Getting Christie
Anti-Christie forces have struck pay dirt with the revelations that some of his aides were engaged in some mighty nefarious and completely indefensible practices. The scandal involving aides who engineered George Washington Bridge lane closings as an act of political revenge is the talk of the MSM and the blogosphere.
There is unanimity on the condemnation of the aides’ acts, and Christie has joined in—and fired the offender as well. The real question is that of his own responsibility; Christie has himself declared “I’m responsible” and added that he had no idea that “anyone on my staff could be so stupid and so deceitful.”
Opinions on this line up in the ways one would expect. My opinion is that in general it hurts him, but unless more emerges to implicate him directly, it’s not a fatal blow. If President Obama can claim lack of knowledge of far greater and more systemic and repeated offenses on the part of those under him, and somehow come out of it with reputation only slightly damaged (it’s been Obamacare that seems to be sinking his polls, not all the rest), then Christie could do it as well.
If this turned out to have been a widespread and recurrent pattern for Christie’s staff, that’s different, and would inform both his general judgment and his control of his staff and the messages he’s giving to them about what’s acceptable and what is not. Obama has been criticized, rightly, on those grounds; he’s had too many things happen under his watch, too many incidents for which he must say “I had no idea it was happening.” Christie’s just beginning, and he may get a pass for this one.
But he’d better watch out, because the press will not be kind to him the way they’ve been to Obama. Au contraire: he has a target (metaphorical, I assume) on his back.
[NOTE: As for whether Christie can win the Republican nomination, even minus this scandal, I’m on the fence about that. I think conservative opposition has been consistently strong. For quite some time now I’ve favor Scott Walker of Wisconsin.]
Neo — Do you mean that you favor Scott Walker as most likely to win the nomination, or that you actually favor him?
He’s got a “Kick Me” sign on his back. It will never come off.
mizpants:
I actually favor him, at least so far. I have for quite a while.
I haven’t a clue who will win the nomination. Way too early.
I like Walker, too. I think the country could use someone who is quietly competent without being a squish. We need to get out of this mode of seeking a messiah.
Messiahs are only around to give people a chance. When a culture deserves annihilation, not even a chance will be enough for salvation.
Unless the press is successful in revealing some systemic political thuggery the public won’t care by the time the primaries begin. Anyone who tries to keep this story alive will look increasingly petty before long.
This is nothing like use of the IRS to target enemies, and since Christie copped to it right away, it’s nothing like Benghazi.
I don’t think Christie has as much to worry about coming from the left; his bigger peril is on his right.
The lap dog media will cover up Barry’s poop and cover for him.
Depressing comment up at Althouse about the Christie mess, and much more of course:
Having the press on your side is like having air superiority in battle. There is no substitute, and the Democrats have it, the Republicans do not.
Christie, after his must-have-federal-pork-Sandy betrayal, lost conservative support. I hope this sinks him. I hope he did; I think he did it; it fits the image of a rising ego/pride of a political operative without real principle.
But this has something of a quality like Strauss-Kahn. It seems suspicious that there is, what could be termed, a media saturation on Christie “bullying” just before this event breaks. And, as Rush pointed out, there is a untoward lack of Republican (and to a less degree but still true) conservative defense, even to point out, let’s wait for the facts.
On the other hand, do aides undertake these kind of actions without at least a sense they have implicit approval?
Very interesting that you now favor Walker, Neo. Your endorsement means a lot to me, as I’m sure it does to other regulars on your blog as well.
I was an enthusiastic Christie fan. I liked it that he could think on his feet — how many Republicans can? And he’s witty. But of course I’ve struggled with increasing doubts about him. It wasn’t so much his fawning behavior with Obama — I think he was genuinely shell-shocked by the destruction Sandy wrought and was sincerely looking for help for NJ. I was also willing to overlook his extreme centrism because I thought he could win. I didn’t really begin to harbor doubts until I saw, maybe a year ago, a brief cell phone video of him exploding at somebody at the beach for some petty reason. It was really ugly.
