act in the 180 days that Romney didn’t have to follow the courts decision, or could have still fought it, but it is a week legal argument unless the supreme court ruling could be overturned. I did find things going way back to support that Romney does believe a marriage should be between an man and woman, but he will follow the law of the land as decided by the Supreme Court. Will Romney fight tooth and nail to keep Marriage, adoption and other gay issues in the traditional? I think we can see that he won’t. Conversely, he will not champion gay marriage on the national level either. If this is your wholly beholden issue, Romney is not your man. If you have bigger concerns about the economy, you may look at him then.
Mandates: He clearly has no problems with state level mandates. If you hate state mandates, then Romney is not your guy. The real question is National Mandates. Did he really support the Chafee bill? The only evidence we have is the interview by Judis in The New Republic. Did he then? possibly. Does he now? I just don’t see it. I could be wrong. What I do know is that he would not have done it for the nation because Romney care would not work for the whole nation. For it to be feasible, it needs to already have a high level of people insured, it needs to have less people at or below poverty level. I’m pretty sure he didn’t do it for ideological purposes, he did it because the numbers fit Massachusetts and probably a very few states. Again, the pragmatic, moderate, less ideological M.O. So far the results, depending on how you look at the results are a big mixed bag. Not enough by most to call it a failure, but still nearly having the uninsured.
Taxes or Fees: Did the tax and fee burden go up drastically? only for a few services where the fees where considerably lower for the same thing in lower states. Maybe that is a big deal for you, maybe it isn’t. Again its the pragmatic pol looking to help revenue where he doesn’t want to increase property or income taxes.
Does he flip flop? Every politician does. Does he do it only when its convenient or insincerely? Not completely, that is the problem with pragmatists. As the context or issues change, your position may change. What has hurt Romney is that he always tries to, as all politicians do, is present his positions in the best light, but he lacks the “it” sojourner? spoke of, but the “it” is the ability to connect and not look plastic or have charisma. Since Romney doesn’t have much of it, he has a hard time coming off as the real deal and make people feel like their issues are the tops of his list because he isn’t an ideologue and can shift what he thinks will work best with changing times. He will never resonate with the Social Conservatives. But he has gotten more conservative as he has gotten older, just like the majority of the baby boomers. He probably wouldn’t have won reelection in Massachusetts because after all the salesmanship of I’m not extreme, I’m safe, he governed more conservatively than most would have liked, especially on fiscal issues.
So, in conclusion, I do not like how he campaigns, especially last time. It makes me a bit squeamish, but since the social issues are not my most pressing ones right now, and since I can trust that he won’t make them worse, and that his actual record isn’t bad, but mostly pretty descent, I can hold my nose and vote for him if no one better shows up.
Now Christie, please tell me more. I think I could really like him.
I have been exploring for a little bit for any high quality articles or weblog posts in this sort of area . Exploring in Yahoo I ultimately stumbled upon this web site. Reading this information So i?m happy to express that I have a very just right uncanny feeling I came upon just what I needed. I most definitely will make sure to do not omit this site and give it a look on a continuing basis.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:11 pm
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees!!!
What?
Ahhh..just kidding.
The more current sitting GOVERNORS the better.
“Welcome aboard, moderate vote splitter.” – Perry says
September 29th, 2011 at 10:12 pm
Does NO ONE say what they mean and mean what they say??????????
Remember Horton the Elephant?? Christie is showing to be a less than honorable man!! (Not to mention he is NOT a real conservative!!!!!!! What are Republicans thinking?!?!)
This kind of behavior…..maybe the Repubs are just too dumb anymore to win the WH?!?!?!?!?!!?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:13 pm
Rombot backlash in 9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 Blast off!
September 29th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Deus ex machina?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
CCRombot,
You jumped my countdown — what’s up with that, my friend?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:15 pm
“Welcome aboard, moderate vote splitter.”
If Christie’s moderate, then Margaret Thatcher was moderate.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Don’t tell me Reagan’s fav, Maggie’s running in GB, too.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:20 pm
6.
The polls after the October debates that Christie participates in will tell us if the big man draws more from Mod Rom or Con Perry.
But I actually know already.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
Baghdad Craig:
I wouldn’t cheer too much if I were you.
Romney, Christie, and Cain won’t leave any oxygen in the room for Perry.
But that’s a great thing, so I’ll cheer!!
Maybe now we can talk about how to fix the nation instead of having to stomp down a fake bad ass…
September 29th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
Sorry, Perry/Bush……….that will totally push Perry out of the race (one tough talkin’ guv is enough in the race). The media will dump the short lived affair with Cain and gush and blush all over Crispy Creme (as Levin calls him).
Will you be Christie/whoever then?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
I still don’t think he’s running.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
If Christie does get in, it is difficult (though not impossible) to envision a scenario where he does not win.
If Christie does not get in, it is difficult (though no impossible) to envision a scenario where Romney does not win.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:28 pm
Where does it say he’s leaning towards running?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Perry’s integrity is really shameful. How is it, after the past 8+ days, one can support a man who has intentionally distorted the truth of his own actions (easy to trace) and make “ads” that are based on stupid (again, easy to trace) out of context statements. Those are CHEAP and lazy and immature tactics.
I’m embarrassed for the guy that he is acting so immature. Sorry Perry/whoever…
September 29th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Matt C
I like Christie, but he has to go through the same vetting treatment that Perry got and he has to go up against the Romney machine with little time to prepare. He’ll also have the same handicap as Perry……..Stepping on to the stage with huge expectations.
I guess it depends on whether he thinks Mitt can beat Obama and do the job.
If he does, I don’t see him running…
September 29th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
From Stephen Hayes on Twitter:
@stephenfhayes ppl in Christie-world who used to say “zero chance” about a bid now say decision soon
September 29th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
Hmm….
What does Nancy have against Mitt?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:32 pm
12. “If Christie does get in, it is difficult (though not impossible) to envision a scenario where he does not win. … If Christie does not get in, it is difficult (though no impossible) to envision a scenario where Romney does not win.”
I don’t agree w/either statement.
I think Christie would be unlikely to win if he joined. He has no ground game–no organization. He has plenty of issues that conservatives won’t like–more than any other current candidate sans Perry. If Christie join one of three things will happen: (1) He will split the intelligent vote & give the game to Perry, (2) He will burn up fast after a strong entry, or (3) He will suck up the rest of the O2, creating a 2-man race w/Romney.
If Christie doesn’t enter the race Romney can still lose. A lot of people are disillusioned w/Perry, but may be willing to go back to him if he could appear to be more than a complete retard for a 2-hour stretch. A lot of people don’t like Mormonism and they’re desperately searching for any reason not to vote for Mitt. If Perry can present anything promising he’ll be a force in IA & SC at least.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
Moderate vote splitter?
The people crying for Christie to get in are the ones with a deep and personal hatred for all things Romney who have suddenly found that Perry isn’t the White Knight they thought he was.
Why does a moderate Conservative, Independent, Pragmatist, or economics-oriented voter perfectly happy with Romney need to consider big boy?
Christie has no deep personal desire to be President. That alone should disqualify him. This is the most powerful, difficult, and important job in the world. You don’t take it unless you want it with every fiber of your being.
For months and months and months and months Christie said no. If he says anything different now, its “might as well” – and that isn’t the kind of sentiment I want in the oval office.
I like christie, I respect christie – but I will do both of those a lot less if he suddenly becomes a fair weather candidate.
And if this party rejects Romney, who’s only real “sin” has been to require those with their own resources to purchase their own health protection, then I may very well start treating this party with the same disdain so many have treated the most competent candidate to run for President in quite some time with.
I may be forced to find a new political home.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Don’t forget about Smack’s inside info from earlier today… Charlie Weaver and other senior Pawlenty staff reportedly flying to New Jersey to meet with Christie on Sunday to discuss plans of “his immediate future”…
Smack, you got any updates for us?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo……..
September 29th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
So funny, he has less experience than Palin, with none of the accomplishments
It’s too late for Palin
she’s too inexperienced
Ha!
this proves that was all a lie
because…
they know
you do to
September 29th, 2011 at 10:37 pm
PhilipRucker Wife no longer objects after Barbara Bush call RT @TheFix SIREN: Chris Christie “seriously considering” 2012 bid. http://ow.ly/6J8jm
8 minutes ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Philip RuckerWashington Post – National Political Reporter (DC)
jmartpolitico: No idea whether Christie ult runs, but ppl in Christie-world who used to say “zero chance” now say new decision soon.
41 minutes ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Jonathan MartinPOLITICO – Reporter (DC)
TheFix SIREN: Chris Christie “seriously considering” 2012 bid.
about 1 hour ago · reply · retweet · favorite
Chris CillizzaWashington Post – Blogger (DC)
Moderate heaven!
!
September 29th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
People who say Christie needs to be vetted are missing the fact that superstars don’t get vetted. Their star power is enough to make people overlook their deficiencies.
It’s what made super pro-life people that I know vote for Obama. When I tried to talk to them about the issues, their response every time was, “So what? I like him. He inspires me.”
That’s how it will be with Chris Christie. Gun control? Immigration? Not a problem. He is the biggest GOP superstar we have (way bigger than Daniels, bigger than Ryan, bigger than Rubio), and that’s all that matters.
If he gets in.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
21. LOL!
The Rombot meltdown is priceless.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
22,
“Seven years US atty for the NJ district” >> “Mayor of Wasilla”.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
It will be very interesting if he takes the plunge, especially with the primaries moving up a month. This leaves Christie essentially with a 3 month campaign to build on the huge momentum boost he’d get from jumping in.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
If this party ends up treating romney like ****, it deserves to lose every position it currently holds. end of story.
The most repeated lines against Romney are “mandate” (AKA, requiring people to pay for their own bill) and “phony” (which still doesn’t have a clear definition, and is about as meaningless as can be).
Reject Romney, and we’re stuck with two political parties – the Democrats, who don’t care about competence, and the Republicans, who don’t recognize it when it smacks them on the head.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
24.
Not buying.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Just when I thought ‘Minnesota Smacks’ couldn’t possibly get any dumber……..
HE TOTALLY REDEEMS HIMSELF!
September 29th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Matt C is right.
But there’s more. “Vetting” from Romney, Inc. isn’t going to do much damage if the principle is a good attorney and quick on his feet and offers sound explanations.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:42 pm
Um, I haven’t looked at the article thoroughly, but where does it say Christie is leaning towards running?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:42 pm
28,
In Republican Party 2011,
IDEOLOGY > COMPETENCE.
And besides, do you really want to argue that Christie is incompetent?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:42 pm
This would be a good time to buy some shares on Intrade.
Just sayin’.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:44 pm
Why do people even post this Christie crap. Who doesn’t know what NO means?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
“And besides, do you really want to argue that Christie is incompetent?”
I’ll argue he isn’t experienced enough.
I’ll argue he doesn’t have the economic experience Romney does.
I’ll argue a lawyer doesn’t necessarily make a good executive.
====
This race has a very personal aspect for me – I’m a person who seriously hopes to go into elected office one day. 15 or 20 years from now, I would much rather like to be able to face voters and tell them I want to follow in the mold of Romney more than in the mold of Perry or Christie or any other chump people are trying to throw at Romney.
