• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Do conservatives still want Chris Christie?

SkinsNDeacs said:
I am not a RINO but I have rarely been called a liberal. Truth be told I am probably more liberal than anyone on this board. I am just a short hair away from being an anarchist. That is either extremely liberal or extremely conservative. I can't decide.
Click to expand...

You are not a liberal....was not referring to you. Didn't even see you post about it to be honest. Was really referring to PH. He apparently knows the Republican Party very well.
 
PhDeac said:
I apologize, Wrangor. I read this post as present tense, not future tense. If you're admitting that Christie is behind now and claiming he won't be in 2+ years, can you explain why such a high profile Republican and possible 2012 candidate hasn't gotten Republican hearts beating and hasn't excited the far right enough to show up in polls now?
Click to expand...

I think I made my view of polling this early very clear. It has almost no bearing on the 2016 Republican Primaries. If you have another way in which you would like to ask the same question by all means be my guest.
 
I know what Republicans say when polled. It's not complicated. Republicans themselves say they like Cruz more than Christie, by a wide margin among the most conservative. I posted the most recent poll a few days ago.

Wrangor, please respond to this:

PhDeac said:
I apologize, Wrangor. I read this post as present tense, not future tense. If you're admitting that Christie is behind now and claiming he won't be in 2+ years, can you explain why such a high profile Republican and possible 2012 candidate hasn't gotten Republican hearts beating and hasn't excited the far right enough to show up in polls now?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
I know what Republicans say when polled. It's not complicated. Republicans themselves say they like Cruz more than Christie, by a wide margin.

Wrangor, please respond to this:
Click to expand...

You are truly dense. Yes, and in 2 years when the two candidates are put on a national stage, and matched up it will be very clear that Christie is not only the better Republican, but the better presidential candidate. As I posted earlier, 2 months before the last primary Cain had a 20 point lead on Romney. You act as though polling data is real life. Perhaps because you live in the world of academia you think that looking at a painting of the beach is the same thing as getting your feet sandy.

The trends in Republican elections are clear. Far right candidates get hype and love early, moderate Republicans get the nomination. Lets go through the list: Cain, Perry, Bachman, Gingrich....they were the clear favorites! What happened? How could they poll so well and then actually lose?
 
Do you realize how polls work? They ask Republicans what they think and Republicans answer. It's a snapshot that reflects the pulse of Republicans, who they are excited about right now. Being in academia, I realize that a map tells me more about where the coastline goes than my sandy feet.

Those trends are because far right candidates get the base excited, but moderate Republicans typically have the advantage in name and cash and they're able to hang in longer. Recently they've also been the obvious favorite at the start and stayed near the top in the polls behind the flavor of the week while others fell to the wayside.

Christie currently has a popularity problem with the base. It's a real problem because the Republican base disagrees with Christie on several issues. Christie folks should be concerned that he has been in the public eye for a few years and trails a newcomer regarded as unlikable among the base with the rank-and-file.

You're letting last year's Romney problems get to you again. Please don't repeat last year. You started going off the rails.
 
Last edited:
You can cut the condescension crap PH. I am making a statement about 2016. You are making a statement about October 14, 2012. I don't know why that is so hard for you to understand, but I get tired of you 'teaching' me how to develop my own political philosophy. Your opinion is that current polls matter for 2016. MY OPINION is that they don't. No matter how much you condescend neither of us is going to change our opinion, and only one of us will be proven right 2 years from now. I would love to enjoy some political discourse on these boards without getting into these pissing fests. Peace brother. It is late.
 
Wrangor, in the future be clearer that you're talking about the future. That would make the political discourse much easier.
 
Wrangor said:
I love all the liberals telling the conservatives who they are going to support. For all the intellect that is housed in the collective brains of the liberals on this board (which apparently is a much greater sum than the conservatives - I read it on the internet) I don't think a single one of you has a firm grasp on the pulse of the Republican Party. Ya'll are praying for Ted Cruz, but it isn't going to happen. Christie is not only a moderate (which like or not the last two presidential nominees have been moderate when compared to the other primary candidates) but he excites the far right without having to kowtow to their rhetoric. I know it might be a somewhat scary thought, but Christie has the makeup to win states like Mississippi and New Jersey even as far apart as they are on the conservative periodic table.

Some of you will be sorely disappointed in a few years.
Click to expand...

Uh, no he doesn't. I guess you don't listen to much talk radio.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Uh, no he doesn't. I guess you don't listen to much talk radio.
Click to expand...

He may not excite the far right now but Wrangor is saying he will in 2 years. Wrangor has plenty of anecdotal evidence this is true.
 
