 |
Gov. Chris Christie told a GOP gathering that his New Jersey
success is a model for the party's future. An attendee
paraphrased him: 'I'm going to run in 2016, and I've demonstrated a winning formula. And if you want to win and don't care about ideology, I'm your candidate.' |
Gov. Chris Christie, building on the impression that he is giving a serious look at a run for the White House, used a speech to leaders of the Republican Party on Thursday to argue that his electoral success in New Jersey offers the GOP a model for how to win support from women, minority and blue-state voters.
Mr. Christie told the Republican National Committee, in a private address punctuated often by laughter and applause, that GOP candidates should hew to conservative economic themes and the promise of pragmatic governance. That argument comes as the party is debating how central a role its opposition to abortion rights and gay marriage should be within the party.
The one-term governor, who is up for re-election this year, pointed to polls and some recent endorsements to show he is winning support among women and certain Latino and African-American groups, all constituencies that have tilted heavily toward Democrats in national elections.
"You don't have to sacrifice your base voters to win Latino votes," he said, according to a recording of the closed-door speech reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. "You don't have to sacrifice your base voters to win a share of the African-American vote."
He contrasted his long-running feuds with the state's public-sector unions with his friendliness toward the private-sector unions, noting that he had won the endorsement of 24 building-trade unions.Read the rest HERE and view a related video below:
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here.
Please follow us on Twitter here.
Please follow us on Twitter here.
52 comments:
What, so he spent some of last week telling the truth then?
What you fail to understand is:
a) No matter whether you like if or not, Mitt Romney was beaten by Barak Obama in the 2012 presidential election.
b) No zero policy alternative waldorf & salter moaning idiot that appeal to 5% of the electorate is not going to fair any better.
The left wants Christie to be the nominee. Notice the left wing press has yet to lay a glove on him?
The left wants Cruz or Paul or Palin or Santorum as the next nominee. they can spell 'LANDSLIDE' for Hillary going up agains one of those buffoons.
Chris seems to be a legend in his own mind.
Anon, the left will mercilessly attack who they fear the most. Why don't they ever attack Christy? It's not like it would be hard to do! Remember how they ignored Huckabee? Think about it.
Why the left doesn't fear Christie...
1. White
2. Short
3. Fat
4. Loud
5. Obnoxious
6. From a blue state. Don't be fooled. He would not carry NJ in a presidential election. Tell me the last time a president was elected without carrying his home state.
7. Moderate. Base stays home.
I forgot one...
8. A world class temper. There's no way he could make it through an entire election cycle without losing it at least a few times.
The two most electorally successful Republican presidential candidates of the past 40 years, Ronald Reagan and George W Bush, drew exceptionally large support from SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE VOTERS.
Chris Christie, just like former LOSING Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, John McCain, Bob Dole and Gerald Ford, has virtually ZERO APPEAL to these voters.
If he somehow becomes the Republican nominee in 2016, Christie will be CRUSHED in the general election by whomever the Democrat nominee turns out to be.
"THOSE WHO FAIL TO LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT" ~ Winston Churchill
Exhibit A of Christie's socially liberal views -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Guadagno
Christie, who claims to be "pro-life", chose the OPENLY PRO-ABORTION Guadagno as his running mate in 2009.
Guadagno's husband, Michael Guadagno, is a LIBERAL ACTIVIST appeals court judge in New Jersey.
The Dems would LOVE to run against Christie in 2016 because he's so easy to beat, and even if he somehow won the election, he would govern just like a liberal Democrat would, except for his phony conservative rhetoric.
The left isn't attacking Christie for the same reason the right isn't attacking Biden. Of course, that would all change if he were to somehow get the nomination. Can imagine the field day they would have with that guy?
RW -
That's exactly right.
If Christie becomes the GOP nominee in 2016, the libs, especially the lib media, would DESTROY HIM by obsessing 247 about his "life-threatening weight problems" and "out of control temper".
It's all so predictable, but unfortunately, there are way too many voters in our party who are EASILY DUPED by liberal media propaganda into nominating guaranteed losers like McCain, Dole and Ford.
