• 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?

Wrangor said:
And this will play beautifully in a primary. Christie will run over some hippie reporter and the super right will love him for it. Meanwhile the middle will continue to support him bc we know he is exactly what the Republican party needs.
Click to expand...

You know what won't play beautifully in a primary? His pretty moderate views on gun control and healthcare.
 
bobknightfan said:
Dream on if you think that the social conservative fanatics in the Republican Party will fall in line for Christie that easily. There will be some Santorems & Perrys in those primaries reminding them how godless Christie is because he didn't denounce Obama. Chris Christie will never be the Republican nominee for president....ever. 30 or 40 years ago, he might have been....but not today. That Republican Party has been gone for a long time.
Click to expand...

Your argument somewhat undermines your point. Santorum, Perry, Bachman...none won the primary. It was the Mormon moderate from the Northeast who won. Not exactly the poster boy for the ultra conservative christian right of the republican party.

Yes, he did have to move to the right to win the primary. Just like McCain had to. I agree with you there. And, I can agree that Christie will have to appeal to that base if he runs in '16 to try and win the nomination. But, I still like his chances more than you're making it out to be. You act like it's an impossibility.

First, we have no idea how much influence the tea party will have in '16. Secondly, not everyone who votes in the republican primary is a card carrying member of the tea party. Most who vote in the primary are pragmatic. They understand that of the however many people running for president in their party, there are probably only two or three realistic chances of guys actually becoming president. Christie is absolutely one of those guys. He'll get plenty of votes from people who may not love him, but know this guy has a chance of winning a national election. Again, look no further than Romney's nomination.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
You know what won't play beautifully in a primary? His pretty moderate views on gun control and healthcare.
Click to expand...

He is no different than Romney on those issues and he is a 100% more marketable and appealing to the average republican than Robot Romney. Y'all are hilarious. Keep dreaming. If Christie wants to run the only candidate that has a chance is Rubio.
 
Les Grossman said:
Your argument somewhat undermines your point. Santorum, Perry, Bachman...none won the primary. It was the Mormon moderate from the Northeast who won. Not exactly the poster boy for the ultra conservative christian right of the republican party.

Yes, he did have to move to the right to win the primary. Just like McCain had to. I agree with you there. And, I can agree that Christie will have to appeal to that base if he runs in '16 to try and win the nomination. But, I still like his chances more than you're making it out to be. You act like it's an impossibility.

First, we have no idea how much influence the tea party will have in '16. Secondly, not everyone who votes in the republican primary is a card carrying member of the tea party. Most who vote in the primary are pragmatic. They understand that of the however many people running for president in their party, there are probably only two or three realistic chances of guys actually becoming president. Christie is absolutely one of those guys. He'll get plenty of votes from people who may not love him, but know this guy has a chance of winning a national election. Again, look no further than Romney's nomination.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse the foaming liberals with facts. The reality is that both of the Republicans last nominees were pretty moderate. They also happened to be vanilla (McCain) and cardboard (Romney) flavored candidates. Put a moderate candidate in there with some national recognition that knows how to bully and fight in a debate (huntsmans problem) and he wins in a walk. Christie/Rubio is the ticket. Perfect blend of what the Repulican party (and this country) needs.
 
Wrangor said:
He is no different than Romney on those issues and he is a 100% more marketable and appealing to the average republican than Robot Romney. Y'all are hilarious. Keep dreaming. If Christie wants to run the only candidate that has a chance is Rubio.
Click to expand...

Rubio/Christie or vice versa is a solid 16 year plan. Probs want to put Christie on top because he might stroke out.
 
As a person who has actually attended CPAC, its a red meat type of conference.

Allen West is red meat.

Christie is still red meat he just kinda turned into a pumpkin for CPAC last year. He'll be back in '14, '15 and def '16.
 
Wrangor said:
He is no different than Romney on those issues and he is a 100% more marketable and appealing to the average republican than Robot Romney. Y'all are hilarious. Keep dreaming. If Christie wants to run the only candidate that has a chance is Rubio.
Click to expand...

Gun control wasn't an issue when Romney was running. It is now. And he definitely was not moderate on healthcare after he started running for President.

I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic about this. The thread was started based on a post on a pretty prominent political blog. It's not like we just came out of nowhere and were like "OH NOOOO! WE'RE SO SCARED OF BIG MR. CHRISTIE!!"
 
everyone always mentions rubio and christie for '16. thoughts on someone like scott walker?
 
Go said:
As a person who has actually attended CPAC, its a red meat type of conference.

Allen West is red meat.

Christie is still red meat he just kinda turned into a pumpkin for CPAC last year. He'll be back in '14, '15 and def '16.
Click to expand...