Then again, maybe by that time, I’ll have lost the stomach to remain in a party that treats competent such experienced, competent candidates like crap.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
Please don’t go. PLEASE. We need the laughs
September 29th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
Christie/Huckabee??? Hmmmmm….
Two tons of fun! Weeeeee…..
Has a nice ring to it!
September 29th, 2011 at 10:46 pm
The Nancy endorsement is a big deal.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:46 pm
“Please don’t go. PLEASE. We need the laughs ”
Dispute anything I said.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:47 pm
Oooh, updating monikers. I want to play!
September 29th, 2011 at 10:48 pm
28
Competency isn’t enough. The resume has never been enough for Presidential races. Inspiration, charisma, the ability to connect and ‘feel your pain’, these are all keys to winning Presidential elections. Romney has always looked good on paper but never inspired or connected. He just doesn’t have ‘it’.
Now, he could still win, George H.W. Bush didn’t have ‘it’ either and still won. But I imagine people connect with the blue-collar Christie far easier than the millionaire CEO.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:48 pm
Truth be told…I find Christie kind of sexy. No joke.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:48 pm
Christie gets in, he wins, I’ve always said that. He’s just too good at what he does not to.
Still prefer Romney though.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
40.
From what I’ve seen Rick Perry/Jeb Bush just spouts propoganda and deflects serious substance. I wouldn’t waste time on him.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
So you’re NOT arguing he’s incompetent.
Maybe the fact that Christie’s a lawyer doesn’t make him a good executive….but he’s sure proven to be a good executive anyway.
He’s cut the budget. He’s taken on the teachers’ unions, and most importantly – he’s moved the political middle to the right and he’s gotten support for conservative policy in a state like New Jersey.
Mitt Romney has never done anything like that.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
#18 Hey! The Mormon card played on a Christiie thread. Way to go.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:50 pm
People WANT to like blue-collar folks more than millionnaire CEO’s.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:51 pm
43 is not me.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:51 pm
“‘it’”
Yes, well, as I’ve said, reject romney, and I may very well tell the GOP where to put “it”.
====
If Christie gets in, from my point of view, its a lose-lose.
Either he wins the nomination, in which case Romney never becomes President, and one of the few Politicans I can LEGITIMATELY look up to and idolize somewhat is thrown in the trash can of history.
Or Christie loses, in which case he never becomes President, never becomes the Republican nominee, etc…honestly, I like Christie (much less if he gets in, but I still like him), and I think he COULD be good nominee, ONE DAY. But not today.
Bachmann. Pawlenty. Perry. How much more of our talent are people going to permanently waste trying to dethrone Romney juts because he doesn’t make Limbaugh go giddy?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:52 pm
This is like a cheesy horror flick, where the monster comes back to life in the closing scenes at least twice.
Except in the case of Christie rumors from the Christie Clingers, it’s more like two or three thousand times.
In the modern era, nobody who has to be begged, pleaded, supplicated, and finally kidnapped as Christie has, is going to make a good candidate.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
38 is not me. Rombot kids are playing as usual.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
48
Romney could always point to the $60 million Todd Christie made when he sold his company to Goldman Sachs. Though it’s a bit of a stretch to hit Chris for that. Christie’s blue collar Italian/Irish Catholic authenticity is hard to malign.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
“but he’s sure proven to be a good executive anyway.”
Give it more than two years. Give it more than a jihad against Unions. Lets see how he does.
Why it is the GOP suddenly wants to throw every fresh-off-the-vine politico into the White House is beyond me.
How well did that work out with Obama?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Limbaugh doesn’t even like Christie.
But in terms of how much talent we need to “waste” – as far as I’m concerned, just enough to knock Romney out of the running and beat Obama. That’s all.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:54 pm
I don’t think Christie is going to run, but even if he does, he won’t win. The sheer difficulty in cobbling together a national campaign and creatng the groundwork for it take months to accomplish.
Plus, and this is what would be most tragic, the moment Christie would stumble (and he will stumble because everyone does), the same types who are cheering him on now would turn on him. Those who are putting him on a pedastal will be damning him after his first mistake.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
This is just getting silly. Either issue a Shermanesque statement or get in.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
I’m of the opinion that it matters far more where you came from than where you wind up.
Just like with Reagan, Clinton, even Huckabee.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
47. “#18 Hey! The Mormon card played on a Christiie thread. Way to go.”
Several studies have shown Mormonism to be a real hinderance to election–a couple of the studies specifically involved Mitt. One lengthy study I read concluded that about 1 in 4 people that dislike Mitt for any policy reason have Mormonism as their root issue w/him. That study was from ’08 though. It is what it is. No one’s boo hooing the bigotry. Whatever your background, someone will be prejudiced against it. For example, Perry some people probably think Perry’s dumb just by hearing his accent. He happens to be dumb as hell, but even if her weren’t, some people would probably hold his accent against him.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Oh, agreed – in fact, its Christie’s reluctance to run that disqualifies him right off the bat. I don’t mind ambition. ambition is good. If you aren’t ambitious about being President, I sure as heck don’t want you to get behind the resolute desk and start making decisions.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
17.
Maybe it’s that she doesn’t trust the GOP voter and what they’ve become. She knows that the GOP of today would never nominate her husband. Risking the party and country to a Rick Perry or a Michele Bachmann would be a disaster and she feels the party can’t take that risk. For some of the big wigs in the party, Christie may simply be insurance.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Was Daniels “fresh off the vine”? Perry – governor for a decade? No.
They just don’t want Romney. It’s as simple as that.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Okay…how long before Craig changes his screen name to Christie/Perry?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
ST,
remind me why you hate Romney so much?
Do you SEE a more experienced, more qualified, more personally admirable candidate in the race?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
If Christie did change his mind I suspect it was weeks ago, around the time when he spoke to Rep. Paul Ryan about how one of them should run.
Not to mention he has dominated the race without even being in it. The free media, displaying republicans begging him to run, stands in stark contrast to some of the awful debates the GOP candidates have had to date. If he’s in, the roll out of the reversal was brilliant.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:58 pm
“Was Daniels “fresh off the vine”? Perry – governor for a decade? No.”
No.
But Chrsite / Perry / Jindal / Rubio / etc. all are.
September 29th, 2011 at 10:58 pm
Can we please just this once not automatically assume that the reason Republicans want someone other than Mitt has to do with Mormonism?
September 29th, 2011 at 10:59 pm
64 – I don’t trust a word he says. Period. That’s it and that’s all.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
Christie’s blue collar Italian/Irish Catholic authenticity is hard to malign.
I would argue that the working class urban Northerner is one of the most important voters of the coming election cycle. A lot of these folks voted Democrat during the Bush era, voted for their fellow Irish Catholic John Kerry in 2004, etc. But they tend to be the folks hit the hardest by the Obama economy, they don’t suffer from the white guilt of the upper middle class whites in the suburbs, and they will have no problem voting against Obama provided that the GOP nominee is someone that “gets” them. Christie would be the first GOP nominee in a long time who could connect with these voters on a personal level.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
#67:
Thank you. The anti-Mormonism shtick is a tired-old tripe that was beat to death then resurrected and beat to death again in the last campaign. I’m very, very sick of it.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
Im-your
Bob Hovic recently linked a survey- I believe it was from Pew- that should people are almost equally disinclined to vote for an evangelical, as a Mormon. Irony aside, this rings true. Evangelicals make up almost 30% of the population, but have no Supreme Court seat, are vastly underrepresented in Congress, and have only produced a couple Presidents.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
I simply don’t see how I can vote for a party if it ends up treating Romney the way so many here want it to. Whatever personal admiration I have for the man aside, you can’t look at his resume, background, positions, or personal life and call him anything other than a clean, competent, qualified conservative.
To destroy a man like that in favor of a flavor of the month would literally be nauseating to me.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:01 pm
Jonathan,
“The anti-Mormonism shtick is a tired-old tripe that was beat to death then resurrected and beat to death again…. I’m very, very sick of it.”
Sort of like Christie rumors….
September 29th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
“That’s it and that’s all.”
On what grounds?
1) He kept every campaign promise he made as governor of Massachusetts
2) He was fully open and honest about once being pro-choice – the only major issue on which he has changed his position
3) He has stuck by his words and his actions when he truly believes in them, even when it would have been far more politically expediant to do otherwise.
WHAT, IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, LEADS YOU NOT TO TRUST HIM?!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:04 pm
63.
I don’t like mushy moderates.
But LOVE SoCon’s like Huck, Bach, Perry, Pence, Jeb, Rubio, etc. etc. etc
And I can’t stand weak slimy politician’s who quit their term midway through to go dance with the reality tv stars merely for the $$$.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:04 pm
Oh! That is what Intrade is all about! They have him at 30%! I am absolutely certain that Christie said no.
And Nancy is not the sharpest tool in the box. Is she like 100 yet?
Besides she likes Romney. She might be a Mormon hater. She is about the right age for that. Like McCain’s Mom.
Well she should talk. She isn’t exactly known for her orthodoxy!
But Ronnie liked Mormons, had the choir out for the inaugurations and such.
Poor Nancy she is so old and out of touch.
She tells eveyone that, Christie, don’t be too flattered.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
60
Anyone who has observed Christie here in NJ knows he does NOT lack ambition. I believe the only reason he didn’t jump in earlier was due to a lack of a clear path to the nomination and family considerations. Early on Pawlenty was blocking his path as credible Romney alternative and Daniels was poised to enter with a ready-made campaign until his wife’s last minute veto. Barbour and his rolodex were looming. Question marks existed about Perry, Rudy, Palin, etc. And frankly, Obama and the economy are in far worse shape than anyone anticipated a year ago. And reports indicate the family has come on board.
Now much of the path has been cleared, without Christie having to campaign yet or spend a dime. The race has come to him, so having a change of heart now due to a dramatically different landscape is not disqualifying, but entirely reasonable.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
#74:
Exactly. The Governor has said a hundred million times that he ain’t running, yet the chattering class “knows”.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
“Poor Nancy she is so old and out of touch.”
Well, if she’s pushing Christie to run to save the Party from Perry, she certain has lost her marbles.
Perry is dropping like a rock, and Christie’s entry will only muddy the waters.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
#76:
It would be in your best interest to stop talking.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
74:
Repeating the same thing over and over. No matter how many times we point out that there’s only one major change of position (abortion), the list of debunked flips keeps growing. But each debunked flip gets repeated over and over (i.e. people lie) and so we hear nonsense like how we can’t trust him.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
“Now much of the path has been cleared, without Christie having to campaign yet or spend a dime. The race has come to him, so having a change of heart now due to a dramatically different landscape is not disqualifying, but entirely reasonable.”
No, its disqualify.
If the only way you take over the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world is when it appears to walk up and shake your hand, you’re a fair weather candidate.
and I don’t want your BIG toe inside the White House.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
69
And it’s not just the north east. The reason Virginia and NC have become swing states is due to their growing suburbs, whose ideology reflects the suburbs of Philly, Ohio, and NJ more than the more rural evangelical regions.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:10 pm
#56 Jonathan,
Yes, see Rick Perry for Exhibit A.
