As a New Jersey resident (and someone who watched him humiliate himself for Trump not that long ago) I can attest that Chris Christie is... not without his objectionable qualities. But if he's committing to the Trump-antagonist role, as it seems he is, I DO want to see him up on that debate stage. Out of everyone realistically in the pic…
As a New Jersey resident (and someone who watched him humiliate himself for Trump not that long ago) I can attest that Chris Christie is... not without his objectionable qualities. But if he's committing to the Trump-antagonist role, as it seems he is, I DO want to see him up on that debate stage. Out of everyone realistically in the picture, he's the one who stands a chance to really pummel Trump with some smart, bruising attack lines. You remember what he did to Marco Rubio. Needless to say, Trump is not Marco Rubio. But Christie can be just brutal, and someone needs to be just brutal to Trump.
Christie could actually fill the fantasy role that I had in my head for Liz Cheney. There are all sorts of obvious problems with this idea (that's why it's a fantasy) but at one point I pictured her running a kamikaze campaign just so she could get up onstage with Trump and rake him over the coals.
Christie won't see himself as a kamikaze. He'll think he can win. Whatever. But even if he goes nowhere in the race, he can be very effective in the role of wounding and diminishing Trump on the debate stage.
I would like to see Trump pummeled by anyone for any reason, but what's the end game here? Can Christie hurt Trump to the point that he loses the primary? Then, who will the Republican candidate be? I'm terrified of someone just as bad as Trump but with a better chance of winning in the general.
I'd probably just file that under "agree to disagree." I completely agree that the GOP is a dumpster fire with many reprehensible figures who shouldn't get near the presidency. But in my view, Trump is uniquely, head-and-shoulders worse than any of them. This is an ongoing disagreement that's been hashed out in a lot of places, so I don't particularly want to repeat it here. But yes, that would be MY end game: anyone but Trump. As bad as some of the others are: anything to keep Trump out of the White House.
We'll see. I think it's too early to know how that will play out. I don't think it's in the RNC's interest to put all its eggs in Trump's basket. (The RNC has to "manage" Trump the way someone needs to "manage" your most difficult relative at Thanksgiving, so he doesn't ruin everything... but privately I doubt they're very keen, or positive about his general election chances, at this point.)
For better or (mostly) worse, lots of folks run for president mainly to raise their profile—to sell a book, angle for a TV gig, or build name recognition for future races. Those candidates will NOT pass up their opportunity for nationally televised debates. I'm willing to bet they'll happen, even if Trump won't take part (which I have my doubts about anyway). And if Trump's not there, I'm pretty sure Christie will just pummel him in absentia.
Oh, I don't think they can – not in any big-picture sense of getting him to behave like a civilized human being or sane, constructive politician.
What I mean is that they're constantly maneuvering and placating him to keep him from destroying the Republican party. That's the threat: If Trump decides the GOP has crossed him, he'll turn third-party, wrecking the Republicans' chances in 2024 and maybe beyond. So the RNC is basically his hostage. Privately, the RNC most likely desperately wishes he were gone, but they have to stay on his good side. That's what I meant by "managing."
I take part of it back. Just read that the RNC's second debate will be at the Reagan Library. Nothing on whether Trump will go. I think he's already said he won't do debates.
Well if Trump said it, it must be the truth... ;-)
Just joshing. Again, I think it's too early to know. If Trump decides at some point that debating would be in his interests, or he just can't stand the FOMO, he WILL devise some excuse for changing his mind. Count on it. Making a statement has never once locked Trump into following through on it.
All true. Depends in part on who he's facing. Last time, everyone he faced, except for Hilary, pretty much folded when he began attacking them. This time? Wasn't Christie coaching him for the 2020 debates? Christie, so far, seems to be fighting against him. Not holding much hope that he continues. Pence will fold, so will the others probably. Ronnie? Depends. But the fact that he signed several of his most controversial bills almost behind closed doors doesn't exactly say much for his courage. Personally, I think he's all talk and bluff. He's riding high because he's got a tame legislature. The fact that he's losing populated parts of FL to Ds isn't helping him. And I think Disney is just getting started. Not to mention if FL gets another Andrew or Ian and he does nothing, he'll be toast. Which, again, leaves Trump in charge of the party.
As a NY resident, I fear that Christie and Trump have figuratively buried too many bodies together. Is Christie going to attack Trump for gutting Atlantic City? For abandoning his casinos to bankruptcy? To stiffing all his contractors? To over-inflating the worth of his NJ casinos to the tax man?
