Midterms impact on Christie's chances at the nomination?

[Mr. Morden]

Obviously, one big impact the midterms will have on the race for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination is that they'll determine the fate of Scott Walker.  Either he'll win and remain a potential candidate, or he'll lose and ascend into the George Allen afterlife.

But aside from that, you have the fact that Christie is head of the RGA, and we have numerous very close governor's races this time around.  What kind of result for the GOP in the governor's races would constitute a "win" for Christie, in that big $ donors would be impressed, and consider him to have done a good job at running such a nationwide campaign (of sorts)?  And conversely, what kind of result would constitute a failure for him?

[Ljube]

R+1 or no change. D+2 would be expected, so no impact.

[Mister Mets]

The major benchmark is to have no net losses (It's okay for him if Republicans lose Pennsylvania, Maine and Florida, if they gain Massachusetts, Arkansas and Illinois.)

He could always blame incumbents for losing, although that's an argument that's better to avoid.

It's also going to be important for him that financial disclosures in Wisconsin indicate sufficient support for Walker.

[whanztastic]

Only impact is if Walker survives.

[ShadowRocket]

As the Republicans lost only two incumbents and were able to pick up some governorships, I'd say last night provided a pretty good boost for Christie's. Despite his other flaws, he does have some credibility now in terms of being able to run a national campaign as far as the GOP donors are concerned. 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As the Republicans lost only two incumbents and were able to pick up some governorships, I'd say last night provided a pretty good boost for Christie's. Despite his other flaws, he does have some credibility now in terms of being able to run a national campaign as far as the GOP donors are concerned. 

Of course it also helped Walker.

[ShadowRocket]

As the Republicans lost only two incumbents and were able to pick up some governorships, I'd say last night provided a pretty good boost for Christie's. Despite his other flaws, he does have some credibility now in terms of being able to run a national campaign as far as the GOP donors are concerned. 

Of course it also helped Walker.

Defintely

[King]

Christie was a down and out GOP's idea of a candidate that can win. Empowered GOP will want someone to the right of Ted Cruz.

Jeb and Christie are sunk

[Ljube]

Christie was a down and out GOP's idea of a candidate that can win. Empowered GOP will want someone to the right of Ted Cruz.

Jeb and Christie are sunk

It is not possible. Priebus and his moderators will sink Cruz in RNC orchestrated debates.

Expect only establishment candidates for 2016.

[RINO Tom]

He's still my pick and preferred candidate to get the nomination...

[King]

Christie was a down and out GOP's idea of a candidate that can win. Empowered GOP will want someone to the right of Ted Cruz.

Jeb and Christie are sunk

It is not possible. Priebus and his moderators will sink Cruz in RNC orchestrated debates.

Expect only establishment candidates for 2016.

Cruz is a little too smart for that.

[RINO Tom]

Meh ... we always hear how the primary electorate is more conservative, but I think we are a bit too influenced by the crazies who attend the debates and yell on TV.  Time after time, the far right candidate doesn't get the nomination.  Ted Cruz is most certainly far right.  Plus, he'll split votes with some SoCon populist (who then has the nerve to call another Republican a RINO!  LOL) like Huckabee or Santorum or Palin and probably another Tea Partier, too.  Then you have Rand taking away votes ... the "Establishment" will rally behind one candidate earlier than the rest, IMO.

[Mister Mets]

Yesterday was his best day since reelection.

Republican gains were impressive, with fewer than expected losing incumbents, and some surprise wins (Maryland!)

Walker won reelection nicely, so Christie could avoid any claims of sabotaging Walker's campaign by arguing the money was needed more in Florida, Massachusetts and Illinois.

Two potential opponents, Walker and Kasich, can point to their own reelections as proof of their own electability, but it takes a bit more than that to become a top-tier contender.