Wrangor said:
Please post polls in 2006 that showed Obama leading among Democrats. Because that was when I called Obama as the next Democratic nominee after reading Dreams from my Father. Certain politicians have it, and in todays political landscape that means everything. Polls are meaningless 2 months before the election, and they are certainly even more meaningless 2 years. And when I use the word meaningless I mean they have exactly 0% value. Not even a small percentage.

Here is a poll from 2006 (2 years before the election) that showed Democratic nominees and their percentages....show me Obama on the list:

Clinton: 36%
Gore: 16%
Edwards: 12%
Kerry: 11%
Clark: 4%
Biden: 4%
Feingold: 3%
Warner: 2%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/23245/clinton-giuliani-top-2008-presidential-nomination-polls.aspx

So you stick to the polls, I will stick to what has worked for me in the past 8 years. I have predicted both Obama and Paul Ryan to be rising stars and Christie is the next one. The trends are pretty easy, and Christie is an easier prediction than either Obama or Ryan because he is a sitting governor, dominating in a blue leaning state, who has major national appeal. He is also intelligent, an incredible public speaker, and is an equal combination of principled and practical.

He is an easy call and Democrats know it, they just don't want to admit it. They are hoping that the Tea Party will screw it up, but in national elections the Tea Party has much less sway. Newt Gingrich was relying on the far right to take him to victory. It turns out that the middle of the Republican party has a lot more to say in presidential nominees. 2016 will be no different.
Click to expand...

Instead of deflecting and going off on a ridiculous tangent, it probably would have been more effective just to post a poll that showed Christie leading. Like this one.
 
Only way that Christie faces a cakewalk coronation is if the GOP totally tanks in 2014 and in the aftermath the Tea Party leaves the GOP and formally forms their own party. The Iowa caucuses heavily favor social conservatives. Social conservatives revolted against the judges who ruled in favor of marriage equality and recalled them. Judiciary ruled in favor of marriage equality in NJ. The votes aren't there for recall in NJ and Christie pushing for a recall would hurt him in November 2016 in the purple and blue states he needs to get to 270. Christie can win New Hampshire, but South Carolina's a problem for him. There's no rational explanation for Newt winning in SC. If it dwindles down to Christie vs a single Tea Party favorite after SC, that's problematic for Christie. Even worse would be a single Tea Party survivor, Christie, and another Governor (who would split votes with Christie). I hope Christie does win the nomination, but I don't think it's a slam dunk if the Tea Party is still part of the GOP.
 
OldGoldBeard said:
Instead of deflecting and going off on a ridiculous tangent, it probably would have been more effective just to post a poll that showed Christie leading. Like this one.
Click to expand...

It was nice to see Wrangor channel a little of his inner lectro in that post.
 
Wrangor - don't listen to Ph about elections. This is the same guy that laughably predicted Crist would destroy Rubio. :)

I agree with Wrangor in the sense that talking about polls now as if they'll be some type of indicator two years from now is completely absurd. I don't agree, though, that the far right loves Christie. But, voters aren't as dumb as most people think they are. Yes, they're dumb when it comes to actually knowing issues, but usually not dumb in choosing the person they think has the best chance of winning. As much as the far right may hate Christie, I can tell you one person they hate more with every fiber of their being - Hilary Clinton. And, if the tea party and far right even have the slightest feeling that she'd be more likely to lose against Christie than a Rubio or a Cruz....They will vote for Christie. Or, at least enough of them will to sway the vote in his favor. This will be even more likely if there are polls during the primary that show Christie is doing better in a head to head matchup against Hilary than his tea party cohorts. I can hear the rallying cry now - pick me if you want to beat Hilary. That's all he'll need.
 
Last edited:
SkinsNDeacs said:
I am not a RINO but I have rarely been called a liberal. Truth be told I am probably more liberal than anyone on this board. I am just a short hair away from being an anarchist. That is either extremely liberal or extremely conservative. I can't decide.
Click to expand...

You are what is called a horny liberal. You become a liberal when you want sex knowing the leanings of your wife.
 
If there were one national primary day where everybody voted on the same day I think Christie could have a shot at the GOP nomination. As is though, value voters get to get their horse out to an early momentum push with Iowa and get the corresponding media attention to the winner. I don't see how Christie can get through the nomination process with the GOP still set up in 2015 as it is right now. Tea Party candidates could potentially split the vote, but there's no way that the south or any midwestern states go for Christie early on if there are other people to choose from. Christie MAY be able to sneak through and win the nomination with some political maneuvering, but there's simply no way in hell the far right or Tea Partiers ever get really excited about Christie with other people still in the field.
 
RJKarl said:
You are what is called a horny liberal. You become a liberal when you want sex knowing the leanings of your wife.
Click to expand...

The political leanings of my wife (that have vastly evolved thanks to her audience with me) are about 5000 on the list of barriers between me and poontang. 1-4000 are diapers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top