I wonder how it must feel to be the Texas governor now. He too was urged to run yet the Republican Party’s fawning over Christie speaks to just how much they are turning their backs on him.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:11 pm
82
Hard to do the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world if you can’t win it. The ability to actually win is a factor in any decision, and Christie’s chances have only gone up throughout the year.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:12 pm
Kilburn, some friendly advice: if you are truly looking to get into politics in the future, you’d better grow some thicker skin. Politics is a contact sport, and nobody agrees with anybody else all the time. Consider this your chance to exercise real leadership and win people over to your side instead of getting furious and channel some sort of faux-righteous indignation.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:12 pm
74 – The flip flops. All of them. But it’s not even that. It’s how convenient they all were and then how he had the audacity to malign others as insufficiently conservative. The changes in position and emphasis. The fact that Mitt always manages to massage his views so that *voila* – they happen to be exactly in line with his desired constituency.
We’ve argued this back and forth for years.
Romney was pro-gay marriage in 1994.
http://townhall.com/columnists/sandyrios/2011/09/26/at_least_perry_has_an_excuse/page/full/
We all know he was all “marriage between one man and one woman” in 2008.
Mitt was for a national health care mandate in 1994 – he told John Judis as much – and now loudly rails against it after having adopted a similar state level plan. I don’t know what the hell he really believes.
Same thing with gun control. He supported the Brady Bill. Then he lied about being a life-long hunter.
Immigration – he supported McCain’s bill, supported a path to citizenship, hired illegals to work on his lawn, did NOTHING about sanctuary cities in Massachusetts until a few weeks before his term as governor ended…and then (this is the part I hate) attacked everyone else on immigration.
He says he never raised taxes – but instead earned the nickname “Fee fee” trumpeted by Russert because he raised a billion dollars in fees.
He’s all over the place. I can go on and on and on. You’re not going to see it. I’m not going to change my mind.
All his changes in emphasis and tone always came at EXACTLY the moment they were most beneficial to his political aspirations. The man is a slippery snake. Even if he has a nice wife and family. And he’s not going to get my vote.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
I never came across a Mormon in my life before I “met” some of you on these boards.
Serious question – are you ALL as whiny and prone to groupthink as is the case on this message board?
September 29th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
“Hard to do the hardest, most powerful, most difficult, most important job in the world if you can’t win it. The ability to actually win is a factor in any decision”
He should want it bad enough that, months ago, he said “I’ll give it my best shot”
The same thing Romney did when he entered at 5% in 2007.
The same thing Hucakbee did when he entered with less than that.
The same thing Bachmann, Gingrich, Brownback, and others have entered it with.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
84:
Like I said, the sad thing will be that once he stumbles or doesn’t dominate absolutely everything, he’ll be brutally put down. The Bill Kristol’s of the world will bemoan that it’s Christie, not them who’s at fault and then their wandering eyes will focus attention on drafting someone else.
BTW, as far as I can tell, we’ve had no polling with Christie. For all the buzz around the New Jerseyite, we have no clue as to how he’d do in the New Hampshire or South Carolina or Florida primaries.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
sweet banner
September 29th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
Christie will be at 20, Romney at 12 max, second week in.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
“Kilburn, some friendly advice: if you are truly looking to get into politics in the future, you’d better grow some thicker skin.”
I have thicker skin, or I could never have gone-it-alone against dozens of posters in the past on here.
My own skin isn’t the problem. I’ve been called every name in the book, etc. etc.
It doesn’t bother me.
My problem is my stomach….and in particular, the way it wants to shrivel up with the way some people here are treating Romney.
I have no illusions about the ease of being a politican…but I have a considerable amount of disgust for many of the sentiments people in this party seem to have right now.
Thats why I’d leave the GOP, not politics.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
91.
Hey, your BEST yet
September 29th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
89
How’d it go for those candidates? Seems like Christie was smart to avoid their failed strategies.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
For what it’s worth, the idea that Nancy Reagan is talking anyone into running for president is pure, complete, utter, USDA A Grade bull poodoo.
I mean, please.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
Perry looks 20 years younger next to Uncle Ron, thanks.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
74 – the “ONLY ISSUE” he changed positions on?
ROFL
September 29th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
“sweet banner ”
From now on, candidates who drop should be grayed out, rather than removed….though perhaps shifted to the outside frames.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
#72 Matthew Kilburn,
Not only that but the guy worked extremely hard for Republicans in 2010. He raised money, made appearances and provided whatever assistance he could to a myriad of candidates seeking office. Did he have an ulterior motive? Certianly. He hoped they’d remember him in 2012 but it is almost sickening the way some in the party fawn all over these flash-in-the-pan anti-Mitts.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:20 pm
Hat’s off to the banner Max.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:21 pm
Kilburn’s discomfort brings me actual, physical joy. I am not even joking…
I think if a piano dropped on him I would ascend into nirvana.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:22 pm
Matthew Kilburn Says:
September 29th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
“Thats why I’d leave the GOP”
You kinda remind me of the Kos Kids.
You’ll do fine there. They’re in LOVE with healthcare mandates, too.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:22 pm
Times 100!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:22 pm
102.
LOL!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
If Christie gets in – and I’m still not convinced he will – Intrade will look like this in one week:
Christie – 45
Romney – 25
Perry – 10
September 29th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
Romney was pro choice, pro gun control, pro gay rights…in other words, for just about anything that would help him get elected in MA.
He endorsed adoption rights for gay couples and ending DADT.
And supported the Bush amnesty plan just a few years before running for President…saying “it was a mistake” for Republicans to oppose it.
The idea that, on a principled basis, Romney changed his mind on all of that in the same timespan he began to run for the Republican nomination…I don’t see how anyone can buy that. Clearly Romney is someone who is willing to tell people what he thinks they want to hear to get elected.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
I don’t know if its discomfort or serious, deep, anger at some people in my own party.
Of course the thought of having to give up on the GOP distresses me – I have no personal respect for Democrats, and I’ve traditionally despised third parties.
btw, Kavon – you might want to change the link on your name – your posts still link to the old “race42008″ url.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:25 pm
“You’ll do fine there. They’re in LOVE with healthcare mandates, too.”
I might oppose those mandates, except for the fact that I don’t like being forced to pay for something for someone who should be paying for it themselves.
Now, if you and your libertarian buddies want to stand up and put up the money to pay for all the insured so it doesn’t cost me an arm, leg, and firstborn son….then perhaps I will change my position.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:26 pm
“I think if a piano dropped on him I would ascend into nirvana.”
If I cared so much for someone who expressed such sentiments, I could easily go throw myself off the administration building for you…
September 29th, 2011 at 11:27 pm
107 – Exactly. Well said.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
#76 Petunia,
I really don’t think it is helpful to be critical of Nancy Reagan. I hold her in very high regrard and I suspect that if it were Romney who said he wasn’t going to run, she’d urge him to do so as well. Urging someone to run is not ultimately an endorsement. I’m sure she wants to see a field of good candidates from which to ultimately select.
If Christie runs, she may well endorse him and that’s fine. I wouldn’t call into question her intelligence or competence just because of her selection. Each of us looks for different traits in a candidate.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
I am starting to think there is a better than even chance that Kilburn feels romantic love for Mitt Romney.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
Jump!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
On the plus side, these Christie rumors can’t possible go on for another year. At most, they’ve got about 2 more weeks.
In the case of Palin, her ‘drones will immediately pivot into speculation over a third party bid as soon as she not-announces. We’ll have to live with that until at least the general election filing deadlines of states representing 270 electoral votes have passed.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
#107 Andrew,
If what you say is true, Romney should say to the electorate “I’m a Methodist now”. Those simple words would likely do move to improve his chances than anything else he could say.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
COMMENT OF THE THREAD by Andrew
(And Why Christie NEEDS To Run)
September 29th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
112 – It’s also, you know, STUPID to imply that the reason the wife of the most legendary GOP president ever to grace this earth *possibly* doesn’t favor Romney (We don’t even know who she supports) might be due to her lack of enthusiasm for Mormons.
With no evidence whatsoever.
Some of you Mormon Rombots throw out the “bigot” charge as liberally as the Democrats employ the race card.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Just one example,
“He [Romney] is a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban.”
- Romney 2002 campaign website
“LJ at Race 4 2008 catches Mitt Romney reversing his position on the federal “assault weapon” ban in the space of less than two months. In a December 16 interview with Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press, Romney said that if elected president he would sign a bill reviving the ban, which expired in 2004. In an interview with Glenn Reynolds and Helen Smith over the weekend, Romney said he saw no need for new gun control legislation and would veto any that crossed his desk.”
-Reason Magazine
http://reason.com/blog/2008/02/04/romney-was-for-the-assault-wea
September 29th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Christie to enter the 2012 race is up to 35% on Intrade.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
“I am starting to think there is a better than even chance that Kilburn feels romantic love for Mitt Romney”
Nice try…but no.
====
No, my lasting support for Romney probably stems from the fact that, unlike most people here, I am not old enough to have the fond memories of the Reagan Presidency…in fact, I don’t think any of the four Presidents in my lifetime appear to have been all that stellar.
So, from what I’ve seen in my time alive, politicans – the group charged with running our country, and a profession to which I have a natural interest – have been a rather miserable bunch.
Romney appears to me to be the candidate MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE who might actually change that. He’s competent. He’s Conservative. He’s personally and professionally clean. He has a family that most people would love to have. He’s spent decades building up knowledge and experience in fixing things.
He seems to me to be EXACTLY the kind of person who could get in the oval office, do good, and actually restore people’s trust and respect for our government.
But of course, Kavon would much rather I just went and shot myself or slit my wrists.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
Too bad. He missed the boat. Romney loved him some gays in the mid 1990′s.
Now, not so much.
Then again all is not lost. No one knows how Mitt will feel tomorrow.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
Romney fans shouldn’t have any problem with Christie getting in the race. He’s a great GOP leader and no one to fear (unlike Perry, who is an idiot). I support Romney, but if Christie or Cain beat him, hey, that’s fine. As long as that person can beat Obama and perform well in the office of the presidency. Nothing wrong with a reluctant leader (cough, Washington, cough).
September 29th, 2011 at 11:35 pm
Give it up So-journer, you and Townhall can cherry pick all you want Romney’s record is better than most. And Romney as a non-professional politician has way more excuse for settling on his policies more slowly than Perry or anyone else besides Cain, another businessman, who is also all over the place in a few areas.
Romney is not a professional politician. That is his excuse. He made errors and he has progressively settled every single issue more conservative than he started. He comes from the most liberal place there is. You are obviously not from a place where conservatives are outnumbered greatly. Perry on the other hand is liberal in a conservative place. Now that is no excuse! He talks and thinks like a Democrat posing as a Conservative to get power.
Romney will not be elected for his politics. They are perfectly in line with the rest of the candidates anyway.
Romney’s strength is his business and finance experience and his impecable worldwide reputation for complete honesty. The 2002 Winter Olympics was saved by Romney’s reputation for honesty. His world wide reputation for honesty.
And all the fellow Rombots… relax. If Christie is better he will win. Christie isn’t better. He is very very liberal for a Republican. Much much more than Romney or Perry.
But he won’t appeal to the Independents or the middle because he has gone after unions big time. Independents and the squishy Democrats are not going to stand up to the unions. Only dedicated Republicans stand up to unions.
