Michael Barbaro and Nick Confessore have a piece up at the New York Times about big donor Establishment Republicans who are considering dumping their support for wounded Governor Chris Christie and shifting their political contributions to Jeb Bush.
It’s good click-bait, but I think there is less here than meets the eye. Barbaro and Confessore understandably sought out comment from Rangers and Pioneers, meaning folks who had bundled huge amounts of money for George W. Bush’s two presidential runs. If you look at a sample of big Bush donors, you shouldn’t be surprised to see a lot of residual support for Jeb.
If there’s an interesting insight in the article, it’s that these donors largely see Christie and Jeb as interchangeable. They also appear to believe that there are no other conceivable choices. So, what is it about Christie and Jeb that makes them so indistinct from each other? And why are they both seen as uniquely qualified?
I mean, I understand that Big Money trusts them, but why don’t they trust any other Republicans? I can see that Christie and Jeb both represent states that have more moderate electorates than Texas or Kentucky, but so does Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and Ohio Governor John Kasich.
Maybe there is a perceived moderation on immigration reform? Maybe there is less of a culture war flavor to Christie and Jeb? I can’t really put my finger on the rationale for why just these two gentlemen are considered acceptable.
Meanwhile, out in the sticks, the common wisdom is that Sen. Ted Cruz has this thing all but wrapped up. He’ll crush all comers in Iowa; New Hampshire will split its support ten ways; Cruz will win a giant victory in South Carolina, and that will be all she wrote. Could be. Could very well be. And Hugh Hewitt could be correct that the smart thing for the Big Money folks to do is to recruit Rick Santorum to peel off the big chunk of Cruz’s evangelical support in the Hawkeye State. It never made sense to me that a pre-Vatican II Catholic like Little Ricky would have much success in winning over evangelicals if they have an evangelical alternative. If you want Huckabee, you pick Huckabee. If he isn’t running, you go with Cruz. At least, that’s how it seems to me. But I have trouble thinking like an evangelical Republican.
As long as we’re brainstorming the 2016 Republican primaries, I’d like to know where Rand Paul is supposed to win. Iowa seems impossible. I saw a poll where he had a weak lead in New Hampshire, so maybe that’s a possibility in a very split big field of candidates. South Carolina seems unlikely. So, maybe the Nevada caucuses?
St. Ralph just endorsed Rand Paul as being beyond the duopoly. That likely kills his hardcore Libertarian support. But it gives Paul the illusion of uniting the anti-Hillary crowd across both parties in an un-Obama coalition. Geography says it ain’t happening. Combining two geographically disjoint minorities doesn’t give you a majority anywhere. And in a within-party run, it doesn’t even function as a spoiler. It’s pure vanity of the “making up for daddy” sort that sank Mitt Romney.
What attracts the big money to Jeb (and Christie if he shakes the bridge stunt) is the idea that they appeal to swing voters who might vote against Democratic candidates. And both now do not have to build name recognition.
Cruz’s problem is that he has to lie about his positions publicly and campaign on them privately in order to have any chance in the general election. At best his campaign is a move to once again capture the GOP and move it ever more rightward even if it creates a massive loss in 2016.
You mean Ralph Reed?
No, Nader. Didn’t you hear?
what a dick.
Ralph ‘effing Nader: http://m.theweek.com/article/index/260813/ralph-nader-wants-liberals-to-back-rand-paul-dont-do-it
Poor guy. It must be hard not to be in the spotlight anymore. In any case, Nader’s long history of not giving a crap about many progressive causes – women’s rights being one of the biggest – seems to fit well with modern libertarianism.
Oh good lord.
I’ll confess, I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. I’m in California, fortunately, so it isn’t quite as bad as voting for Ralph Nader in Florida, but still. I’m not here to make excuses, but to point out that at least I learned my lesson. I didn’t see enough different between the Democrats and the Republicans, but the Bush junta set me straight.
If you want to convince me that there’s no meaningful difference between the parties now, you will first have to convince me that Al Gore would have used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq.
So much for Ralph Nader.
Doesn’t Nader have about as much influence on the left as Lyndon LaRouche does on the right?
The only influence he has on me now is to cause me to think unkind thoughts about him. Obviously I’m not the only one.
It seems like Nader was just calling Rand Paul a “sell-out”. Oh, what a difference eight months makes.
I’m wondering if Nader is going senile like Scalia. I seem to hear lots of loopy stuff from him these days.
Oh, for the real Reich-Wingers, there’s no doubt that Ted Cruz-ader is the man of their dreams!
Everything he does, is designed to piss-off the Liberals.
I don’t think he’d have great chance in the general election.
But he still scares me!
Because if he should win, he’s the one who’ll gladly bring (more) Fascism here – all while holding The Bible, waving the American Flag, and reciting the 2nd Amendment.
If there is anyone on the national political landscape who would be fully behind the whole tin-foil-hat idea of internment camps, it would be Ted Cruz.
Yes, another interesting question is whether it matters who Big Money loves. Will 2016 finally be the Tea Party’s year? We know they’re perfectly capable of throwing away Senate seats by nominating psychopaths, so why not the presidency? If you’re the Tea Party, maybe you keep hearing that Ted Cruz can’t win, but of course McCain and Romney didn’t win either. Maybe if we finally nominated a REAL conservative, yes?
Big money wants what they want with the least amount of populist giveaway they can get.
Bush’s FL governorship went better than Christie’s NJ is going. Every time I see a new Christie investigation announced I think kaching, more money the big boys gotta dole out to counteract.
My money’s on Bush at this point. they’ve got nobody else, and he’s not as virulently anti-hispanic as the rest (though his policies aren’t any better). Big money wants a winner who isn’t tea party whackjobbish. It’s really all semantics, but Jeb looks better than tea party right now.
God, I’m rooting for Calgary Cruz, though. Guaranteed dem win, and the entertainment value would be astronomical. He’d fill up Fallon and Colbert’s first year in the late night seats with endless amusements.
Christie could be another first for 2016 — to match the first woman Democrats are determined to nominate for no good reason other than her sex and name. There have been a few crooked Presidents, more criminal Presidents (but as Nixon said, “When the President does it, it’s not illegal), a drunk or two, at least two that were cognitively impaired, but never have we had a man or women running for POTUS while under investigation for several criminal acts. If he gets indicted on the eve of the general election, it could push him over the finish line to a win.
In addition to the comments discussed above, Christie and Bush have one VERY important thing which they share. They are BOTH 9/11 MADE MEN. We don’t have to say much about Jeb or any Bush in that regard, of course. Christie was informed that he was going to be appointed US Attorney for New Jersey in the evening on September 10, 2001. The US Attorneys Offices for New Jersey and particularly the Southern District of New York (where terrorist cases are handled) are crucial bulwarks for the coverup of the 9/11 false flag operation and thus allowing the war on terror to continue, unexamined. That is also why early on in the Christiesgate exposures, you had the specter of Giuliani and Chertoff literally leaping up to defend Christie. The Port Authority of NJ & NY was the perfect vehicle for the 9/11 operation. Not directly accountable to either NJ or NY, but with a total penetration by US Federal Security.
Notice that the other contenders have most likely not been ‘read in’ yet. That must be causing extreme anxiety among the hegemons. The multiple investigations surrounding Christie is also a great worry. One investigation can be easily co-opted, but multiple investigations have exponential powers of tripping people up. That’s why you will see an effort to bring them all back into the US Attorneys’ Offices to keep the lid on. Christie knows that he might have to be sacrificed to draw the attention (BIG corruption THERE, all over now) but he also knows he will be taken care of if he continues to play his part according to the hegemons’ script. Or least he thinks!