Krauthammer: C’mon, let Christie speak at CPAC

posted at 10:41 am on February 27, 2013 by Allahpundit

Just putting a bow here on all the Christie/CPAC coverage lately until the man himself finally chimes in, which should be soon. Over at the Times, Nate Silver argues that the conservative romance was Christie is ending essentially because it was always based on a lie:

[W]hat seems to have changed is the salience of different issues, as driven by major news events over the past year.

Mr. Christie has long been an advocate of gun-control policies, for example. But that issue has become far more relevant since the shootings in Newtown, Conn.

Mr. Christie has also taken moderate positions on immigration. Immigration was an issue in the 2012 campaign, but it seems to have grown in importance now, after the poor performance of the Republicans with Hispanic voters November, and the push by President Obama and by some Republicans in Congress for immigration legislation…

Contrast this to the political climate in late 2011, when Mr. Christie was winning praise from conservatives for his statements toward teachers’ unions — an issue that was then in the news because of the protests against efforts by Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin to curtail benefits for public-sector unions in that state. Mr. Christie also takes relatively conservative views on gay marriage and abortion, social issues that had the stage more to themselves in 2011, but which may have to compete more against immigration and gun control in the next political cycle.

Silver’s conclusion: If there’s anyone out there capable of making a third-party run kinda sorta viable, it’s Christie. Needless to say, I agree. You’ll know he’s thinking about that if he decides to double down on gun control in the next year or two. That’ll antagonize conservatives even further but it’ll also endear him to Bloomberg, who can marshal Wall Street money for him and who could, singlehandedly, fund a pro-Christie Super PAC to level the playing field with the major parties. In fact, his richest supporters are sticking with him, for now:

Ken Langone, the billionaire Home Depot founder and influential Christie donor, and Tom Kean, the former New Jersey governor and longtime Christie mentor, remain bullish on his political future. In interviews with National Review Online, both men say Christie remains a leading contender for the Republican nomination.

“If the governor can expand Medicaid without disrupting his budget and without raising taxes, then I don’t have a problem,” Langone says. “To the critics, I say, ‘give me a break.’ If conservatives are going to criticize him for doing what’s right for his state, then we’re on our way to becoming a minority party.”

Langone says he and several other prominent donors think Christie has the best shot of winning a presidential general election, and they’ll stick with him, even if some conservatives start to rule out the 50-year-old governor.

Still, despite the antagonism with righties, an indie bid would still be harder than winning the Republican nomination. In spite of everything, there may still be a constituency for him inside the GOP:

p

Note that 36 percent. Not all of them would be instant Christie voters, but then not all of the 62 percent on the other side would be implacably opposed to him either. If conservatives splinter over Rubio, Ryan, Jindal, and Paul, then ~30 percent or so makes a contender. And if the answer to that is that the base would never turn out for him if he won the nomination, well, read this. The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule. Plus, there may be some block of Republican voters who are thinking this way:

Christie could do worse than aspire to the role that Clinton played for Democrats in 1992. The young Arkansas governor was perceived as the solution to a problem that had dogged Democrats for 20 years by then. Before the primary that year in New Hampshire, one liberal Democrat after another told me that their hearts belonged to Tom Harkin or Bob Kerrey or Jerry Brown, but they were going to vote for Clinton. They were tired of losing with stereotypical liberals who were easily caricatured as soft on crime and defense, and they saw the Southern moderate as a game-changer.

Some centrists might back him purely for that reason, less because they love the candidate himself than because of the party reorientation he would represent. Because of that, with the possible exception of Rand Paul, he’ll be the most interesting Republican to watch for the next year or two. Does he tack back to the right after his reelection to try to atone with conservatives? Or does he actually inch a bit further to the center by partnering with Bloomy on guns, or “evolving” on gay marriage, or maybe pushing reform on marijuana laws to try to get the attention of younger Republicans? He’s got to pick a brand before other people pick it for him.



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

The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule.

I wouldn’t count on that anymore.

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Let him talk at CPAC.

As long as he’s willing to do Q&A afterwards.

The problem with Christie is he’s a grandstander.

Make him answer questions from conservatives, not union lefties, and let’s see how he does.

budfox on February 27, 2013 at 11:48 AM

No, Punchenko nailed the headlines were he to speak……
“Christie booed at CPAC!”

“GOP Civil War Continues!”

Anybody that identifies themselves as a conservative and is passionate enough to travel to DC for CPAC is not going to be all that kind to a morbidly obese liberal “Republican” who was on camera all but french kissing the enemy days before the general election. I’m not saying that Romney had either the election or New Jersey in his column but that doesn’t mean the “Republican” who endorsed the enemy and then refused to do anymore events with the Republican candidate should be welcome at CPAC.

Happy Nomad on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

He’s right, of course, not that the tiny TruCon minority wants to hear it.

Meredith on February 27, 2013 at 10:54 AM

Tiny you say?

