Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Everything Chris Christie Thread


@DCGoldPants

Recommended Posts

Christie appears to be a pro-environment (and green jobs) and pro-gun regulation GOPer. 

 

That has a lot of crossover appeal - despite his take on abortions and teacher's unions. 

wait - teachers are sacred cows in NJ? Must be their 6 figure salaries.

 

Of course he does, Ron Paul also had great cross over appeal with his anti-war pro civil liberties stances. 

 

Christie is also an avid supply sider, slash spending, deficit control guy. How that plays out in a GE in 2016 will be interesting 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ron Paul's crossover appeal is/was overrated. Those who supported him were loud, but few it seemed. The idea of him was easy to get behind than the actual him.

 

Christie has an opportunity to start shaping his imagine and path into something new and different. If the GOP doesn't like him anymore, and establishment Dems don't like him. Then maybe he's doing something right.

 

Of course there will be things voters from either side won't like. But it seems he won't run extreme ideals about anything into the ground.

 

While it would have been fun to see him demolish amateurs like Bachmann and Perry, I'd imagine he wants to stay away from the next wave of those types. Just stand up there and say "Yeah, some of my moves have been unpopular, but I am getting **** done here."

 

Question is.....is he getting **** done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christie's fall in popularity among tp'ers was inevitable.  Too moderate and common sense on too many social issues for hardcore conservatives masquerading as libertarians to tolerate him for too long, even if they do like his anti-establishment approach. 

 

HIs approval ratings across D/R/I would make him a very formidable opponent against anyone in a one-on-one race.  The problem for him is getting to that race. 

 

McCain 2000 sold his soul to get the nomination in 2008 (in the process turning his back on what made Dems and Independents like him in the first place).  I don't know if Christie would do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is.

Because, despite all those things, he's STILL not as far off the deep end as the bulk of the GOP?

Just a theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

 

"opposed gay marriage" is true, but also misleading on his stance.  He's pro civil union, which is enough for many Ds to give him a pass on the issue.  Pro-green energy and anti drilling (NIMBY at least), supports "amnesty" for illegals, pro gun control... 

 

He's a moderate.  No, he's not as committed to liberal causes as the left-most would want him to be.  But it's only a struggle to find the appeal if you assume all Dems are that far left on all social issues, you assume that Ds don't also support small govt and spending cuts, you discount the possibility that social moderate is "good enough", or you ignore where the rest of the Rs stand. 

 

Also this is the season for the politically bi-curious to flirt with the idea of switching teams for the right candidate (McCain, Huntsman, Powell, etc.).  Once the election really starts gearing up, the story may change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is.

Because, despite all those things, he's STILL not as far off the deep end as the bulk of the GOP?

Just a theory.

 

Or as far right as these new fake libertarians. 

 

 

 

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

 

"opposed gay marriage" is true, but also misleading on his stance.  He's pro civil union is enough for many Ds to give him a pass on the issue.  Pro-green energy and anti drilling (NIMBY at least), supports "amnesty" for illegals, pro gun control... 

 

He's a moderate.  No, he's not as committed to liberal causes as the left-most would want him to be.  But it's only a struggle to find the appeal if you assume all Dems are that far left on all social issues, you discount the possibility that social moderate is "good enough", or you ignore where the rest of the Rs stand.

 

Which puts him almost directly in line (on a lot of social issues) with the current guy who Dems elected back in 2008 and 2012. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is.

Because, despite all those things, he's STILL not as far off the deep end as the bulk of the GOP?

Just a theory.

 

Or as far right as these new fake libertarians. 

 

 

 

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

 

"opposed gay marriage" is true, but also misleading on his stance.  He's pro civil union is enough for many Ds to give him a pass on the issue.  Pro-green energy and anti drilling (NIMBY at least), supports "amnesty" for illegals, pro gun control... 

 

He's a moderate.  No, he's not as committed to liberal causes as the left-most would want him to be.  But it's only a struggle to find the appeal if you assume all Dems are that far left on all social issues, you discount the possibility that social moderate is "good enough", or you ignore where the rest of the Rs stand.

 

Which puts him almost directly in line (on a lot of social issues) with the current guy who Dems elected back in 2008 and 2012. 

 

 

 

But does it make him more electable to your rank and file blue Dem voter then Hillary?

 

Again, I just don't see the appeal to an average Democratic voter over Hillary.

 

I certainly hope he is able to siphon off 5-10% of the Dem vote because I think he would be an outstanding executive and I am in line with most of his views that I have heard (except I have heard very little on GWOT/drone policy etc, that could change things)

 

I am just not seeing enough for a Dem or someone who leans left to vote him over Hillary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of those things that makes politics so entertaining.

Right new, I'm enjoying watching people who would never consider voting for Christie (at least not in the primary. They'll vote for ANYBODY with an R, in the general), specifically because he isn't far right enough, trying to paint the guy as a staunch conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a show me attitude Larry. I don't see those who would vote for a D, regardless of if that D supports things that Dems abhorred during the Bush admin, voting for an R over Hillary Clinton.