Christie won't mention any of Trump's crimes in NJ because all this lawlessness happened with his permission. This is all kayfabe. Otherwise, Christie would be wondering why NJ isn't bringing Trump up on tax fraud charges.
I'd like to think that you are right, but I fear that, instead, it simply would cause his supporters to dig their heels in even deeper, seeing their hero as a victim even more than he already portrays himself to be (as if that were possible). The harsh truth that we've learned over the last seven years or so is that there is no "right" way to handle Trump even when historical precedent, societal norms, truth, and common sense come into play, as they simply do not apply to him and his movement as if a magic spell or a deal with the devil were in place. It seems that they finally will burn out only when faced with the ultimate enemy: time. The questions are how soon, and after how much damage has been done.
I kind of agree. I am not sure even making him look ridiculous would break the spell. They are so heavily invested, it's like they are one and the same.
There's a lot to this. I too look at 76-year-old Trump and think: "At least the clock is ticking..."
And I don't see Christie as some Trump-slaying messiah who will bring him down for good. But I think he's capable of doing some real damage, while (importantly) puncturing Trump's aura of invincibility. The one thing I'm pretty confident of is that he *won't* slip into the futile old strategy of "Maybe if we just ignore Trump and avoid poking the bear, he'll go away..."
And the battle isn't for Trump's hardcore supporters. They're not leaving Trump, and will in fact double down if they see him attacked. The battle is for the many Rs out there who don't particularly want Trump but maybe think he's inevitable—or just dislike the Libs enough to rally around Trump in the name of supporting the team and spiting the other guys. I think the key is wounding Trump enough that he no longer looks so strong (much less inevitable)—thus opening up some space for other candidates to at least compete.
It’s hard to land blows. He’s a deflector. “No puppet. You’re the puppet.” I’m rubber, you’re glue. He insists on getting the last word and visibly pouts if he is silenced by the moderator. He has the debating skills of a toddler, but still wins every debate—in the eyes of his supporters. It’s vexing.
"Hang on Mr. [Moderator]. Donald, are you seriously expecting the American people to accept, "Nuh-uh, you are!" as a legitimate response? Is that why Putin treated you like his bitch?"
Ridiculous? No. They're captivated by a lift-wearing, makeup caked, cotton candy swirled tub of crap. That ship has long-ago sailed.
Pathetic? Yeah, sorta.
Weak? Kryptonite. If you can puncture his aura of invincibility, I think that goes a long way towards breaking the spell. No one has really gone after him in a vicious, humiliating, sustained manner.
I forget where I read it, but some commenter said that Christie should just start calling Trump "Donnie OneTerm", which I thought had a nice, biting quality.
Ha, not bad. Has kind of a Jersey-style wise-guy sound to it too. Though to be completely honest, I think Christie can do better. Trump uses name-calling because he's not that bright but it's one thing he has a certain lizard-brain instinct for. Christie is actually smart. He was a prosecutor. I see him landing some real verbal body-blows without having to mimic Trump's thing with the nicknames.
I'd LOVE to see Christie on a stage attacking Trump. Christie is a bully, too. Deep down, bullies are cowards. My fear: Christie immediately backs down after Trump's first counter attack. My hope: both Christie and Trump simultaneously wither under their fear of the other's attack and turn into metaphorical puddles of pudding.
LOL, what an image. (Don't tell Ron DeSantis... it'll make him hungry.)
I really don't see Christie backing down this time. Whatever else he is, he's smart. He knows kowtowing to Trump (in hopes of winning his favor or at least avoiding his wrath) didn't work for anyone last time. And I bet it kills him to remember how he himself was reduced to looking like Trump's little b!tch at certain points. I think he'll go scorched-earth all the way, and I look forward to it.
As a New Jersey resident (and someone who watched him humiliate himself for Trump not that long ago) I can attest that Chris Christie is... not without his objectionable qualities. But if he's committing to the Trump-antagonist role, as it seems he is, I DO want to see him up on that debate stage. Out of everyone realistically in the picture, he's the one who stands a chance to really pummel Trump with some smart, bruising attack lines. You remember what he did to Marco Rubio. Needless to say, Trump is not Marco Rubio. But Christie can be just brutal, and someone needs to be just brutal to Trump.
Christie could actually fill the fantasy role that I had in my head for Liz Cheney. There are all sorts of obvious problems with this idea (that's why it's a fantasy) but at one point I pictured her running a kamikaze campaign just so she could get up onstage with Trump and rake him over the coals.
Christie won't see himself as a kamikaze. He'll think he can win. Whatever. But even if he goes nowhere in the race, he can be very effective in the role of wounding and diminishing Trump on the debate stage.