But I must say, his aggressiveness may really have been the source of his appeal to me in the first place. I’m a little ashamed of this, but I hate the Chicago brand of thuggery so much that I couldn’t help being a little thrilled that here was a down and dirty NJ politician who could go up against it.
This political climate makes cynics of us all.
“Getting Christie” as the head for a story about how Christie’s people tried to get an entire town. Something wrong there …
Ann,
I appreciate the ‘air superiority’ metaphor. Up till now I was calling it ‘home field advantage’, but it’s more powerful than that.
Air superiority knocks out the opponent’s communications systems, and thus their command and control.
Because of that, messaging has to be simple. “First Woman President” is a simple message that will be hard to overcome.
I’m not going to comment on the Christie ‘scandal’ other than note I don’t know enough to comment.
I too have been thinking of Walker as a great candidate. He has demonstrated that he is a skilled executive with solid principles. However, has he even hinted he would be interested in running? Unless you’re a democrat it is a rather thankless job.
Vanderleun; yes, he does have a kick me sign on his back; it is also known as a R after his name in the voting booth.
When a Democrat’s underlings do this kind of stuff the press either ignores it or they make excuses. When a Republican’s underlings do it that pol is blamed for it all!
Christie is finished. There’s no way he’s going to recover from this, and he was already carrying a lot baggage from within the Republican Party on account of his de factor endorsement of Obama at the time of Hurricane Sandy.
Speaking of that endorsement, Bridgegate makes it pretty difficult for me to believe it was not calculated to hurt Romney. IOW, there is now very good reason to believe that Christie is personally responsible for the fact that we have Obama in the White House now instead of Mitt Romney. Asking GOP voters to support him for president in 2016 is a bridge too far. Fat chance.
I was never a Christie fan. At first, I didn’t know anything about him and I was neutral. After the Sandy pork, and getting to know his positions better on immigration et. al., I’ve become a detractor.
I think Christie is a RINO without even the leavening effect of business acumen. Christie would do nothing substantial to stop the decline.
I used to be a Walker fan, after the recall nonsense and his anti-union position. Alas, as I’ve gotten to know him better, I’ve come to the conclusion that he too is a RINO. “Immigration reform” that promises to keep the border wide open will be suicide for the US in the long term, but that’s what he seems to support. Also, his “can’t we all just get along” schtick vis-a-vis the Tea Party tells me that he is either naive or dishonest. The old “fool or knave” thing. Either way, he just doesn’t “get” it.
I’m afraid that means he won’t shake up Washington either.
Rick Perry is establishment. He and his people supported Ted Cruz’ opponent in that election, which wasn’t a great sin at the time since Cruz was an unknown quantity. I’ve been impressed by his leadership of TX after his failed presidential run. I think he would reverse the decline of institutions that the right cares about, like the military. Whether he’s actually serious about closing whole departments of the government is another matter.
I could support Perry, and think he would be a fine president…but maybe not great.
All of the above may be moot, though. If persuadable voters want/need to like their candidate, then I think the only one able to appeal to both moderates and conservatives is Rand Paul. That is key, as you cannot afford to gain one group while losing the other (see: Romney campaign).
I agree with Paul 1000% (!) on fiscal matters. I agree with him, kinda, on social policy mainly out of practicality: states rights is as close as we will get to conservative social policy. I think he may be less interested in “foreign adventures” than is appropriate for a superpower. Paul has shown some traits that bother me, though. Mainly, supporting Mitch McConnell and trying to slyly position himself.
I could support Rand Paul.
As far as other unknown candidates are concerned, I think that after Obama executive experience will be a big plus.
Oh, and I would support Ted Cruz. Except that I would also like to see him as majority leader in the Senate.
I watched the Christie Press conference and was impressed with his forthrightness. It is particularly heartening that unlike Obama, he rolled heads.
But he better be clean, or his big head will roll the farthest.
If his operatives insist that the atmosphere, if not direct orders, motivated them, he has a problem.
He has a problem anyway. He hired people capable of such crap, and didn’t know they’d do it.
Choice of subordinates is important for executives, as is knowing what is going on.
