Christie’s Huge Gamble
By Robert Ringer - Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Aside and apart from its being the dirtiest profession known to mankind, politics is also a game of risk taking. Thoreau described voting as “a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it.”
But it isn’t just voters who place bets. Politicians do it all the time. Which bills to back and which ones to reject? Which issues to support and which ones to fight against? And, above all, which of their fellow candidates to endorse when election time rolls around — which is now pretty much 365 days a year.
Yesterday, Chris Christie placed a lot of chips on the line when he officially endorsed the Republican Party’s latest version of John McCain — none other than the Mitt. It’s a gamble that could have a major impact on Christie’s political career — especially if he ever decides to run for president.
Because of his positions on such hot-button issues as immigration, gun control, and abortion, the New Jersey governor had already convinced a lot of people that he’s a closet liberal. Even so, there were still many — such as Ann Coulter — who were true believers when it came to Christieism. But if there was any doubt about where the man stands ideologically, the Romney endorsement put a huge exclamation point on his liberal slant.
Give the man credit, he took a big political gamble, one that could pay off big if Romney becomes president — especially if he chooses Christie as his running mate. But my guess is that Christie will live to regret his decision to endorse the man tea partiers love to hate.
I still believe that true conservatives (not establishment Republican conservatives) will find a way — any way — to prevent Romney from winning the Republican nomination. And if that happens, it could also put an end to any long-term presidential aspirations Christie may have had.
It’s all kind of ironic considering that Chris Christie is the guy who, in an effort to put to rest speculation that he might run for president, asked the question, “What do I have to do outside of threatening to commit suicide to convince people I’m not running?” Maybe it was a self-fulfilling prophesy.
You have permission to reprint this article so long as you place the following wording at the end of the article:
Copyright © 2012 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.
To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.
Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints. Make your case passionately, but please keep your comments civil and to the point (150 words or less). Obscene, profane, abusive, or off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.
If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion. Thanks for your participation.
14 Responses to “Christie’s Huge Gamble”
Leave a Reply
1500 characters maximum.
In a horse race why should one wait until just before wagering closes to place their bet? Because the odds can change dramatically between post time and close of betting.
Only fools don’t consider the odds when handicapping a race. Christie may have calculated the odds when backing the Mitt, but hey, it’s way too early!
so true. have you heard of intrade? not the first such futures (prediction) market – there are or is one that facilitates play by play trades in various sports – but seems very well done. think there was a 60-minutes episode on them.
http:// http://www.intrade.com /jsp/intrade/trading/t_index.jsp
In a horse race why should one wait until just before wagering closes to place their bet? Because the odds can change dramatically between post time and close of betting.
Only fools don’t consider the odds when handicapping a race. Christie may have calculated the odds when backing the Mitt, but hey, it’s way too early to place your bet.
If we’re lucky, there is a nice winnowing taking place in this political primary season; maybe, just maybe we’re getting to discover who these people really are.
Closet liberals [common vernacular, not in the classical sense], hidden agendas, schemers, tricksters and snake oil are in the mix. How about a few of these questions for the debaters to help in the vetting?
- How do you feel about a country which says it does not believe in involuntary servitude (slavery) having an income tax?
- Do you believe the War Powers Act to be constitutional?
- If elected President would you preserve the Patriot Act or would you work to repeal it?
- Which among the nations would you consider our most trusted 3 allies and why?
- Do you approve of the Executive Order system currently in place and why or why not?
- Do you believe that a candidate for President or a President’s religion should be a personal matter or a public matter?
- If elected President would you continue the common use of the term “democracy” or would you prefer to use “constitutional republic”…or perhaps “CR” for short?
- Are any of the current Executive Branch cabinet positions unnecessary or irrelevant and if so which ones and why?
…
Sorry Teapartiers, Libertarians, Constitutional Conservatives, and all other lovers of freedom and liberty, but we’re toast.
After watching the 3rd or 4th replay of the “Mitt Romney vs the world” presidential debate last night, topped off with the announcement by that snake in the grass from the bastion of freedom & capitalism, New Jersey, it now seems evident that Bush’s clone has been unofficially anointed as the Republican version of the “chosen one”, and it’s enough to make you barf. The situation reminds me of that sage quote from Hegel, “The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.” So back we go to square one with a tweedledee vs tweedledum presidential election.
So when will we ever learn? And the answer is: Never — because it’s not about learning. It’s all about stealing. Huh? That’s right boys and girls. It’s all about thievery and what’s called the “something for nothing” mentality. This concept was best pointed out by Robert in “Restoring the American Dream”, and he’s been trying to help us understand this notion for many decades now (hmmm, are we that old?). You know it better by that old adage of, “A taking from B to give to C” (correctly restated as: A stealing from B to illegally give to C for the power to buy votes). This isn’t complicated and it’s all you really need to know about government and politics. Until the human species adopts the idea that stealing from others is immoral and wrong we will continue to plunge down the porcelain drain. It’s really just that simple, really.
