Let's see, a Republican who's a former U.S. attorney, who was then elected to an executive position in a blue state, who has a well-crafted media image as a take-charge guy, and who is not a complete RWNJ on some of the social issues -- and who asks the Republican Party's conservative base to overlook their dislike of some of his more moderate positions, and to nominate him because he can win in November.
Why does all of this sound familiar?
It's because that was essentially Giuliani's playbook. In 2007, some commentators thought he was the front-runner for the nomination. Instead, he crashed and burned, proving to be much more popular among the commentariat than among the Republican rank and file.
Nor will the right-wing base be any more forgiving this time. Twice in a row, the Republicans have run a Presidential candidate who was identified with the party's more centrist wing, who was denounced by the base as a RINO, and who was touted as being the most electable. Twice in row, the supposedly more electable candidate has lost. The centrists' position has been undercut. The 2008 and 2012 results have strengthened the position of those who think that the Republican Party's problem has been that it hasn't run a genuine conservative, and that a Palin-Cruz ticket would storm to victory.
Yes, Christie will tack hard right if he decides to seek the nomination, but the conservative base will point out that Romney did the same.
My prediction: If Christie runs, he'll get clobbered. Withdrawal by the end of March.
= new reply since forum marked as read
