The Field
The piece on Chris Christie that Daniel Henninger published in this morning’s Wall Street Journal is worthy of attention. No one, to my knowledge, has described Christie’s appeal with comparable precision. “Politics,” he observes, “is the art of communication. Rick Perry tripped over his tongue in one debate, and the gods of polling cast him out.” Chris Christie, by way of contrast, is “a great communicator” worthy to be included among the “super salesmen of retail politics.”
Gov. Christie has come across the Hudson River a number of times to talk to the Journal's editorial-page writers. We've heard a lot of his high-velocity rhetoric. Often overlooked when he's performing this verbal magic is that about 80% of what Gov. Christie says is drab detail about New Jersey's budget, pension crisis, schools situation, property taxes and the rest. He flat-out knows New Jersey.
The admired Christie persona isn't just charisma, charm and smarts, attributes that adhere to many political rookies. Unlike rookies, almost all of the devastating punchlines Mr. Christie delivers are wrapped inside a substantive, detailed argument.
What Gov. Christie gives his audiences is the performance of a gifted federal attorney, which he was in New Jersey for six years. Prosecutors master facts and fashion them into a case for their side. No one in politics today matches facts to plain speaking better than Chris Christie.
And there lies the rub – for “with this stillborn presidential draft, Mr. Christie was being asked to perform without half his skill set, his mastery of facts.” Had he known “as much as Paul Ryan does about entitlements, ObamaCare, the details of the U. S. budget and federal tax policy, he’d have rolled over the incumbent like (insert your heavyweight metaphor here.” But, Henninger argues, Christie did not know the details, did not have adequate time to mug them up, and decided to punt.
I do not blame Christie. He knew that he was not ready. He doubted that he could get ready in time, and so he held back. Governor Mitch Daniels and Congressman Paul Ryan no doubt have their reasons for staying out of the race, but neither has as good an excuse as Christie. They are the men who flat-out know the federal budget, and they have left us to the mercy of candidates who have no such mastery of the facts.
There are, at least, two men in the race, and there may be a third. Mitt Romney is an accomplished administrator and an experienced executive. He is not quick-witted, and he is not much of a communicator, but he compensates for these defects by careful preparation. He is methodical in the extreme, and he is industrious. He is a man with a great multitude of plans.
Unfortunately, there is virtually no chance that Mitt Romney will seize on the crisis of the administrative entitlements state to articulate a substantive, detailed argument for beginning the long, complex process of dismantling it. Like most MBAs, he is, by instinct and training, a social engineer, and he is proud of Romneycare. We can be confident that he has no principled objection to the federal government dictating the shape of our toilets, the character of our light bulbs, and the way we live our lives. If the experts say that this bit of petty tyranny or that will improve our lives, you can be confident that Romney will jump on board. He has a great deal more in common with Herbert Hoover, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush than with Ronald Reagan, and in his enthusiasm for statist solutions he is to the left of everyone on this list. When, in Massachusetts, he embraced the individual mandate, he made it crystal clear that he is no friend of limited government.
The difference between Romney and Obama is that Romney is aware that we cannot spend what we do not have. He is the heir of Bob Dole: tax collector for the welfare state. And that is why both Davids – Frum and Brooks – favor his nomination. He is, they believe, the man to clean up after Obama. This was the role assigned the Republicans in the New Deal order. When the Democrats in their enthusiasm ran amok, the managerial progressives in the Republican Party were to come in and tidy up – which is what Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush père, and Bush fils did.
Rick Perry is also in the race. Like Romney, he is an experienced executive. Whether he is also an accomplished administrator is less clear. The governorship in New Jersey is the strongest executive position in state government found in the United States. Chris Christie has the means with which to make people dance, and he knows how to call the tune. The governorship in Texas is weak. The lieutenant governor wields more power. This fact, notwithstanding, Perry is a force – in part because of his longevity. No one in the history of Texas has been Governor as long as he has, and over time he has gained leverage. At this point, there is hardly anyone left in an appointed position in state government who owes his job to anyone else.
Even more to the point, Perry has accomplished something of real significance. He took on the trial bar. He beat them, and he managed to get tort reform passed. There are other Governors who have done comparable things – Scott Walker in Wisconsin, Mitch Daniels in Indiana, John Kasich in Ohio – but none of them are in the race. To this we can add that Perry is a genuine proponent of limited government on the federal level. When he says that he aspires to make the federal government as “inconsequential” in our lives as possible, he really means it.
Unfortunately, however, as a communicator, Perry makes Romney look like an aficionado. He “tripped over his tongue” not “in one debate,” as Daniel Henninger says, but in three. There is good reason to doubt whether he has mastery over the facts, and it is hard to imagine his articulating a substantive, detailed argument in defense of the policies he prefers. And without that ability he is bound to fail. We will have to see how he does in the next couple of debates. If he does not do better – a whole lot better – he will have disqualified himself.