I would like to see Trump pummeled by anyone for any reason, but what's the end game here? Can Christie hurt Trump to the point that he loses the primary? Then, who will the Republican candidate be? I'm terrified of someone just as bad as Trump but with a better chance of winning in the general.
I'd probably just file that under "agree to disagree." I completely agree that the GOP is a dumpster fire with many reprehensible figures who shouldn't get near the presidency. But in my view, Trump is uniquely, head-and-shoulders worse than any of them. This is an ongoing disagreement that's been hashed out in a lot of places, so I don't particularly want to repeat it here. But yes, that would be MY end game: anyone but Trump. As bad as some of the others are: anything to keep Trump out of the White House.
Christie is a mean little SOB and I think he'd like nothing more than being a weasel in the 2024 Republican hen house.
Which is why Trump (and the RNC) isn't doing debates.
We'll see. I think it's too early to know how that will play out. I don't think it's in the RNC's interest to put all its eggs in Trump's basket. (The RNC has to "manage" Trump the way someone needs to "manage" your most difficult relative at Thanksgiving, so he doesn't ruin everything... but privately I doubt they're very keen, or positive about his general election chances, at this point.)
For better or (mostly) worse, lots of folks run for president mainly to raise their profile—to sell a book, angle for a TV gig, or build name recognition for future races. Those candidates will NOT pass up their opportunity for nationally televised debates. I'm willing to bet they'll happen, even if Trump won't take part (which I have my doubts about anyway). And if Trump's not there, I'm pretty sure Christie will just pummel him in absentia.
The RNC has never been able to "manage" Trump in the past. Why would you imagine they could do it now?
Oh, I don't think they can – not in any big-picture sense of getting him to behave like a civilized human being or sane, constructive politician.
What I mean is that they're constantly maneuvering and placating him to keep him from destroying the Republican party. That's the threat: If Trump decides the GOP has crossed him, he'll turn third-party, wrecking the Republicans' chances in 2024 and maybe beyond. So the RNC is basically his hostage. Privately, the RNC most likely desperately wishes he were gone, but they have to stay on his good side. That's what I meant by "managing."
I take part of it back. Just read that the RNC's second debate will be at the Reagan Library. Nothing on whether Trump will go. I think he's already said he won't do debates.
Well if Trump said it, it must be the truth... ;-)
Just joshing. Again, I think it's too early to know. If Trump decides at some point that debating would be in his interests, or he just can't stand the FOMO, he WILL devise some excuse for changing his mind. Count on it. Making a statement has never once locked Trump into following through on it.
All true. Depends in part on who he's facing. Last time, everyone he faced, except for Hilary, pretty much folded when he began attacking them. This time? Wasn't Christie coaching him for the 2020 debates? Christie, so far, seems to be fighting against him. Not holding much hope that he continues. Pence will fold, so will the others probably. Ronnie? Depends. But the fact that he signed several of his most controversial bills almost behind closed doors doesn't exactly say much for his courage. Personally, I think he's all talk and bluff. He's riding high because he's got a tame legislature. The fact that he's losing populated parts of FL to Ds isn't helping him. And I think Disney is just getting started. Not to mention if FL gets another Andrew or Ian and he does nothing, he'll be toast. Which, again, leaves Trump in charge of the party.
But the Victim-In-Chief will eschew the opportunity, instead crow from the sidelines to his red-meat cultists.
Christie is deeply awful and a bully. He made the Staties his praetorian guard and worked ti destroy public education
Not wrong. Never said I wanted him to be president (I don't). Doesn't mean he can't be quite useful as a Trump-pummeler.
Sounds like he understands what makes Trump tick. Let the two jerks battle it out.
As a NY resident, I fear that Christie and Trump have figuratively buried too many bodies together. Is Christie going to attack Trump for gutting Atlantic City? For abandoning his casinos to bankruptcy? To stiffing all his contractors? To over-inflating the worth of his NJ casinos to the tax man?
Christie won't mention any of Trump's crimes in NJ because all this lawlessness happened with his permission. This is all kayfabe. Otherwise, Christie would be wondering why NJ isn't bringing Trump up on tax fraud charges.
I voted for Christie in his first primary for governor. but he really is an amoral thug. Not Trumpian - but only because he is smart and knows better.
I think you nailed it. Just said something sort of similar above.
