RSS Feed Menu
Speculation is rampant as to whether New Jersey Governor Chris Christie will enter the 2012 Republican presidential primary. Almost all the media focus thus far has been on political calculations, such as Christie’s ability to raise money, put together a national campaign organization, and withstand the rigors of the race.
For the most part, however, pundits are ignoring the most important consideration of all: Is Christie actually ready to be President of the United States?
The Washington Examiner’s Byron York, to his credit, did the math and points out that on October 10, 2011, Christie will have been governor for 629, whereas when Barack Obama announced his presidential candidacy on February 10, 2007, he had served as a U.S. senator for 768 days. On the other hand, it is not the tenure of service in public office that should concern voters, but rather the quality of that service, regardless of its length. Christie’s New Jersey administration has been marked by balanced budgets and other impressive accomplishments in fiscal responsibility, such as comprehensive pension reform, in contrast with the thin record of accomplishment in the Senate on the part of then-candidate Barack Obama.
Notably, the governor also took a principled stand on his appointment of a Muslim-American judge despite criticism from Islamaphobes, earning a standing ovation from the staff of MSNBC show host Lawrence O’Donnell, of all people.
Furthermore, Christie previously served as a U.S. Attorney for seven years and successfully tackled political corruption on the part of both Democrats and Republicans, having amassed, according to the New Jersey Star-Ledger, “an amazing record of 130 convictions against zero acquittals for the public officials he indicted.”
Christie himself has been refreshingly honest about his preparedness for the presidency, stating on multiple occasions that he feels like he may not be ready. This self-awareness indicates both a willingness and determination on Christie’s part to address his shortcomings. If the governor’s recent, excellent speech on the concept of American exceptionalism at the Reagan Library is any indication, he has already begun to vigorously study up on foreign policy.
Christie’s sentiment is also a marked contrast with other politicians – say, Sarah Palin – and another presidential contender, Herman Cain, who disingenuously claimed that running a pizza chain gave him insight into foreign policy and flat-out refused to discuss national security issues until after the election. In fact, Christie’s famous candor should itself be considered an important qualification for the presidency, all the more so in a time of national fiscal and economic crisis, when leaders and citizens alike have been reluctant to confront hard, unpopular truths. “Real leaders don’t read polls, they change polls,” as the governor declared during the question and answer session of his Reagan Library speech.
Chris Christie has been right on a great many things, but wrong on one. His record of accomplishment and rare character make him both ready and well-suited to be president.
I would like to commend the writer of this article, I believe the message was spot on.
I am only a reluctant ex Jersey Boy as taxes and regulation were killing me and I left the state of my birth in 2005 when Gov. Corzine was taxing accomplishers.
I hope Christie realizes that sometimes we cannot pick the time, as the time picks us.
All Americans need a man like Chris Christie. He is not a god, he is not the Messiah. He is just an authentic person who speaks to the people honestly and respectfully. Moreover, as you may see in his YouTube videos, he will not cower under pressure.
A rare breed in politics today. I pray he and his family accept the challenges and burdens that may befall on them with this run, as indeed, he would be a great President I am sure.
To those that say Christie has no experience to be president, and we shouldn’t fall into the trap as we did with an in-experienced Obama, I see two errors with that:
1. The real possibility the other Republican candidates do not infigurate the base and attract independents to defeat Obama; Christie will do that.
2. Governor or President, both are executive positions, and as the writer of the article so rightfully pointed out, it is not the time in office but the results produced. Christie has produced more results than Obama, despite Obama’s greater tenure, and even Perry, while 8 years in office, has not been as much a man of the times in startling leadership results, when considering the opposition party, as Christie has.