[King]

Meh ... we always hear how the primary electorate is more conservative, but I think we are a bit too influenced by the crazies who attend the debates and yell on TV.  Time after time, the far right candidate doesn't get the nomination.  Ted Cruz is most certainly far right.  Plus, he'll split votes with some SoCon populist (who then has the nerve to call another Republican a RINO!  LOL) like Huckabee or Santorum or Palin and probably another Tea Partier, too.  Then you have Rand taking away votes ... the "Establishment" will rally behind one candidate earlier than the rest, IMO.

They generally don't get the nomination because they split votes amongst each other. In in a pure McCain vs Huckabee and Romney vs Santorum election from Iowa on with no other candidates, I think Huckabee and Santorum would've won or at least dragged it on like Clinton-Obama.  Hangers-on like Perry and Gingrich made it easier Romney to advance.

I think Ted Cruz is dangerous because he could be a unifying voice among the far-right. For has crazy as he can be ideological, he doesn't make actual gaffes and he's such a dominant presence that he would stop any other conservative on his level from running.

[Bull Moose Base]

Meh ... we always hear how the primary electorate is more conservative, but I think we are a bit too influenced by the crazies who attend the debates and yell on TV.  Time after time, the far right candidate doesn't get the nomination.  Ted Cruz is most certainly far right.  Plus, he'll split votes with some SoCon populist (who then has the nerve to call another Republican a RINO!  LOL) like Huckabee or Santorum or Palin and probably another Tea Partier, too.  Then you have Rand taking away votes ... the "Establishment" will rally behind one candidate earlier than the rest, IMO.

They generally don't get the nomination because they split votes amongst each other. In in a pure McCain vs Huckabee and Romney vs Santorum election from Iowa on with no other candidates, I think Huckabee and Santorum would've won or at least dragged it on like Clinton-Obama.  Hangers-on like Perry and Gingrich made it easier Romney to advance.

I think Ted Cruz is dangerous because he could be a unifying voice among the far-right. For has crazy as he can be ideological, he doesn't make actual gaffes and he's such a dominant presence that he would stop any other conservative on his level from running.

The far right candidate loses 'time after time" if you literally mean 2008 and 2012, the 2 times when the GOP nomination was remotely as open as it now is. And if you look closer…

Huckabee 2008 was no Cruz. He was a very poor fundraiser. Cruz is very good. And his non-social policies were considered liberal by many conservatives. Kasich is a better comparison for Huckabee 2016 than Cruz.

In 2012, even with splitting, what was the moment the 2012 field was stacked with the most conservatives? Before Herman Cain dropped out. Before he did so, he polled with big leads even with all those conservatives in the race. And before that Rick Perry polled even bigger leads with all those conservatives in the race. Conservatives are better at unifying around a candidate than people here seem to understand. And the reason they each collapsed had nothing to do with splitting. For Rick Perry, it had to do with his being too liberal on immigration and then a bad debater/campaigner. For Cain, it had to do with a sex scandal. Then when there were fewer, Gingrich was sunk by corruption. And Santorum was hobbled by Gingrich refusing to quit but also by being a bad candidate who said he didn't care what the unemployment rate was.

Cruz has none of the problems that sank past conservatives. It doesn't mean he'll win. But it does mean their winning matters now.

[King]

Yes, Cruz is not going to fail at GOP Debates. He says the right things and knows how to draw attention to himself. If Priebus and Co try to defeat them, it will be they whose heads get chopped off.

This nomination is Ted Cruz's for the taking. I firmly believe it.

[Likely Voter]

Cruz can do well but will he fall prey to the same thing that hit so many other conservatives and that is too many other conservatives splitting the vote. He has doe deal with Perry (who people continue to underestimate), Carson (who is going to be popular), Paul (who has appeal beyond his father's libertarian base), and maybe even Huckabee (who will scoop up the evangelicals).

So will 2016 be like so many other years where the conservatives duke it out and a 'moderate' mainstreamer like Christie just sails past them.   Of course if Bush and Christie are both in, then they will have duke it out for that vote and we could see a conservative consolidate before one of them does.