And Then There Was One...
Chris Christie stood up in front of the media today, pulled out a plastic dry-cleaning bag, and wrapped it around his head. He tightly knotted it, before anyone realized what he was up to, and then toppled over on the stage, gasping for breath. Within moments, he was dead, having suffocated himself before anyone could rush to his aid.
Well, no. That's not what happened. That whole previous paragraph is actually fiction. It was inspired, of course, by Christie's own words. He replied, to the ten-millionth time he got the question "Are you running for president?" from a bored and jaded media, with: "What do I have to do to convince you I'm not running? Commit suicide?!?" Or words to that effect (read: I am too lazy to look up this exact quote, but that's pretty close to it).
The media, of course, likely won't believe Christie -- at least until he says "No" several more times. Last week he gave a speech that created a media frenzy, and in the question-and-answer period responded to the twenty-millionth time he was asked exactly the same question that there was a "mashup" video available online of him saying "No" over and freakin' over again, and anyone who was interested in the answer should just go review this video. The media forgot to report this, and instead focused on what they decided was a more ambivalent answer to being asked the same question for the twenty-million-and-one-th time. "Christie Might Run!" was the headline they decided to go with. They were bored, quite obviously, and attacked with the ferocity of a shark pack with chum in the water. The fact that there actually was no actual chum didn't even seem to faze them.
To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld; you go into an election with the media you have, not the media you'd like to have.
Sigh.
Because the media is so obviously bored with reporting on actual political news, and because we are not their parents who can force them to clean up their room or go outside and play or do something else constructive, I'd like to offer up a prediction for the next week or so. Because there's one Republican left who could indeed jump in the race and make a big splash, but has yet to do so. And that Republican is not named "Rudy Giuliani." It is, in fact, the Mama Grizzly herself, Sarah Palin.
Now don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying she's going to run (or not run), at this point. What I am predicting is that rampant speculation about whether she'll run or not will be the next shiny, shiny object which distracts the media's attention.
The storyline would be perfect, and will go something like this: Sarah Palin has hung back and stayed out of the race so far because she is actually the most politically astute Republican out there. She resisted the urge to jump in early, knowing that by doing so she could avoid a lot of debates and a lot of early hassles. She has shrewdly watched the others vying for the "Tea Party candidate" label (or the "I'm not Mitt Romney" label, take your pick), as each of them fell by the wayside, one by one. Each in their turn caused a swoon among the media and among the voters, and each ultimately led to disappointment. Trump toyed with the idea (to get a better television contract). Cain was the flavor for one month. Pawlenty didn't measure up. The media loved Huntsman, but no matter how many exuberant "Huntsman's Perfect!" stories they ran, the Republican voters simply did not share this love. Bachmann made a lot of sound and fury, but eventually showed she was not crazy like a fox, but just downright crazy (on Fox News). Perry was going to be the party savior, but has been sinking like a big flat stone with white paint on it (so to speak). Christie caused a big commotion, but has now taken a pass. Throughout it all, Palin has sat back and mostly just watched and waited. She knows she's already got name recognition with every single Republican voter, and so didn't need to jump in early. She can now be the knight riding in at the very last minute to save the day, and there is simply nobody left for her to share the Tea Party spotlight with. She'll vault into second place status in the race immediately, and be the default "not Romney" candidate.
I just re-read that paragraph, and I'm close to even convincing myself, here. Like I said, the storyline would fall into place perfectly for a lazy and easily-distracted media. But, more seriously, I really kind of doubt she'd get in at this point. Palin could still surprise me (she is nothing if not eternally surprising), but I think the window for her to make this move has already shut. She had been saying she'd get in by the end of September, and here we are in October -- meaning she didn't even make her own timetable to stop the teasing and declare herself in or out.
We may watch as Herman Cain and Rick Perry vie for the Romney-challenger position. It's even conceivable that one of the others will surge in the primary voters' polls (Newt Gingrich or even Ron Paul could make a run at it). Maybe Mitt Romney will get caught in some gaffe or sticky position we haven't yet seen. But at least we're almost over the rampant "Who else will run?" speculation. Because with Christie out, there's only one possible candidate left to speculate about.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
I think Christie is the smartest of the bunch. He's waiting until 2016 when there's absolute certainty Obama will not be there.
The person who benefits the most from this is Cain. He seems to be the most likable candidate.
Yet he suffers from the flaw that his views are pretty radical for the general election. What Republicans may be deciding is that they want to wage the war of ideas rather than win the general election.
