There is a fascinating, if slightly disturbing, account in Mike Allen’s newsletter from Politico this morning:
FLY ON THE WALL: Fifty of the most prized donors in national politics, including several hedge-fund billionaires who are among the richest people in the world, schlepped to a Manhattan office or hovered around speakerphones Tuesday afternoon as their host, venture capitalist Ken Langone (pronounced LAN-goan), a co-founder of The Home Depot, implored New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to reconsider and seek the GOP presidential nomination. The governor was firm that it’s not in the cards this time, but left his spurned suitors with the impression he might well go in 2016. He impressed the audience with his emphasis on family and commitment, and flashes of disarming humor.
Langone backed Rudy Giuliani in 2008, and his guests came from both parties, although most were moderate Republicans. Most are uncommitted in the presidential race. Participants who rank on the Forbes list of richest Americans included Bernie Marcus, Paul Tudor Jones (hedge funds; $3.3 billion), Stan Druckenmiller (hedge funds; $2.5 billion) and Bernie Marcus (Home Depot; $1.9 billion). Several of them said: I’m Republican but I voted for President Obama, because I couldn’t live with Sarah Palin. Many said they were severely disappointed in the president. The biggest complaint was what several called “class warfare.” They said they didn’t understand what they had done to deserve that: If you want to have a conversation about taxation, have a conversation. But a president shouldn’t attack his constituents — he’s not the president of some people, he’s president of all the people. Someone mentioned Huey Long populism.
–Here’s a paraphrase of what Christie told his would-be backers: “I’m not running, but I came because Langone is so aggressive, he basically just physically shook me into doing it. I’ve weighed this carefully; I didn’t dismiss it out of hand. There were four considerations. 1) One question was: Where’s my wife? She’s not enthused. 2) The second is: I looked ahead at the potential for two years of running, and not seeing my kids. If I won, six years of not seeing them. If I won a second term, 10 years of not seeing them. Missing my kids growing up is a big deal to me, and it was a big reason. The wife was the biggest. The children were the second. 3) I’m staying in New Jersey. I am not just going to quit halfway through my term. The people trusted me, and I feel like I owe that trust and faith some fidelity. 4) And fourth: Could I win? Could I really do it? I think I would win — not saying I would win, but I could win. I brought my oldest son today because, first of all, I wanted him to wake up early. And, second of all, to have to put on his one suit and tie. But I wanted him to listen because if I did run, which I’m not going to — but if I did in the future — it’s going to affect him. There’s six people in the family — I’m just one. I recognize that not all of you would immediately commit, but it certainly makes me realize that if I were to run, and had this group were behind me, I certainly wouldn’t have any problem raising money.”
Dear wealthy moderate Republicans: I mean no disrespect, as you’ve made more money than I’ll probably ever earn and you’re quite accomplished in your fields. And like you, I find Chris Christie to be a bold and inspiring leader, who makes a very intriguing option at the national level someday.
But not all of us are shocked and stunned about Obama’s class warfare and his demonization of you and the sense that he doesn’t think of himself as your president too. Some of us spent two years telling anyone who would listen that he was a lot more liberal than his bland, blank-slate rhetoric suggested. And was all of this worth it because you “couldn’t live” with Sarah Palin? Really? The prospect of having her living at the Naval Observatory was so epically offensive to your sensibilities that you really thought this, and all of the economic joy we’ve endured for the past 30 months, was the better option?
By any chance, have you done any reexamination of all of that thinking in the past two and a half years?
Beyond that, I found Christie’s comment that he couldn’t bear to not see his children grow up a suggestion that this is a man with a clear sense of priorities and values strangely healthy for the world of politics.
Sarah Palin as Vice President was over the line, but a Jeremiah Wright protege as President was not.
I hope the excuse of these tycoons is that they were too busy running their businesses to pay much attention to something unimportant like an election campaign. The alternative explanation -- that they were paying attention and relied on Candidate Obama's campaign speeches instead of evaluating his pre-campaign track record -- is terrifying.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course they chose the well-spoken black man with views from the bat-guano wing of the Big City Union Machine Party, over someone who basically shared their views but went to the wrong school and has a twang.