Obama’s subordinates are perfect choices for Obama, for example, and nobody believes he didn’t know this, that, or the other. But his supporters either don’t care or think it’s neat.
Wasn’t this just an example of the “Jersey Way”?
It’s not like he sicced the IRS on his political enemies…
“There is unanimity on the condemnation of the aides’ acts.” I take it Neo means the MSM and the blogosphere in “unanimity”.
Of course there is. It’s how it works. WJClinton commits perjury and a leading GOP Congressman (Livingston) resigns as a result. Aides to Christie make a classical political dirty trick and the GOP swoons. In either case, the Dems love it and pile on.
Me, I don’t give a damn. Christie is just another useless pig at the taxpayer trough, fatter and less wealthy than Corzine but in the same club. Oink squeal oink.
I don’t give a damn about Christie. Not when we have the evils of the Obamanation, the Fast and Furious deaths, the Benghazi deaths, the mafia rule of the (ahem) Executive Branch, the obscenity of Obamacare, the Crony Capitalism becoming indistinguishable from fascism.
I watched part of the press conference and kept saying to Christy, shut up, take a few questions and leave. He went on ten times longer than he should have. The apology and Q and A session should have taken no more than 15 minutes. Going on for almost 2 hours makes him look guilty.
Even if Christie is innocent, I still have problems with him as a candidate. He never seems to look further than NJ. I can’t imagine how he would do on foreign policy or whether he could understand the problems of flyover country well enough to come up with sound national policies. He would have to show a lot more of his views before I could support him.
Here’s what’s gonna happen. Democrats, realizing they are killing their best chance to win the White House, will resurrect Christie. Op eds will be written in the WaPo and the NYT extolling Christie’s courageous reaction. But, all that is political and will be forgotten, much as any political flap is forgotten after one month, until it is presidential campaign time. Then we will see it is time to “re-think” Christie’s personality and the bullying allegations.
No fan of Christie, but . . .
Maybe I am missing some of the evidence, but to this point there is little evidence that Christie or his staff, or the officials managing the road did anything wrong.
If Wildstein had alerted Kelly that they were going to do a traffic survey that would cause traffic problem, as a courtesy to the Governor or his staff, seeking tacit approval from the Governors office, and Kelly simply responded “Time for some traffic problems” a couple of weeks before the survey, acknowledging that the survey was coming, and hearing no objection from Kelly, Wildstein said “Got it”, that is no smoking gun of any kind. Maybe a little too flip for those looking for dirt, but nothing criminal or even untoward.
More may surface, or I may be missing some of the evidence out there, but so far, on these facts – not much to complain about.
“I can’t imagine how he would do on foreign policy or whether he could understand the problems of flyover country well enough to come up with sound national policies.”
expat,
IMO few who eventually reach the Oval Office are knowledgeable in the arena of FP before they assume office. And, those who have such knowledge are usually senators who lack the skills that make for a competent executive. When it come to FP I tend to judge the new POSTUS on the FP team he appoints.
When it comes to flyover country, its the rare president who really gives a damn about flyover country. We don’t have the electoral votes and its much easier to raise campaign cash on the two left coasts. Personally, I like it that way. As a region flyover country has low unemployment. Iowa’s rate is currently below 5%. NE, SD, ND, and others are doing just fine. There are far worse things in life than being ignored by DC.
Another point floated by Rush Limbaugh today was the possibility that by making the keynote Romney nomination speech about himself and his family – Romney’s name was not mentioned – Christie was ignoring (or downplaying) Romney’s virtues as a candidate and in doing the weepy walk on the boardwalk with you know who one week before the election Christie certainly did everything Obama could want in order to raise his image and help him get re-elected. A President Romney would have meant no candidate Christie in 2016 Politics is a creepy business.
neo saith, “If President Obama can claim lack of knowledge of far greater and more systemic and repeated offenses on the part of those under him, and somehow come out of it with reputation only slightly damaged (it’s been Obamacare that seems to be sinking his polls, not all the rest), then Christie could do it as well.”
Not if the former comes equipped with a “D” after his name, whereas the latter has only a measly “R”.