-David
The person who benefits the most from this is Cain. He seems to be the most likable candidate.
Yet he suffers from the flaw that his views are pretty radical for the general election. What Republicans may be deciding is that they want to wage the war of ideas rather than win the general election.
You mean "flaws" like he took on several businesses that were in the toilet and made the profitable again??
Flaws like that?? :D
I would also point out that Obama's Hope For Change platform was pretty radical for the general election..
And yet, here were are...
Michale.....
I think Christie is the smartest of the bunch.
“There’s no substitute for knowing how to lead. Everything else you can be taught. You can’t be taught how to lead and make decisions. Obama has failed the American people because he’s failed that absolute litmus test to be president of the United States, and that’s to know how to lead and decide, and he hasn’t done that.”
-Governor Christie
I would have to agree with your assessment, David. :D
Michale......
You mean "flaws" like he took on several businesses that were in the toilet and made the profitable again??
Flaws like that?? :D
I would have gone with his 999 plan but that's just me...
Bashi,
What's the problem with it??
As me and David discussed before, it rewards success instead of punishing success...
Apparently Cain has done SOMETHING right to be as successful a business man as he is...
The current Administration's plans don't amount to much and actually HARM the country and the economy..
Maybe it's time to try something new, eh??
I also like the Flat Tax idea. Makes it real simple for simpletons like me to understand...
The more I read about Cain, the more I like him... :D
Apparently, the majority of my fellow Floridians agree with me.. :D
Michale.....
Governor Christie could try giving a reason other than "I don't feel ready". Feelings change.
The next thing that distracts the MSM from doing their job might well might be a phantasmagorical Sarah Palin candidacy. Then again, it might be a literal shiny object. Or maybe it will turn out that Elian Gonzalez has a cousin named Citizen Rodriguez, who knows. Truth (or the stream of meaningless trivia that passes for truth in the media) is stranger than fiction could ever get away with.
What's the problem with it??
As akadjian said:
Yet he suffers from the flaw that his views are pretty radical for the general election...
Ends all payroll taxes
All? Does that mean Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment taxes?
Unites all tax payers so we all pay income taxes and no one pays payroll taxes
Does that mean no tax withholding per paycheck? That sounds like a terrible idea.
Ends the Death Tax
Features zero tax on capital gains and repatriated profits
His plan does more than rewards success. It entombs success through multiple generations...
National Sales Tax – 9%.
I want to raise your sales tax to 18%!
Now there is a campaign slogan...
Yea, if you pick and choose stuff out of context, of course it's going to sound bad...
Current circumstances call for bolder action.
The Phase 1 Enhanced Plan incorporates the features of Phase One and gets us a step closer to Phase two.
I call on the Super Committee to pass the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan along with their spending cut package.
The Phase 1 Enhanced Plan unites Flat Tax supporters with Fair tax supporters.
Achieves the broadest possible tax base along with the lowest possible rate of 9%.
It ends the Payroll Tax completely – a permanent holiday!
Zero capital gains tax
Ends the Death Tax.
Eliminates double taxation of dividends
Business Flat Tax – 9%
Gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders.
Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for payroll employed in the zone.
Individual Flat Tax – 9%.
Gross income less charitable deductions.
Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for those living and/or working in the zone.
National Sales Tax – 9%.
This gets the Fair Tax off the sidelines and into the game.
I don't see a problem with any of that..
Isn't a Flat Tax what progressives have been pushing for years??? Or do I have my zealots confused?? :D
Under the current system, the ONLY people who win are the accountants....
It's the middle class that gets royally screwed by the current system...
I thought ya'all were warriors for the Middle Class???
Seems to me, under Cain's system, the Middle Class makes out pretty good...
But then again, what do I know about economics, eh?? :D
Michale.....
Yea, if you pick and choose stuff out of context, of course it's going to sound bad...
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Bashi,
Thank you for illustrating my point so perfectly.. :D
Michale.....
If Cain is the GOP Nominee, it's going to be a real hoot to see conservatives try to paint liberals as "racist" because liberals disagree with Cain's ideas.. :D
Gonna be as fun as a pig poke at a burlesque show... :D
Michale.....
Michale [8] -
Flat tax is a favorite of the right, not the left.
Google "Steve Forbes campaign slogan" or something along those lines to see the history of the flat tax idea. Cain's 999 plan is just an expansion of the flat tax idea, in essence.
For someone making, say, $25K, the 999 plan would be a whopping increase in taxes. For the uber-wealthy (surprise!) it will be a massive tax break. And you betcha that will be pointed out, should Cain actually become the nominee.