First off, Chris Christie is not respectful, at least not to those who hold a opinion different from his own. As much as I loathe Corzine, he was trying to clean up a mess created by Whitman, McGreevy, and Keen. Property taxes in this state are insane. Corizine was moving to address this issue. The residents didnt like the results. Christie hasn’t balanced one budget yet. They did not pay the State’s share of the pension contribution for two years and they with held money from Abbott school districts, which the State Supreme court just deemed illegal. All of this national attention for a man who will not get re-elected if he decides to run is quite astounding. Not to mention the inherent problems he has with the GOP base. He is pro evolution, believes in climate change, is not anti muslim and has raised taxes in this state several times. I’m he doesnt call them taxes, “fees” were raised here in New Jersey. Everything from car registration to more money for closing on a house. (Just bought one in southern New Jersey). Gov. Christie has not in anyway, shape or form produced more results than President Obama. Thats complete and utter nonsense. Like him or not, the list of things the President has gotten done in the past three years, in the face of total opposition even within his own party, is quite astounding. I do hope Christie does not run so that he can face the voters of New Jersey in 2012. Even with a univerally hated Gov Corizne in office Christie had a rough time defeating him. He has talked down to the teachers union, disregarded the firefighters and even manged to get under the skin of the the Police and state workers. With a united service union front along with other democratic constituencies, I see no path to victory for him. I certainly could be wrong. The shame of it is that he has some good ideas but his beligerance simply does not play well here in New Jersey and has become tiresome. For all the crookedness and cronyism in my state, rudeness from politicians is not a well liked attribute.
Christie needs to finish at least one complete gubernatorial term before running for President. Full stop. “Obama was inexperienced too” is not the rallying-cry you want for his campaign.
I agree – and I think, seeing the times, one should also have business schooling AND business experience.
The man has said he isn’t ready, and that he really doesn’t want the job. Clifton Yin doesn’t believe him.
If Clifton Yin has so little trust in Mr. Christie’s judgement, why should I have any?
Christie’s main problem is that his desire to appease the GOP base, and his own political ideology, and his desire to be electable in the general election all end up creating some massive contradictions that will need to be veneered over very thickly.
For example, climate change. Christie believes climate change is a serious problem. He believes that it’s being caused by man. He just … well … doesn’t seem to believe that we should actually try to implement any regulatory mechanism to address it until we are 100% sure that whatever mechanism we select is absolutely the best that could be designed.
If you really believe climate change is a serious problem, this is akin to having an intruder in your house, running to your gun closet, then taking a good long time to deliberate what is the appropriate weapon to use, and whether you even have the best weapon for the job, or should perhaps wait to grab a gun until you have a chance to go to the gun store and see if there might be a better self-defense weapon available.
And his abortion stance. Christie embraces the popular on the right, pseudo-moderate – I believe life is precious and abortion should be illegal except for cases of life of the mother, rape and incest (paraphrased).
Life of the mother, I’ll give you – that’s a balancing act. But if you really do believe that life is precious – why should that fetus be killed simply because it was conceived illegally? Is that the fault of the fetus? How precious is an “innocent life” if you believe it should be terminated because it was created because of force, while if created in a moment of drunken lust it needs to be protected?
Christie is in the GOP … but he strongly opposes drilling off the Jersey Shore, and he strongly favors government spending to incentivize renewable power generation. He wants MORE money spent on the National Institutes for Health, he wants more money spent on healthcare for the poor and disadvantaged. While he’s against same-sex marriage, he’s pro-civil unions for gay couples … pretty much Obama’s declared position. He refuses to take a public position on gun control.
In short, were Chris Christie to have a (D) next to his name, instead of an (R), he’s be another punching bag for right wing pundits. The fact that people who attack Obama as being a wild-eyed Marxist can promote Christie as a desirable Presidential Candidate just says far more about them, and their true motivations, than it does about Christie.
Because some of us consider things other than the physical well-being of the mother. I do not accept the view that forcing a 12-year-old girl who was impregnated by her step-father (for example) to endure a pregnancy is a moral or ethical stance. The psychological impact of such a stance would be devastating to the child (that would be the “mother” in this case) and would have lifelong consequences – for both the rape victim and the fetus she carries. Banning abortion in the case of incest and/or rape only serves to victimize the woman again – reinforcing the idea that she has no right to control over her own body. I can’t think of anything more damaging.
While I am pro-choice, I am not a fan of abortion. I like what Hillary Clinton once said – “Abortion should be safe, legal and RARE.” But forcing a woman (any woman) to carry an unwanted fetus to term does not solve the problem. Free access to birth control and comprehensive sex education (not just Abstinence only sex “education”) would do more to lower abortion rates than any ban. All a ban on abortion accomplishes is creating a market for back alley abortions that threaten not only the life of the fetus, but often results in the loss of the woman’s life as well. Banning abortion does not stop abortions. It just kills women.