HotAirian on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Remember near the end of the election where Obama went hard at his base and how we (myself included) laughed and laughed. “He has his base” we said.

Who’s laughing now?

These bozos don’t know how to win and don’t want to learn. We were given a clinic in what the base means in 2012 yet they’re still whining about “big tent”.

How about you worry about your base first.

kim roy on February 27, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Yup. And we all thought Barry & Co. were nuts rolling out porker Dunham and sitting down with Us Weekly. Boy howdy, were we wrong!

Barry trolled for every trashy underclass vote and won by busing them to the polls and turning out the vote. And he has given his base everything they wanted with exception to scaling back Bush Admin. national security policy.

And what do we get from the GOP? Nothing. I don’t even think the GOP knows who their base really is at this point. The GOP basically tells us they’re standing athwart history when in reality they’re letting history in through the backdoor.

It’s shameful.

Punchenko on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Chris Feistie would lecture and call names if allowed to blow at CPAC. Seriously. If we follow Krautht’s advice, Christie would now have the last laugh. And donut.

LetsBfrank on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Illinidiva on February 27, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Christie wanted Romney to lose. Had Romney won and been successful, he likely would have been reelected in 2016 and Ryan would likely have been the 2020 standard-bearer, which would have left Christie high and dry.

Christy’s best strategy was to help defeat Romney, which he did.

bw222 on February 27, 2013 at 12:00 PM

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Didn’t work with Romney.

Rusty Allen on February 27, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Christie has always struck me as a new millennium Blue Dog Democrat; not that there’s anything wrong with. Fiscal conservatism is good, and a tough magic act to pull off in uber-liberal New Jersey, but all this ‘he’s not invited to CPAC’ crap is just that – crap.

This is another one of those ‘OMG, he’s drinking from a water bottle’ moments about which these TV heads wet their pants so easily.

Do they all really think Gov. Christie(R) has no other concerns in uber-liberal New Jersey, which still is floundering from Dear Leader’s(D) post-Sandy, photo-op clown show, that’s done little to help the freezing, unemployed, hungry and homeless Sandy victims??

I’m pretty sure Christie ain’t losing sleep over this ‘snub.’

locomotivebreath1901 on February 27, 2013 at 12:01 PM

And what do we get from the GOP? Nothing. I don’t even think the GOP knows who their base really is at this point. The GOP basically tells us they’re standing athwart history when in reality they’re letting history in through the backdoor.

It’s shameful.

Punchenko on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

I think we got insulted. Repeatedly. :/

The GOP knows it has a base. They just ignore it because where else are we going to go?

kim roy on February 27, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Anybody that identifies themselves as a conservative and is passionate enough to travel to DC for CPAC ….

Happy Nomad on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Today I think most people who are passionate enough to travel to DC for CPAC are looking to get laid. CPAC hasn’t been effective for nearly 30 years.

bw222 on February 27, 2013 at 12:03 PM

I’m pretty sure Christie ain’t losing sleep over this ‘snub.’
locomotivebreath1901 on February 27, 2013 at 12:01 PM

No the apnea takes care of that.

Rusty Allen on February 27, 2013 at 12:05 PM

The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule.

Really. You mean that’s still dogma after Romney lost to the Worst President Ever?

ddrintn on February 27, 2013 at 12:10 PM

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Didn’t work with Romney.

Rusty Allen on February 27, 2013 at 12:00 PM

I think the big fallout started when Boehner made the first deal with Obama. It took this straight-ticket-voting gal a couple of years, but I’m done with the Republicans. I voted for Romney, because of the Supreme Court picks coming up. Now that he lost, who is there to be scared of that’s worse than Obama? And, if the moderates won’t fight the left why would I bother to vote for them anymore?

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 12:10 PM

He’s too fat to be President. And if he does lose weight, we’ll look at him the way we look at a svelte Rush Limbaugh — as someone who has lost something of himself, a different person, and not better for it.

I’ve noticed this about huge weight loss — women almost invariably look better, but some men, not all, seem to be reduced by it. I think Christie will be one of them.

bobs1196 on February 27, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Punchenko on February 27, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Post of the week! Derp….

tommyboy on February 27, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Christie would now have the last laugh. And donut.

LetsBfrank on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Then don’t let him. Kick his ass with questions and challenges. We have to break this fear cycle. We’re afraid of Christie AND the media? We need to stop dreading and start fighting. Christie has the psychology and techniques of a bully — but this is not hard to finesse. Really, it isn’t. By now, we should be very proficient at it. But I guess that’s the larger problem — we’re not. We haven’t learned anything in our war with the Left. Because we really haven’t internalized the reality and demands of the war. We’re not on a war footing. We don’t have war-tempered leaders, or even apparently any who want to be.

rrpjr on February 27, 2013 at 12:14 PM

I thought CPAC stood for CONSERVATIVE political action committee not Republican political action committee.

tommyboy on February 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM

By what definition is a gathering under the name of CPAC obliged to include every Republican?

katiejane on February 27, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Christie is a Republican, not a conservative. CPAC is about promoting CONSERVATISM, not the progressive wing of the Republican party.

astonerii on February 27, 2013 at 11:34 AM

CPAC was started by conservatives as an alternative to big government republicans and that is how it should stay. That means NO Christie.