This time around, however, the conservative candidates - Cruz, Paul, Carson, DeMint, Haley, among others - are FAR STRONGER than they've ever been before, with the possible exception of 1980.
"The left wants Cruz or Paul or Palin or Santorum as the next nominee. they can spell 'LANDSLIDE' for Hillary going up agains one of those buffoons"
Agreed 100%
"George W Bush,"
lol, he was a true conservative
RM -
Bush CAMPAIGNED for President as a socially conservative born-again Christian, and as a result, the "religious right" TURNED OUT IN DROVES for him in November.
Obviously, his record as President didn't live up to his conservative campaign rhetoric.
Your hero Christie already has so much liberal baggage on his political resume` that he will NOT be able to fool the voters nearly as successfully as Bush did.
Ted Cruz's reform-minded policies and SUPERB oratorical and debating skills allow him to attract moderate Democrats and Independents in addition to the conservative GOP base which absolutely adores him.
lol, this is too funny
"Ted Cruz's reform-minded policies"
Name them?? He's got no policy.
Write a full a/c of his healthcare policy. I mean, he moans about Obamacare so much, but offers NOTHING in return.
Cruz is the Muppet balcony moaning waldorf and statler
RM -
Ted Cruz's reform-minded policies:
- Greatly reduce illegal immigration by dramatically increasing border patrols and fencing, enforcing E-Verify and cracking down on visa violations with a computerized entry-exit tracking program
- Abolish ObamaCare
- Abolish the IRS
- Privatize Social Security
- Tort reform
And that's just for starters, which is why lefties like Mickey Kaus, James Carville and Geraldo Rivera are ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIED of Cruz winning the GOP nomination, and are already trying to bring him down with birther-like accusations and other types of demagoguery.
lol
Recall I stated:
"Write a full a/c of his healthcare policy. I mean, he moans about Obamacare so much, but offers NOTHING in return.
Cruz is the Muppet balcony moaning waldorf and statler"
To which you reply, as Cruz's Obamcare alternativr: "Abolish ObamaCare "
lol. Cruz back with his high action, full, specific laden alternative then? lol, 3/4 of a year on, and we've *progressed* to 1/2 of 'repeal and replace'
No wonder OB said who the GOP moan, but got NOTHING to offer people as an alternative.
More waldorf and statler
"
Tort reform "
"Greatly reduce illegal immigration by dramatically increasing border patrols and fencing, enforcing E-Verify and cracking down on visa violations with a computerized entry-exit tracking program "
lol so *his* policy/full written bill is just pinching most of Rubio's- who actually DID SOMETHING AND WROTE AN ALTERNTIVE, whether anyone likes that or not.
You have listed just Cruz's moaning bullet points- but no substance.
YOu know what, colleagues can't stand the way that the place I work at is run...moan about it all the time. Guess what, they moan, but offer NOTHING AS AN ALTERNTIVE THAT IS FULL AND SPECIFIC LADEN.
Cruz should work there.
Or go on the balcony with waldorf and statler.
lol, so what's his full POLICY/proposed full written bill?
Nothing. More moan and no product.
RM -
Here's more on Cruz -
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/CandidateDetail.html?CandidateID=225399
Read it, you might learn something that you'll never see or hear on your favorite "news" source, MSNBC.
lol to a lot of these comments.
Newark, I find it particularly funny that Cruz says the exact same thing Romney said about immigration--except now Cruz is saying it, so it must mean something! Too too funny.
BTW, Romney appealed to social conservatives as well as Bush did, and actually a little better.
Plus, the idea that liberals are afraid of Cruz, Paul, Carson, Demint or Haley is beyond laughable.
Bosman, I agree, Christie is a legend in his own mind. The man has an ego as big as Montana. Our field stinks as far as I'm concerned. I hold out hope for Ryan, but right now things look bleak.
RW, I agree, the left didn't touch Huck for obvious reasons, but I don't think we can assume the left wants Christie, or that he is easy pickens. As awful as I think he is right now, he is to be feared more than all the rest combined, IMO.
And they will start attacking him, no doubt.
-Martha
BTW, Cruz has absolutely nothing to recommend him at this point. He's boring and annoying and a little too anxious. He makes me very uncomfortable. I don't like to listen to him for some reason.