I’m squarely with Charles 3:40 pm on this one. Totally different rules. Don Carlos 4:52 pm nails it pretty nicely:
“It’s how it works. WJClinton commits perjury and a leading GOP Congressman (Livingston) resigns as a result. Aides to Christie make a classical political dirty trick and the GOP swoons. In either case, the Dems love it and pile on.”
Good Peggy Noonan piece at WSJ right now — How Christie Ended Up in This Jam: Political operatives, intoxicated with victory, think they can get away with anything.
Regarding the “Good Peggy Noonan piece” referenced by Ann 9:02 pm: for anyone who’s been stopped cold by the non-subscriber wall, I found a link that provided me with the entire text of the Noonan piece. Here it is:
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Declarations
Noonan: How Christie Ended Up in This Jam
Political operatives, intoxicated with victory, think they can get away with anything.
By Peggy Noonan
The Wall Street Journal
Jan. 9, 2014 7:29 p.m. ET
Gov. Chris Christie acquitted himself well in his “Bridgegate” news conference, and emerged undead. He said he had “no knowledge or involvement” in the apparent scheme by his political operatives to take revenge on a New Jersey mayor who refused to back him in the 2013 election. He had “no involvement,” in the four-day-long traffic jams they arranged on the George Washington Bridge. Learning of it left him feeling “blindsided,” “embarrassed,” “humiliated” and “stunned by the abject stupidity that was shown here.” He claimed personal responsibility, announced the firing of a top staffer, apologized to the state, and said he’d go to Fort Lee to apologize to the town and its mayor. Instead of leaving the podium at the end of his statement he stayed for a barrage of questions. The appearance went almost two hours. You can make mistakes, lose your focus and poise, when you let the press exhaust itself asking questions of you; it took guts and brains to pull it off.
He made some mistakes. There was a lot of “I” and “me” even for a modern politician. He tends toward solipsism and is too interested in his feelings. At times he seemed to see himself as the victim, when the victims of course were the state’s commuters, including children on school buses.
It was reminiscent of President Obama’s sighing, a few months ago, that he’d been “burned” by the rollout of ObamaCare. Actually America got burned. If only he, so much more powerful and consequential than a New Jersey governor, ever faced a barrage of questions.
***
The news conference saved the day but didn’t solve the problem. This is a rolling story and phase two is coming. We may soon see the March of the Redacted–steady revelations and rumors as to who else was texting, emailing about, aware of, or in on the scheme. A lot of reporting will be done, and Democrats will have a field day after four years of not being able to lay a hand on him. Mr. Christie will experience in the concrete a political rule he knows in the abstract: “Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate.” The fired deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, and others who have stepped down or aside in the scandal, may or may not talk, and may or may not back up the governor. Did staffers and appointees think they were carrying out the boss’s wishes or did they just go rogue? Why did Ms. Kelly set the lane closure scheme into motion at 7:34 a.m. on an August morning, and why did a Port Authority official who was a Christie appointee agree to the plan, with no questions or requests for clarification, one minute later?
The Washington Examiner’s Byron York, during the news conference, tweeted his cool-eyed read. There are only two possibilities–”he’s innocent or he’s a Clinton-level liar.”
If everything the governor said stacks up, he’ll wind up diminished but the story will fade. If it doesn’t–if there are new revelations or questions that cast him in a dark light–he’ll be finished as a national figure.
His uphill fight for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016 just got uphiller. Those Republicans who didn’t quite like him for other reasons have something new to hang their antipathy on.
How lucky is Hillary Clinton? Mr. Christie was leading her in the polls. If he got through the nomination he’d be a real threat.
***
I end with a thought about staffers and operatives in politics. They’re increasingly important. More and more these political players are weighing in on serious policy questions that affect how America is run. As Bob Gates makes clear in his memoir, political players in the Obama White House were to an unprecedented degree involved in foreign policy. That will be even more true in the future, whoever runs it.