-CW
CW,
Flat tax is a favorite of the right, not the left.
Ahhhh.. Thanx for the clarification.. It's so hard to keep all the agendas straight. :D
Me, personally.. I love the idea of a Flat Tax... The tax code is just WAY too complicated.. As I mention above, the ONLY people who win in this case are the accountants... Poor people can't afford accountants..
For someone making, say, $25K, the 999 plan would be a whopping increase in taxes. For the uber-wealthy (surprise!) it will be a massive tax break. And you betcha that will be pointed out, should Cain actually become the nominee.
As I said, that seems to me to be an incentive to become successful...
But whaddoooiiinooo.... :D
Michale.....
Palin's out....
Michale...
As I said, that seems to me to be an incentive to become successful.
If everyone would just be rich, we'd have no problems!!!
(If you couldn't tell that was sarcasm ... but that's basically Cain's platform. He doesn't think there are any problems in America, except some people are lazy.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20116087-503544.html
If everyone would just be rich, we'd have no problems!!!
No...
If everyone would pull their own weight and those who are lazy and wanting to live off the public dole would quit and get their lazy asses off the couch and to work, our problems would be small and manageable...
Michale.....
Hey Michale,
All kidding aside. Do you really think the problem is that people are sitting around on their lazy asses?
That's why we have almost 9+% unemployment?
Do you know anyone who was laid off? Talk to them. Ask them how hard it is to find a job. Or ask a recent college graduate where the rate of unemployment is much higher.
It's true there are lazy people. But the vast majority of people out of work would love to have work. They're doing what they can at part time jobs and picking up work here and there. But by and large the market is really rough.
Seriously.
And this is my exact problem with Herman Cain. In order to have competent government, you have to first accurately assess the issue.
Cain and many conservatives aren't even close. He's living in some other magical rich-person world where he has absolutely no idea what's going on.
And it's really easy to blame all your problems on the people who are out of work rather than actually work to create jobs.
Talk about lazy ...
-David
All kidding aside. Do you really think the problem is that people are sitting around on their lazy asses?
Not ALL people, of course...
But the vast majority of people out of work would love to have work.
While I would agree that the majority of people would love to have work, I would dispute the "vast" adjective.
And it's really easy to blame all your problems on the people who are out of work rather than actually work to create jobs.
It makes absolutely no sense to work to create jobs with the government in such disarray..
The government needs to create stability and confidence before business leaders will start hiring again...
Considering the utter incompetence of the Obama Administration and the mixed signals it sends, do you really blame the business leaders for holding off and seeing where the administration is finally going to land??
If it was YOUR livelyhood on the line and YOUR hard earned money on the line, would you want to make such a risky bet??
Of course you wouldn't. No logical or rational person would..
Michale....
It's true there are lazy people. But the vast majority of people out of work would love to have work. They're doing what they can at part time jobs and picking up work here and there. But by and large the market is really rough.
Nearly Half of U.S. Lives in Household Receiving Government Benefit
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/10/05/nearly-half-of-households-receive-some-government-benefit/
I know these are numbers that Republicans like to throw around to justify their arguments.
Have you thought about those numbers, Michale?
Here's a couple quick comments off the top of my head ...
Just 18.1% of households pay neither payroll nor federal income taxes and they are predominantly the nation’s elderly and poorest families
Do you want to put the elderly back to work? And how much can you really take from the poor?
Also, notice they include subsidized housing as assistance. Does this number include mortgage tax deductions? Because that's technically subsidized housing. WSJ doesn't say but I suspect this is the case.
Yunno who gets mortgage tax breaks? Lots of lazy people like me and, I suspect, you.
Yunno who else they include in the 46.4% pay no income tax statistic?
The wealthy who have found loopholes, the elderly, and kids under 18 with jobs.
As for the remaining folks ... yeah, it's f*ckin sad that they don't make enough to pay income tax.
I'd just ask you to think about the statistics and what the WSJ wants to accomplish. They want tax breaks for the wealthy. They also want access to the nation's retirement money. No surprise, right?
So of course they're going to present statistics in a way that tries to make it look like average people should pay more.
Don't be a sucker and fall for it!
-David
"There's lies, damn lies, and statistics." To paraphrase Mark Twain.
So of course they're going to present statistics in a way that tries to make it look like average people should pay more.
Just like the Left does with THEIR statistics to make it seem like the rich "don't pay their fair share"..
Are THOSE the statistics I should listen to???
Ya'all fault the GOP for so many mean and evil tactics, all the while forgetting that the Left does it too...