This leaves Herman Cain – who has recently soared in the polls. He is an attractive man with a generous laugh. He, too, is an experienced executive, and he is an accomplished administrator. What he accomplished in the private sector is impressive, and he has a good knowledge of banking in general and of the federal reserve in particular. He is the “not-Romney” of the moment, and he deserves close scrutiny. I have misgivings concerning his ignorance of foreign affairs (which is considerable), and there are comments that he has made about Muslims and about the homoerotically inclined that are worrisome.
Cain’s communication skills are excellent, however, and his instincts are genuinely conservative. Whether he can articulate a detailed, substantive argument we do not yet know. If Perry trips over his tongue again and again, and if Cain turns out to be an empty suit with a golden tongue, we will be left with Romney – which is a sad commentary on the Republican Party. They don’t call it the stupid party for nothing.
- Comment (46)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Rudy Giuliani too, but nobody wants a guy as moderate as Rudy.
Oct '10
Re: The Field
The tea partiers showed bad judgment when they picked Bachmann over Pawlenty. And now they're souring on loudmouth Bachmann? Rick Perry can't talk straight and Herman Cain is more interested in promoting his book.
It's not the Republicans that are driving the stupidity.
Edited on Oct 6, 2011 at 7:19pmOct '10
Re: The Field
Henniger on Christie: "Feel free to believe he said "No" only because of organizational challenges. I think something purely political scared him off. It might behoove the hyper-energized conservative base to look in the mirror and ask why Chris Christie is only the latest to take a pass on the gauntlet."
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Perhaps the fact that the middle of the road GOP operatives have shown themselves to be nothing more than a pit stop on the leftward Nascar race to oblivion could be the issue?
Christie, like too many other GOP party favorites still has a comfort level with the statist left that the rest of us are not willing to embrace.
Sarah Palin, for her own reasons, believes that her gifts are better suited to influence rather than elective office. The good news is that we are left with Herman Cain, a rather good remaining option.
As for Romney, I agree with Katie O. There is no reason to accept the usual inferior Republican loser. Bob Dole redux is not a winning strategy.
Edited on Oct 6, 2011 at 7:48pmAug '10
Re: The Field
I'm not sure how we would do it but I think we need to ask Romney specific questions to address the concerns you outline. Unfortunately the debates and their 60 second response format with gotcha questions are not going to accomplish this. Is there any chance conservatives leaders could hold a forum like the one in SC a few weeks ago when an intelligent panel asked substantive questions with extended time for responses? This would either allow Romney to assure conservatives of his stances or cement the perception of him as a progressive.
You teach at Hillsdale - Romney's from Michigan - invite him up there for a little Q&A!
Speaking of Perry, I watched the Juliet Cuddy interview with him on O'Reilly last night where he tried to address the painted rock issue. The guy still could not string a complete sentence together. Unbelievable!
Sep '10
Re: The Field
The political challenge is to do something no post New Deal Republican has ever accomplished: to roll back the Hobbesian Leviathan state before it strangles the Republic and removes it from the world stage for good.
To say it requires cahones is an understatement. Do you remember what Governor Haley Barbour said about what they did in Mississippi with state expenditure reductions? Not slowing the rate of growth but absolute reductions in expenditures from year to year. That's no mean feat.
Jul '11
Re: The Field
I share Prof. Rahe's downheartedness over the mismatch between the gravity of the moment and the quality of our candidates. With Daniels, Ryan, Bush, Rubio, and now Christie all out, and the remaining field as it is, I keep thinking, "Is this it?" But the answer to that question is now clearly "Yes." I only hope that, if we are fortunate enough to beat Obama, and if, as seems most likely, Romney should win, Ryan et al. would push Romney in the right direction and genuinely start to fix our biggest problems. But that is certainly an optimistic view, as it is today painfully clear that leadership still needs to start in the Oval Office.
To John Marzan's suggestion that Christie was too "moderate": Chris Christie is a man who speaks with passion, clarity, and truth about what we all recognize as an existential crisis: a crumbling entitlements state that is dragging our economic vitality down with it. No one else in the field is doing this. If we fail to solve this crisis, we will no longer even have a space in which to fight about the issues on which you criticize Christie for being heretical.
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Frozen Chosen:
Speaking of Perry, I watched the Juliet Cuddy interview with him on O'Reilly last night where he tried to address the painted rock issue. The guy still could not string a complete sentence together. Unbelievable! · Oct 6 at 7:49pm
That's why the planned Perry-O'Reilly interview is must see tv!
Aug '10
Re: The Field
John Marzan
Frozen Chosen:
Speaking of Perry, I watched the Juliet Cuddy interview with him on O'Reilly last night where he tried to address the painted rock issue. The guy still could not string a complete sentence together. Unbelievable! · Oct 6 at 7:49pm
That's why the planned Perry-O'Reilly interview is must see tv! · Oct 6 at 7:57pm
It's also why he's been ducking Bill for so long...
