‘Fox News Sunday’ on Christie vs. Clinton

‘Fox News Sunday’ on Christie vs. Clinton

‘Fox News Sunday’ on Christie vs. Clinton

The New Jersey governor still looks like a front-runner for 2016.


In case you missed Fox News Sunday—and, really, why wouldn’t you have missed it, with the Olympics on at the same time—host Chris Wallace paired Karl Rove and former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland yesterday to discuss the parallel presidential ambitions of Chris Christie and Hillary Clinton. The pairing is one more indication that, despite Christie’s avalanche of troubles in New Jersey, he’s still a front-runner (and we’d argue here, the front-runner) for 2016.

Strickland, an amiable, relatively progressive Democrat, maybe isn’t the most forceful spokesman that the Democrats might have put forward, but in any case he’s the one who was assigned last week to shadow Christie during the New Jersey governor’s fundraising trip to Chicago. Earlier, here at Christie Watch, we’d argued that by paying so much attention to Christie now, the Democrats are essentially admitting that Christie is the one they’re most worried about in a head-to-head match with Clinton two years from now. That’s the question that Wallace tried to get Strickland to answer, though he had to ask it more than once. Eventually, Strickland did respond:

WALLACE: Why are you shadowing Chris Christie two-plus years before he’s even a candidate?

STRICKLAND: Well, because he’s been put out there by the Republican Party as the leading candidate for the presidency in terms of the Republican nominee. And so, he is a national figure. He is described himself as a national figure. And he’s the head of the RGA. And, quite frankly, what he does is a broader concern than simply being the governor of New Jersey. He has been and hopes to be, I guess, the front-runner for the Republican Party in 2016.

Naturally, Rove agreed, and emphasized the point:

ROVE: Well, first of all, I think Governor Strickland is correct. The reason the Democrats are doing this is because Chris Christie is a strong potential candidate in 2016. They’re going to try to smother every Republican presidential possibility they can because they know that this race in 2016 is going to be difficult for the Democrats, hard to get a third term, particularly after the two terms of Obama.

Rove knows, of course, that demographics and the electoral college are changing the makeup of presidential elections, and that whoever runs against Clinton—assuming she’s the nominee, and it’s looking all-but-inevitable—will find it difficult to win the swing states that Barack Obama carried in 2012. Polls show that Clinton would overwh elm Christie, 58-37 by one count. But it’s early, and Clinton has much higher name recognition than Christie, needless to say, and she has double-digit leads over nearly all of the other potential GOP nominees, too, and an eight-point lead over Paul Ryan.

Yes, it’s way, way too early, though you can already buy lots of Christie 2016 merchandise. Still, a pair of New Jersey former governors, Tom Kean and Brendan Byrne, discussed Christie’s 2016 prospects, according to the Newark Star-Ledger, and they weren’t ruling Christie out. Kean, who’s unhappy with Christie because of a recent disagreement between Christie and Kean’s son, an up-and-coming New Jersey pol, said:

I think he can recover. He has a lot of time left, provided the statements he’s made hold up, and I think they will. We’re already detecting a sense of sympathy for Christie. There’s a feeling that everyone is piling on. He still has a reservoir of support. It will be difficult, but he can come back.

And Byrne, responding, said: “Some people would rather have a damaged Christie than a pure alternative.”

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy