Weekly Standard: Christie now under “serious consideration” for VP?

posted at 4:51 pm on August 6, 2012 by Allahpundit

Bill Kristol’s been a Christie booster for ages so it’s tempting to dismiss this as wishful thinking, but I don’t know. Makes more sense now than it did three months ago.

Speaking of Christie: As of Friday, when we wrote the editorial [recommending Ryan or Rubio for VP], we’d been led to believe Christie wasn’t in serious consideration. We now have reason to think he may be. So to be clear: We’d certainly include him with Ryan and Rubio as potential gold medal finalists. As to choosing among the three of them? A photo finish. But choosing a VP candidate who will help Romney run a big, forward looking campaign—that is not a close call.

We’re three months out from election day and Romney’s favorables are still upside down. In Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll, Obama’s suddenly ahead for just the second time in two months. The last wispy chances of an economic recovery before election day evaporated long ago, yet according to Nate Silver’s statistical model of the electoral college, Obama would crack 300 EVs (barely) if the election were held today. If you believe Major Garrett, even Romney’s own advisors are worried that he’s been “too rich for too long” to put some undecideds at ease. And because political news today moves faster than it did 30 years ago, there’s no telling if the convention and the debates will shift votes as dramatically as they did for Reagan against Carter.

If, in other words, the campaign’s decided that it needs some oomph, who better than Christie to provide it? Arguably only Rubio would jolt the race more, but Rubio’s lack of experience would be a bigger problem for the ticket than Christie’s would for the simple, silly, superficial reason that Rubio looks so much younger than his age. People will look at him and be amazed that he’s 35, a bad reaction when you’re presenting him as the man you want one heartbeat away. Christie’s older and looks the part of a seasoned pol even though he’s only held major political office as long as Rubio has, so he’s easier (though necessarily easy) to sell in that role. Beyond that, Christie’s better suited to the campaign demands of the VP role than Rubio is: Romney needs an attack dog and that’s not really who Rubio is. He’s more of an uplift guy a la Obama 2004 than a streetfighter, whereas Christie’s the preeminent streetfighter in the GOP right now. And like Rubio and Paul Ryan and precious few others, Christie can deliver big-picture fiscal conservatism on the stump like few other politicians in America can.

The argument against picking him has always been that (a) he’ll overshadow Romney and (b) he’s enough of a loose cannon that he’ll say something damaging on the stump. As to the latter point, Christie’s been stumping for Romney for months without any miscues; in fact, he’s trusted enough that Romney chose him, among the Republican all-stars who were with him, to give the closing remarks at the big GOP confab in Colorado a few days ago. He’s not a dummy. He can rein himself in with the stakes this high. As to the former point, the more the election looks like it’s slipping away from Romney, the more I’d bet he’s willing to make peace with the idea of a larger-than-life VP if that guy can help him win. And Christie probably can help: Just four days ago, an FDU poll of the deep blue state of New Jersey found CC with a 55 percent approval rating there, including 65 percent approval among independents. Some conservatives would argue that that’s because Christie, apart from fiscal issues, is basically a centrist, but I doubt Romney cares about that either. If tea partiers are willing to line up behind the guy who signed off on RomneyCare in the interest of bouncing The One, adding a guy to the ticket who believes in global warming isn’t going to deter them. The question at this point is, simply, would Christie increase Romney’s chances of winning more than any of the other shortlisters? There’s an argument to be made that, yeah, he would. Risky, but potentially high reward.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Romneybots are finding out it isn’t so easy when you don’t have the MSM to help destroy your rivals.

SurferDoc on August 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Some Conservatives keep wanting to nominate prophets to jobs only politicians can win. Conservatives tend to forget that Reagan was a politician, a great one at that. Being just conservative is not good enough.

The American people don’t move from point A to point B fast. Romney is the best we can do right now, because Paul is too much of a prophet and Palin knows her time has not arrived just yet.

One place conservatives can change the game now is in congress, where there are Senate and House spots that should be filled with more conservative members because their state or district can handle the truth. Winning the presidency is different, you have to get people who are not ready to handle the truth yet to vote for you and then slowly teach them the truth. You have to convince them and make them believe they came up with the idea all by themselves.

Always remember that when you think of Christie and the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan…teaching the truth takes time. Christie is a good first grade teacher…and they are in the first grade when it comes to conservatism.

William Eaton on August 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Romney is the best we can do right now…

William Eaton on August 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

No he isn’t, and he never was. And never will be. Romney is the Next In Line, and enough sheeple GOP voters just went along. It’s impossible to prove, but I think Rick Perry would be 8 points ahead of Obama right now.

ddrintn on August 7, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Romneybots are finding out it isn’t so easy when you don’t have the MSM to help destroy your rivals.

SurferDoc on August 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I’m no real fan of post-1996 Newt Gingrich, but I’ll never forget that weirdly synchronized anti-Newt blast that came from conservative media on the eve of the Florida primary.

ddrintn on August 7, 2012 at 11:57 AM

NO TO CHRISTIE !
Just, NO !!