Christie’s appeal is limited. His experience is limited, has no executive experience at all, never even came close to creating a job of any kind. He has always worked in government as a minor figure…
And Christie is very offended at personal questions. He gets testy and down right rude if asked the simplest question. Such as why are you going after public school teachers while you send your kids to private school. What do you know about public school…
Christie blew up at that question. He lost it. I think it was a valid point. I agree that teacher unions are out of control, but Christi has no first hand experience with public schools and it hurt his creditbilty on that issue to get angry when asked a legitamate question. He was far too offended by the question.
That kind of anger will not wear well. He will lose people’s trust quickly. The circus is only entertaining for a while. It gets old to see people argue and fight all the time.
Christie will make Mitt seem all the more steady and reassuring. People are angry but also scared, more scared than angry now, I think. They will pick steady, sane and knowledgable over angry and out of control.
People flirt with hotheads, but they marry steady and sure.
Christie won’t win against Romney.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:35 pm
I don’t see Christie as a man who would restore the public’s trust, reverence, and respect for our government. I just don’t.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
Christie – 31
Perry – 29
Romney – 15
Fixed it for you, Matt C.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
117:
Yeah, too bad the most of that comment is false. The only thing there he actually changed on was DADT, which he only changed because it was a time of war (i.e. the circumstances changed).
September 29th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
“Too bad. He missed the boat. Romney loved him some gays in the mid 1990?s.
Now, not so much.
Then again all is not lost. No one knows how Mitt will feel tomorrow.”
See, if only Perry was this good in the debates…
September 29th, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Voting likely starts in about 100 days or so. MWS, maybe Christie cracks loose some sort of path for Huntsman in NH. Christie doesn’t seem positioned well for Iowa. Who knows? We’re all along for the ride.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:40 pm
Oh and so-journer once again gay rights in the work place is not gay marriage.
Romney protested the MA Supreme court on the steps of the court house while he was a sitting governor–agaisnt Gay marriage.
Maybe you just don’t really understand the issues, because your knowledge is just not very deep.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:41 pm
#127
Did you miss the link on gun control? It even mentions Race for 2008
http://reason.com/blog/2008/02/04/romney-was-for-the-assault-wea
Here’s Romney on gay adoption:
“There will be children born to same-sex couples, and adopted by same-sex couples, and I believe that there should be rights and privileges associated with those unions and with the children that are part of those unions.”
On same sex partnership benefits:
“Basically I see the provision of basic civil rights and domestic partnership benefits [as] a campaign against Tom Finneran. I see Tom Finneran and the Democratic leadership as having opposed the application of domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples and I will support and endorse efforts to provide those domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples…”
He criticized the Democrats as not being pro-gay rights enough!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
“Bush, whose wife was born and raised in Mexico and who speaks fluent Spanish, also championed the legislation.”
Craig, Jeb most likely can’t be trusted on this issue as he obviously has bias relations. Question Craig: Do you think it is right, even moral, to put illegals before our our citizens? Subsedizing tuition breaks for illegals, while not doing so for our own, is unethical, plain and simple.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Andrew not killing gays, and not firing them is not Gay marriage.
Do you hate people just because you don’t like their sex habits? Really? Because I dont’ see how that is any of your business.
But marriage is my business, that effects families and society.
See, that is a difference some people just don’t get.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
130 – The commenter who suggests that Nancy Reagan’s possible opposition to Mitt might be anti-Mormonism accuses ME of not understanding things.
Did or did not Romney license same sex partners and change the wording on certificates from “husband” and “wife” to “Partner A” and “Partner B” BEFORE same sex marriage was even the law in Massachusetts, as Sandy Rios asserts in her Townhall article?
September 29th, 2011 at 11:43 pm
““Bush, whose wife was born and raised in Mexico and who speaks fluent Spanish, also championed the legislation.”
Craig, Jeb most likely can’t be trusted on this issue as he obviously has bias relations. Question Craig: Do you think it is right, even moral, to put illegals before our our citizens? Subsedizing tuition breaks for illegals, while not doing so for our own, is unethical, plain and simple.”
I think this is in the wrong thread….
September 29th, 2011 at 11:43 pm
Petunia,
Do you also go by the handle, “Martha”? Just asking…….
September 29th, 2011 at 11:45 pm
Look at this. THIS is perfect.
THIS is attacking a DEMOCRAT FROM THE LEFT on civil unions in 1994.
This is exactly like Mitt’s attack of Perry FROM THE LEFT on Social Security.
A slippery slippery snake, Romney is.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:45 pm
intrade on Christie is at 22, not 30….
September 29th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
More on Romney and gun control (from Wikipedia):
“For Romney’s 1994 US Senate campaign, he supported the Brady Bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period on gun sales, and a ban on particular semi-automatic rifles.
In a 2002 debate during Romney’s campaign for governor of Massachusetts, Romney said: “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them. I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”
As governor, Romney signed a 2004 measure instituting a permanent Massachusetts ban on military style assault weapons, to take the place of a Federal ban, which was then about to expire. The bill made Massachusetts the first state to enact its own such ban on specific semi-automatic weapons and some shotguns with specific accessories, and Romney supported the law with the comment: “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
As Governor Romney extended the term of firearm licenses from four to six years, reinstated a 90-day grace period for citizens renewing their gun licenses, and signed a law providing free replacement licenses.
When he supported the Brady Bill in 1994, Romney said, “That’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don’t line up with the NRA.”
Just before declaring his candidacy for the 2008 Republican nomination for president, Romney joined the National Rifle Association (NRA).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Mitt_Romney
September 29th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
Give it up Andrew eveything you say is absolutely hog wash. It is no different from every other poltician.
Oh I see you have the opposition research McCain left.
So you like McCain and want him to win!!!! I get it. You are living in 2008.
Wake up new election, all this has been settled long long ago. McCain isn’t running put away his dirty trick book.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:47 pm
#140. Yeah how dare I quote Romney’s actual words and positions.
But of course Perry being registered as a Democrat back in the late 80s…that’s totally fair game!
September 29th, 2011 at 11:47 pm
132.
Asked by Rombots and answered on about four different threads below (today alone.)
Hint: I used the words of Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Jeb Bush’s wife, and Ronald Reagan. Along with Perry’s.
But this is the WRONG thread.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
hmmm….
Kavon seems to have left the thread.
I guess he doesn’t have any more suggestions for my death to offer up beyond the piano.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
Maybe he went to get a used LARGE piano.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
Oh for goodness sakes… Take a joke.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
I’ve gotta run. Everyone cross their fingers for Christie to jump in this thing…
September 29th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
“Oh for goodness sakes… Take a joke.”
Was joking myself.
You should know me enough by now Kavon.
I can be far more of a hothead than that when seriously offended.
September 29th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
#142. Still doesn’t answer my question, but I’m not holding out hope
.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:01 am
Silly So-journer I didn’t say you were one. But do you deny the existence of Mormon haters? Did you see McCain’s Mom on C-span? I supose not.
Admitting the exsitence of Mormon haters is just reality. And a top reason I did not want Romney to run at all.
But after seeing the choices. How could he not run? We simply can’t let the Mormon thing get in the way of saving this country.
I just mused that Nancy might be, there are lots of people in her generation that have biases against different groups.
But Ronnie Reagan was a true blue friend, so I doubt it.
You getting so offened at the mere suggestion of the possiblity is, well, interesting I guess.
I didn’t accuse you of anything, there are reasons not to support Romney. But that is the one that everyone assumes first. And it is at the root of all the accusations of flip flops, that are completely silly and hypocritcal. It is the elephant in the room. I just said it outloud.
Sort of like Christie that way, I speak my mind, so do you, do you want me to be offended at what you say?
September 30th, 2011 at 12:04 am
138 Yeah his bubble popped! I wonder why! I gave the rumours no credibilty until I checked Intrade and he really really was at 30.
I have been all over and this had more information than others… and this isn’t that much.
But it is late in the EAst. So…
September 30th, 2011 at 12:05 am
Jump!
===================
If he jumps, that will be the jump felt around the world.
Haven’t we gone through this before? Everytime he says no, five minutes later some idiot says he didn’t mean no. Maybe he can defend his backdoor tax increases. Does anyone really believe that you can negotiate with Reid and Pelosi? They’ll take everything including the clothes on his back. Also
states have to balance the budget by law. No such law at the federal level.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:06 am
In other news, which does not require us to ignore a candidate’s own statements 100x over…
Romney is now back to 2x+ what Perry is on intrade.
47% something to 23% something.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:06 am
HA srry to say, but yall r all retards. all these people begging christie to get in, just want something to do in their meaningless lives, no offense. its nothing but entertainment for these peeps who want him in, they dont give a crap about making the country better, they want a good fight and interesting race is all, christie is fat, im not making fun of fat people, but seriously haha we havnt had 1 fat president. and he says he has problems with his weight, so y the hell would we let him run our country if he already has problems with his own weight!@!@ hello lol, think about it. he has a food addiction already. and plus he said NO over 30 times, that i counted lol leave him alone, ur making him eat more
September 30th, 2011 at 12:09 am
RUN.PRES.2012.CHRISTIE
Last Trade : UP 7.1 points
Christie’s chart..
http://www.intrade.com/graphing/timeAndSalesChart.gif?contractId=735291&timePeriodType=LastDay&intradeChart=true&transBackground=true
September 30th, 2011 at 12:10 am
HA srry to say, but yall r all retards. all these people begging christie to get in, just want something to do in their meaningless lives, no offense. its nothing but entertainment for these peeps who want him in, they dont give a crap about making the country better, they want a good fight and interesting race is all, christie is fat, im not making fun of fat people, but seriously haha we havnt had 1 fat president. and he says he has problems with his weight, so y the hell would we let him run our country if he already has problems with his own weight!@!@ hello lol, think about it. he has a food addiction already. and plus he said NO over 30 times, that i counted lol leave him alone, ur making him eat more.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:11 am
Andrew you are making a fool of yourself.
That has been asked and answered. Get over it. Don’t vote for him. That’s fine.
But I see absolutely not difference between Romney and ALL of the others.
McCain compiled a dirty trick book that is devastatingly detailed on every work Romney ever said in his life and pulled anything even close to inconsistent.
Especially McCain was a complete two faced politician, who had not room at all to speak.
The only difference is someone took the trouble to make Romney’s every word accessible.
Why the focus on that? Because there is nothing else.
Romney is so squeaky clean they had to do that book to try to discredit him. It is a dirty trick book, and I hope they do one just like it on your candidate then you can hear the same old stupid stuff over and over and over and over… and no matter how many times you explain each and every word… it comes back for years and years and years…
Asked and answered, One hundred and fifty million times, move on this is not 2008. McCain isn’t running put away his dirty trick book and lets talk about qualifications and the future of our country.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:19 am
Let the Northeastern Moderate Twins, Christie and Romney battle it out in New Hampshire
Meanwhile in Iowa and South Carolina…….
INTRADE:
September 30th, 2011 at 12:28 am
#156
My posts were in response to Matthew Kilburn’s comment, in which he said about Romney:
“He was fully open and honest about once being pro-choice – the only major issue on which he has changed his position”
Now, clearly that’s not true by a long shot, and it’s a little baffling to see Romney supporters try to claim that it is.
Romney changed his position on a number of issues aside from abortion – including gun control, stem cells, DADT, gay adoption and immigration. And in every single instance, the change was from a position that appealed to the MA electorate, to one that appealed to a Republican primary electorate.