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Pseudodionysius
The political challenge is to do something no post New Deal Republican has ever accomplished: to roll back the Hobbesian Leviathan state before it strangles the Republic and removes it from the world stage for good.
To say it requires cahones is an understatement. Do you remember what Governor Haley Barbour said about what they did in Mississippi with state expenditure reductions? Not slowing the rate of growth but absolute reductions in expenditures from year to year. That's no mean feat. · Oct 6 at 7:54pm
Barbour is unelectable vs Obama. i'm not worried about romney once he is in office. he might surprise people the same way christie did (remember christie wasnt an impressive candidate. the focus of media attention was on virginia gubernatorial candidate bob mcdonnell.)
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Frozen Chosen
John Marzan
Frozen Chosen:
Speaking of Perry, I watched the Juliet Cuddy interview with him on O'Reilly last night where he tried to address the painted rock issue. The guy still could not string a complete sentence together. Unbelievable! · Oct 6 at 7:49pm
That's why the planned Perry-O'Reilly interview is must see tv! · Oct 6 at 7:57pm
It's also why he's been ducking Bill for so long... · Oct 6 at 8:00pm
he's worried o'reilly might ask him about the "ryan plan" and it would have disastrous results ala palin on "bush doctrine" with charlie gibson.
Sep '10
Re: The Field
Barbour is unelectable vs Obama.
Barbour's electability isn't at issue. He rolled back state expenditures across the board in absolute dollars. That's what a Republican candidate is being asked to do in the Presidency. People have justifiable angst about the guy who wilted in front of Ted Kennedy being up to the task. There's only so many PowerPoint bullets he can fire at the federal deficit.
Jun '11
Re: The Field
First, Herman Cain is no empty suit. He will continue to impact the race positively. His common sense conservative message will continue to resonate. He is an intelligent, inspirational leader and a quality American Christian. He will not disappoint even if he comes up short in securing the nomination.
I, for one, do not understand the hand wringing many feel toward the Republican field. I would be elated for any of them to assume the presidency, including the crazy uncle in the attic, Ron Paul.
It’s been striking in the last few weeks how Larry Kudlow and others have been unable to let Christie go.
Mitt Romney is a facsimile of Herbert Hoover, the “Wonder Boy”. Herman Cain is akin to Calvin Coolidge, “the business of America is business”.
I think Cain would perform best and heed the urgent warning from Mark Steyn to cut government deep and wide and quickly to save the nation. Bachmann, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum would also move quickly to downsize the federal government.
It’s going to be painful and thankless to turn this nation around for any of them.
Jun '10
Re: The Field
If you can't get the president you want then all might hang on the constitution of the house and senate. Romney with a Republican house and a Republican senate might just be turned into a rock ribbed conservative. Cain and Perry are starting to look dicey.
Oct '10
Re: The Field
If Romney is the nominee, his choice of VP should be:
1) Jindal (realistic)
2) Cain (realistic)
If Perry is the nominee, his VP is
1) Giuliani (realistic)
2) Rubio (he could reconsider)
If Cain is the nominee, his VP should be
1) Giuliani
2) Condi Rice
Mar '11
Re: The Field
Indeed.
Mar '11
Re: The Field
John Marzan The tea partiers showed bad judgment when they picked Bachmann over Pawlenty. And now they're souring on loudmouth Bachmann? Rick Perry can't talk straight and Herman Cain is more interested in promoting his book.
It's not the Republicans that are driving the stupidity. · Oct 6 at 7:11pm
Edited on Oct 06 at 07:19 pm
Honesty is refreshing, please continue. Spit on the base as it were Mr. Marzan we wait with baited breath to hear the opinions of what you child-men/realists choose to instruct us with. Please continue.
Oct '10
Re: The Field
Special Report with Bret Baier
Tonight we begin our special series, "Center Seat", where we will invite the 2012 candidates to take questions from myself and the panel-- tonight we welcome Congresswoman Bachmann along with our panel,Steve Hayes, Charles Krauthammer and Dan Balz of the Washington Post
Special Report with Bret Baier thoughts on the show tonight? and the new segment "Center Seat"? We have Newt Gingrich next - I believe.. then Herman Cain in a couple of weeks.. we're working on scheduling with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul -- and trying to lock in Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. should be a great segment.
Dec '10
Re: The Field
I still want to know how Perry got elected and reelected in Texas while sounding like an idiot. Yes, there are rubes in Texas, but not enough of them to elect a moron repeatedly.
Mar '11
Re: The Field
The only uplifting thread today was on the nude mud wrestling match in Massachusetts (or something like that).
Anyway, I liked the most recent podcast, and Bill Kristol's cheery attitude towards the stupid party.