KickandSwimMom on February 27, 2013 at 11:38 AM

S. D. on February 27, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Could anyone snarking about “trucons” and conservatives in general please explain the difference between Republicans and Democrats? Other than Republicans usually have jobs and pay taxes.

Cindy Munford on February 27, 2013 at 12:21 PM

CK is first and foremost an east coast snob. He doesn’t have anything in common with the conservatives except as an audience. If you listen to him you’ll end up in rinoland (re: romney). He doesn’t want you to purge the layer that christie inhabits because that layer gives him cover. I say get rid of both of them unless you get to sip cocktails with him and sally.

rik on February 27, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Chris “Fat Boy Rino” Christie shouldn’t speak at CPAC. No, where he should speak is at the Democratic National Convention were he would feel more at home.

RZuendt on February 27, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Chris Christie is not some un-earthly organism to whom this and that are being done while he remains his awesome, constant self.

His current persona was created by him and his own actions. So, AllahP, it might be time to let him walk on his own two feet. In which case, he won’t walk far. And this has nothing to do with his weight (as much as that says about his self-discipline).

There is not a chance in heck that Chris Christie is going to be the 2016 nominee for any party, even one the Head Nanny creates for him (besides, if Nanny is going to create a party, it will be for himself). If the Christie speech at the 2012 convention — which made me slap myself 3/4 of the way through to remember who the nominee of the Party was supposed to be — didn’t tell you what he’s all about, then nothing will.

He’s known for his tough talk, supposedly. He doesn’t have the stuff to head a third party. And, on the Republican side, a party needs a leader, not somebody who can check off barely enough boxes on the issue chart to call themselves a member.

Can’t you find anybody else in the whole of the United States to back? There are a lot of folks out here who would recast Hot Air as RINO Air already. Do you really want to prove them all right?

IndieDogg on February 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM

I think Ben Carson took his spot

blammm on February 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Christie’s hubris extends far back and it does not reflect conservative values as a whole. His very vocal positions on the building of the mosque at the World Trade Center site, his appointment of Muslims in highly positioned jurisprudence areas in NJ, his self-serving grandstanding at the RNC convention, his position on curbing gun ownership, his demands for federal monies (whether for Sandy relief (bloated) and now Medicaid funding), his outrageous attacks against conservatives, etc. do not recommend him as a consertive spokesman.

OTOH CPAC has invited Dr. Ben Carson to speak, and that presentation will inject a lot of energy into the conservative point of view.

onlineanalyst on February 27, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Could anyone snarking about “trucons” and conservatives in general please explain the difference between Republicans and Democrats?

Among the upper-middle-class I’ll tell you the difference: Both D’s and R’s try to give their children the best education. In America in 2013, that means sending them to high schools where there are few, if any, Trayvon’s and Shaquitha’s.

Republicans accept that as one of the inequities in life that poorer minorities should strive to overcome by working themselves into the middle class.

Guilt-ridden Democrats, instead, call anyone who objects to give housing loans to people with no money a racist.

bobs1196 on February 27, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Christie/Crist, or

Christie/Bloomberg 2016

Schadenfreude on February 27, 2013 at 1:01 PM

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 12:10 PM

I agree. I didn’t use to. I was the guy that chastised anyone who wouldn’t vote for the rebus local nominee. Now I understand that the party needs to change or it will die. If there are two horrible movies playing at the cinema, you don’t have to watch either one.

Rusty Allen on February 27, 2013 at 1:03 PM

It may be that the venue engineering staff simply decided that the stage could not take the load.

slickwillie2001 on February 27, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Random observation: remember how when Palin was deciding on whether or not to run for president in autumn of 2009 the consensus establishment critique was that she’d waited too long and she wouldn’t have any “national organization” and she was doing a disservice to everybody? Then remember when Christie flirted with the idea of running — at the SAME TIME, AFTER already saying he wouldn’t run, AFTER promising New Jersey he would finish two terms if they’d have him and with NO national presence or organizational structure AT ALL — the establishment thought it was all pretty neat?

rrpjr on February 27, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Sorry — got my year wrong above — meant 2011.

rrpjr on February 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Good for CPAC… the only thing Christie stands for is well, Christie.