I see what you did there.
 
Go said:
As a person who has actually attended CPAC, its a red meat type of conference.

Allen West is red meat.

Christie is still red meat he just kinda turned into a pumpkin for CPAC last year. He'll be back in '14, '15 and def '16.
Click to expand...

Christie:
cinderella_pumpkin_wallpaper-other.jpg
 
Les Grossman said:
Your argument somewhat undermines your point. Santorum, Perry, Bachman...none won the primary. It was the Mormon moderate from the Northeast who won. Not exactly the poster boy for the ultra conservative christian right of the republican party.

Yes, he did have to move to the right to win the primary. Just like McCain had to. I agree with you there. And, I can agree that Christie will have to appeal to that base if he runs in '16 to try and win the nomination. But, I still like his chances more than you're making it out to be. You act like it's an impossibility.

First, we have no idea how much influence the tea party will have in '16. Secondly, not everyone who votes in the republican primary is a card carrying member of the tea party. Most who vote in the primary are pragmatic. They understand that of the however many people running for president in their party, there are probably only two or three realistic chances of guys actually becoming president. Christie is absolutely one of those guys. He'll get plenty of votes from people who may not love him, but know this guy has a chance of winning a national election. Again, look no further than Romney's nomination.
Click to expand...

You were doing OK until you hit the highlighted part. Even Bobby Jindal disagrees with you on that part. He said GOP has to stop being the "party of stupid".

The statement absolutely refers not only to idiotic statement in the general but nominating people like Todd Akin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Mourdock, the guy in CO and many others.

If there had been a RW candidate with a brain and some money, Romney would not have won the nomination. I would say he ran against a bunch of clowns, but that wouldn't be fair to clowns.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
Gun control wasn't an issue when Romney was running. It is now. And he definitely was not moderate on healthcare after he started running for President.

I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic about this. The thread was started based on a post on a pretty prominent political blog. It's not like we just came out of nowhere and were like "OH NOOOO! WE'RE SO SCARED OF BIG MR. CHRISTIE!!"
Click to expand...

Exactly. Get back with me in 2016. Who cares how CPAC views Christie now.
 
I don't think a Christie/Rubio ticket works because neither will have enough experience on Capital Hill. As big a clown as Biden is, he's valuable to Obama because he can work prior relationships. I definitely think Christie can win a general election, but the primaries will be tricky for him.

There's a reason why Obama was the first sitting Senator elected President since JFK, and I think Rubio will suffer a little bit because of the comparisons to Obama's problems as an inexperienced President during the first term. I think Christie needs to have somebody with significant Capital Hill experience as VP. I don't think that's Rubio, who strikes me as a speed bump for conservatives with little bipartisan cred.

Romney and Pawlenty had the right profile-moderate Governors from blue states who had some early bipartisan success. Both panicked under the bright lights, moved too far right, and looked like flip flopping weasels. Don't see Christie doing that, but he will piss off the far right along the way. Hence the primary problem.
 
RJKarl said:
You were doing OK until you hit the highlighted part. Even Bobby Jindal disagrees with you on that part. He said GOP has to stop being the "party of stupid".

The statement absolutely refers not only to idiotic statement in the general but nominating people like Todd Akin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Mourdock, the guy in CO and many others.

If there had been a RW candidate with a brain and some money, Romney would not have won the nomination. I would say he ran against a bunch of clowns, but that wouldn't be fair to clowns.
Click to expand...

I agree there's plenty of dumb people in the GOP and plenty of dumb GOP voters. No argument here. But, I dont believe those people are the ones deciding who wins a presidential primary. Influence? Yes. Decide. No. As evidence for that, you only need to look at Romney and McCain. And, I concede that they had to move further to the right than they probably wanted, but they dont come anywhere near the crazy level of the candidates you mentioned.
 
bobknightfan said:
If you really believe everything you posted there, you are the pollyanna. You are envisioning the Republican Party as you wish it was, not like it actually is today.

The only way that Christie can win the nomination is if he is willing to sell his soul to the far right wing of the GOP, like Romney did. And if he does, he will meet the same fate that McCain & Romney met....and I just don't think that Christie is a guy who would sell his soul to be another losing Republican nominee in a presidential election.

The Tea Party nuts in the GOP might not be able to nominate their own idiot...like Perry, Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee, Santorem, etc....but they are strong enough to fatally wound the candidacy of any moderate by forcing him to move so far to the right that he becomes unelectable.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said in the bolded part with the exception of the word "fatally."

