And it’s apparently working like a charm. New Jersey is really loving the “I’m so moderate and above-the-fray, I’m perfectly willing to excoriate my own party and I simply adore compromise” tack, with the added bonus that the media cannot seem to get enough of the Republican-on-Republican crime and is helping Christie to expand his national profile by plastering his face everywhere. He really piled the bipartisanship on thickly in his State of the State address on Tuesday:

Speaking to a standing-room-only crowd packed into the New Jersey State House, Christie called on Congress to pass immediately a multibillion-dollar package of emergency aid in the aftermath of super storm Sandy — legislation that has been tied up in Washington. …

A Farleigh Dickinson University poll released Monday showed him with a 73 percent overall approval rating among registered New Jersey voters. And in a particularly encouraging sign for his re-election prospects, 62 percent of Democrats approved of the job Christie is doing in this deep-blue state. …

“See, some things are above politics,” he said to sustained applause. “Sandy was and is one of those things.”…

“Let’s put aside destructive politics in an election year,” he said. “Let’s put aside accusations and false charges for purely political advantage. Let’s work together to honor the memories of those lost in Sandy. Let’s put the needs of our most victimized citizens ahead of the partisan politics of the day. …

Call me cynical, but whenever anybody feels the needs to specifically reiterate how very truly and sincerely something is absolutely not in any way political, I say that’s usually a pretty great indicator of exactly how political it really is. Methinks thou doth protest too much, and this “could Christie be the rescuer the GOP really needs?” question is conveniently gaining a lot of steam.

He is just everywhere lately, and it certainly isn’t merely because of the continual coping with Sandy’s aftermath:

So, of course, the question is: Wily and savvy political planning in filling the “moderate, aisle-reaching, bold leader” role for which a lot of the country is clamoring in reaction to our gridlocked federal government, or is he walking down a path that will burn bridges with bona fide fiscal conservatives as well as alienating establishment types just a little too enthusiastically?