This doesn’t require leafing through a campaign book from 2008 (which I’ve never read), it’s all in the public record.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:29 am
Christie will not run,but even if he does as a Northeastern liberal,to the
left of Romney and Huntsman,he will never survive vetting.
Too many things against him.TOO many.
The guy has no record,no accomplishments,no success in anything,governor
for less than 2 years with nothing to show for.
Claim to fame:Couple well edited Youtube videos yelling at the woman teacher
and also yelling at another woman for asking him(paraphrasing):
“Hey slob,how come you send your kids in private school,you lousy hypocrite.”
Anyway,he has nothing to offer,he has one shtick:Yelling at women.That’s all.
I wish he runs,it will be ton of fun watching Sarah Palin clobber the fatso
like Barracuda ripping and shredding five times bigger fish.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:33 am
WOO HOO!!!!
Sorry I’m late to the party, folks!
September 30th, 2011 at 12:35 am
#157: Almost no volume is traded on those contracts. Those values are meaningless now.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:40 am
“Sorry I’m late to the party, folks!”
I think you might have arrived in time to clean up all the vomit left by the departing guests.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:41 am
Actually, I was quite early to this Christie party.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:01 am
161.
Everyday, more join in. Now we have two northeastern moderates, Christie and Romney splitting THAT vote.
Woo-hoo! Go Perry!
InTrade wire to wire in IA and SC = FL and the nomination.
Period.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:04 am
Make no mistake about it, if Perry wins IA — he’s then favored in SC.
And if Christie joins in to split up Romney’s soft mushy moderate vote, all the easier for Perry.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:09 am
Just checked InTrade, Metro…
About 10,000 shares VOLUME in Iowa alone on the top four candidates with Perry up BIG!
September 30th, 2011 at 1:20 am
By definition, Chris Christie is morbidly obese. He had to be talked into running for President of the U.S. If he really was going to be serious, he would have done something about his health choices. To think he wants to be the primary example to the world of what America is about (and they all think we are excessive in our spending, debt, eating, etc.), one would think he would do something about his weight. A 380-pound man has an average life expectancy of 52 years. Call me crazy, but I want a man who has made at least minimal efforts to be physically prepared for the rigors of the job. I don’t want to think that his VP choice has a very high probability of taking over before he can finish his term.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:23 am
Health groups (doctors, trainers, etc.) are going to come out with messages around Cristie (i.e. he is not a role model for health). It’s one thing to be overweight, but it’s another to be so obese. It sends a message that you didn’t care about your body enough to maintain it, so why would we expect you to care for the country?
September 30th, 2011 at 1:32 am
His weight is going to get a ton of attention.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/w_DietAndFitness/chris-christie-weight-sink-presidential-bid/story?id=14626522
September 30th, 2011 at 1:36 am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chris-christies-big-problem/2011/09/29/gIQAAL7J8K_story.html
“On average, health-care costs for obese persons are 42 percent higher than costs for individuals whose weight falls into the “normal” range. It costs Medicare $1,723 more a year for an obese beneficiary than a non-obese one. For Medicaid the differential is $1,021, and for private insurers it’s $1,140. In other words, obesity is helping propel the rise in health-care costs, which are fueling the long-term rise in the national debt.”
September 30th, 2011 at 1:38 am
Donald Trump tweets today…
@JonHuntsman has zero chance of getting the nomination. Whoever said I wanted to meet him?
Time is money and I don’t waste mine.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:40 am
So the Rombots in frantic desperation are busily going after Christie’s weight as the did with Huckabee.
Comedy Gold!
September 30th, 2011 at 1:56 am
I’m pretty sure Christie will not compete much (think McCain ’08) in Iowa but instead make New Hampshire his must-win to Romney’s chagrin and Perry’s delight..
@Perry has RSVPd for 2 conservative forums in IA. Faith & Freedom’s with @ReincePriebus, and Family Leader’s. http://bit.ly/or6Fkh #iacaucus
2 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply
September 30th, 2011 at 1:56 am
Chris Christie’s weight will be a net plus for him in this politically correct society. It will be seen as rude and mean-spirited to attack Christie for his weight and any such attacks will backfire and only operate to Christie’s benefit. In a vague sense, Christie’s weight in 2012 is very much akin to Obama’s race in 2008. Any attacks even remotely coming close to the subject will severely backfire.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:56 am
Chris Christie’s weight will be a net plus for him in this politically correct society. It will be seen as rude and mean-spirited to attack Christie for his weight and any such attacks will backfire and only operate to Christie’s benefit. In a vague sense, Christie’s weight in 2012 is very much akin to Obama’s race in 2008. Any attacks even remotely coming close to the subject will severely backfire.
September 30th, 2011 at 2:00 am
@RichLowry
We’re hearing that christie’s supporters think they’ll get a sense of his final answer by sunday
2 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply
September 30th, 2011 at 2:03 am
Very true, Joe. But Rombots are pretty dense around here.
September 30th, 2011 at 2:04 am
#87 Sojourner Truth……
….In 1994 gay marriage wasn’t an issue…Even for the gays.
September 30th, 2011 at 2:20 am
FPP idea if we had a Perry FPP’er
Job creation under GovernorPerry visualized: http://bit.ly/o6SQBF (click on to enlarge and view each area)
September 30th, 2011 at 2:21 am
Giuliani endorses Romney!!!!
J. Paul Giuliani; Montpelier City Committee
)
(From Vermont
September 30th, 2011 at 2:45 am
PLEASE GET IT YOUR HEADS THAT HE IS NOT RUNNING!
Sorry for the caps but these threads are embarrasing.
September 30th, 2011 at 2:51 am
What is it with all the people who aren’t running. They think the world is waiting for their decision (sadly some on here and elsewhere give support to that)?!
Just say you aren’t running and move on.
I bet if Romney loses to Obama this year he will very quietly announce WELL BEFORE OCTOBER 2015 that he’s not running in 2016.
Mark my words in the next few weeks BOTH Christie and Palin will make a huge deal out of NOT running. Both will say they would have won but aren’t running due to their families. There is nothing surer.
September 30th, 2011 at 4:58 am
Just two small comments.
Why isn’t Mr. Giuliani in the new banner at the top of the page?
Why is Huntsman closer to the center of the banner (assuming the center means the strongest candidates) than Gingrich (who is my personal idol)
September 30th, 2011 at 5:02 am
If I’m a betting man, one of Chris Christie, Rudy Giuliani, or Sarah Palin will announce a run for the Presidency within 10 days. But only one. And I’m betting it’s Mr. Giuliani, not Mr. Christie. And there is a pathway for him with Cain and Perry splitting the right…Giuliani and Romney will split the center and Giuliani will win based on the layout of the primary calender at the point. I admit fully that I’m a hack for Mayor Giuliani and I wildly support him but if he doesn’t enter the race, I will stand firmly with Governor Romney. I have no interest in Governor Perry or the others on the far right. I will always love Newt and if he ascends into the top tier, I’ll have to make a very calculated decision between him and Romney.
I don’t see Christie entering. He just won’t do it. He’s got too much power in New Jersey to give up on the 30/70 chance he’ll get the nomination and then a 40/60 chance that he’ll win the presidency.
September 30th, 2011 at 5:53 am
#38,
A ticket with substantial gravitas.
September 30th, 2011 at 6:00 am
With all this attention being paid to Christie, nobody is going to paying any attention to Perry while he’s explaining what he really meant in the debate a week ago and why he isn’t just a squishy corrupt moderate. It’s like the next chance he’ll have to explain himself will be on Oct. 11 in NH. Damn!
Still 100% for Romney – No hat, Lots of cattle
September 30th, 2011 at 7:12 am
It’s sad, actually, when you see a potentially good candidate self destruct because he listens to those around him who stand to benefit by an attempt and not to his own personal analysis. If Christie runs he will obviously give NJ voters the finger and will quit the Governorship……..like Sarah Palin. Only Christie has less experience in Trenton than Sarah had in Juneau. Christie has less experience than almost any candidate including President Obama. Christie has a very messy relationship with Bernie Madoffs mess. Christie has some very liberal associates inherited from the outgoing Dem Governor and some very liberal positions. Finally, Christie has some personal problems that will be glaringly apparent on national TV. Think William Howard Taft , with 325 pounds on national TV. sad commentary but glaringly visible on TV
It is sad, because Christie will crash and burn , NJ will revert to a Dem state next year and Christie will be a footnote and a memory. And he could be so much more
CraigS
September 30th, 2011 at 7:19 am
Perry /Whoever is breathing
You know what is “Comedy Gold” ? You are! You need your own web site where you can debate yourself often, but not always, successfully
CraigS
September 30th, 2011 at 7:28 am
Christie’s a Catholic? I didn’t realize that. I’ve always thought it odd that, for 50 years, the intellectual heart of the conservative movement has been Catholic, yet we’ve never nominated a Catholic. NR has always been heavily Catholic. Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, all Catholic, and the up and comers in the party- Rubio, Ryan, Jindal- tend to be Catholic. In a party that now wins something like 60% of the white Catholic vote, in a bad year, we’re a little past due. You get the devout religiosity without some of the off-putting cultural cues.
September 30th, 2011 at 7:37 am
Stay alert.
Stay close to RACE42012 in the next three days.
We have a source that is very close to the situation.
RACE42012 will have the info before anyone else will.
I will pst some more stuff later this morning.
September 30th, 2011 at 7:53 am
Kavon, I like how you switched the pictures at the top of race42012.
I would imagine that the battle for the nomination would become a 2 man race again-Romney vs Christie.
And if Christie got in, has the fire in the belly, he would be the nominee.
September 30th, 2011 at 7:59 am
“They” might have finally found someone to take down Romney. Congrats, you might be paid off for your persistence.
Your endurance is laudable. Let’s see if Jeb jumps on board in spite of Christie’s stance on education assistance for illegals.
I guess he will announce just after the next debate to buy time for prep and then the vetting will begin. Let’s see if he can do better than Perry.
If not, then what???? Or then who???
September 30th, 2011 at 8:19 am
MEM,
It doesn’t surprise me at all. The Catholic Church is the preeminent conservative institution in the world. It practically defines the concept as perhaps the oldest continuing institution in the world. The Church has always had a vibrant intellectual life as well. Traditionally, conservative Protestant scholarship has focused largely on Biblical studies and apologetics. The Church- with a larger pool to draw from- has also had a lot to say about philosophy, science, anthropology, economics, etc….
September 30th, 2011 at 8:30 am
I would love a 2-man race between Christie and Romney. Either way, we beat Obama, either way we get a competent, intelligent, executive. And any Romney fan who is genuine in their distaste of Perry should welcome a Christie entry as well. Regardless of what Rick Perry/Jeb Bush or whoever tells you, Perry will not survive a Christie entry. Yes, Christie is objectively closer to Romney than Perry ideologically, but we’re in the middle of a Cain boomlet- which means that Perry’s unlikely to benefit even if a number of TRUE conservatives immediately decide that Christie’s just another RINO. A week after a Christie entry, Perry will be hovering around 10% nationally. At which point, the media- including much of conservative media- will be writing his obituary. Which means that money will dry up. And the spotlight will be so intensely on Christie that, no one will notice even if Perry immensely improves in the debates. A Christie entry either will leave us with a 2-man Christie/Romney race, or possibly a 3-man race with Cain as the dark horse.