 

I'll bet Hillary captures 95% of the Dem vote in a GE vs Chris Christie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a valid point.

Yeah, I have no doubt that a great many Ds would prefer Christie over, say, Santorum.

But it won't be an election between Christie and Santorum. It'll be between Christie and Hillary. And in THAT election, how many people who voted for Obama, vote for Christie?

(The flip side of tat, though, is: not very many of them HAVE to "change sides", to swing the election).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/04/dear_everyone_chris_christie_is_conservative/singleton/

 

Its this article I saw which makes me believe it'll be a cold day in hell before Christie gets greater then 5% of the D vote in 2016 vs Hillary. From SALON.com 

 

 
Dear everyone: Chris Christie is conservative

Chris Christie in swimming in Democratic money as he runs for reelection. His Democratic opponent, Barbara Buono, is ignored by the national press and the sort of people that would usually be writing checks for the Democratic challenger to a Republican governor in a large, liberal state.

Hugging Barack Obama was maybe the best political decision New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has ever made, and he’s made some very canny ones. I’m not saying his embrace of the president following Hurricane Sandy was entirely cynical, but it was very boisterous, and it continued through last week, when Obama visited the Jersey Shoreand once again made nice with Christie before the national TV news cameras.

Here’s what’s odd about this Republican governor who currently seems much more popular with Democrats than national Republicans: He’s quite conservative. Especially for the Northeast. That was, in fact, his original appeal, back when conservatives were thrilled about him: He’s the most conservative possible successful statewide officeholder for a blue state like New Jersey.

In his first term, Christie torpedoed a much-needed mass transit tunnel project, same-sex marriage and early voting. He vetoed a minimum wage hike. He vetoed legislation designed to eliminate the gender wage gap. He withdrew from a regional carbon cap-and-trade agreement. He killed a Jersey version of the DREAM Act and cut funding for women’s health services, including eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood.Remember how pissed everyone got when Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives tried to do the same thing? Many liberals seem to give Christie a pass for his antiabortion views that they’d never give a “red state” Republican. (This is maybe because he used to be pro-choice, meaning he made the exact switch on the issue everyone trashed Romney for making.)

 

 

Link for rest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

Just curious, if he stayed the same weight he is now, would he still get your vote?

 

I guess I don't get the "he's 'fat' so he can't be an effective president" line of thought...at all.

 

As far as Democratic voters flocking to him, who cares?  He has appeal to the independents and swaying them to his side will determine the election, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always open to a former energy lobbyist

 

I was just wondering what ya'll see 

 

He put a ban on new coal plants and has even opposed new ones in PA and doesn't support off shore drilling (off shore of NJ at least).

 

I think somebody else above hit on the general issue though, he's a right of center, but not far right (on some issues he's pretty far right, but on many much less so).

 

If somebody is a full fledged blue Democrat, then no they aren't going to vote for him.

 

The question would be can he pull some moderates away or even have some people stay home.  Realistically, I don't think he wins the Republican nomiation.  He doesn't have a national organization or the money to over come some of the dislike of much of the Republican base (Romney had both).

 

**EDIT**

The big issue for Christie, and all Republicans, in a national election will be supply side economics.  In NJ, there is no way the state legislature is going to pass a tax cut for the top 1% so it hasn't been an issue in terms of actually running the state so we've gotten the Republican buget cutting w/o the supply side tax cuts, and it has worked pretty well.

 

In a national election at a national level, I'm not sure how any Republican going to deal with that.  On the state level, you can take some of Christie's more extreme conservative positions (e.g. tax cuts for the top 1% and say well I'm not going to worry about that because it isn't going to happen and go ahead and vote for him.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people are desperate for the increasingly elusive and endangered moderate republican... a species that is clearly facing critical destruction of habitat and is under threat for extinction if nothing can be done to reduce its decline. People had no idea how much they would miss the Jim Kolbes/Nelson Rockefellers/Ike Eisenhowers/Lincoln Chaffees of the world, until they disappeared.  When viewed throught the current goggles the GHW Bushes/Nixons/Reagans of the world look downright purple...

 

 

Christie right now looks attractive as a candidate to many in the same way that seeing a bald eagle soaring over cleaveland in the 1970s (as the river burned) would've been awe inspiring.  Nowadays, bald eagles have made a resurgence and are downright commonplace .... in the 70s people thought they would never be seen in the wild again.  But christie...christie is THIS guy, harkening back to a past that can only be remembered nostolgically, from the days we all walked barefoot to school in teh snow, uphill both directions...

 

 

 

 

tumblr_lszahiEh6i1r4qjq0o1_250.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

Just curious, if he stayed the same weight he is now, would he still get your vote?

 

I guess I don't get the "he's 'fat' so he can't be an effective president" line of thought...at all.

