Christie for VP [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Christie for VP


IvanVic
08-10-2012, 06:49
Given the docile manner in which Romney has responded to the President's despicable accusations that he was somewhat responsible for the death of a woman, does the GOP need someone with the fervor and energy to say what needs to be said? I'd rather not have a debate about Christie's politics, as everyone knows that Romney isn't exactly the most conservative person on earth, but rather a discussion about what can be done to help win the election in terms of a VP pick.

HexHead
08-10-2012, 06:51
Yeah, let's have some guy even more anti-gun than Romney on the ticket. I'll vote for 0bama if that fat prick is picked.

beforeobamabans
08-10-2012, 06:52
Why would the RNC want to have a dynamic candidate for Veep when they are serially incapable of producing one for the top spot on the ticket?

DOC44
08-10-2012, 06:55
nice anti gun guys that play be the rules seldom win a back alley fight.

Doc44

Goaltender66
08-10-2012, 06:58
Here's the thing...

When you're playing defense, you aren't playing offense. If a candidate is going to be committed to refuting every dumb allegation against him, then he's playing by the other guy's rules.

Plus, there's some structural issues involved, namely that technically Romney is still in the primary and money spent has to be in that effort.

I'll also mention that the Mitt Romney : Wife Killer ad has been criticized and argued against by even Obama's allies in the MSM. I don't see a huge need for Romney to stop hitting Obama on the economy and start talking about the ad. Obama is clearly using an LBJ-type tactic here. Thing is, I'm pretty sure most independents (which this ad is targeting) is looking at it as over the top.

Based on that, nominating a combative (as opposed to conservative) VP wouldn't serve the ticket well. The idea is to show competence. If the GOP allows itself to get dragged down in the dirt instead of expressly offering a clear, competent alternative to Obama, more people will just be turned off and not vote at all by declaring "a pox on both houses." Low turnout helps Obama, especially with the way undecideds are shaping up this cycle.

eracer
08-10-2012, 07:00
See the thread about crack pipes at gas stations.

series1811
08-10-2012, 07:03
Since one traditional role of the VP has been to be the attack dog in a campaign, Christie wouldn't be such a bad choice.

JFrame
08-10-2012, 07:05
Here's the thing...

When you're playing defense, you aren't playing offense. If a candidate is going to be committed to refuting every dumb allegation against him, then he's playing by the other guy's rules.

Plus, there's some structural issues involved, namely that technically Romney is still in the primary and money spent has to be in that effort.

I'll also mention that the Mitt Romney : Wife Killer ad has been criticized and argued against by even Obama's allies in the MSM. I don't see a huge need for Romney to stop hitting Obama on the economy and start talking about the ad. Obama is clearly using an LBJ-type tactic here. Thing is, I'm pretty sure most independents (which this ad is targeting) is looking at it as over the top.

Based on that, nominating a combative (as opposed to conservative) VP wouldn't serve the ticket well. The idea is to show competence. If the GOP allows itself to get dragged down in the dirt instead of expressly offering a clear, competent alternative to Obama, more people will just be turned off and not vote at all by declaring "a pox on both houses." Low turnout helps Obama, especially with the way undecideds are shaping up this cycle.


Good post...


.

TheJ
08-10-2012, 07:16
Good post...


.

I second that e motion.

The Machinist
08-10-2012, 07:30
My God in Heaven...

As if one gun-banning stooge on the GOP ticket wasn't enough, you guys want another?

http://mob895.photobucket.com/albums/ac159/GIFsforhire/Facepalm/facepalm.gif?t=1287804448

evlbruce
08-10-2012, 07:35
Since it's not about principles and policy... why not Hillary? She's is the most popular politician in the US right now.

Lethaltxn
08-10-2012, 07:39
Since one traditional role of the VP has been to be the attack dog in a campaign, Christie wouldn't be such a bad choice.

Perhaps, but I can think of a couple actual conservatives I'd rather see on the ticket who would not back down from a fight. JMO.

JFrame
08-10-2012, 07:42
Perhaps, but I can think of a couple actual conservatives I'd rather see on the ticket who would not back down from a fight. JMO.


Marco Rubio, for one...


.

DOC44
08-10-2012, 07:45
Marco Rubio, for one...


.

AGREE^^^^^

Doc44

douggmc
08-10-2012, 07:47
Rubio is the male 2012 version of Sarah Palin. Pretty face ... but hollow and clueless inside.

beforeobamabans
08-10-2012, 07:52
Here's the thing...

When you're playing defense, you aren't playing offense. If a candidate is going to be committed to refuting every dumb allegation against him, then he's playing by the other guy's rules.

Plus, there's some structural issues involved, namely that technically Romney is still in the primary and money spent has to be in that effort.

I'll also mention that the Mitt Romney : Wife Killer ad has been criticized and argued against by even Obama's allies in the MSM. I don't see a huge need for Romney to stop hitting Obama on the economy and start talking about the ad. Obama is clearly using an LBJ-type tactic here. Thing is, I'm pretty sure most independents (which this ad is targeting) is looking at it as over the top.

Based on that, nominating a combative (as opposed to conservative) VP wouldn't serve the ticket well. The idea is to show competence. If the GOP allows itself to get dragged down in the dirt instead of expressly offering a clear, competent alternative to Obama, more people will just be turned off and not vote at all by declaring "a pox on both houses." Low turnout helps Obama, especially with the way undecideds are shaping up this cycle.
The only problem with your theory is that negative ads work. Obama is defining Romney in a way that will cost him the election. Romney's 'unfavorable' ratings are polling 5-6 points higher in swing states where Big O and friends are running thousands of ads day and night. Romney can't get his message out and our brilliant electorate is deciding that Obama isn't so bad after all. He's gonna protect me and stick it to those rich pukes.