If things hold for the next three years, it appears it will be a battle between Rubio and Christie. To be honest, I think what hurts Christie in that matchup is not his politics, but his race. I think many republican voters will mistakenly believe that if they vote for Rubio that means they can get the Latino vote and win the election, not appreciating the nuances of the Hispanic community.
 
bobknightfan said:
Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 out of the last 6 presidential elections. In other words, they've only won the popular vote once in the last 25 years. They lost several senate seats in the last two elections when they should have been winning seats and taking control of congress. Both of these things have happened as a result of the fringe rightwing taking over control of the Republican Party. They are clinging to a narrow majority in the House of Representives now due to one reason and one reason only: Gerrymandered districting in state legislatures. The Democrats had a 600,000-vote majority in total combined House elections in the last election. Population demographics continue to rapidly go against their constituency....and all the while, they refuse to get the message and claim that the reason they have been losing all these elections were due to cosmetic reasons, not that they were on the wrong side of the issues with a growing majority of the American people.

Dream on......
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said. I think the gerrymandering portion of this post is a bit of hyperbole, but I get the point. I think the Tea Party is ruining the Republican Party. No doubt about it. I still believe Christie can win. Maybe in 3 years I will have a different opinion. Nothing is certain.
 
Les Grossman said:
I agree there's plenty of dumb people in the GOP and plenty of dumb GOP voters. No argument here. But, I dont believe those people are the ones deciding who wins a presidential primary. Influence? Yes. Decide. No. As evidence for that, you only need to look at Romney and McCain. And, I concede that they had to move further to the right than they probably wanted, but they dont come anywhere near the crazy level of the candidates you mentioned.
Click to expand...

If there had been a single far right candidate, with some money and not as insane as the clown posse that ran, I think he would have beaten Romney.

Every time I saw Romney I thought of the movie Field of Dreams when they asked if Ty Cobb would be playing and they said, "Nobody liked the son of a bitch when he was alive."

There will be something else to factor in for 2014 and definitely 2016- the VRA decision. When the SC overturns it, I wouldn't be shocked to see 75+% of black and Latino turnout.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
Gun control wasn't an issue when Romney was running. It is now. And he definitely was not moderate on healthcare after he started running for President.

I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic about this. The thread was started based on a post on a pretty prominent political blog. It's not like we just came out of nowhere and were like "OH NOOOO! WE'RE SO SCARED OF BIG MR. CHRISTIE!!"
Click to expand...

But the reality is that Liberals are a bit scared of Christie. As evidenced by the fact that many of you have advised him to come over to your side. First it was Christie will piss everyone off because he is too brash, now it is he will piss off the conservatives and will never get through the primaries. Christie is a legitimate threat for the presidency, and because Democrats have failed to find a true weakness to his platform they are banking on a conspiracy theory about Republican primaries. 3 years from now assuming Christie continues to do exactly what he has done so far as Governor of New Jersey, he will be the front runner for the Republican primaries. If he runs I believe wholeheartedly he wins in a route. This year it was pretty obvious that Romney was going to win. I believe it will be just as self evident come 2015.
 
Wrangor said:
But the reality is that Liberals are a bit scared of Christie. As evidenced by the fact that many of you have advised him to come over to your side. First it was Christie will piss everyone off because he is too brash, now it is he will piss off the conservatives and will never get through the primaries. Christie is a legitimate threat for the presidency, and because Democrats have failed to find a true weakness to his platform they are banking on a conspiracy theory about Republican primaries. 3 years from now assuming Christie continues to do exactly what he has done so far as Governor of New Jersey, he will be the front runner for the Republican primaries. If he runs I believe wholeheartedly he wins in a route. This year it was pretty obvious that Romney was going to win. I believe it will be just as self evident come 2015.
Click to expand...

It's not some "conspiracy theory." It's exactly what happens in a primary. History has shown that moderate candidates (Romney, McCain) must tack HARD to the right to get through the primary. I don't see why it would be any different with Christie. His primary opponents will hammer him on his moderate stances, and the far right voters (who are mostly the ones voting in primaries) won't like his answers if he sticks to his guns.
 
Les Grossman said:
I agree with everything you said in the bolded part with the exception of the word "fatally."

If things hold for the next three years, it appears it will be a battle between Rubio and Christie. To be honest, I think what hurts Christie in that matchup is not his politics, but his race. I think many republican voters will mistakenly believe that if they vote for Rubio that means they can get the Latino vote and win the election, not appreciating the nuances of the Hispanic community.
Click to expand...

Christie would run over Rubio in a debate. Rubio is not ready for the top seat. But he will get his shot at some point. He is a great speaker, and seems to have run a brilliant political career. In a lot of ways he is similar to Obama. Both seem to always make the right move at the right time. Perhaps he will surprise us 2016 much the way Obama did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top