-Martha
Martha -
I'm not going to address your unfounded, unsubstantiated, uncorroborated assertions one-by-one because quite frankly, I have better things to do.
You obviously are still VERY BITTER about Romney's defeat last November.
I truly do hope that you get over it some day, for your own good, and for that of your family.
They basically begged Huckabee to run by ignoring any story that pertained to him. Can you imagine if Palin had pardoned that cop killer?
Romney did better than Bush with socons? Seriously? Where did you come up with that gem, Martha?
Here's the best synopsis of WHY ROMNEY LOST that I've seen -
http://townhall.com/columnists/stevedeace/2013/01/19/lies--clever-myths-n1490861
It's a quick and easy read that COMPLETELY DEBUNKS the lies and myths that have bamboozled the likes of Martha, Pablo and RomneyMan.
NH,
Great article!
I did not know about this....
....but also pro-choice television ads Romney was running in Ohio that angered some pro-lifers. Romney also ran those pro-choice television ads in Virginia....
Unthinkable.
RW -
Yeah, that shocked me too.
No wonder socons stayed home last November 6th.
They won't stay home if Ted Cruz is the nominee in 2016.
You can take that to the bank.
I look to 2004 - an election Bush probably should not have won. The only way for the GOP to win a national election is enormous base turnout. I've felt that way for quite some time.
RW -
I completely agree.
BASE TURNOUT + REAGAN DEMOCRATS/INDIES = GOP VICTORY
I honestly believe that Cruz has what it takes to do that, especially if he were to select a female running mate.
I'm not as big a Sarah Palin fan as you are, but a Cruz-Palin ticket or Cruz-Haley ticket would be VERY TOUGH TO BEAT.
I'd be a MUCH BIGGER FAN of Palin had she completed her 4-year term as Alaska Governor.
I've come to the realization that Palin probably doesn't want to run. She was the key to Cruz winning the Senate seat, and I fully expect her to back him for the presidency....should he decide to run.
I'm fine with either one of them. Nobody else comes close, although I'd be willing to give Scott Walker a serious look. He wouldn't be nearly as strong as Cruz, though.
Threading the needle to try to get "swing voters" won't cut it against Hillary. It will require a GOTV effort like we've never seen before. It won't be about the Hispanic vote, although I would expect Cruz to gain at least a few points here as well. At the very least, many FIRST TIME Hispanic voters would emerge.
"Muppets" like RomneyMan completely overlook the fact that African-American voter turnout will PLUMMET in 2016 without Obama on the ballot.
If Hillary is the Democrat nominee, turnout among young voters will PLUMMET too.
As I suggested earlier, the GOP MUST HAVE A FEMALE ON THE TICKET to offset the Dems' strength among female voters, especially if their nominee is Hillary.
Enjoyed chatting. Gotta hit the sack. Goodnight.
lol at that * Cruz résumé*
8Yet again* I see NOTHING of any full policy/full written outlines/bills that provide ANY alternative.
The naff website just gives his prior lawyer accomplishemnts, history of his campiugns etc.
Like OB said, buttressed by Gingrich- Cruz has NOTHING CONCRETE to offer as an alternative.
10+ requests in posts just asking for full flesh on Cruz (or others) full policy specific bills/outlines for ALTERNATIVES to the likes of Obamacare etc .
Instead, we just get a lot of replies back stating 'repeal Obamacare' (lol, great 'specific laden *policy*) and the likes, or just linking essentially hero worshiping, specific empty websites.
Everyone rips the likes of Rubio. Yes, he was way off with some of his proposals. HOWEVER, at least he presented SOMETHING full of specifics. Same full specific laden ALTERNATIVE.
Where's Cruz's (or others) similar fully specific laden policy.
I've asked for this 10+ times and, unsurprisingly nothing form his hero worshippers.
Cruz- like many others- is just an empty vessel- moans and moans like walforf and statler- but OFFERS NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE as an alternative.
okay folks, get ready for this:
Take a seat, this one's special:
[paraphrased + semi quoted]
"Cruz-Palin ticket would be VERY TOUGH TO BEAT"
Is it worth even commenting on this all credibility lost comment?