I agree completely. Further, there would be fewer abortions if women (single or married) were assured about receiving good health care for herself and her child, as well as other help such as better childcare and early education programs. If people love the fetus, they must also love the child; if not, then they do not really feel life is precious.
Because some of us consider things other than the physical well-being of the mother.
You started with “because” … but you didn’t really answer that crucial dichotomy, did you?
If the life of a fetus conceived after a night of drunken revelry, inhibitions and judgement shot to hell, is “precious” … why then is the life of a fetus conceived via rape not “precious”? What fault of it was for the latter fetus that it came from sperm injected by force into a woman’s womb, rather than by sperm injected to her when she made a stupid decision with no desire to get pregnant?
The answer, of course, is that the woman who willingly engages in sex when she doesn’t want to have children is doing something that violates God’s will (that is in fact the position of Christie’s Catholic Church) … and thus the fetus inside her is a penance she must bear, while the rape victim has no need for penance and therefore Christie is fine with the abortion.
Frankly, I don’t want a woman carrying a fetus to term if she really doesn’t want to … and I don’t care if the reason is because it was conceived via rape, via incest, via stupidity, or via a mistake. It’s her body, and I feel no right to legislate the circumstances that dictate whether she should or shouldn’t be forced by the state to carry it to term.
Christie, clearly does feel that right. Maybe that’s the reason he’s in the GOP.
But it’s not just her body, it’s also the body of another human being.
I agree with the proposition that the pre-Roe standard was too tight.
However I do not think “I don’t want to carry this baby to term” is enough of a reason to justify a medical procedure that results in the termination of human life. I agree with CL above, the real answer here is access to education and birth control. I also agree with your reasoning re: rape and/or incest, although these cases raise other moral dilemmas without any easy answers.
So if the pre-Roe standard was too tight, the post-Roe standard is too loose. Liberals and progressives should take note, Roe’s days are numbered, so the question is not how to preserve Roe for all time: voices more combative than my own are ensuring that Roe will not be preserved as it currently stands. The question is, what will the new law be? The parallel I see is with the ACA, liberals and progressives can either cling to Roe and have the clock turned back even before 1972, or they can cooperate in creating newer, stricter standards and preserve some of their insights in law.
He’s not running, he’s pulling a Palin; trying to build suspense for the next time. Or for his next run for governor. It’s supposed to raise his gravitas and disappoint his fans. Not unlike Shrub going on vacation to meditate on stem cell research.
Rock groups are also notorious for this kind of drama.
To be honest I don’t think this is so much him creating drama as it is the GOP desperate for anyone but Romney dragging him kicking and screaming to the podium every couple of days in the hopes he will change his mind.
Palin is running a scam, as usual. Christie has said he doesn’t want to run in just about every way it can be said, but the Will Kristol’s & Co are keeping their fingers in their ears.
Young man, by your standards, it would seem that Rick Perry is even more “ready”. Except that, of course, his dreadful performance on the campaign trail demonstrates that he is not. And so don’t you think it might me just a teensy bit early for the declarative sentences regarding Christie, a man who has “I have no impulse control” tattooed in big letters around his midriff?
Watusie-
Thanks for reading. As I wrote in the piece, I think voters should be concerned with the quality of our elected officials’ service. In that regard, I don’t think Rick Perry was a very successful governor. Two of his signature accomplishments, the HPV vaccine and the Trans-Texas Corridor, were highly controversial. Beyond that, he tries to take the lion’s share of credit for job creation linked to the burgeoning energy industry and a growing state government.
As for then-candidate Obama v. Christie, I do think there is a big difference – especially when it comes to a job like the presidency – between executive and legislative experience.
Finally, I do not think I adequately characterized just how much I admire Christie for bluntly declaring on more than one occasion that he does not feel he’s ready. I really think he’s wrong, and it is exactly that kind of candor that is needed in the White House today.
In any case, I think my blog post became irrelevant in a hurry: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/chris-christie-not-running-for-president/
Two of his signature accomplishments, the HPV vaccine and the Trans-Texas Corridor
Ummm … how was the Trans-Texas Corridor an accomplishment?
That’s like calling Cap and Trade a success for Obama, or Social Security Privatization a success for Bush, or a balanced budget a success for Reagan.