The difference between us is that I recognize the evil in BOTH ideologies.. You only see the evil in the Right's ideology..
Michale.....
Just like the Left does with THEIR statistics to make it seem like the rich "don't pay their fair share".
You mean statistics like capital gains are taxed at a 15% rate?
That seems like an easily confirmable fact.
All statistics should be questioned. It's the ones that hold up under questioning which you should listen to.
The difference between us is that you admit that your statistics and arguments don't hold up. But you think it's ok because you have an enemy that you're fighting. It's ok to use "hyperbole" and "spin" and to twist the truth when you're fighting an enemy who you've been told uses the same tactics.
You're right to question everything but don't blame the "LEFT" when your arguments don't hold up. Question your conclusions.
Is our economy really the fault of the "lazy poor"? Please.
-David
The difference between us is that you admit that your statistics and arguments don't hold up. But you think it's ok because you have an enemy that you're fighting. It's ok to use "hyperbole" and "spin" and to twist the truth when you're fighting an enemy who you've been told uses the same tactics.
Actually, ya'all did the exact same thing during the Bush years.. And ya'all STILL do it to support Obama..
WHY??
Why after all the mismanagement, the mistakes, the incompetence, why do you STILL support Obama??
Is our economy really the fault of the "lazy poor"? Please.
I never claimed it was..
Our economy is the fault of greedy Republicans and gross mismanagement and greed of the Democrats.
Would you dispute that statement??
And now you think that the Democrats' way is the best way forward, despite overwhelmingly factual evidence that the current Administration is completely incompetent..
Why do you think poll after poll after poll shows Obama's approval ratings in the dirt?? If the election were held today, Obama would lose to ANY Republican 47% to 41%...
WHY do you think that is???
Barring a major upheaval, it's beginning to look more and more like we'll have a Republican President and a Republican Congress...
We'll see what happens then... Things will likely get better because it's sure as hell they can't get much worse...
Michale
All statistics should be questioned. It's the ones that hold up under questioning which you should listen to.
It's not just MY statistics that don't hold up to questioning....
Just 18.1% of households pay neither payroll nor federal income taxes
51% of Households Pay No Income Tax; Share of Taxes Paid by Rich Growing Faster Than Income
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2011/05/senate-51-of-households.html
You are correct about one thing.. We can both provide polls and statistics up the wazoo to support our positions.
But one must look at the big picture and answer one simple question..
Are Americans better off today then they were before President Obama?
The answer is a clear and unequivocal NO...
Even President Obama himself said as much...
This being the facts of the issue, how can people NOT vote GOP this election??
Michale.....
I never claimed it was.
My apologies. I should have stated exactly what you said:
"If everyone would pull their own weight and those who are lazy and wanting to live off the public dole would quit and get their lazy asses off the couch and to work, our problems would be small and manageable."
The poor and unemployed would love to find work, there just are not jobs. So again, puh-leez.
It's not just MY statistics that don't hold up to questioning.
That 18.1 percent number was from your Wall Street Journal article.
So if you're questioning that, be careful, you are questioning your own statistics.
Our economy is the fault of greedy Republicans and gross mismanagement and greed of the Democrats. Would you dispute that statement?
Yes, I would. I would say it is due to the result of too much "supply side" economics, the influence of money on Washington, and too much deregulation (especially of Wall Street).
This is why I am for anyone who is proposing growing our economy, proper regulation, and fighting things like the Citizens' United decision to remove undue influence from our government.
-David
Making the claim that the economy is in the crapper because the rich don't "pay their fair share" of taxes is as ludicrous as saying the economy is in the crapper because the poor don't "pay their fair share"..
The funny thing is that the latter is more factually accurate than the former...
It seems to me that the economy being in the crapper has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with the complete and utter incompetence of the last three administrations...
Yes, I would. I would say it is due to the result of too much "supply side" economics, the influence of money on Washington, and too much deregulation (especially of Wall Street).
Brought on by....... greedy Republicans and gross mismanagement and greed of the Democrats.
This is why I am for anyone who is proposing growing our economy, proper regulation, and fighting things like the Citizens' United decision to remove undue influence from our government.
The ONLY reason the Left fights the Citizens' United ruling is because Corporations support GOP over the DP...
You can bet if the reverse were the case, Democrats would be protecting the ruling with everything they can...
Prove me wrong. Have the Democratic Party forgo, refuse and return ALL Corporate Donations and support...
Betcha can't.. :D
What does that tell you?? :D
Michale.....