SteveInRTP on February 27, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Krauthammer starts from the false premise that conservatives and Republicans are the same thing. I think that the last 20 years have shown that is absolutely not the case. In any event, conservatives don’t need a big tent, Republicans need a big tent.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2013 at 1:11 PM

williamg on February 27, 2013 at 11:44 AM

That is easily the worst definition of elitism I’ve ever read.

budfox on February 27, 2013 at 11:51 AM

I didn’t “define” elitist – I gave a list. I also said that Elitists are Elitists and that Party Affiliation is irrelevant. “Elitist” is its own political affiliation. That said, I will REVISE my list of KNOWN elitists – which is by no means a COMPLETE list:

1. Chris Christis
2. Joe Scarborough
3. Charles Krauthammer
4. Allahpundit
5. “budfox”
6. John McCain
7. Lindsay Graham
8. Murkowski
9. All of the “Republicans” who voted “yes” on cloture, but “no” on confirmation of Hagel. By voting “yes” on cloture – they were ensuring that Hagel got confirmed – their subsequent vote made no difference.

williamg on February 27, 2013 at 1:18 PM

“1. Chris Christie” typo

williamg on February 27, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I have just returned from a town hall meeting with Chris Christie. Much as I disliked his threesome with Obama and Springsteen, the guy will easily give most Washington retreads half a mile of handicap. A pol having convictions, even if they are different from mine, feels like fresh air. He is not a conservative and makes no secret of it, but I’ll still take him for a top executive any day over Rubio or Ryan, not to speak of another Bush or the dog-eating freeloader.

Archivarix on February 27, 2013 at 1:18 PM

It’s all bs. Until a conservative can be ruthless in his/her messaging and have represented fairly by the media, no conservative will win… until it’s all gone to sh!t.

The media controls it all because the public is gullible.

Vince on February 27, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Does anyone know when cpac will be on the tube and have a link of who/when they will speak? I plan to be selective who I watch.
L

letget on February 27, 2013 at 1:25 PM

- Medicaid Expansion of Obamacare
- Climate Change Fanatic
- Hurricane Sandy Congressional Giveaway Scam
- Undermining Romney Campaign
- No investigation nor prosecution of Corzine

sorry, being tough on Teacher’s Unions just ain’t enough.

Afterseven on February 27, 2013 at 1:27 PM

- Medicaid Expansion of Obamacare
- Climate Change Fanatic
- Hurricane Sandy Congressional Giveaway Scam
- Undermining Romney Campaign
- No investigation nor prosecution of Corzine

sorry, being tough on Teacher’s Unions just ain’t enough.

Afterseven on February 27, 2013 at 1:27 PM

1) Christie has no business investigating or prosecuting Corzine because the latter’s crimes are federal in nature, and have been committed in NY. He just said today in the town hall meeting that he gladly would.

2) It might come as a surprise but most of Sandy money heads to NY, not NJ. We are getting $16B at best, and $10B of it are insurance backstop obligations (insurance underwriters are *not* in NJ).

The rest, I could agree with. What he did to Romney should disqualify him from any nationwide Republican nomination. You also forgot being a complete, unrepentant turd on the Second Amendment. But even that much, I’m willing to overlook because here in New Jersey, we are not getting anything better for at least another freakin’ century. Must be something to do with our contaminated water supply.

Archivarix on February 27, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Do they all really think Gov. Christie(R) has no other concerns in uber-liberal New Jersey, which still is floundering from Dear Leader’s(D) post-Sandy, photo-op clown show, that’s done little to help the freezing, unemployed, hungry and homeless Sandy victims??

I’m pretty sure Christie ain’t losing sleep over this ‘snub.’

locomotivebreath1901 on February 27, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Then why isn’t Christie calling out Obysmal for using him as a campaign prop and for the abject negligence of NJ’s Katrina?

onlineanalyst on February 27, 2013 at 1:35 PM

“With Obama we get a president with the political intelligence of a Bill Clinton harnessed to the steely self-discipline of a Vladimir Putin. (I say this admiringly.) With these qualities, Obama will now bestride the political stage as largely as did Reagan.”

Q: Who said that?

slickwillie2001 on February 27, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Krauthammer: C’mon, let Christie speak at CPAC

Beltway Ruling classer defends Beltway ruling classer.

Shock!!

PappyD61 on February 27, 2013 at 1:37 PM

It will be a 30%, 30%, 30% split with 10% finally leaving the gop for good.

Really had it with these lying, pandering, tax and debt raising, non-npr defunding, gun-grabbing…sobs.

Panther on February 27, 2013 at 1:42 PM

It’s all bs. Until a conservative can be ruthless in his/her messaging and have represented fairly by the media, no conservative will win… until it’s all gone to sh!t.

The media controls it all because the public is gullible.

Vince on February 27, 2013 at 1:21 PM

If you are waiting for the media to be fair to conservatives or Republicans then you are delusional beyond belief… It is only that the media support the democrat party it is that the democrat party exist because of the media… The media is the creator of the democrat party of modern times, end of story…

All the Republicans who won the Presidency starting with Nixon won depsite the media being 100% against them… Since that time Republicans won the Presidency 7 times and the democats won it 5 times. So yes the Republicans can absolutely win the Presidency even when the media is 100% against them…

mnjg on February 27, 2013 at 1:51 PM

I consider the GOP out of touch and would never vote for Christie.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2013 at 1:54 PM

Christie should have been invited not to speak at CPAC but to be a visual representation of the government spending.