Here’s a problem. Policy people are policy people–sometimes creative, almost always sober, grounded, mature. But political operatives get high on winning. They start to think nothing can touch them when they’re with a winner. They get full of themselves. And they think only winning counts, because winning is their job.
The ones who are young lack judgment, but they don’t know they lack judgment because they’re not wise enough. So they don’t check themselves.
They vie with each other for Most Loyal. They want to be admired by the boss. They want to be his confidantes. They want to be the one he trusts to get the job done. You can get in a lot of trouble when you’re like that.
There’s an ethos of wise-guy toughness among these staffers and consultants, and they often try to out-tough each other. That’s how dirty tricks happen.
It’s also how policy is hollowed out, by too many people thinking only of immediate political gain and not something bigger.
A bit of this ethos is traceable to the late GOP operative Lee Atwater, who worked in the Reagan and first Bush campaigns. Lee was a political guy who wanted to be appreciated as a significant player, so he bragged to the press about the wicked things he’d done. That allowed Democrats and journalists to tag him and say the GOP doesn’t win on the issues, it wins because it’s brute and ugly and tricks everybody. Lee didn’t mean for that to be their line! He just wanted respect, wanted people to understand political professionals are important.
The documentary “The War Room,” about the 1992 Clinton campaign, also made a contribution. It celebrated the toughness of operatives who yell on phones and warn people they’ll pay a price for coming out against the boss.
That was a generation ago. Young operatives are still re-enacting what they saw, and acting out what they see in a million other movies and shows–”Scandal,” “The Good Wife.”
There’s a twist on this you can see in the Christie story. You read the emails and texts his operatives were sending, and you realize: This is TV dialogue. It’s movie dialogue. They get everything off the screen, not real life, and they’re imitating the sound of tough guys.
Those emails and texts, they were “Sopranos” dialogue. “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee” is pure Tony. “Got it” is pure Silvio. “I feel bad about the kids,” is druggy Christopher, or maybe Adriana. “They’re the children of Buono voters” is Paulie Walnuts, in all his aggression and stupidity.
Christie operatives are not the only ones in politics who talk this way. And they all do it not because they’re really tough but because they think that’s how people like them–rock-’em sock-’em operatives–would talk. They don’t have the brains, heart or judgment of people who’ve lived a life because they haven’t all lived a life. They’re 30 or 40 and came of age in a media-saturated country. They saw it all on TV. They saw it on a screen.
They sometimes forget they’re not in a TV show about callous operatives who never get caught. They’re in life, where actually you can get caught.
Advice for politicians: Know who they are, and help them mature. If you don’t, they’ll do goofy things, bad things, and they’ll not only hurt us. They’ll hurt you.
Peggy Noonan has been in Coventry as far as I’m concerned, ever since that laser-brain swooned over, and voted for, Hussein Obama. She has a lot of nerve still “dispensing wisdom” to the peons.
I saw her at a conservative meeting in New York, and was angered by the sight of all the Repubs clustering around to kiss her ring.
We have two parties in this country: the All Nuts (D.), and the No Nuts (R.).
Being from Baraboo, Wisconsin, I quite like the idea of President Scott Walker. Put a Badger in the White House!
napolitano finally says what i have been saying for ages and never actually discussed…
we could wish that this list was printed!!!!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Judge Napolitano: How to get fired from Fox in under 5 mins
Asking questions as Judge Andrew Napolitano did in a recent broadcast on his now cancelled daily show may very well be the reason behind his recent dismissal from Fox. Though specific details are hard to come by because the Judge has yet to give any interviews on the matter, it’s believed that his refusal to bow to commonly manufactured media narratives is among one of several key reasons he his no longer with the network.
The following 5-Minute Speech that Got Napolitano Fired from Fox News is one that should not only be forwarded and shared with every single man, woman and child in this country, but taught and expounded upon in every social studies, civics and government class from first grade through college.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=52b_1329796059
So you’re a Walker fan?
LOL.
…that’s not a bad “lol” mind you.
More like a “you’re outing yourself rather early, aren’t you” type of lol.
But I don’t disapprove. Oh no, not at all.
