Because of my job as an editor and the fact that I’m a writer, I probably do not read news articles the same way that you do. I won’t say that I skim them, exactly. What I do is read them as constructions. I look at how they are put together as much as what they actually have to say, and if I skim something it is probably going to be the set pieces that I know must be written as predicates for the overall point of the piece. That’s why I initially did not see even one mention of Bridgegate in Peter Hamby’s CNN piece on Chris Christie. I had to go back and read it two more times until I found the brief obligatory mention of the episode that torpedoed Christie’s presidential ambitions. It’s tucked in here, in a bit on how Christie can replicate McCain’s town hall success in New Hampshire:
Christie’s team, aware they can no longer rely on the establishment forces that were propping him before last year’s Bridgegate fiasco, is hoping that his personal charisma and Jersey-tested ability to engage with voters in unscripted settings will produce a similar outcome.
That is the eighth paragraph in a piece that begins with a simple question: “Whatever happened to Chris Christie?”
It seems like a long time to wait for the answer, and the “Bridgegate fiasco” is never explained either for what it is or why it has been a fiasco. Hamby’s article doesn’t even give a nod to the story currently running on the front-page of the New York Times: Indictments May Be Near in George Washington Bridge Scandal.
Strangely, the article takes a perplexed tone about why the governor hasn’t been keeping in touch with his would-be organizers in states like South Carolina or why he hasn’t checked off certain boxes in Iowa and New Hampshire. Instead, it reads like some kind of detached-from-reality press release from Drumthwacket, wherein Christie’s aides pretend that the walls aren’t about to cave in and their boss will soon launch a Jersey-flavored version of John McCain’s 2000 Straight Talk Express.
Because the article completely fails to explain “Whatever happened to Chris Christie,” and it doesn’t address the fact that things are about to get a whole lot worse for the governor, it reads like something from an alternative universe.
Maybe writing a piece like this is good for maintaining sources and getting access, but it’s an absolute embarrassment as a piece of journalism.
Having said that, it does at least detail Team Christie’s fantasy-world plans to make their man the Republican nominee. And that’s worth something, I guess.
It’s worth something? What exactly?
CNN rarely commits journalism.
CNN articles are worth a look if you like information about Alice in Wonderland or some other alternate universe.
“… Jersey-flavored version of John McCain’s 2000 Straight Talk Express.”
This bit cracked me up. Instead of McCain yelling at the damn kids to get off his lawn, Christie would be yelling at everybody to fucking get off his fucking bridge, you fucking fucks.
Not while he’s eating shit on a shingle in Rahway.
“Jersey tested ability to engage with voters”???? – how about “berate” voters, or insult voters.
Yes, but that’s more popular in NJ than in other states.
Christie’s two GOP calling cards were 1) re-elected governor in a very blue state with a landslide win and 2) slays Democrats and is mean to public employees and unions. Similar to Walker’s calling cards. More verbally mean than Walker but less effectively mean to public employees. But won re-election more handily and in a bluer state than Walker.
Christie’s NJ approval ratings peaked in 11/13, but there have been large swings in his approval numbers since his first election. What changed as the facts surrounding the GW bridge lane closures became public is that his disapproval numbers began climbing from a very low 29%. Combined with more revelations on his other shenanigans and the negative outcomes of his other controversial decisions, his approval rating has continued to decline and disapproval rating continued to climb. Now at 35% approval and 51% disapproval.
Walker’s not doing all that well in WI either, but better than Christie. Now at 43/52, but he was only re-elected with 52%.
Christie’s been on defense in NJ for over a year now which has handicapped his ability to bloviate his way to the GOP nomination. And it’s not likely that he’ll come out clean enough from the AG investigation to relaunch much of a campaign. Shrinking support in WI isn’t going to help Walker. Republicans have already seen what happens when their nominee can’t carry his home state.
And I bet CNN didn’t mention that NJ Democrats took a dive re: Christie’s re-election.
Not likely. But appears that NJ Democratic voters may be catching on.
An interesting speculation wrt the impending indictments of NJ Republicans (which may not be limited to the bridge lane closures) is that Menendez’s indictment was to deflect possible charges that US Attorney Fishman is partisan.
Had to google Drumthwacket. Interesting Wikipedia entry and history but the place is only lightly used by Jersey governors, apparently.
Latest on the investigation from The Republic: Bond filing shows voluminous data sought by feds, local authorities for Port Authority probes
Also not to be forgotten:
I remember when progressives were coming to the Frog Pond to soil their pants in worry about what a great POTUS candidate Christie would be. I’m not the best one to divine the voting habits of the GOP primary voter, but I knew he would be a rotten candidate, and said so.
It’s hard to take too much credit for my prescience. The guy is way too volatile and out of shape to run a modern POTUS campaign all the way to the end. And, retrospectively, we could have predicted that anyone who treated people with such contempt in public would have dome some contemptible things in private which would come out.
Many politicians have managed to hide their contemptible private, or should we say secret/covert public, actions and behaviors through many election cycles. Nixon did through years and two presidential winning elections. Romney succeeded as well. And if I hadn’t read Bernstein’s extremely well researched and written Hillary Clinton book, I would never have appreciated how she and Bill had covered up his multiple affairs over decades.