The EFM Feature
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, from Flick user Bob Jagendorf, used under a Creative Commons license

I just read an interesting piece over at the Washington Post about Gov. Romney’s continued refusal to discuss the matters journalists (virtually alone) love to talk about:  the ins and outs of political tactics.  The Post comments Gov. Romney as follows:

It will come as no surprise to you that in the business world, and in the political world, that we tend not to reveal our strategy to our competitors, so you’ll wait and see what we’ll do.

It seems to me this comment has relevance well beyond the (boring) topics of ad buys and Des Moines office space.  Why?  Because there’s also a frustration out there, generally among conservative wonks in and out of the media, that Gov. Romney is not spelling out exactly what he’d do in the White House about our nation’s most pressing–and most politically radioactive–fiscal issues, particularly Social Security and Medicare.  And while he’s said a little lately about entitlements, earning the praise of Congressman Paul Ryan, he hasn’t said as much as the nerds of the right would like.

Since I myself am a nerd of the right, this gets my mind going about recent political history.  Few remember it now, but when current conservative heartthrob Chris Christie was running for the governorship of New Jersey in 2009, he had stiff competition on the right from a former mayor named Steve Lonegan.  As I said on EFM, I was for Mayor Lonegan.  And you heard the same criticism then of Gov. Christie that you hear now of Gov. Romney:  He won’t say what exactly he’ll do.  No one had any idea during that campaign that Gov. Christie would boldly take on the teachers’ unions and everyone else.

With 20/20 hindsight, I have to admit that Gov. Christie had the right strategy, much as the nerd in me hates to say so.  If he’d gone beyond vaguely promising to bring back fiscal sanity and publicly announced the way he intended to take on the teachers’ unions, we’d be in the middle of Gov. Jon Corzine’s second term right now (and Wall Street would look rather different).  Similarly, when it comes to presidential politics, the nerd in me wants Gov. Romney to move from talking about his experience turning troubled enterprises around and tell us exactly which sacred cows he’d like to slaughter in D.C.  But the former Steve Lonegan supporter in me wonders whether the same principle isn’t at work here as is discussed in the Post article:  The ex-CEO doesn’t want to tell his competitors the details of his plans, and would be crazy to do so.

About Charles Mitchell

EFM's resident Yankee, Charles Mitchell, works in the non-profit arena in his native Pennsylvania. He and his wife, Charissa, live near the state capital of Harrisburg with their daughter, Adeline, and are members of a congregation of the Presbyterian Church in America.

Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

2 Responses to Running the Christie Way?

  1. Jim Tills says:

    Mitt has run an almost flawless campaign so far. He supported Christie when he ran for the New Jersey governorship and his support helped considerably. Now the favor is being returned.
    Chris Christie was supported by Ann Coulter who now supports Romney as an extremely articulate conservative voice. The Republicans can not win without the Independent support. A candidate must reach out and win that support for which the endorsement of Chris Christie is crucial.
    Mitt is conservative to the core but must not appear as comeone who will ruin entitlement programs (social security, medicare and medicaid) as he returns us to sound fiscal and economic sanity. His 59 step plan is incredible as it ensures a steady step by step return to that National state of being which promotes business, jobs, and prosperity.
    Some of the other candidates for the Republican nomination make wonderful sound bite promises which we hopefully can eventually come to BUT simply are not feasible in the short term due to the subsequent crisis that would occur—of which our current fragile economy could not endure. The Democrats would make hay out of the crisis blaming Republicans, and shortly we would be back to an Obama-type disastrous administration. With that, it might be good-bye American exceptionalism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>