Another reason Romney supporters should welcome a Christie entry: Christie is not going to just run away with this thing. Christie’s a potential early flameout like any late entry. He lacks Perry’s natural geographic base. And there are serious questions about his qualifications (objectively, he’s scarcely more qualified than Palin was at this point in ’08). All of this means that there is a non-trivial chance (probably around 35%) that a Christie entry simply kills all of Romney’s competition, for good, without actually having the staying power to remain a threat. If I had to chart the possibilities I’d lay out something like this:
Possibility 1: 35% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals before fading himself. Outcome: 90% chance Romney’s the nominee.
Possibility 2: 50% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals, has some serious stumbles, but goes on to field a credible campaign with staying power. Outcome: 55% chance Christie’s the nominee, 30% chance Romney’s the nominee, 15% chance Cain/Perry is the nominee
Possibility 3: 15% chance Christie kills off non-Romney rivals, campaigns like he governs (flawlessly and with gusto). Outcome: Christie wraps this thing up before March.
Add it all up, and you still have Romney as a slight favorite and you’ve drastically reduced the odds of an awful outcome (from the perspective of the center-right wing of the party). Romney’s fans need to face facts: under no scenario, is Romney going to walk away with this nomination. He’s too vulnerable. Want to guess why Cain has suddenly rocketed in the polls? It’s not because he’s just so gosh-darned impressive. It’s because there’s a critically large faction of the GOP that is prepared to vote for anyone other than Romney and, with Perry faltering, they picked (as they’ve done repeatedly this year) the guy who’s star was currently shining the brightest. If Romney’s going to have a rival, Cain’s the guy Romney himself would cast in the role. But I’m not the only one who doubts Cain can sustain. As long as Romney’s rival is someone like Cain, with no establishment support or political clout, Perry will be remain a viable alternative. And at some point, he’s going to say something clever, and for a few moments here and there, he’ll manage to sound like he didn’t just swing down from the tree. At that point, all his structural advantages will come back into black- big state governor, lots of financial connections, no enormous ideological vulnerabilities, from a region of the country which dislikes Romney and has 40% of the GOP’s delegates.
If Christie enters, Perry will disappear within a month- effectively disappear- and Romney will have an opponent who is weaker than the idealized Perry, but also a reasonable alternative if Romney can’t put all the pieces together. The Romney guys should be screaming for Christie to run. It’s a no-brainer.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:31 am
Love the news, just wished he would’ve deftly gotten into the race than what happened over the last month. Also, he should’ve chosen his words better on whether he would run or not. He’ll get some hell, but it’ll dissipate rather quickly. Only four months till IA, will be a wild ride.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:40 am
Talk about a cult of personality!
You guys are like little school girls with a crush on that fat RINO.
What has he done? Yelled at some old women on you tube and caused NJ ‘s credit rating to be downgraded (he has that in common with the jug-eared beanpole in the White House)
he has done NOTHING in his career..nothing that would make him a good candidate for president, other than have a glib and combative personality.
Can you imagine him sweating on that debate stage with all those lights?
This could be a train wreck of massive proportions.
I say, bring it on!
Come on Crispy Creme Christie! Your fan boys are about to wet their pants!
September 30th, 2011 at 8:40 am
194
Yeah, I think you’re right about that. Christe would kill off Perry, and as long as Perry is silenced, I’m happy. It’s no secret on this site that I absolutely hate that awful man.
If it comes down to Christie-Romney, I’m pretty happy.
Christie may face some backlash from Conservatives because I’ve heard he supported the Ground Zero Mosque. I disagree strongly with Christie, but I also disagree strongly with Romney on ethanol subsidies… so I’m a forgiving kind of guy, as long as there isn’t too much baggage.
If Christie gets in, Romney’s going to have to prove himself to be the best candidate. If Romney can beat Christie for the nomination, there is every reason in the world to think Romney is an exceptionally capable leader with true grit and gravitas.
Christie is an acceptable nominee to me at this point, but I am obviously a solid Romney fan, given his extensive experience in the private sector and his excellent command of what it takes to be president.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:42 am
196
Palin isn’t running. Thought I’d throw that out there.
I still don’t think Christie is running, though. I’d give him a 10% chance to run.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:45 am
194-Nice analysis. I could live with a Christie nomination much better than a Perry nomination, mainly because of the corruption thing. Christie’s positions seem to exactly equal to McCains, which makes him less appealing to me than Romney. But Christie is a much better communicator than McCain. I still like Romney’s energy, optimism, business experience and stand on the issues better than Christie.
But Christie is a reluctant warrior at best, which will make it difficult for him even to get in, much less keep up the pace necessary to seal this thing.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:50 am
I want Christie to get in just to see Rush Limbaugh’s head explode live on-air. When it’s a Christie-Romney race, he’ll have conniption fits.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:54 am
Christie was my governor (I live in Maryland now, sadly). I voted for him. I made calls for him. I cheered for him. But it’s no foregone conclusion I’d even vote for him over Romney. Ryan, no question. But Christie? How will he handle foreign policy questions? Will he, like Perry, have trouble shifting from talking about what he’s done, to what needs to be done? Will he pass the “qualified” threshold, or will his resume- substantively quite similar to Palin’s in ’08- and his lack of familiarity with national issues, end up hurting him, if not with primary voters, in general election polls? Can he put together a credible, efficient campaign on-the-fly? I imagine we’d have answers to all those questions by December and if he’s leading in the national polls come Christmas, I imagine all of those questions will have been answered to my satisfaction and he’ll have my vote pretty much sown up. But there are so many questions, I don’t think Romney’s boosters should be panicking. Romney has a core of support. He can weather a flash in the pan. He’s weathered a half-dozen so far. Better, who might become a flash in the pan, then Perry who could conceivably win the nomination even if he is a flash in the pan.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:55 am
#19 – Matthew,
You must have had my phone tapped, because I expressed nearly the same sentiments to my brother on Wednesday. Well said.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:56 am
I wonder why the only person Kavon hates around here is Kilburn. There’s a few obnoxious people here to dislike, and I just think it’s weird that Kavon chooses to pick on Matthew all the time.
September 30th, 2011 at 8:58 am
Oh my. Anyone who compares Christie to Palin in the qualified dept hasn’t been paying much attention. I don’t care how long they were each govs.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:03 am
#49 and #52: Here we go again with Feckless Sissypants crying foul once again. Who are you going to falsely accuse this time, jackass?
September 30th, 2011 at 9:08 am
204. I have to agree 100%.
Palin was a transformational figure in Alaska and accomplished more than any of the current candidates, a real reformer.
Alaska has a $12 billion dollar surplus and their credit rating was UPGRADED to triple A due to her reforms. Christie has a personality but no accomplishments that can come close to what Palin did.
She will tower over this field when she gets in.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:10 am
206
she’s not running
September 30th, 2011 at 9:13 am
203
Killburn represents the George W Bush style of politics, and our party has moved past that. The fact that Killburn is stuck in the 2004 Republican Party probably bothers Kavon.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:16 am
Teldue. Checking the calander… Sept 30, 2011. 8:16 MST. I know the day is not yet over, but still no decision? Com’on. I thought she was superwoman. Or is she just toying with you?
September 30th, 2011 at 9:18 am
Ron Paul raised $5 million in Q3
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64803.html
September 30th, 2011 at 9:22 am
First it was going to be july 3rd or 4th. Then it was going to be over labor day weekend. Then it was going to be by the end of September. Palin isnt running people…although I still wish she would get in and split the vote further.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:23 am
And what’s the big deal re: Nancy Reagan? Her claim to fame is she looooooooved Ronnie. People commented on how she looked at Christie in the same way she used to look at Reagan.
Sure, she was charmed and twitterpated by Christie. We like him too. But Nancy’s a 90-something year old lady captivated by a personality. Maybe Christie should run, but not because Nancy says so.
On the other hand, I’m sure Nancy and other Christie supporters are concerned about Romney’s personal appeal to the average voter. This really is about politics, not applying for a job on Wall St.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:25 am
Perry dropping like a rock on Intrade, was 39 two weeks ago now 21.
Mr brain, Craig will be changing his name soon
September 30th, 2011 at 9:29 am
The only explanation for this phenomenom is that Christie must be angling for a job with the next administration. Perhaps he’s holding out for VP. Romney/Christie would be a great ticket though.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:29 am
I like Christie, but wish he would wait when he is more ready, more experienced and seasoned. I would hate to see his late entry and maybe not quite being ready hurt him for a future run. If Perry does not win, I believe this has hurt him and he is thru, I don’t want that for Christie. Stay out of the race don’t hurt your credibility now by running after saying so long, so dogmatically that you are not running. Wait until 2016 or 2020 and build your base, experience, favors, credibility, etc. Please wait. VP is a possibility.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:30 am
209. She’s toying with morons like YOU.
LOL
She lives rent free in your head…it’s a sickness and you hate yourself for it. Ha!
What a sad and pathetic life you must lead, to be so obsessed with hatred for that good woman.
Yeah, someone polling in the top three without even announcing, with a built in support organization that numbers in the hundreds of thousands, the ability to easily raise the money from that vast support group, someone with the best political skills since JFK, who also has outlined policies and holds views that the majority of Americans agree with, someone with a stellar record of making the exact reforms we need at this time in Washington, someonme who has been out front leading the public debate for three years now…yeah, would that person run?
You guys need to check yourselves before you wreck yourselves.
It’s hers if she wants it.
She wants it.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:31 am
IMO “Herb” Cain shot himself in the foot bigtime with his Blacks Are Brainwashed comment. It’s the comment of a loose-mouth, novice politician insulting the people whose votes he seeks. There are ways he might have said the same thing: Like I hope people who normally vote Dem will come and take a look at Pub policies and see what we have to offer.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:38 am
#216 Yes, Sarah’s toying with morons all right.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:42 am
KG,
I agree Cain needs to control his tongue (and temper) better, but I suspect he’s tired of being called an Oreo, Uncle Tom, house slave, etc….. just because he’s successful and conservative.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Telly,
Did Sarah indicate what time zone she’d be working off of with that Sept 30 deadline?
September 30th, 2011 at 9:50 am
209. I’m not the moron. Anyone who has been saying she would jump in june. July. August. Sept. Deandlines she has set… and you still send her cash. Let’s just say a fool and their money is soon parted!
September 30th, 2011 at 9:50 am
By the by, did anyone see Christie’s Q & A at the Reagan Library? The speech was great but the Q & A? My gosh. He’s more effective, rhetorically, in that type of setting than any politician in the media era. More effective than Reagan. More effective than Clinton. Huckabee and Rubio are the only politicians in the last decade who even belong in the same category. As you watch Christie in these types of settings, you’ll notice that he doesn’t just do tough well- he does emotional well too. I think it’ll be extremely difficult to reduce him to a mere bully. But here’s the funny thing. In ’09, Christie was the dullest man on the planet. His consultants said, “look, Corzine’s at 35% in the polls. Be dull and acceptable and the game is yours”. And it almost wasn’t. Lonegan gave Christie a real run in the primary. For two weeks in October, Christie looked like he was honest to goodness going to blow an unlosable race. Then the real Christie emerged and made a joke about his weight. And loosened up. And stopped being so scripted. And he won comfortably. If he runs, there are going to be a lot of people urging Christie to reverse himself on some his moderate positions to cater to the primary electorate. He needs to ignore them. He needs to be himself. Sincere and heartfelt, sincere and blunt, whatever the moment or issue demands. I suspect if he does that, he’ll be able to convince the primary electorate that, on the big things, he’s with them heart and soul.
