Will Christie bother running?

[Mac1958]

.

Not looking good: Top Christie ally defects to Bush - The Washington Post

I'd say "we can probably stick a fork in him", but the snarkers would have a field day with that one.

Maybe he should just concentrate on getting his state running a little better. It would probably be a good idea to get his numbers over 38%: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/nj/nj04202015_ngf735bu.pdf

.

 

[G.T.]

when one party plus independents favor marijuana, and your own party has mixed views on it themselves, and you say hard line "fuck state legalizations, im coming after it!"

you lose.

its automatic.

 

[Toro]

Sure, why not. It's a crowded field already, and Bush is hardly a shoe-in.

 

[gipper]

Christie is a big fat progressive. We have lots of them in politics. Why do we another one?

Though he could run to the left of Hillary.

Progressives and their media should not be upset, nearly all the Rs likely to run are progressives too. Once again it is likely to be a win-win for them in 2016...but they are too partisan to see it, since their belief system tells them Ds good...Rs bad...duh!

 

[|electric|foxy|]

If he will run or not, he's got too low chance in comparison with Cruz or Bush, too much compromising info about him is known.

 

[Moonglow]

Christie won't run, he can't even do the airborne shuffle, he's too fat and old....

 

[candycorn]

I do not think he'll run. The real reason has more to do with the calendar than anything else. Of the first 4 large contests, only NH holds any sort of promise. If he doesn't win comfortably (by more than 5 percentage points), game over. He may have a shot in Nevada since the state is decided by large metro areas.

 

[Agit8r]

"Will Christie bother running?"

Story of his life....

 

[JoeB131]

I think the graph at RealClearPolitics tells the story.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

In Dec 2013, fresh off his re-election, before Bridgegate hit the fan, he was at 20% in the RCP Average. Now he's at 5.6%, trailing Bush, Walker, Rubio, Cruz, Paul, Huckabee and even Uncle Tom Carson.

 

[JoshuaZ]

If he will run or not, he's got too low chance in comparison with Cruz or Bush, too much compromising info about him is known.

Interesting, you think Cruz has a high chance? About how high would you estimate?

 

[JoeB131]

Christie's big problem is, there's no subclass he could run in.

Bush has the Establishment Wing tied up, with Rubio and Walker taking up what daylight is left.

He really never fit into the Religious right's box.

The Teabaggers have Cruz.

The Libertarians have Paul.

The Liberal republicans have LIndsey Grahmn to remind the GOP they are still there.

The business Republicans have Carly.

 

[JoshuaZ]

I think the graph at RealClearPolitics tells the story.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

In Dec 2013, fresh off his re-election, before Bridgegate hit the fan, he was at 20% in the RCP Average. Now he's at 5.6%, trailing Bush, Walker, Rubio, Cruz, Paul, Huckabee and even Uncle Tom Carson.

Thank you for supplying hard data rather than speculation. (No comment on the unnecessary attack on Ben Carson.)

 

[JoeB131]

I think it's totally necessary to attack Carson and people like him at every opportunity, for no other reason than they give intellectual cover for racists.

 

[JoshuaZ]

I think it's totally necessary to attack Carson and people like him at every opportunity, for no other reason than they give intellectual cover for racists.

I can't tell if that's intended as a joke or not. That's worrisome.

 

[JoeB131]

I think it's totally necessary to attack Carson and people like him at every opportunity, for no other reason than they give intellectual cover for racists.

I can't tell if that's intended as a joke or not. That's worrisome.

No, I'm totally serious. The problem with guys like Clarance Thomas, Ben Carson, Alan Keyes is that they turn on their own trying to get the acceptance of white people.

Nobody thinks for a MINUTE that Ben Carson will be the 2016 GOP nominee. Not even Carson himself. But what he does do is allow Republicans who've spent the last 8 years getting upset about Obama's existence to say, "See, See, We're not racist, we have a black guy up there saying how shiftless other blacks are!"

 

[JoshuaZ]

No, I'm totally serious. The problem with guys like Clarance Thomas, Ben Carson, Alan Keyes is that they turn on their own trying to get the acceptance of white people.

Nobody thinks for a MINUTE that Ben Carson will be the 2016 GOP nominee. Not even Carson himself. But what he does do is allow Republicans who've spent the last 8 years getting upset about Obama's existence to say, "See, See, We're not racist, we have a black guy up there saying how shiftless other blacks are!"

Ah, I see your logic. I don't think I agree with it, because I think people like Carson and Thomas are sincere, and I'd rather not attack people who are sincere simply because their existence ends up providing cover for someone else. (Keyes on the other hand is just crazy, and I don't feel good attacking the mentally ill.) But I do see where you are coming from.

 

[JoeB131]

Ah, I see your logic. I don't think I agree with it, because I think people like Carson and Thomas are sincere, and I'd rather not attack people who are sincere simply because their existence ends up providing cover for someone else. (Keyes on the other hand is just crazy, and I don't feel good attacking the mentally ill.) But I do see where you are coming from.

I don't think Carson is sincere at all. I think he's found an audience of white folks who are happy to hear him say how shiftless other blacks are, especially the one currently in the White House. And he's totally cashing in.

Thomas, I think it a bit more pathetic. I think he still feels burned about what happened during his confirmation hearings.

 

[JoshuaZ]

Ah, I see your logic. I don't think I agree with it, because I think people like Carson and Thomas are sincere, and I'd rather not attack people who are sincere simply because their existence ends up providing cover for someone else. (Keyes on the other hand is just crazy, and I don't feel good attacking the mentally ill.) But I do see where you are coming from.

I don't think Carson is sincere at all. I think he's found an audience of white folks who are happy to hear him say how shiftless other blacks are, especially the one currently in the White House. And he's totally cashing in.

Thomas, I think it a bit more pathetic. I think he still feels burned about what happened during his confirmation hearings.

It is very easy to attribute ulterior motives to those one disagrees with or whose existence raises difficult questions. It happens throughout the political spectrum. It generally is a good idea to be careful about it and always think at least twice about any conclusion which reinforces such a narrative.

 

[JoeB131]

It is very easy to attribute ulterior motives to those one disagrees with or whose existence raises difficult questions. It happens throughout the political spectrum. It generally is a good idea to be careful about it and always think at least twice about any conclusion which reinforces such a narrative.

From 1980 until about 2008, I was very right wing and conservative. After about 2010, when the nuts took over the GOP, I became more left wing.

And I've seen flim-flam men on both sides. Al Sharpton is a flim flam man. So is Jesse Jackson. So is Ben Carson.

 

[JoshuaZ]

It is very easy to attribute ulterior motives to those one disagrees with or whose existence raises difficult questions. It happens throughout the political spectrum. It generally is a good idea to be careful about it and always think at least twice about any conclusion which reinforces such a narrative.

From 1980 until about 2008, I was very right wing and conservative. After about 2010, when the nuts took over the GOP, I became more left wing.

And I've seen flim-flam men on both sides. Al Sharpton is a flim flam man. So is Jesse Jackson. So is Ben Carson.

Fair enough. For that it is worth I agree with you there about Sharpton and Jackson but not about Carson (and I'm fairly left-wing). I'm curious, who else in each party do you consider flim flam men?