"a) No matter whether you like if or not, Mitt Romney was beaten by Barak Obama in the 2012 presidential election."
And Mr. Christie would do even worse than Mr. Romney. Many of us who held our noses and voted for Mr. Romney will not vote GOP if a clown like Mr. Christie is the nominee
No, Cruz-Palin, that's the way to go.
Hillary would be shaking in her pant suits at the prospect of that all encompassing, independent grabing, electorate uniting, minority outreaching partnership.
Newark, Ha ha ha ha ha ha! So Steve Deace is your go-to guy for the truth eh? That explains a lot . . . sadly.
-Martha
Newark Hawk,
I have to say that now that I know your true self, all of your previous snarling about Romney makes more sense. Anyone who gives Steve Deace a drop of attention or credibility has severe problems. (To put it mildly.) Deace is the worst of the worst.
Accordingly, your opinion is no longer worthy of consideration, IMO.
-Martha
Plus, now we know why you are still fighting the Romney wars. Ha ha ha ha ha.
-Martha
I must say that it is funny that the great defenders of Romney, Martha and Pablo, disappeared as soon as he became the nominee. They only showed their heads again months after the election and proceed to blame everyone and everything for Romney's loss except for the fact that he ran a lousy campaign.
"Plus, now we know why you are still fighting the Romney wars." Then why are you fighting the Deace war Martha?
"I must say that it is funny that the great defenders of Romney, Martha and Pablo, disappeared as soon as he became the nominee." I certainly, would not put Martha in the same catagory as Pablo, Ellie, the guy from Georgia and other characters. Martha appears to be a sincere Romney supporters as opposed to a trouble maker. If she disappeared for a while, it is because she has a life and other obligations besides politics. But yes, it is interesting that many in the Romney camp (by no means all) disappeared during the general elections and failed to help him. It certainly makes us wonder if they were closet Democrats and not sincere Romneyites. However, we should not put Martha in that catagory. I disagree with some of her opinions, but I do not doubt her sincerity to her camp.
OJ, I have more respect for Martha than I do for the others you mentioned as well. She just happens to be very, very wrong on many things.
Martha,
The only people I've ever heard complain about Steve Deace are a handful of Romney supporters on the internet.
Which of his findings do you find fault with? The numbers are what they are.
OJ, and RW, thanks! Although RW, I am 100% correct in all of my opinions. Just sayin...
Actually, I didn't disappear after Romney won the nomination, as far as I remember it. I did cut back on all my internet wanderings after Romney lost. It was too depressing. Especially the blowhards fabricating why he lost. No one really cares about the truth, they just want to justify themselves in their ignorance. I don't need that crap.
If you guys want to know Deace, just google him and read if you can stomach it. It's a disgusting thing to have to do, but better informed than not, right?
He's a disgusting bigoted slimeball, and hereafter I will refer to Newark as SteveDeaceSympathizer. We have to battle hatred and bigotry where ever we find it.
-Martha
"I am 100% correct in all of my opinions. Just sayin..." Haha, then you should start your own radio show.
As for Mr. Deace, I'll take your word that he is a bigot, but so is Mr. Obama. Newark is not in that catagory.
OJ, I should give Newark Hawk a chance to denounce Deace before I assume he is cut from the same cloth. So I hope he will do so.
-Martha
RWN says " She just happens to be very, very wrong on many things."
So at least you've got something on common then.
I did a very quick search, and did not come across any bigotry from Deace, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, I suppose. That said, he did support Romney in the general election. True bigots would have a hard time doing that, I would think.
RW, I read a lot of Deace stuff a few years ago. It was horrible. It might be harder to find now. I haven't tried lately.
-Martha
I am always disappointed when the Romney-haters show up to disparage him over and over. This cannot be helpful for us to so divide ourselves while our political enemies consolidate their electoral power by using every means, fair or foul against us. Few seem to acknowledge that the IRS was also mobilized against those who opposed this administration. This could happen again and again. We need to acknowledge this fact, even those who dislike Romney so we can unite and try to stop the Chicago way from becoming the U.S. Way.
AZ
Post a Comment