I’d like Jindal, but he’d be better used @ HHS, or whatever’s left of that dept once he gets in there.

pambi on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Winning the presidency is different, you have to get people who are not ready to handle the truth yet to vote for you and then slowly teach them the truth. You have to convince them and make them believe they came up with the idea all by themselves.

Always remember that when you think of Christie and the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan…teaching the truth takes time. Christie is a good first grade teacher…and they are in the first grade when it comes to conservatism.

William Eaton on August 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

I could accept your first position but your identification of Christie as the person capable of convincing slow learners couldn’t be further from the truth. Chritie’s style will drive people away just like the the most rabid supporters of various politicians do to other posters. I voted for Christie & I don’t like his style – too much huff & puff – talks a lot and delievers less.

katiejane on August 7, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Well,I just wanted to thank you folks. After reading Hot Air during my lunch break for the last few years, I am done. Done with this forum and done trying to identify with what is now considered conservative. I am very much fiscally conservative, but you social cons are killing us. I have watched with equal parts amazement and sadness over the way you treat each other, and anyone who dares disagree. I know I won’t be missed, as I rarely contributed.
I thought you may as well know that even though people may not post here, they read your words and those very words influence people(and in this case negatively). This Christie thread is just the last straw. Really, villifying Christie because of his belief in global warming or he’s fat? Laughable children,the whole lot of you.

MouthyMainah on August 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Really, villifying Christie because of his belief in global warming or he’s fat? Laughable children,the whole lot of you.

MouthyMainah on August 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

No, its because conservatism actually matters to some people and for them its about more than being a financial officer for the welfare state.

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/301071

Christie’s claim to have put New Jersey’s fiscal house in order is grossly overstated.

Christie made like a Democrat and attacked Lonegan’s conservative proposals: a flat tax, a $5 billion spending cut, and the shuttering of government agencies. It was what you’d expect from a cardboard cut-out northeastern GOP moderate proponent of progressive taxation and the welfare state — which is exactly what Christie has proven to be.

as U.S. attorney, Christie also personally championed a Hamas operative named Mohammed Qatanani and, more shockingly, put his federal office in the service of that operative, in opposition to the federal government’s worthy effort to deport him.

New Jersey has an unfunded pension liability of over $41 billion. To “balance” the budget (as the state constitution requires), Christie is doing what his spendaholic predecessors have done: He is pretending that he is not required to make the state’s full pension payment. (What do you suppose would happen to a CEO in a private-sector, SEC-regulated business who tried that?) He has skimped on more than $5 billion — money he is spending on government programs (or, as he puts it, “core services”). The pension bomb is kicked down the road, to explode on some future governor, who will have to make the tough choice Christie is ducking: pay the mounting debt, slash pension benefits, or drastically cut other spending.

Christie also claims to have “balanced” the budget without raising taxes. That is true only insofar as income taxes are concerned. But the real problem in Jersey is property taxes. They are among the highest in the country and have risen sharply on Christie’s watch.

Unlike Republican governors across the country, Christie declined to sign New Jersey onto the multi-state lawsuit against the “Affordable Care Act”

before the ink from Obama’s signature was dry, Christie joined Democratic governors in the rush to claim federal funds that Obamacare doles out to states that set up its hyper-regulated “high-risk” insurance pools.

The governor likes government, particularly its “investments” in everything from green-energy boondoggles like his Offshore Wind Economic Development Act (because “climate change is real” and it is time to “defer to the experts” who say it is anthropogenic) to the creation of new state bureaucracies within existing state bureaucracies to provide government services for children and the elderly.

This week, however, Moody’s burst his balloon. The investors’ service projected growth at only 3 percent for fiscal year 2013 — about what it is now — and surmised that the governor had significantly overstated revenues in trumpeting the state’s supposed recovery. (In 2011, Christie’s second year in office, both Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s downgraded New Jersey’s credit rating to Aa3 — only California and Illinois rank lower.)

Then the next shoe dropped: The state’s legislative budget officer (New Jersey’s analogue to the federal CBO) announced that revenue would fall $1.3 billion short of Christie’s projections — prompting the governor, with his usual grace, to inveigh, “Why would anybody with a functioning brain believe this guy?” and to belittle the budget officer as “the Dr. Kevorkian of the numbers.” By the next day, at least some functioning brains decided “Dr. Kevorkian” wasn’t so inept after all: Christie’s state treasurer conceded that revenues would come up nearly $700 million short of what Christie projected just two months ago. The treasurer also mentioned in passing that Christie will fill part of the gaping budget hole by diverting $260 million in transportation funds to other spending needs . . . and then borrowing $260 million in order to preserve the transportation spending. Christie, in fine Keynesian fettle, explains that this government spending cannot be cut because it is necessary to put people to work — New Jersey’s unemployment rate, at 9.1 percent, being even worse than the nation’s.

If this is what you as a so-called fiscal conservative want, then I would agree that you would feel more comfortable elsewhere. I hear that David Frum has a forum.

sharrukin on August 7, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4