Are Chris Christie's Problems with the Republican Base Exageratted?

[ShadowRocket]

We all know how since last October it has been a major talking point in regards to 2016 speculation, that Chris Christie seriously damaged, possibly destroyed, his prospects of winning the Republican nomination when he commended President Obama on his help with the Hurricane Sandy relief. And how since then, calling out House Republicans for delaying passage of a relief bill and snubbing a social conservatives gathering for a meeting with Bill Clinton has only made the problem worse.

Which leads me to ask, does anyone else think these actions are being exagerrated in terms of their impact?

I mean, John McCain and Mitt Romney arguably committed greater "sins" against the Republican Party. McCain was a thorn in the side of Bush during his first term, was suggested as a running mate for John Kerry, and supported immigration reform with Ted Kennedy. Romney of course put in place the prototype for Obamacare in MA and changed his position on important issues to the base everytime he ran for something. Christie's violations seem pretty minor compared to those two.

Granted, the perception of being a moderate will hurt him in the primaries, but he's been a pretty center-right governor, and if the conservative base can't rally around a single candidate, and I'm not sure it can, it seems to me that Christie should be able to follow the McCain/Romney path to the nomination.

[ShadowRocket]

Republicans hate Obama more than they ever hated Kerry or Clinton.

Look at what happened when Crist hugged Obama. Now Christie has done that, and beyond. Even seeming to side with Obama while snubbing Romney in the last few weeks of the election. And continuing to support Obama and attack other Republicans.

In a sane country, this shouldn't hurt Christie. But it really has. He has stronger approval ratings from Democrats... who will easily be persuaded to vote Democrat again if Christie ever makes it to be nominee (which he won't, unless the GOP radically transforms by Election Day 2016).

Which Clinton are you refering to? Regardless of which one, the GOP hates them just as much as they do Obama. The reason why that hate may've subsided for the moment is by virtue of neither one being Obama, but it'll be riled up once again the moment Hillary formally announces.

Still I don't see how the examples you've cited are any worse than what McCain or Romney did to piss off the base in their own respective circumstances. If anything I would say Romney did the most to accomplish this, out of the three, with providing the template for Obamacare. Which has pretty much been the bane of the GOP's existance for the last several years.

[ShadowRocket]

I think so. Most of his problems with the base are over his behavior, not necessarily actions he's taken as Governor, and could be washed away once he starts campaigning as a conservative Republican.

Do you really think his Tea-Party opponents (for the sake of argument, let's suppose Rand Paul runs) will let the base forget Chris Christie's transgressions against GOP orthodoxy -and worse, his (sometimes even physical) closeness to President Obama?  I think you underestimate the potency of the argument offered by the true believers that the GOP has tried going 'moderate' the last couple of times -and both times they lost.  And they will not hesitate to point out that McCain and Romney lost because they weren't right-wing enough, that now is a time to nominate one of their own, a man (or woman) of spotless adherence to conservative principles.  

Judging by what has happened to Marco Rubio's 2016 chances (regardless of the fate of immigration reform in Congress), I would not hold out hope that the saner elements of the GOP will win out yet again with Chris Christie as your nominee.  

The thing is though that in order for the primaries to produce a Tea Part nominee, the conservatives will have to unite behind a single candidate. In a field that could potentially have Rubio, Paul, Santorum, Walker, Cruz, Perry, and possibly others, I'm just not sure that'll happen. All while Christie will have the moderates and indepedents to himself. 

I'm not denying that he'll have problems, but again, I just don't see how Christie's transgressions against GOP orthodoxy are anyworse than those of McCain or Romney. Especially since with his, he has a pretty simple defense of why should his constituents have had to suffer for political reasons. Which seems pretty sound when compared with Romney trying to explain Romneycare as a states right issue.