This is just one reason I was adamantly anti-Romney in the primaries. He fooled the GOP into believing he was "most electable" which was what the dems wanted because he most certainly is not. No Republican from Mass has ever been elected to anything on the national stage because any one from there is inevitably out of step with the party as a whole. Roll in the milktoast personality, the Mormon thing, and you've got another loser on your hands.

Lethaltxn
08-10-2012, 08:06
Marco Rubio, for one...


.

Yep, or West.

Goaltender66
08-10-2012, 08:07
The only problem with your theory is that negative ads work. Obama is defining Romney in a way that will cost him the election. Romney's 'unfavorable' ratings are polling 5-6 points higher in swing states where Big O and friends are running thousands of ads day and night. Romney can't get his message out and our brilliant electorate is deciding that Obama isn't so bad after all. He's gonna protect me and stick it to those rich pukes.

This is just one reason I was adamantly anti-Romney in the primaries. He fooled the GOP into believing he was "most electable" which was what the dems wanted because he most certainly is not. No Republican from Mass has ever been elected to anything on the national stage because any one from there is inevitably out of step with the party as a whole. Roll in the milktoast personality, the Mormon thing, and you've got another loser on your hands.

There's a diminishing marginal return though...Obama has been very negative in his ads and he hasn't seen a bounce from them. The negative ads also need to be pushed at a time when people are paying attention, and I daresay in August the majority of voters aren't really looking at them yet. Remember, we here are pretty plugged in and involved, but most people don't actually look at the candidates until October.

As for polls, well, most of them I've seen have been oversampling Democrats in clear defiance of the 2010 turnout model. Even with the oversample, Obama's leads are under the proportions of the oversampling, so that is an interesting development in and of itself. Anyway, if you look at crosstabs you are starting to see preferences for Romney start to climb, meaning we could be looking at a real live preference cascade here.

I do have to admit my error here, in that I was also one of the guys thinking Romney is a milquetoast...until he had his surrogates ambush Axelrod outside of Boston. Romney also delivered a speech outside of a shuttered Solyndra building at the same time Obama was touting some green energy initiative. I've since rethought my opinion...Romney is actually a pretty ruthless SOB in his own right (Newt Gingrich could probably second that opinion...). I think the calculus here is that he doesn't think it serves the overall campaign to have him portrayed as such, so instead he opts for the backstage knife-between-the-ribs over the on-stage hammer over the head.

IvanVic
08-10-2012, 08:48
Here's the thing...

When you're playing defense, you aren't playing offense. If a candidate is going to be committed to refuting every dumb allegation against him, then he's playing by the other guy's rules.

I agree, in theory, but Romney hasn't shown much passion in defusing any allegation against him.

Here's the thing...
I'll also mention that the Mitt Romney : Wife Killer ad has been criticized and argued against by even Obama's allies in the MSM.

There's a high probability that a decent percentage of people that could be persuaded by such an ad do not watch the news. It's sad, but candidates still need to compete for the lowest common denominator, because some of them vote.


Based on that, nominating a combative (as opposed to conservative) VP wouldn't serve the ticket well. The idea is to show competence.

Nominating a conservative, yet boring and passive VP candidate, could prove equally insufficient in terms of serving the ticket well. If the focus is winning the election, then how advantageous is it to seek, in a VP candidate, conservatism over other characteristics? How many voters are really going to sit at home because the VP pick was not conservative enough? It's an infinitely tiny percentage. I would agree wholeheartedly that competence should be a given, but I'm not so sure that a wining strategy is randomly picking a candidate just because they are perceived to be more conservative than someone like Christie.

Chuck TX
08-10-2012, 08:49
I'd sooner vote for Fat Tony from the Simpsons.

snerd
08-10-2012, 09:15
http://obamadiary.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/barack-obama-chris-christie-2011-9-4-12-30-54.jpg?w=800&h=678


http://media.nj.com/ledgerupdates_impact/photo/obama-chris-christiejpg-fb811b3c3f4092c9.jpg

2@low8
08-10-2012, 09:20
Lets take the Governor of one of the most anti 2A states and make him the VP, yeah, that'll motivate the base.

May as well leave Obama in charge. He talks a better 2A than Christie.

Bruce H
08-10-2012, 09:46
Everybody does understand that the Republican party will do anything to keep from winning this election. I wouldn't be surprised if they really try to lose the house. They don't want to be seen as in charge of anything. They think that they will be able to take over after the crash and wield power.

They are all dumber than a bag if hammers.

series1811
08-10-2012, 11:49
Perhaps, but I can think of a couple actual conservatives I'd rather see on the ticket who would not back down from a fight. JMO.

Well, I agree with you on that. Christie wouldn't be my first choice, but he wouldn't be my last one, either. :supergrin:

Drilled
08-10-2012, 14:48
http://www.ammoland.com/2011/11/26/nj-governor-christie-shows-his-anti-gun-owner-hand/#axzz23B7eetOh

Flying-Dutchman
08-10-2012, 15:04
Two words-Joe Biden. The standard set for VP is pretty low.

It was no small feat for a Republican (Christie) to win in NJ.
They said he did not have a prayer yet he won.

Christie would be OK as VP as he is a good attack dog with some charisma.

Do not worry about gun control. Nothing is going to happen regarding guns unless you vote Democrat.

brickboy240
08-10-2012, 15:45
Would ANYBODY really help Romney?

I doubt it.

-brickboy240

countrygun
08-10-2012, 17:55
I saw a known politician giving a real good defense of Romney the other day. Besides that he blasted the Obama campaign.

Mario Cuomo

Cavalry Doc
08-10-2012, 18:20
Would ANYBODY really help Romney?

I doubt it.

-brickboy240

For me, Petraeus would have. But that was a Barry misdirection from the beginning.