The early 2016 political conversation at the Davis’s usually winds up at Scott Walker.
I’m for. Very thoughtfully for.
Because he’s so demonstrably …what’s that word? – oh yeah: competent.
A rare bird, that.
1. More than establishment enough to appease the elitists? Check.
2. Has some Tea Party cred’? Check.
3. Won’t offend blue dogs? Likely check.
4. Won’t offend independents? Probable check.
5. Might portend no intra-party civil war this go-round? Possible check.
But …plain spoken, nerdy, competent, mid-westerner Scott Walker?
Really?
Yeah. Right.
So. I usually sigh, and end by reflecting that, while he’s my current first choice (and given my overall tilt toward populist fury and Tea Party evangelism, I find that a rather weird place to be in), I doubt he can get the call (if he even wants it …I suspect he would, but …it’s kind of not really the prize it used to be, eh).
Until the bridge controversy, I was kind of resigned (since he threw his cap in the water), that – having suffered through 8 years of Chicago politics – we might have to endure 8 additional years of New Jersey politics.
I had the oddest mental image of the country jumping out of the fire and into the frying pan with that, lol.
(Well, if The Christie could get past The Hilary. Whom I’m pretty sure has the lock over there. Although I’m not as convinced …lately …is as assured in the general as she is in the primary.)
Now? Cracks in the Christie wall?
Hmm.
Hmmmmm.
[twirls tips of moustache] How very interesting. [/twirl]
But …I was pretty sure you’d favor Walker. How interesting that you’ve confirmed. And so early on.
Jolly good show, neo.
…yeah.
A visible comment, neo.
I figured something out to get through the auto-blocking lol.
It ain’t exactly convenient, but it works. (I’ve a new workstation, that is MUCH faster, so at least it’s not as onerous a burden.)
Whoo-hoo.
He’s baaaack.
davisbr:
Welcome back!!
But let’s not talk too much about the fact that you’re back, or the spam filter might get wind of it :-).
davisbr:
I’ve liked Walker ever since he burst on the national scene.
I also still like Christie well enough to vote for him, but I trust Walker far more.
Shhhh. You’ll waken him.
It took me a while to warm to him. I’m pretty provincial that way though lol.
Gawd, but wouldn’t it be nice to have an effective administration though?
And. I’ve little doubt a Walker administration would be effective based upon his proven performance as governor.
Boring? Probably …but I’ve come to long for some political boredom from just such an outbreak of administration (and Congressional, if that’s not too much to hope for) competence.
Sigh. Just don’t see the charisma that the LIV’s substitute emotionally for competence when they enter the booth and see Walker as a choice though.
Gimmie an “R”
Gimmie an “O”
Gimmie a “C”
…ad nauseum ’til you’ve spelled rockstar. /sarc
…but considerably quicker than it took me to figure out Romney. With whom my original disdain has long since grown into warm admiration. Yeah. I admire Mitt Romney. Who’d a thunk.
…and just how often does a politician grow in personal admiration, as you know more about them?
I’d shorten that to “enough to vote for him”. Maybe.
(Well, probably. Considering the alternative.)
Christie’s has long since become an example of the opposite of “…grow in personal admiration the more you know about them“.
My brightest 2016 hope is that the Tea Party continues to grow in strength. And that a nascent Democrat branch catches a wave amongst their grass roots.
(That little Chicago alderman town hall video fixated me for days afterwards lol.)
…a girl can dream, can’t he? (Not misspelled lol.)
Golly Gee Willickers–the sillies in Christie’s office should return and state for the record that a couple days before the bridge stoppage, they secretly voted themselves a service union. Then, they merely did what such unions always do when they want to achieve some result–they stopped up a service. Bridges, bus lines, subways, hospitals, etc.–whenever unions want something, they use the public as hostages to gain what they want. In this case, they wanted to damage a mayor–and they succeeded.
Surely the moment the press learns that they are just union members shutting down something to achieve an end, the press will report the story positively, right??
Like I said before the 2008 elections, I only care that the “leader” wants to kill the Left and does it.
Don’t really care what that leader’s positions are after that point.