Have Captain Cruller come out in a Speed-o with the words SOY BOMB OBAMA BUDGET painted across his gullet.

Visual aids are painfully necessary sometimes.

profitsbeard on February 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM

Christie wanted Romney to lose. Had Romney won and been successful, he likely would have been reelected in 2016 and Ryan would likely have been the 2020 standard-bearer, which would have left Christie high and dry.

Christy’s best strategy was to help defeat Romney, which he did.

bw222 on February 27, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Yes. Rubio also secretly wanted Romney to lose. Ambitious Senators don’t parachute into Iowa the week after their party suffers a stinging electoral defeat for altrustic reasons. Christie and Rubio were the two Republicans that benefited the most from Romney’s loss. However, the hamhanded and public way that Christie tanked Romney’s campaign has created alot of blowback for him. So it really is a win-win for Rubio – He gets to run for President in 2016, and a worrisome rival for the nomination ends up shooting himself in the foot. For those of us who are tired of Christie, we can sit back and enjoy Charlie Crist redux.

Illinidiva on February 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Would You Like Another Serving Of Schadenfreude? Ms Bazile Is Serving!

http://tinyurl.com/dxg7man

Resist We Much on February 27, 2013 at 2:19 PM

“Republicans” who dance with Marxists = NO FRIEND OF MINE

Czar of Defenestration on February 27, 2013 at 2:22 PM

Note that 36 percent.

OMGZ – DUBIOUS POLLS, RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

Midas on February 27, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Hey Allah…

you get Joisey Buddah the nomination you pick up the tab…

I gave 4500 to Mccain and ~6500 to Romney…

this gun’s retired I am not bankrolling another democrat.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 2:41 PM

Who made Krauthammer the voice for all things Conservative. IMO, CK is a mole from the left, he ran McGovern’s Campaign for heavens sake. He’s a Trotsky Repub and only a “Fox News” conservative just like O’Reilly or Hannity.

el Vaquero on February 27, 2013 at 2:42 PM

and Allah I held my nose for Mccain, I swore in the ashes of 08 I’d back whomever in 2012 and I kept my word I had one and a half “f*** you” candidates I’d sit out for Luap Nor and Huckadoddle.

If Krispy Kreme is the GOP I am not end of story.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 2:44 PM

The GOP knows it has a base. They just ignore it because where else are we going to go?

kim roy on February 27, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Increasingly, it simply isn’t leaving home to go vote. The GOP know this, they just choose to berate and behave as though it’s not *their* fault, that conservatives should simply show up and vote as they’re told.

Eventually, if the country lasts long enough, they might ‘get it’.

Midas on February 27, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Charles, Charles, Charles….
Christie may be a Republican (for now), but he is certainly no Conservative, and it is the CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE conference.
If they wish to hear him speak, all they have to do is to tune in to PMSNBC.

Another Drew on February 27, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Oops…CONFERENCE!

Another Drew on February 27, 2013 at 2:51 PM

KUDOS to CPAC for snubbing the Liberal Christie!

There I said it…Christie is a Liberal! – (using my best Mark Levin Rant voice imitation)

*snicker*

workingclass artist on February 27, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Krauthammer: C’mon, let Christie speak at CPAC

Maybe we can get Andrew Cuomo as well!

From Christie’s own mouth: “I’m not much different from Andrew Cuomo. I probably agree with him on 98 percent of the issues.”

RJL on February 27, 2013 at 3:06 PM

“If the governor can expand Medicaid without disrupting his budget and without raising taxes, then I don’t have a problem,” Langone says.

Good luck with that one. Medicaid is breaking state budgets now, and it will get much worse when Obamacare kicks in and the Feds dump the expansion onto the states.

TarheelBen on February 27, 2013 at 3:25 PM

I’m confused. Did Christie ask to speak and get turned down? Or he just wasn’t invited?

Because I’m not sure where it’s written that Chris Christie has to speak at every event there ever was or shall be. And frankly after his convention speech last year was a bomb, why should he speak? Unless he’s yelling at a reporter or union lackey, he’s not that engaging.

grahsco on February 27, 2013 at 3:28 PM

The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule.

Did someone miss what happened last November?

Missy on February 27, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Did someone miss what happened last November?

Missy on February 27, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Yup looks like the moderate wing is still chasing fool’s gold and is convinced they can grab more donks than lose republicans…

“okay”

not getting my money this cycle.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 3:44 PM

I was peeved at Christie at first too

But he is the most popular governor in a BLUE state

Christie should speak at CPAC..he may be our last hope at the WH

Redford on February 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Christie should speak at CPAC..he may be our last hope at the WH

Redford on February 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM

I’d rather not have hope then….

sorry like I said if Obama is a great American I am reflecting on whether I can be one, and if Christie is captain GOP I am quitting.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 3:58 PM

I gave 4500 to Mccain and ~6500 to Romney…

this gun’s retired I am not bankrolling another democrat.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 2:41 PM

How did you pull that off?