I'd like to think that you are right, but I fear that, instead, it simply would cause his supporters to dig their heels in even deeper, seeing their hero as a victim even more than he already portrays himself to be (as if that were possible). The harsh truth that we've learned over the last seven years or so is that there is no "right" way to handle Trump even when historical precedent, societal norms, truth, and common sense come into play, as they simply do not apply to him and his movement as if a magic spell or a deal with the devil were in place. It seems that they finally will burn out only when faced with the ultimate enemy: time. The questions are how soon, and after how much damage has been done.
I kind of agree. I am not sure even making him look ridiculous would break the spell. They are so heavily invested, it's like they are one and the same.
There's a lot to this. I too look at 76-year-old Trump and think: "At least the clock is ticking..."
And I don't see Christie as some Trump-slaying messiah who will bring him down for good. But I think he's capable of doing some real damage, while (importantly) puncturing Trump's aura of invincibility. The one thing I'm pretty confident of is that he *won't* slip into the futile old strategy of "Maybe if we just ignore Trump and avoid poking the bear, he'll go away..."
And the battle isn't for Trump's hardcore supporters. They're not leaving Trump, and will in fact double down if they see him attacked. The battle is for the many Rs out there who don't particularly want Trump but maybe think he's inevitable—or just dislike the Libs enough to rally around Trump in the name of supporting the team and spiting the other guys. I think the key is wounding Trump enough that he no longer looks so strong (much less inevitable)—thus opening up some space for other candidates to at least compete.
Making Trump look pathetic/ridiculous to his cult members is how the spell becomes broken.
It’s hard to land blows. He’s a deflector. “No puppet. You’re the puppet.” I’m rubber, you’re glue. He insists on getting the last word and visibly pouts if he is silenced by the moderator. He has the debating skills of a toddler, but still wins every debate—in the eyes of his supporters. It’s vexing.
He need to be called on that.
"Hang on Mr. [Moderator]. Donald, are you seriously expecting the American people to accept, "Nuh-uh, you are!" as a legitimate response? Is that why Putin treated you like his bitch?"
Ridiculous? No. They're captivated by a lift-wearing, makeup caked, cotton candy swirled tub of crap. That ship has long-ago sailed.
Pathetic? Yeah, sorta.
Weak? Kryptonite. If you can puncture his aura of invincibility, I think that goes a long way towards breaking the spell. No one has really gone after him in a vicious, humiliating, sustained manner.
I forget where I read it, but some commenter said that Christie should just start calling Trump "Donnie OneTerm", which I thought had a nice, biting quality.
I love that cuz it's mafia like Donnie Two Toes and he has the the value system of a mob boss.
Isn't Trump already "Donny Two-Scoops"?
I love it. Maybe also Bankruptcy King to add some extra seasoning.
Ha, not bad. Has kind of a Jersey-style wise-guy sound to it too. Though to be completely honest, I think Christie can do better. Trump uses name-calling because he's not that bright but it's one thing he has a certain lizard-brain instinct for. Christie is actually smart. He was a prosecutor. I see him landing some real verbal body-blows without having to mimic Trump's thing with the nicknames.
Christie is a rich kid from the burbs
Not really...he's from the burbs though
Trump's a mega rich baby from Park Ave.
Trump's a wannabe from Queens.
Yeah, but he likes to play a wise-guy on TV. And he is genuinely pugnacious, burbs or no burbs.
That's the sort of thing that would absolutely get under his skin and stay there. It would catch on, too which is even better.
Someone could write a catchy song. It might even get to top ten.
Randy Rainbow could do some excellent work here…
What do you think about this for the music?
https://youtu.be/wwIYSofgpY0
Ha ha.
Honestly, I can almost hear Randy parodying this right now!
We can have Annette Funicello sing the one for DeSantis: Ronnie NoTerm.
I'd LOVE to see Christie on a stage attacking Trump. Christie is a bully, too. Deep down, bullies are cowards. My fear: Christie immediately backs down after Trump's first counter attack. My hope: both Christie and Trump simultaneously wither under their fear of the other's attack and turn into metaphorical puddles of pudding.
I don't think so Mike. Christie has an axe to grind. Trump almost killed him with covid. He will be like Michael Cohen: "Vengeance is mine."
LOL, what an image. (Don't tell Ron DeSantis... it'll make him hungry.)
I really don't see Christie backing down this time. Whatever else he is, he's smart. He knows kowtowing to Trump (in hopes of winning his favor or at least avoiding his wrath) didn't work for anyone last time. And I bet it kills him to remember how he himself was reduced to looking like Trump's little b!tch at certain points. I think he'll go scorched-earth all the way, and I look forward to it.
The RDS thing is why I picked "pudding." :)