Sorry, Clifton, I don’t have the magic decoder ring that allowed me to see the lines wherein you explained that Rick Perry’s time in office did not make him “ready for the White House”.
However, let me make my point again, in a different way, since you obviously didn’t get it the first time around: you don’t know if anyone is “ready for the White House” until they’ve been put through the wringer. Afterall, isn’t that why we have campaigns?
How Republican of this so call writer to leave out Obama’s time served as a State Senator…. during which time he signed or authored/co authored over 1000 pieces of Legislation. Then you add in his 2 years in Washington and gosh, those realities being pushed in this article change. Darn facts.
While Obama’s skin color has ALWAYS been an issue to some, so will Christie’s weight. Neither will be acknowledged by the MSM, but it won’t change the fact that it will affect voters.
The GOP will likewise be eating lots of crow on the liberal stations too because they raised such a ruckus over Obama’s so called inexperience. That’s my party now days though, flip flopping like a caught fish.
Christie sounds more like a conservative Democrat than a Republican. He is NOT a TP conservative and people will tire quickly of his temper and brusque manner.
He would be crazy to get in for 2012 as he will not win the nomination and in 60 days or less will be like Perry yesterday’s news.
He has way too much baggage on video in terms of yelling at people and saying he is not ready to be President, which he is not.
Polls even show him losing his home state. Not a good combo at all.
Christie sounds more like a conservative Democrat than a Republican.
My point exactly, as I stated above. With Christie’s policy stances, if he had a (D) next to his name instead of an (R) most of the people touting him for President today would be contributing money to defeat him in the next NJ Gubernatorial election.
Christie is going to run?
He can barely waddle.
He’s too liberal, too green, and too late.
Move on.
He won’t run until or unless he loses a significant amount of weight, right now he is clinically if not morbidly obese and has a number of weight related problems. And the one thing he must dread is if he announces he will have to publicly state his weight. He can’t state it is not our business because the Presiden’t physical fitness level is our business.
And where is the proof that Christie is a good Governor? unemployment is higher there than neighboring states, he turned down billions for a much needed commuter tunnel that NJ would only have had to kick in 1/3 of the cost, he is driving experienced teachers out and replacing many with young, and even foreign born, teachers all to “save” money while shortchanging kids future. He is popular because he has a loud mouth and yells at voters. I think he is a grade A ahole. Granted, he is a jersey one so people there are used to that but it will wear thin quickly.
As to his tenure as DA, that was fine but has zero bearing on being President, Attorney General I can see. And finding a corrupt politician you can convict is as easy as finding a politician.
And his speech at the Reagan library was a joke. What is his policy on China’s currency valuation? Or on the Syrian demonstrators, or on Libya, how about Zimbabwe? Stating America is wunnerful and Reagan was a modern day Jeebus is not a foreign policy speech.
This is about the extent of his positions on the Middle East: “Around the world– in the Middle East, in Asia, in Africa and Latin America
—people are debating their own political and economic futures–right now.
We have a stake in the outcome of their debates. For example, a Middle East
that is largely democratic and at peace will be a Middle East that accepts Israel,
rejects terrorism, and is a dependable source of energy.”
Yeah, I can see the PLA sitting down with a Christie administration and doing just what he laid out should be done. To call that excellent is embarrasing. It is pablum.
The argument of ‘President Obama was inexperienced so Christie is fine since he’s even less experienced’ just doesn’t make sense considering he’d be running against President Obama not Candidate Obama of 4 years prior.
I agree – neither one of them – Christie or Obama – should be elected president – too green.
oh, but one term Governor of a medium sized state years ago is sufficient enough experience. Romney himself claims he did not inhale but not for lack of trying, I think he has lost more campaigns than the rest of the GOP field put together.
Romney not only has executive experience having served a term as a governor, he went to school for business, and has lots of executive experience in business.
Obama – no executive experience – no business schooling – no business experience – and we have a rotten economy as proof of it.
“and we have a rotten economy as proof of it.”
Of course Bush, our Harvard MBA with business experience engineered the greatest financial and economic crisis since the great Depression….and wasn’t Hoover actually a civil engineer turned businessman? But don’t let facts get in the way of your delusions Dragonfly.
Romney not only has executive experience having served a term as a governor, he went to school for business, and has lots of executive experience in business.