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Does Kraut want to let Obama speak at CPAC too?

VorDaj on February 27, 2013 at 4:04 PM

We are witnessing the slow death of the GOP.As an activist in the party I voted for Romney, but did not volunteer or make donations.Now I will not even vote for any Republican that espouses amnesty,gay marriage,the legalization of drugs,or who has compromised the fiscal health of the nation via their votes to raise taxes or to cave to Obama and his minions.Call me an unrealistic purist,and I will call you a sans gonad RINO-its a wash,and will not stop me from doing what I know must be done to save this country.We must destroy the democrat progressives and the fake conservatives.I don’t know how many of me are out there,but if the numbers of folks who were supposed to come out for Romney and who didn’t show up are an indication,then not only am I not alone but there are enough of me to prevent a Chris Christie or a Rand Paul or a Marco Rubio-all of whom have failed my requirements for a vote.Pander to me and mine or face the consequences.As for FakePac,they are enablers of this kind of RINO behavior and represent an elitist group that have completely lost touch with voters they need to get elected and simply take for granted.As the illegals are fond of saying,No Mas!

redware on February 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM

I gave 4500 to Mccain and ~6500 to Romney…

this gun’s retired I am not bankrolling another democrat.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 2:41 PM

Seriously. There are many, many people here I bet who would like to know how they can give more directly to the candidates. How did you get around campaign-contribution limits?

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM

How did you pull that off?

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

worked a side job delivering Pizzas in spike years…

collated the cash and donated to the campaigns and victory funds…

and I will never do it for a RiNO again.

I would donate that money to la raza before Christie to remove the tumor.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I would not declare specific amounts I donated to any campaign anywhere online. The most vigorous butt-sniffers go after campaign donations regularly. The data can be parsed in all kinds of ways to isolate and identify you. It’s easier than you think.

Donation info is the first thing journos are taught to research.

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Seriously. There are many, many people here I bet who would like to know how they can give more directly to the candidates. How did you get around campaign-contribution limits?

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM

What “limit?” There’s a primary limit, there’s a campaign limit, and there’s the PACs….

you think Ogabe’s fans are limited even without the credit ID verisign being shut off?

I followed the law to the letter, had to since I was donating 1000-1500 a pop.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Christie is a 5 minute to 3 am’er.

VorDaj on February 27, 2013 at 4:11 PM

I would not declare specific amounts I donated to any campaign anywhere online. The most vigorous butt-sniffers go after campaign donations regularly. The data can be parsed in all kinds of ways to isolate and identify you. It’s easier than you think.

Donation info is the first thing journos are taught to research.

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM

believe me I know…

of course given that the GOP has done such gangbusters work saving the republic I sleep like a baby….

well no not really.

I am not too worried, but am aware.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

So you didn’t donate directly? Gotcha.

And I thought I gave a lot. It will be many moons before another candidate gets my money.

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

As the illegals are fond of saying,No Mas!

redware on February 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Illegals may be in a perverse way the salvation of Freedom in this nation. Not in the way intended, but they will give the mules enough of an edge they will not be able to resist changing the Constitution and stealing the shale and LNG….

that will, if anything have structural implications.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

So you didn’t donate directly? Gotcha.

And I thought I gave a lot. It will be many moons before another candidate gets my money.

Capitalist Hog on February 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

I worked my first campaign at 16, I have given 24 years of my life to this party. I knocked on doors, I did well in forensics, I manned phones, I gave what cash I could and as my wealth grew I added to my donations. I fell in love at age 7 with a grandfatherly man who looked at the TV and said essentially “I believe in YOU America and I know we are better than what Carter has wrought.”

That man, Milton Friedman, and the US military helped me lay the groundwork to work my way out of poverty, and I will die grateful to him and Lee Atwater.

I respected GHW Bush as a Medal of Honor recipient and head of CIA even if I found him wanting compared to Reagan.

I’ve wanted a decent candidate for a long time, a really really long time.

I am not backing another campaign with a democrat facing a democrat.

harlekwin15 on February 27, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Increasingly, it simply isn’t leaving home to go vote. The GOP know this, they just choose to berate and behave as though it’s not *their* fault, that conservatives should simply show up and vote as they’re told.

Eventually, if the country lasts long enough, they might ‘get it’.

Midas on February 27, 2013 at 2:47 PM

As long as the conservatives stay home the GOP has an excuse for fielding poor candidates who lose. They blame the losses on the Conservatives rather than look at their choices. Otherwise they might have to consider a potential candidate with appeal to Conservatives and they certainly don’t want anyone like that.

katiejane on February 27, 2013 at 4:47 PM

As long as the conservatives stay home the GOP has an excuse for fielding poor candidates who lose…

katiejane on February 27, 2013 at 4:47 PM

I think you have cause and effect exactly backwards and you probably could get a White House job with that kind of spin.