September 30th, 2011 at 9:54 am
Will the race will be Christie vs Palin?? The establishment YouTube star vs THE People’s Conservative Superstar?
Bring it
I have never set a deadline and neither has she.
LOL
September 30th, 2011 at 9:55 am
It really doesn’t matter when Sarah Palin announces – because once she does, it’s over. And the GOP SmartSet knows it.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:00 am
Well, well…
If Palin Enters the 2012 Contest, Christie Will Too
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/if-palin-enters-2012-contest-christie-will-too/
the establishment is freaking out about Palin! that’s why this sudden push for Christie, just as I’ev outlined many times. (so foolish to doubt me) They know Romney would be feckless against her.
I am almost starting to feel sorry for the sharply creased, squishy, effete, elites in Washington…their days are numbered.
Palin is coming and she’s bringing Hell with her.
and the best part?
they know
September 30th, 2011 at 10:00 am
MEM,
Christie’s Q & A skills are right up there with John F. Kennedy.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:03 am
Over for her career? you betcha wink winky. FYI, you can’t run a country via facebook and twitter. Just sayin’.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:05 am
She’ll prolly do it like she did in Alaska…non stop reform working 16 hour days until sh*t is fixed.
You guys are clueless
September 30th, 2011 at 10:07 am
First off, I don’t hate Kilburn. I don’t hate anyone. He just really ticks me off because of his totally incoherent political philosophy.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:10 am
I was beginning to understand the often ferocious disdain for Romney and his ” perceived ‘ Flip Flops ” After all, you shouldn’t be allowed to change a 1994 position in 2011. You shouldn’t be allowed to change a 2002 statement in 2011. You shouldn’t get away with it. But, then new light has come to the stage and illuminated the true definition of Flip Flop. It is , indeed, time sensitive.
Rick Perry wrote a book in the fall of 2010 with a dozen or so written positions that he is now carefully, but under distress, abandoning and changing.
Chris Christie has a web site filled with his own statements about his own Presidential candidacy. These are over the last six months.He is now thinking of a belly flopping
( sic ) Flip Flop
Many Republicans were quite happy with the Mass health Care plan in 2008. They have now Flip Flopped in 2011, even though the plan is unchanged
Sarah Palin quit the Governorship of Alaska and has been taken over the coals by many for quitting. These same folks are urging Chris Christie to quit. A classic Flip Flop.
We are working towards the ultimate Flip Flop. Say something on Monday and Deny it on Tuesday.
Lost in this is the now somewhat aging context in which Romney was accused of ” Flip Flopping. The term had relevance when it was new….but it is now old and abused and
supplanted by newer and much more profound examples of the verb…..to ” Flip ” and then, to ” Flop”
CraigS
September 30th, 2011 at 10:13 am
Smack1968,
If somehow we could sell a Christie/Rubio ticket, Obama would end up looking like an especially fastidious actuary in comparison. Of course, I have no idea how a ticket with that little experience would play, even if both men sounded well-informed, competent, etc.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:17 am
Christie represents the last great white hope of the scheming crony capitalists in D.C and their corrupt cabal of bought and paid for politicians. What ever will the K streeters and big money fat cats do if someone really reforms the place and represents the people instead of the special interests willingly greasing the wheels for a spot on the gravy train? The horror!
She is the one thing they can’t abide…a truly honest person who can’t be bought.
Stuff is gonna get real up in here pretty soon!
September 30th, 2011 at 10:25 am
#194: MEM, that was a lot of words wasted. The hardcore Rombots don’t support him because they want a center-right candidate. They support him because his election would help legitimize their Mormon religion.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:26 am
“Stuff is gonna get real up in here pretty soon!”
GOD, I LOVE THIS PLACE!!!
September 30th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Tele,
I am curious about something.
If Palin does indeed run, how will this “hel” she intends to bring go down?
I mean, who is suspporting her? Most of the GOP voters polled don’t want her to run. And I don’t buy they are being programmed to think she won’t run, so they are tuning her out.
No political figure short of Obama has received as much media – good and bad, as Palin since bursting on to the scene. The last year has seen her policial value wan and as we speak, the GOP may like her, but they don’t want her as President.
So how does she change a race in which no will be supporting her, short of a 5-10% of Republicans?
September 30th, 2011 at 10:35 am
Kavon,
To be fair it seems to me like incoherent political philosophy is a bit of a trademark of American conservatism. I think it’s a product of our two party system which forces everybody into only two camps. Classical liberals and classical conservatives and every other brand of conservative are smashed into one blob, brought together to fight the common threat of neo-liberalism and quasi marxism. A lot of folks only know their on one side or the other and think that this is all there is to it. Therefore, they grab a little of this ideology and that ideology all on the right side of the aisle and declare themselves to “True Conservatives” plain and simple. MattK is hardly alone in that, I think possibly more people do this than don’t, especially the talk radio crowd. Actually, MattK shows a little more independence from orthodoxy than most – even though this leads him to sound distubingly similar to the American Party of the 19th cent.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:36 am
#225: Juan Williams? You are using Juan as a source. Nice guy but so consistently inaccurate, he makes Craig seem like a steadfast, resolute and honorable poster.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:38 am
MattK has a coherent political philosophy. He is a statist who wishes to use big government power to force all of us into his fetishized version of the 1950s, socially and economically.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:40 am
This has been quite a thread. I’ll try to stick with Christie.
I will be very surprised if Christie actually enters the race. He is known for being a straight talker. I like that about him. Very much. No other potential GOP candidate has been so emphatic in denying running. Changing his mind now would damage his credibility, in my opinion.
The concerns about Christie’s weight are in some ways legitimate, and in some ways not. His weight as it affects his health is legitimate, but to say “if he can’t take care of his body, how can he take care of this country” is hogwash. I know a lot of fat people who work hard and are patriots. One can be a good president and be fat. However, we live in a TV age, and while it’s not right, people are judged on their appearance all of the time. It is a possibility that Christie’s weight could influence the votes of some of our more uninformed voters.
Would I support Christie over Romney? Absolutely not. Romney remains the most qualified, the most competent, the most balanced candidate we have. However, if Christie were to win the nomination, I could support him, most definitely. He is not the most conservative candidate on the GOP side, not even close. I would disagree with him on several issues. But I have no doubt that he would be a good leader, something we sorely lack in the White House at his time.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:41 am
Sarah Palin said that by the end of September she will make a decision.
She never said when she will announce!
This is what she said last night on Judge Napolitano:
“I hold my political cards close to my chest and I’ve certainly learned lessons along those lines and I’m going to continue to do that until I’m ready to make an announcement”.- SARAH PALIN
GAME ON!!!
September 30th, 2011 at 10:41 am
Relax Dougie…if you have this all figured right – she should be inconsequential to you!
Heck, she’s just a snowbilly from a little town!
heh heh
this might be easier than I thought
not even going to see it coming…
Doug is going to be like that gal from New York who couldn’t believe Nixon won…she didn’t know a single person who voted for him. It’s a bubble of ignorance I’m content to let them live in.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:42 am
*this
September 30th, 2011 at 10:51 am
Romney Expects To Raise 13 -14 Million in Q3
From the story:
Pressure on Perry
Steffen W. Schmidt, a political science professor at Iowa State University, said the pressure on Perry to produce a competitive fundraising sum is heightened by continued speculation about the presidential intentions of New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie.
“Perry needs to squash ’Christie fever,’” he said. “It is a killer for Perry, that even with him in the race, the GOP is still looking. If I was a Republican fat cat, I would sit on my political money until the dust settles.”
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-30/romney-campaign-said-to-raise-up-to-14-million-in-quarter.html
September 30th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Rather fun, but weird (in the sense that I never thought I would see this) picture of Mitt and Huck chatting before taping Huckabee’s show today. Politics does indeed make for interesting bedfellows. There was all kinds of animosity between the camps four years ago… perhaps bygones are bygones???
http://gop12.thehill.com/2011/09/romney-chats-with-huck.html
September 30th, 2011 at 10:53 am
#241: I thought I was attempting to start a snark free, serious conversation.
I guess I dialed the wronged number.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:54 am
Yes, this is correct.
I was trying to think of a current day politician who actually espouses what Kilburn believes and I just couldn’t do it. How does a 17 year-old become the last Kefauverite anyways?
September 30th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Metro that sounds about right (except for the term Statist which I think tends to be an intellectually simplistic term devised by libertarians with a one dimensional view of the world, but I digress), so I don’t really get Kavon’s complaint that his ideology is incoherent. It’s more coherent than the borderline economic anarchism combined with robust militarism and strict Social Conservatism that is defined as the three stools of “True Conservatism” in America today. I think MattK attitude toward immigration is downright scary, but he seems as consistent as most.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:56 am
#244:
This will be a big boon for Romney, especially in Iowa. Romney is very competitive there and any semblence of harmony and acceptance by Huck will be beneficial. If Romeny comes in thisclose to the winner – or wins outright – he’ll be well on the way.
Thanks for sharing.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:58 am
John Mark,
The incoherence come from the fact that he is a pro-union, anti-free trade, ultra-pro lifer who worships Mitt Romney of all people. I don’t want to delve to deeply into the bones of ideology.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Doug,
After years of running and spending $50 millions of his own money,
we know where Romney is in so far meaningless and worthless polls,between
17%-23%.Nothing to brag about.
Sarah Palin is not running yet.So we don’t know what her numbers will be
once she start vigorous campaign.
We can only make predictions according what we know and what we think.
My prediction:
Once sh’s in the race Sarah Palin will easily surge in front and be #1.
September 30th, 2011 at 10:59 am
#239 Noelle
Christie’s personality transcends his weight with his charm, IMO. However, as you point out, health and energy levels could be a concern. He’s a very intense person. He was taken to the hospital with an asthma attack recently. Maybe he’s on prednisone, which causes weight gain and other problems in most people. The stressful demands made on a POTUS are something to consider in Christie’s case, who may suffer from health problems we don’t yet know about but would have to become public knowledge.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:00 am
So has anybody mentioned his statement ridiculing those worried about Sharia law? I like him for that, but it seems like it could hurt him among those looking for the perfect “True Conservative.”
September 30th, 2011 at 11:03 am
Actually, to all those people looking to Palin for an announcement today…she said it would be unfair to her supporters to string them along past September if she wasn’t running. Go back and listen to the video. If she’s running, she ain’t stringing anyone along.
Get it?
September 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
“I don’t want to delve to deeply into the bones of ideology.”
You’re no fun at all.
. You’re right his commitment to Romney is a bit strange – and he’s a Catholic too, so it can’t be explained away as him supporting a Mormon. The best explanation is that he picked him as a teenager, a lot of us probably didn’t make sense in our politics back then.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
#253 – teledude
Well, at least you are consistent. Nothing wrong with that.
I just don’t see Palin winning this thing, or even running, but I’ve got no problem with you rooting for her.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Tex,
You asre being disingenous to count the money spent in the 2008. However, even if you do, Romney was an unknown, who didn’t have the prominent oppurtunity (VP selection) Palin was afforded. So for an unknown Gov in the last cycle to emerge as the frontrunner in this cycle, it’s not a bad amount of money. Politics is expensive. Palin is going to need boatloads of cash to re-work her image and negative, if she decides to run.