After Bush can we put to rest the idea that an MBA qualifies anyone for higher office?
I would hazard that for 90% of the MBA graduates, even from Harvard, the most valuable takeaway is a network of business connections to tap into throughout the rest of life.
At the very best, they learn to manage systems that have very different charters and expectations than what we expect from Government. The CEO of GE doesn’t have to convince 60 Senators and 218 Representatives before he implements a policy.
Obama – no executive experience – no business schooling – no business experience – and we have a rotten economy as proof of it.
This makes about as much sense as saying “he’s a great farmer, so I’d bet he’d be an excellent chef, too.” There is simply no reason to believe that business acumen will serve you well in crafting good policy. In a more sane political environment, I would argue that Obama’s time as a community organizer is the best training for government you can get.
No one is “ready” to be President of the United States. To argue otherwise is just silly. Counting “days” is especially silly.
With their many years of government service, were Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld “ready” to be president? Scary thought, isn’t it?
Being president isn’t a matter of experience. Competent advisers can fill in the details. It’s a matter of temperament, intellect, and character. As well as some minimal standard of physical fitness for the rigors of the job.
By the way – Barack Obama will have four years of the most relevant experience possible when he runs for re-election. Christie? Not so much.
Christie would be short lived in the Republican primary once his real views are reveals in ads from Romney and Perry – so its not even worth while discussing Christie.
There’s the rub … and if he moves at all rightward to try to combat Perry and Romney in the primaries, he’ll ensure beyond a shadow of a doubt that he’ll be a one-term Governor.
“ottovbvs // Oct 4, 2011 at 12:57 pm
“and we have a rotten economy as proof of it.”
Of course Bush, our Harvard MBA with business experience engineered the greatest financial and economic crisis since the great Depression….and wasn’t Hoover actually a civil engineer turned businessman? But don’t let facts get in the way of your delusions Dragonfly.”
ottobvs,
Under Bush and a Republican-controlled Congress we were doing pretty good coming out of two major economic disasters – 9/11 and Katrina.
The Democrats took control of both houses of Congress on Jan. 3, 2007 – 11 months later the nation went into a recession.
Obama, the Dem-controlled Congress’ rubberstamp, got in then super-sized the mess.
Now that we have a Republican-controlled house, we are able to put a lid on the out of control spending by the Dems.
When the Republicans take control of both houses of Congress and the White House come Jan. 2013, then you will see America get back on track.
“The Democrats took control of both houses of Congress on Jan. 3, 2007 – 11 months later the nation went into a recession.”
Amazingly fast work that. The Democrats created the entire housing bubble which was the proximate cause of the financial crash and the entire mass securitization of real estate debt which was the real underlying cause. One problem with your “the Dems did it formula” the housing bubble started to implode in 2006 Q3!!!! Unfortunately, you’re either a)unfamiliar with the facts b) disingenuous c) a liar….I’ll leave you to decide which.
That’s right – Frank and Dodd did a right quick number on the economy while chairing the banking and finance committees – guess what took a nose dive? Banking and housing. Housing because of bank loans.
Yup, the Democrats did quite the number on America.
The Dems in Congress had to come up with TARP to bail out what Frank and Dodd did, and Bush wouldn’t sign it unless it had a pay-back provision in it, which it did before he signed it.
Bush took it to Frank and Dodd 17 times to try to have them stop their buddies in Frannie and Freddie from underwriting loans to people who didn’t qualify for them – even McCain took it to them – to no avail – Frank and Dodd said, don’t worry about it, everything will be fine – RIGHT. It’s on record with CSPAN that Frank and Dodd was begged to quit doing what they were doing, and their say they have it under control, don’t worry about it.
Anyway it seems the fat boy unlike Dickens’ protagonist isn’t going to run. The Christie boomlet is over.
Christie said – AGAIN – this afternoon that he ain’t runnin’. Period. Full stop.
But he didn’t take a Sherman, did he?
Maybe there’s still a chance that Christie is the Great White Republican whale hope.
Meanwhile, what’s the next Republican Flavor of the Month?
Fruity Loopy Michele is over.
Scary Perry Berry is over.
Christie Crunch seems to be over. (Unhealthy high fat content.)
Maybe the next one will be Chocolate Nut.
Anything but Santorum. Anything but that.