Don L on February 27, 2013 at 4:56 PM

I’m confused. Did Christie ask to speak and get turned down? Or he just wasn’t invited?

grahsco on February 27, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Actually he was turned down but not because of what everyone thinks-his progressive heart. You see, CPAC has a limited food budget and….

Don L on February 27, 2013 at 5:06 PM

I was peeved at Christie at first too

But he is the most popular governor in a BLUE state

Christie should speak at CPAC..he may be our last hope at the WH

Redford on February 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM

It is three years before 2016 and there is nothing to suggest that Rubio or Jindal couldn’t be a formidable candidate by then.

Illinidiva on February 27, 2013 at 5:06 PM

The Democrats are scared about 2016. They know that they only won by the skin of their teeth in 2012, and that after four more years of Obama the country will have moved rightward, and want to elect a more conservative candidate.

The 2016 Democrat primaries will resemble the Republican primaries form 2012 – a pack of drooling, slobbering idiots who don’t have a prayer in hell in being elected. On the other hand, the Republicans will be fielding a decent slate of candidates: Rubio, Jindal, Paul, possibly Ryan and a few others. Every one of these guys will have buzzed off their sharper conservative edges in an attempt to appear more moderate to independents and right of center Democrats, and may just succeed in doing so.

Unless Hillary sobers up and gets back from the fat farm in time, the Democrats only hope in 2016 is to field a right of center candidate who is somewhat tough on fiscal issues, but palatable to the left on things like gun control, gay marriage, immigration, and Obamacare.

Enter Chris Christie. I think he’s made some kind of deal with Obama and the Democrat Party to come over after he has won reelection. The deal was probably sealed this week end, with Christie’s prominent seat at the White House dinner the signal. Christie has been picking fights with the right in order to burnish his cred when the Democrat’s leftist base starts grumbling when he switches and Obama endorses his candidacy (either overtly or tacitly). Of course, the Democrats base will fall into line when they are told to, rather than risk losing The White House.

Expect it, it’s coming.

Mr. Arkadin on February 27, 2013 at 5:18 PM

The 2016 Democrat primaries will resemble the Republican primaries form 2012 – a pack of drooling, slobbering idiots who don’t have a prayer in hell in being elected. On the other hand, the Republicans will be fielding a decent slate of candidates: Rubio, Jindal, Paul, possibly Ryan and a few others. Every one of these guys will have buzzed off their sharper conservative edges in an attempt to appear more moderate to independents and right of center Democrats, and may just succeed in doing so.

Rubio and Jindal have already started that. Jindal gave his “stupid party” speech – (It seems like he is trying to triangulate ala Clinton in 1992, which really is the best bet for him in 2016). Rubio is betting quite a bit immigration reform and has been tacking to the center on social issues.

Unless Hillary sobers up and gets back from the fat farm in time, the Democrats only hope in 2016 is to field a right of center candidate who is somewhat tough on fiscal issues, but palatable to the left on things like gun control, gay marriage, immigration, and Obamacare.

My theory is that a deal was cut in 2008 for Hillary to run in 2016 and for Obama to secretly support her. That is why Biden was made VP rather than her or perhaps someone less prone to gaffes than Biden like Evan Bayh. Hillary Clinton was also appointed Sec of State despite the fact that she was far from a foreign policy expert. It was a win-win for her over the past four years. She basically got to play first lady for four years and travel all over the world and rehabilitate her image in a fairly non-partisan role. She doesn’t have the association with the Obama administration that being VP would have nor does she have a logical VP successor to battle for the nomination.

I think that the Clintons have something on Obama and that is why there was a deal in 2008. (It probably has to do with the gay rumors.) The Clintons didn’t want to go all out dirty and risk losing their popularity in the black community, so they just used it as blackmail to get what they wanted eight years later.

Enter Chris Christie. I think he’s made some kind of deal with Obama and the Democrat Party to come over after he has won reelection.

Then expect the Clintons to release the information they have on Obama. It won’t tank an election, but it will be mighty embarrassing.

Illinidiva on February 27, 2013 at 5:34 PM

Hopefully they won’t invite Allahpundit either

ignatzk on February 27, 2013 at 5:42 PM

Krauthammer on why he thinks Christie should be at CPAC:

We should have a wide tent.

C’mon, Chuck! That’s not very nice.

Seriously, as Hammer admitted, Christie is a moderate!
And it’s a conservative conference!
Duh!

itsnotaboutme on February 27, 2013 at 6:48 PM

I was peeved at Christie at first too

But he is the most popular governor in a BLUE state

Christie should speak at CPAC..he may be our last hope at the WH

Redford

It’s called CPAC, not DEMPAC. Hillary Clinton could probably win too, but I don’t want her as our candidate.

xblade on February 27, 2013 at 6:58 PM

Does Kraut want to let Obama speak at CPAC too?

