Chris Christie and the audacity of mendacity

Here is New Jersey's Star-Ledger editorial board's Tom Moran, who's feeling rather uncharitable:

Most Americans don't know Chris Christie like I do, so it's only natural to wonder what testimony I might offer after covering his every move for the last 14 years….

My testimony amounts to a warning: Don't believe a word the man says.

If you have the stomach for it, this column offers some greatest hits in Christie's catalog of lies.

Don't misunderstand me. They all lie, and I get that. But Christie does it with such audacity, and such frequency, that he stands out.

Having catalogued Christie's greater lies — what the editorialist calls his state's "painful moments" — Moran then fingers Christie's press strategy:

[Network news reporters] are facing a crowded Republican field with more than a dozen contenders. They can't be expected to know this stuff. Which is why Christie prefers to sit down with the national press. It's easier to get away with these lies. For now.

What Christie has going for him are a) the GOP's adoration of rude behavior and b) the GOP base's susceptibility to Cyclopian pandering. From Christie, they'll get plenty of both. But what I fail to comprehend about Christie is precisely what I fail to comprehend about all other Republican comers:

Once the nomination is secured (which, notwithstanding his advantages, seems an exceedingly unlikely future for Christie), what then? How does any Republican nominee take the 2012 electoral map and improve on it in the red column? Is there a political strategist alive who honestly believes Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or Scott Walker has a shot at turning Pennsylvania red? Or Ohio? Or Wisconsin or Michigan or New Hampshire? At the utmost outside, Florida's 29 Electoral votes might be in play for Bush or Rubio, but there, the "improvement" would end. And 29 aren't nearly enough. (Neither, by the way, does it help to add Virginia's 13. In fact, one can also throw New Hampshire and Wisconsin in the red column, and a Republican still wouldn't make it.)

As for Christie, if he actually believes he could outperform Bush nationwide, then he's only lying to himself.

 

Comments

[Bob]

"[Network news reporters] are facing a crowded Republican field with more than a dozen contenders. They can't be expected to know this stuff."

Considering the money they still generate selling Gold Bond powder and Depends Underwear to the people who still watch network news I'd ask why the hell they can't be expected to know that stuff. The editorial says more about the stupidity and corporate bias of network media than anything else.

[Peter G]

I would say the answer is quite straightforward. Whoever gets the Republican nomination has a shot at the history books and a chance of becoming president if the Democrat, for whatever reason, drops dead. If not there is money to be made elsewhere.

[Bob]

Although, to their scant credit, Fox News has let Sarah Palin's contract expire. Maybe they're just making room for the next Republican VP candidate and hoping they're a little less dumb.