Amen Stephan F. I’m afraid you’re right.
< So when will we ever learn? And the answer is: Never — because it’s not about learning. It’s all about stealing.
and the parliamentary procedural employed, this dirt patch, is "democracy".
which also applies to word definitions: a definition is what the majority says it is : a robber, with his one "vote" is just a robber : 51% of the 50% who vote are "citizens".
how to get people to "interpret" dictionaries as literally as some (too many) do their bibles?
what's the scrabble equivalent of fire & brimstone & "i'm so special" annointedness/exceptionalism?
triple word scores aren't enough, that's proven……
a sort of droit de cuissage,(or,jus primae noctis): who shall fertilize the young, wet sponges first? and build up those strong thighs? obviously, parents who recognize & respect reality, will need to pull their kids out of the gov reeducation camps. "if we can't get them out, we'll breed them out…."
stop being bred, and do your own breeding, in other words…artificial insemination is the beginning of all those synthetic ism's – including euphemisms (robbing is____, voting is _____) – i wrote of yesterday……
@Stephan and Scott,
Agreed. Rombama is the anointed of the RINOstablishment and the MSM.
Once he wins the nomination, the Dem’s will be able to run Bush’s 2004 campaign commercials, changing nothing save the names of the candidates.
What will Rombama do? Promise to diss conservatives, and call us T-bleepers in private? In exchange for what?
Bailing out the big banks and their credit default swaps at the cost of almost every opportunity for almost every kid in the industrial world for the next 30 years?
What would you bet the 3d world dictators club is drooling over the possibility of knowing their campaign contributions will be profitable if the pick heads and tails…
Just
< Bailing out the big banks and their credit default swaps at the cost of almost every opportunity for almost every kid in the industrial world for the next 30 years?
this wholesale theft by the democratic more of the democratic less was grain alcohol on the fire of mean reversion.
one of the problems with oligarchies (democracies) is that it puts the meanest, most reverted in charge, thus guaranteeing a bonfire of the vanities (and books and heretics and, and, and…self destruction writ large…).
My the way, as an aside, an old nemesis of mine has come up with the Democratic strategy for 2012:
Chucky Schumer’s new progressive talking points are going to be as follows: Democrats will blame any Republican opposition to their agenda on “tea party economics,” a “tea party double-dip recession” and “tea party gridlock.”
Got to hand it to Chucky for his mastery of propaganda.
Voting has more of an “[im]moral tinge” to it nowadays, I’d say. And the field of politics is a very darkly painted, indeed.
It’s no surprise that Jabba the Hutt sided with Romney the RINO, who, after the debate last night, is still looking like a front runner.
Tricky Perry is looking so defeated—almost time to pop a cork and celebrate his implosion— although, knowing Tricky, I wouldn’t count him out of the race just yet.
Newt was the consummate politician, last night; Did you notice how he attacked Ben The Bankster Bernanke? Newt’s cunning awareness and his two-steps-ahead cognition of where, when and at whom future public wrath will be directed is unmatched.
Of course, the 999-loud-mouth banking-huckster was busy hawking his tax-con throughout the debate. However, IRS agent, Michele Backmann (sic), quickly pointed out the fact that the 999 tax plan looked more like tax deviltry of 666; Which, by the way, is what Alex Jones has been saying from day one. Of course, that fool-clown, Glenn Beck, loved the idea of opening a new revenue stream through 999. Jon Huntsmen ( aka Jon Hunts(suckers)) thought the 999 tax scam was “the price of a pizza.” Funny, yes, but, as you well know, it’s much more than that, Jon.
You’ve summed them up quite well. Soooo . . . , where does that leave us? Ruling out the fairy-tale dark horse, we have to make do with one of them. I frankly don’t see the visciousness that is demonstrated against the front-runner. If he is to be believed at all (and I know that may be a problem–but it IS politics) he’s as conservative as any of the others. Robert (and I) have in mind a more conservative candidate, but will one ever be elected to anything until the country is re-educated? And, I remember Goldwater, and I would like my horse to at least finish in the money; in fact it is imperative that there be a change in administration. A little reality please! Romney has the tools. With a little control from congress, wonders could happen. (As pragmatic as he is, he is NOT McCain.)
Ron Paul, frankly, is the only candidate at the debate last night who had a “moral tinge.” His unwavering stance on such issues as ending the Fed, Austrian economics, restoring liberty and telling the truth about The Military Industrial Complex has made him a modern-day hero, and placed him far, far above the other impostors, e.g. Jabba the Hutt and The Bankster Godfather Cain.
Too bad the ignorant, immoral electorate seems to prefer the immoral over the moral, the serf in lieu of the free man, the 666 tax scam of the devil instead of voluntary taxation of free-market capitalism. Yes, too bad that the suckers far outnumber the prescient(s) and allow the deceitful to remain triumphant.
@Stephan: Well said.