VorDaj on February 27, 2013 at 4:04 PM

I think we have a thread winner!!

LevinFan on February 27, 2013 at 7:05 PM

I was peeved at Christie at first too

But he is the most popular governor in a BLUE state

Christie should speak at CPAC..he may be our last hope at the WH

Redford

When will people ever learn???

Enough with the only moderates can win garbage!!

Were you living in a cave during the last 2 Potus elections?????

LevinFan on February 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM

Krauthammer: C’mon, let Christie speak at CPAC

…go fluck yourself Chuck!

KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2013 at 7:07 PM

Redford

When will people ever learn???

Enough with the only moderates can win garbage!!

Were you living in a cave during the last 2 Potus elections?????

LevinFan on February 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM

What? The “moderates don’t get a third chance to lose?

arnold ziffel on February 27, 2013 at 7:14 PM

Dish customers should check out channel 212, The Blaze channel. It’s still a work in progress but I like the liberty direction Beck says he’s taking it. The panel on his TV show today was excellent, as was yesterday’s, (I just started watching). If you don’t get Blaze yet, ask your TV provider to add it or switch to Dish.

FloatingRock on February 27, 2013 at 7:30 PM

What? The “moderates don’t get a third chance to lose?

arnold ziffel on February 27, 2013 at 7:14 PM

They’ve lost at least 5 times counting Dole, Bush Sr, and Ford.

LevinFan on February 27, 2013 at 7:40 PM

As for the “wide tent” comments, I agree — welcome to the party, all who agree with the GOP positions, including Chris Christie.

But CPAC is no place for a liberal from New Jersey. Conservatives have principles, unless Republicans. Graham, McCain, Christie and their ilk have no business speaking to conservatives.

Jaibones on February 27, 2013 at 9:57 PM

If the obsessive global warming er climate change promoter loses 220 pounds, and presents a before / after picture that does him better justice than he did in his self-centric speech at the R convention, fine. Otherwise, the WINO (Why Is he a republican in any Name Or form?) should keep his heavy dose of leftism in NJ.
“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing …” -leftist Senator Tim Wirth, 1993
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” -Paul Watson, Greenpeace
“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.” -Sir John Houghton, ex ipcc chair
“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective [lying] and being honest [ineffective].” -Stephen Schneider, lead ipcc author, 1989
“It’s time to defer to the experts.” -Chris Christie

anotherJoe on February 27, 2013 at 11:11 PM

Hopefully they won’t invite Allahpundit either

ignatzk on February 27, 2013 at 5:42 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

OH MY GAWD!!! MY – MY – STOMACH!!!!! OOOOOH!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

GAWD THAT’S FUNNY!!!!!!!

williamg on February 27, 2013 at 11:25 PM

He is picking a brand for a primary run, not a third party run.

The McCain formula.

Whatever delegates he gathers in lib territory, he will hand over to the Club pony.

Right now, he is being staged as an outsider, rejected by the soc cons to gain him in NJ. Who is the real candidate? Jeb?

Remember, its not over til the fat laddie sings

entagor on February 27, 2013 at 11:54 PM

The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule.

I wouldn’t count on that anymore.

txhsmom on February 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM

I’m not sure it was true to begin with. What is the evidence that its true? The Dole, McCain and Romney presidencies that did not occur?

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2013 at 11:57 PM

There’s no third-party. The Christie ego is too big for a party anyway.

Kow-towing to Obama as if he were some Chinese premier finished him for good. Liberals won’t embrace him for that. Conservatives hate him for trying to swing the election (doesn’t matter whether he did or not).

He will be fondly remembered for his populist wrangling with corrupt NJ teacher’s union members.

virgo on February 28, 2013 at 1:05 AM

CPAC is for conservatives.
Christie is not a conservative at all.
Christie:
* did not sign the brief against Obamacare’s constitutionality case
* believes in global warming
* believes in open borders (comprehensive immigration)
* supports Medicaid expansion which will cripple his state
* supports new gun control laws

Mark7788 on February 28, 2013 at 2:57 AM

The base is very, very, very forgiving of apostates when the alternative is another four years of Democratic rule.

Not this time. Christie already helped usher in another four years of the worst President in American history. There’s no way in hell I’ll ever vote for him – no matter who he’s running against.

DRayRaven on February 28, 2013 at 6:01 AM

New Jersey dems and the media hope you will stop backing Christie because he was a pain in the butt to them and won the election to governor. They are not going to send stories your way that flatter Christie. NJ is a mess, nothing has changed in government response to catastrophe since Katrina, and you know, it ought to be set up so that any state gets the same response, not that you have to send a special bill thru congress with porkie pies attached.

If they can find anything else that conservatives don’t like about Christie they will put it in your face so you will abandon him and they can take the state over again. That will help.

Fleuries on February 28, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3