 

As far as Democratic voters flocking to him, who cares?  He has appeal to the independents and swaying them to his side will determine the election, IMO.

its that people don't seem to vote on a national level for people who don't look healthy. Its not that he's so fat he wouldn't be effective. More like, he's so fat and we see how the office ages people. Imagine what it'll do to him.

 

Last overweight President? I mean REALLY overweight. Not Clinton tubby. Taft? Over 100 years ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think more so Bang, Dems will flock to Hillary in 2016 regardless of who runs, even if Christie has cross over appeal.

 

I am full on in the tank for the guy except for that fact that he is fat. However when Dems find out he is essentially a small government, slash spending economic conservative who opposed gay marriage in NJ, I am struggling to find where the "appeal" really is. 

Just curious, if he stayed the same weight he is now, would he still get your vote?

 

I guess I don't get the "he's 'fat' so he can't be an effective president" line of thought...at all.

 

As far as Democratic voters flocking to him, who cares?  He has appeal to the independents and swaying them to his side will determine the election, IMO.

its that people don't seem to vote on a national level for people who don't look healthy. Its not that he's so fat he wouldn't be effective. More like, he's so fat and we see how the office ages people. Imagine what it'll do to him.

 

Last overweight President? I mean REALLY overweight. Not Clinton tubby. Taft? Over 100 years ago?

I guess the notion of a candidates weight keeping people from voting for him/her is just stupid to me.

 

Several of our recent presidents have had health issues or engaged in lifestyles that drastically increased their risk of chronic disease:

-  Obama's a smoker.

-  Bush had a drinking problem earlier in life, the stress of presidency easily could have pushed him off the wagon

-  Clinton chowed down so much on McDonald's during his presidency it reached the point where I sometimes wondered if he had a promotional contract with the McD's.  Subsequently, he underwent a quadruple bypass surgery just 2-3 years after leaving office for his severe CAD (a disease that didn't just manifest after he left the presidency).

 

Then there's Chris Christie who is morbidly obese.  Like others with chronic disease, he appears to be performing his tasks pretty well...  I guess that since people can see the weight on him instead of him being able to hide his habit (smoking, eating Big Macs like they're going out of style) he gets more criticism than everyone else around him and I think that's kind of ridiculous.

 

To be clear, I'm not advocating for obesity.  As a public health professional working in preventive care, specifically exercise and nutrition, I hope he is able to successfully reduce his weight so that he can live a long life without suffering from the effects of chronic disease.  But I guess I don't see his problem as too much worse than someone smoking or someone leading an unhealthy nutritional lifestyle even though the individual appears to be just "tubby."

 

Clearly I am biased toward Christie, but it just kind of irks me when people call out obese people for their unhealthy lifestyle, but don't give a second thought about others who appear "normal" size, but blatantly engage in high risk behavior for chronic disease.    And admittedly, my sensitivity meter goes up when people use the term "fat" to describe others as I think it's used in a condescending manner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people think he would be unelectable in a GE vs Hillary because the D's won't vote for him. The R's won't vote for her either. What really matters is the 10% in the middle that can go either way. The other 90% will vote their party line the vast majority of the time. If Christie can get the middle 10% he will win.

If he can win the purple states that Obama won then he will win. He can win VA, FL, NC, OH, PA. Those are all very reasonable goals for a Christie ticket.

I don't think that Hillary is a very strong candidate to be honest. I'd take the fat guy over the wife who's husband had his secretary suck his Johnson but is still married to him because she wants the power associated with him 10 days out of 10.

I suppose that most die hard D's can find a way to respect a woman like that but I'm sure that no R's do and as someone who has very traditional views of "family" I don't either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a long way to 2016. Christie seems to me to be someone that i'll listen to rather than write off as a far fringe loon like Santorum or Bachmann.

 

As someone who still claims to sit in the middle, he seems to me to carry the truer conservative values rather than this social agenda and upper crust toadying that the neo-cons claim to be 'conservative values'.

 

In terms of gay marriage,, no matter what any leader is going to have to come down somewhere on it, and that doesn't necessarily translate to pushing a social agenda. He seems to have taken a pragmatic stance on the matter, and frankly, that is appealing to me whether i totally agree with his point of view or not. 

Thought over rhetoric. Practicality over inflexibility. A willingness to consider the opinions of more than your base.

I'm not so naive as to think any candidate will ever be "the Chosen One" who shares every belief I have. 

Someone who appears he will thoughtfully weigh each issue independent of party agenda, that is appealing to me.

 

And I have a long time to decide if he fits all of these "seems".

 

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you neglect the turnout factor

So you think that Hillary would be a larger draw than Obama?

 

you think Christie will be a larger draw than Mitt?

 

his base voted at a lower rate than the previous two elections....winning the 10% does not win the election w/o the base

 

I would welcome him running, but I don't see anything special (just the usual talk about appeal that vanished for the last two candidates)

 

add

fwiw...I do think Hillary would have a higher overall turnout, of course she will also turnout opposition

 

Palin was also rather popular w/ low negatives....till the long knives came out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...