Bramnick backs Christie for governor; urges GOP to use Lance as a model

You know, as someone who resides in the 7th Congressional District that elected Leonard Lance, whom I supported, earlier this month, I agree with quite a few of the things Jon Bramnick is saying here. Lance was indeed able to win because he was a social moderate who did not preach family values and social conservatism. I have always thought that Republicans who claim to believe in small government but then want to deny women the right to an abortion are hypocritical. Lance was also running as a fiscal conservative, and I think that appealed to a lot of people, which shows that it's possible for fiscal conservatism and budget accountability to remain popular; no, that's not what's bringing the Republican Party down. It's everything that has to do with trying to force evangelical Christian values on everyone regardless of their religion -- that's what's bringing them down. Now who will I be supporting in 2009? I'm undecided, although it's still quite early. Gov. Corzine's job performance leaves much to be desired, but I'm uneasy about Christie's strong support of President Bush. I don't know enough about Merkt or Levine yet to form any sort of opinion, and I think that Lonegan is too right-wing to gain much support. I'll tell you who I won't be supporting in 2009: Jon Bramnick, assuming he runs for re-election to the New Jersey General Assembly. While I agree with his above analysis, I couldn't help but laugh when he said, "People want solutions to problems that face average people." This is coming from a guy who voted AGAINST limiting local tax increases, AGAINST reducing property taxes for middle- and lower-income families, AGAINST setting limits on eminent domain laws, AGAINST requiring companies laying off 100 or more employees to pre-notify the Commissioner of Labor and Workforce Development so a response team can be established to provide job referrals, counseling, and information to affected individuals, AGAINST this year's Affordable Housing Bill, and AGAINST extending family leave benefits to provide compensated time off to care for seriously ill family members. So much for working to benefit "average people." I won't be voting for Jon Bramnick next year, that's for sure.

Just don't bring up Christie Whitman, us moderates don't like her fiscal policy much either.

It's time the GOP focuses completely on kitchen table economics/job/reducing government spending. Guns and abortion are not what most people care about now, nor will they be in the Gubernatorial election.

By the way Rick, that's the worst analysis that I've heard of the 7th district race yet. Didn't the DCCC try and convince people Hsing was the conservative? Lance won because of himself and his record..getting every single newspaper endorsement sure as hell didn't hurt either.

And for all those who seriously think the fact Christie raised some money for Bush and got appointed by him is a serious issue in an election about the direction of our state and the future, then please hit yourself in the head. Ask yourself this question: Has Christie performed well in his current position? I'd say an undefeated record on corruption busts is pretty damn good. The issue at hand is the affordability of this state and the business climate, not the notion that Christie and Bush are somehow tied. Bush will be long gone soon enough, if he already isn't.

Brian Levine is the fiscal conservative, social moderate that New Jersey needs. His philosophy is most similar to Leonard Lance. He's also worked closely with democrats to make a difference for real people. He's not afraid to take an unpopular stance if he believes it will benefit the people of Franklin. Look at his record before you make a decision.

Though I have some sympathy for a few moderate views, I retain a bit of fear for those that call themselves Republicans when they disagree with more planks than they support. I fear that many of these so-called Republicans are merely so because it is easier to run in certain districts with an (R) next to their names on the ballot, as opposed to an (I) or (L). Living too much in the gray areas is dangerous for a party, as it certainly can lead us down the road the Democrats went down long ago, i.e. being the party with no real principles. There is nothing wrong with family values. There is nothing wrong with being against abortion. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a strong military. There is nothing wrong with believing in smaller government and less government spending. There is nothing wrong with the belief (proven correct) that lower taxes stimulates the economy more than higher taxes. The problems have come when we act like menu-Republicans, selecting the parts that we like and not ordering the dishes that we don't. OK, I get the problems with certain social issue positions, and that the far far extreme is a bit over the top. But, is abortion the only issue that makes you a "moderate"? or are there more issues pulling you away from the platform? My point is, are you really a Republican, or is this just an identity you grew-up with, and now wish to change the party to meet what you actually believe (even if it is contrary to the majority of party members?) This concept of party identity is tricky, and many of you with a "Republican Identity" need to be able to clearly articulate why you are a member of the Republican party, and not a member of the independent or Libertarian party. It is look in the mirror time.

Rick, how does your Lance theory apply in PA?

Specter (liberal), 2004: 53%
Santorum (conservative), 2006: 41%

George Ajjan

The conservative that liberal "Republicans" hate even more than Steve Lonegan!

How come no one can explain why Scott Garrett continues year after year to be the top votegetter, not just in the whole 5th CD but also in virtually every single election district???

Only a fool thinks a one-issue "corruption" candidate like Chris "Sonny Liston" Christie is going anywhere in a climate where all the issues are fiscal.

Those betting on the legbreaker are going to be disappointed when he falls down in the First Round, mumbles something about how Steve Lonegan is raising too much money, and disappears into oblivion.

Time to get on the bus.

NJ-5 is quite possibly the worst represenation for the demographics of New Jersey I've ever heard. NJ-5 is drawn out to be a safe Republican district with the rich towns in Bergen County and the Rural parts of Northwest Jersey. You gotta be kidding me if you think that's a representation of this state. Scott Garrett would lose in almost any other NJ Congressional District, with the possible exception of NJ-11 and maybe NJ-4 (that's a stretch too).

Here's what I don't get: How come everyone is already assigning an election platform issue to a candidate who has not even announced yet? Just because Christie is well-versed in tackling corruption doesn't mean that he won't talk about economic issues or make solid economic proposals. He would do well to mention corruption, but I'm pretty sure that he'll have an economic platform as well. Americans and New Jersey just elected a President with little economic background, so I'm pretty sure the "experience" argument is pointless. A so called financial whiz couldn't fix this state...

Couldn't get a hold of McCain and Zimmer signs until the last minute. Lance signs were no problem. I wonder who won?

Other than corruption issues, we know little about Christie, but then again, that is because he was doing the duties of his job. I will reserve any judgements of any potential candidate until I hear what they say - and it better be clear and action-oriented. New Jersey needs action now. We need fiscally conservative ideas - i.e. lower personal, property, and business taxes, cut government spending and waste, attract growth-oriented businesses back to new jersey to stimulate our state production and jobs, and let's get away from the class and racially-oriented policies that this state has long been mired in. It is time to bring Newark to finally reach its full potential in terms of growth, prosperity (contribution to state revenues), safety, and job growth. The time is now for a candidate that can clearly and convincingly articulate why the past Democratic approach has led to NJ being a high-tax, low production, job-losing state. It is time for a Reagan-style message for NJ ... not to mention the one thing that Christie does bring .... continue to put our crooked politicians in jail for all the corruption and abuse they have been killing our state with for generations.

Bramnick is out there a little fast. He doesn't know where Christie stands on social issues - very few do. He's making a lot of assumptions - but just wants to speak up early to appear like he's a 'leader'...