All this delay of game, however, only reduces her reputation, in my oipinion. You might hold to the romantic, Hollywood idea of her sweeping in and riding a wave, but that is doubtful to occur. Even Obama, how was best positioned to do that in 2008, still had a long fight on his hands with Clinton.
By delaying her decision and to keep playing with dates, only makes her look like a dodger and oppurtunist. Besides, she doesn’t want to get all “shacklely” (new Paliism no doubt) by being President.
The only reason she keeps her political cards close to her vest is because she’s not holding a winning hand.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:10 am
Metro: From some post above. I believe you said Mormons want Mitt in order to validate Mormonism. I’m sure that many LDS believe that. Minorities love to vote for their guy. Catholics voted for JFK. Blacks for Obama. I see it differently. Has Obama helped improve respect for blacks? No.
I’m voting for Mitt because I don’t see a better alternative; but because I’m LDS I kind of wish he weren’t running. If he were to win the nom, the billion dollars Obama’s promised to raise will surely be spent dredging up every nutty thing possible against Mormonism. If Mitt were POTUS, any failures (and he could have many despite his best efforts considering the state of things) would certainly be used to reflect poorly on the church.
Romney’s and Huntsman’s candidacies may have helped the CJCLDS in some ways, but a win? Not necessarily.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:16 am
There are lots of reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney.
September 30th, 2011 at 11:16 am
#265 “The only reason she keeps her political cards close to her vest is because she’s not holding a winning hand.” VERY good.
People were screaming for Perry to get in. Now people are screaming for Perry to get it. I don’t know anybody screaming, demanding, that Sarah get in.
And if she did, she would be sunk with “shakle-y.”
September 30th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Doug NYC GOP
Tex,
You asre being disingenous to count the money spent in the 2008. However, even if you do, Romney was an unknown, who didn’t have the prominent oppurtunity (VP selection) Palin was afforded.
==============================================
Yes,Romney was an unknown,so was Huckabee.
See what I mean when I mention $50 million?
September 30th, 2011 at 11:49 am
K.G.
“I don’t know anybody screaming, demanding, that Sarah get in”.
======================================
How about millions of her supporters?!
Are you that lefty,loony lady from upper East Side Manhatann that never knew
anybody who voted for Nixon,therefor she refused to believe that he won
the presidentcy?
September 30th, 2011 at 11:50 am
*presidency*
September 30th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Andrew Says:
September 30th, 2011 at 12:28 am
I appreciate that you see it as pandering. And that is what the people who hate him think.
But I see it as a businessman realizing he wants to be a politician and figuring out what his positions really are.
In my view, it looks to me like Romney got into politics not to hold any office but to be the one who got to stand up to Ted Kennedy and challenge him to his face.
His first campaign was a protest campaign against Democrat orthodoxy and Ted Kennedy corruption. He could not have ever believed that he, a totally unknown, would win against Ted Kennedy.
So he was sloppy, and he said whatever. He was never going to be a US Senator so, whatever, he got to give Kennedy a run for his money and show that Kennedy was not as popular as everyone thought.
Then he did so well they drafted him (like they are trying to draft Christie) to run for Governor. I doubt he believed he would win that one either. And he still didn’t think it was important to be rock solid on the issues and was sloppy. That isn’t good, but that is what I see.
Then he won.
And then he looked at what he said and felt compelled to do what he said. But on abortion he had a choice. Break his commitment to not let his personal feelings about abortion effect his public policy or in reality support abortion. When it came time to put his name down saying abortion was okay, he couldn’t do it.
He decided he could live with breaking a campaign promise easier than signing his name to a paper that resulted in abortions. He couldn’t be personally responsible for killing babies.
After that, I think he revamped his policy positions. And in every single instance he became more conservative. Because those were the positions he could sign his name to.
That is when he decided he could run the government and fix the problems better than anyone else.
I think Romney had a learning on the job experience with politics. He now understands how important his words are.
But I also think he is naturally very polite. And he can’t bring himself to condemn someone or something without first pointing out positives. It is an odd quirk.
If you notice, he always says, I respect this thing about Obama… or school policy… or something but I condemn this part of it…
I don’t think it is wishy-washy I think he was raised not only look for the bad but always always notice what is good first. Because that is how I was raised too.
I actually don’t have the self-discipline to do that. But Romney almost always does.
September 30th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
252 . Grasping at straws now, are we?
September 30th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
#260 TEX: “Are you that lefty,loony lady from upper East Side Manhatann that never knew
anybody who voted for Nixon,therefor she refused to believe that he won
the presidentcy?”
No, “Tex,” I am that straight-thinking, hard-core conservative lady from So. California, who descends from early Oregon pioneers. Like Sarah, I’ve been hunting, fishing, mountain-climbing, and with Mr. K.G. have run a business for over 30 years. However, before that I was an English teacher, soooo….like I’ve said before, I loved Sarah in the beginning. Her screechy voice and poor syntax disqualify her if nothing else. A person who says “shakle-y” on national TV cannot be POTUS. We’ll never have another Andrew Jackson.
I run in conservative circles here and in AZ, TX, UT, WA and ID. I only know one person who likes SP (from Midland) and many who find her as appealing as fingernails on a blackboard.
Yes, she has her supporters and that’s fine. But the country is not clammering for Palin the way they are Christie. Granted we know Palin a lot better and Christie very little. Palin charmed our socks off in the beginning but………..
Maybe the same thing will happen to Christie. I dunno. But Sarah will never be POTUS.
September 30th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
K.G.,
Running around few states you know only one person who likes Sarah Palin?
Your friends are bunch a liberals and RINOS,that’s why.
I
You don’t like phisycal sound of Gov. Palin voice?!
But you don’t mind 380lbs morbidly obyse slob?
What a phony lousy hypocrite!!!
September 30th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Tex. Pot, meet kettle. And don’t you live out of the country?
September 30th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
It looks like I now need to really take a close look at Christie. He looks like someone I could get excited about, rather than just voting and supporting the last man standing (i.e. Romney).
What has been so interesting to me is the Romnots vs the Rombots go at it. Such a vastly different perception of the same candidate is fascinating. The anyone but Romney camp think he is the dirties, slimiest, can’t trust him, most liberal ever; while the Rombots are petitioning him for sainthood (possible hyperbole here, but not much). It’s made me smile quite a bit today and in the past months.
Guess what, your both closed minded. Romney is opportunistic and will twist what he says further than most politicians. His criticism of other candidates last round really turned me off when so many other criticism of that same vane could have been just as easily and probably justly been fired right back at him. In that regard, Andrew and Sojourner are exactly right.
However, petunia is right in that most of the facts you two spouted were more propaganda then facts similar to the McCain attach that Romney supported a timetable to end the war. There is no question that Romney is more a pragmatic moderate, but still well on the conservative side of the fence.
On gun control: he supported the Bradley bill because of the waiting period. Why did he change, because technology changed such that a background check could now be done instantly, whereas before it took days. A moderate, pragmatic view in that he thought it necessary to keep guns from those who wouldn’t pass a background check. If you believe government impediment to purchase a gun at any time is a gross infringement on the right to bear arms, than Romney is not your guy. If you think that some measures need to take place to keep guns from “The Crazies” as Romney said is OK, than Romney is your man. I just do not see him trying to undo the 2nd amendment. From all that he has said, he feels it should be a right as long as you are not a criminal or a “Crazy.”
On gay rights: its more murky, but the context has changed drastically since ’94. Gay marriage wasn’t even on the table back then, discrimination more so. It appears he didn’t have many qualms about recognizing something like a civil union back then, its hard to tell. Definately shows moderate to liberal stance back in ’94. Enter 2002 governorship. I didn’t read the town hall article, but I’m pretty sure the marriage license didn’t change from Husband and Wife until after the ruling. He did kind of fight the issue until the ruling, but for many it was not enough as can be seen here in this link http://www.massresistance.org/romney/gregg_jackson_122007.html. Looking at the presentation the state made to the Justices of the peace along with Romney comments on the radio show, it more looks like the state (i.e. Romney and his counsel) concluded it would cost too much in litigation if state representatives didn’t comply. He we see the pragmatism and that it wasn’t the most important issue to him at the time. Some argue that since the legislature did not act in the 180 days that Romney didn’t have to follow the courts decision, or could have still fought it, but it is a week legal argument unless the supreme court ruling could be overturned. I did find things going way back to support that Romney does believe a marriage should be between an man and woman, but he will follow the law of the land as decided by the Supreme Court. Will Romney fight tooth and nail to keep Marriage, adoption and other gay issues in the traditional? I think we can see that he won’t. Conversely, he will not champion gay marriage on the national level either. If this is your wholly beholden issue, Romney is not your man. If you have bigger concerns about the economy, you may look at him then.
Mandates: He clearly has no problems with state level mandates. If you hate state mandates, then Romney is not your guy. The real question is National Mandates. Did he really support the Chafee bill? The only evidence we have is the interview by Judis in The New Republic. Did he then? possibly. Does he now? I just don’t see it. I could be wrong. What I do know is that he would not have done it for the nation because Romney care would not work for the whole nation. For it to be feasible, it needs to already have a high level of people insured, it needs to have less people at or below poverty level. I’m pretty sure he didn’t do it for ideological purposes, he did it because the numbers fit Massachusetts and probably a very few states. Again, the pragmatic, moderate, less ideological M.O. So far the results, depending on how you look at the results are a big mixed bag. Not enough by most to call it a failure, but still nearly having the uninsured.
Taxes or Fees: Did the tax and fee burden go up drastically? only for a few services where the fees where considerably lower for the same thing in lower states. Maybe that is a big deal for you, maybe it isn’t. Again its the pragmatic pol looking to help revenue where he doesn’t want to increase property or income taxes.
Does he flip flop? Every politician does. Does he do it only when its convenient or insincerely? Not completely, that is the problem with pragmatists. As the context or issues change, your position may change. What has hurt Romney is that he always tries to, as all politicians do, is present his positions in the best light, but he lacks the “it” sojourner? spoke of, but the “it” is the ability to connect and not look plastic or have charisma. Since Romney doesn’t have much of it, he has a hard time coming off as the real deal and make people feel like their issues are the tops of his list because he isn’t an ideologue and can shift what he thinks will work best with changing times. He will never resonate with the Social Conservatives. But he has gotten more conservative as he has gotten older, just like the majority of the baby boomers. He probably wouldn’t have won reelection in Massachusetts because after all the salesmanship of I’m not extreme, I’m safe, he governed more conservatively than most would have liked, especially on fiscal issues.
So, in conclusion, I do not like how he campaigns, especially last time. It makes me a bit squeamish, but since the social issues are not my most pressing ones right now, and since I can trust that he won’t make them worse, and that his actual record isn’t bad, but mostly pretty descent, I can hold my nose and vote for him if no one better shows up.
Now Christie, please tell me more. I think I could really like him.
October 8th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
I have been exploring for a little bit for any high quality articles or weblog posts in this sort of area . Exploring in Yahoo I ultimately stumbled upon this web site. Reading this information So i?m happy to express that I have a very just right uncanny feeling I came upon just what I needed. I most definitely will make sure to do not omit this site and give it a look on a continuing basis.