I mean, which one do you think they would hire in a heartbeat to work for them?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou wrote: "Dear wealthy moderate Republicans: I mean no disrespect, as you’ve made more money than I’ll probably ever earn and you’re quite accomplished in your fields. And like you, I find Chris Christie to be a bold and inspiring leader, who makes a very intriguing option at the national level someday. But not all of us are shocked and stunned about Obama’s class warfare and his demonization of you and the sense that he doesn’t think of himself as your president too. Some of us spent two years telling anyone who would listen that he was a lot more liberal than his bland, blank-slate rhetoric suggested. And was all of this worth it because you “couldn’t live” with Sarah Palin? Really? The prospect of having her living at the Naval Observatory was so epically offensive to your sensibilities that you really thought this, and all of the economic joy we’ve endured for the past thirty months, was the better option? By any chance, have you done any reexamination of all of that thinking in the past two and a half years?" THAT was precisely what I was thinking. These men didn't earn their millions and billions for being stupid but in this case they were epically stupid! They chose, essentially, a Marxist with no discernible record and hates that they've earned so much money over a woman who had an impressive pro-growth record in Alaska and who thinks their earning so much is a sign of America's greatness. Sounds to me like they allowed sexism to make their decision and now they're shocked it all blew up in their faces. Morons.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Dear wealthy moderate Republicans: I mean no disrespect, as you’ve made more money than I’ll probably ever earn and you’re quite accomplished in your fields. And like you, I find Chris Christie to be a bold and inspiring leader, who makes a very intriguing option at the national level someday. But not all of us are shocked and stunned about Obama’s class warfare and his demonization of you and the sense that he doesn’t think of himself as your president too. Some of us spent two years telling anyone who would listen that he was a lot more liberal than his bland, blank-slate rhetoric suggested. And was all of this worth it because you “couldn’t live” with Sarah Palin? Really? The prospect of having her living at the Naval Observatory was so epically offensive to your sensibilities that you really thought this, and all of the economic joy we’ve endured for the past thirty months, was the better option? By any chance, have you done any reexamination of all of that thinking in the past two and a half years?" THAT was precisely what I was thinking. These men didn't earn their millions and billions for being stupid but in this case they were epically stupid! They chose, essentially, a Marxist with no discernible record and hates that they've earned so much money over a woman who had an impressive pro-growth record in Alaska and who thinks their earning so much is a sign of America's greatness. Sounds to me like they allowed sexism to make their decision and now they're shocked it all blew up in their faces. Morons.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseyour comment was worth the double post! :)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFunny how they are so sensitive to class warfare, but are so unconscious of their own cultural and regional warfare.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat does that even mean? Aside from making you sound oh-so-smug and smarmy, what are you talking about? Cultural and regional warfare? God, man, grow a set.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTim, what it means is that they are east coast snobs. Obama went to all the right schools and talked the correct way and gave public perception to being one of them. Cultured, politically correct, creased slacks, etc. Palin did none of that, therefore she is trash; although it wouldn't surpise me if her marks in college weren't superior to the One. Question, how many Harvard Yale types does it take to implode the finances of the country? Just look at this administration and the beautiful people running it. I think for the next 10 years being an Ivy leaguer should disqualifiy you from govt service all together.
All the superficial things that don't really make a difference, but who these people think do or at least want to make sure they give the perception they hold the right attitudes with fellow jet setters.
That's all it means Tim - perhaps you need to examine your own pair.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Creased slacks"
Wow. All the people AT WORK right now reading this in creased slacks: YOU ARE WHATS WRONG WITH AMERICA!
Do you think Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush would ever let anybody into the Oval Office who wasn't in creased slacks?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethe creased slacks reference was to David Brooks infamous remark about how he fell in love (I'm paraphrasing) with Obama when he saw the crease in his slacks. At least that's how I read it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDougV you win the prize. Blackhawk, I am so disappointed you missed it. Brooks is the epitome of the problem. An educated dupe, who values form over substance. Just apparently like many of these wealthy men. I hope they fully understand their mistake. True diversity? Most of the PC crowd is about as diverse as the grass in my lawn.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDo I have to pick up the prize, or do you ship it to me? Is it a pony? I've always wanted a pony.
Sadly, the gift taxes would kill me (reference the dude who caught Jeter's 3,000 hit.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, then that tells us all we need to know about David Brooks. An idiotic comment on his part.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd this time around these moderate republicans may have to live with Sarah Palin living in the White House. Serves them right...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think these wealthy moderate donors (with this kind of thinking) are at the bottom a-religious bordering on anti-Christian, and thus any candidate who expresses a faithful Christianity will be unacceptable to them. It all comes down to social issues for them. They might be member of mainline protestant denominations or cafeteria catholics, but that just confirms the hypothesis. That is why they could not "live with Sarah Palin."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHuh? Im sure most of these people voted for George Bush twice. Now, please continue on about their anti-Chirstianity...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat makes you think New East Republican's voted for Bush?
No matter his Ivy probably paved over his Christianity.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou can easily find the named mentioned in this post. Most donated money to Bush...Also, are you really suggesting Republicans just write off an entire region...and region which Republicans have been making great strides the past few years.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm certainly suggesting the Region is not a priority. I've missed the strides we've been making in the Region.
It is a region where Republicans will likely abandon a conservative Republican in favor of a Democrat, and they are out number by democrats anyway.
Look Scott Brown is a New England Republican so are the Maine twins, they do not excite conservatives. Of course, they are better than Democrats and the best that Republican can hope for in the region, but the Presidency lays in getting Democrats to crossover in a few a states that McCain loss, but Bush carried.
New England is not a primary concern. Republicans need to make arguments that will help our industrial Midwest. If the US economy is to recover the industrial Midwest must recover.
The Republican Presidential nominee needs to make economic arguments, not worry about social issues. Our nominee will be pro-life and pro-family; if those issues are problems for New Englanders they can and should pound sand.
They "donated money to Bush," so what. When have the very wealthy not donated to both parties? They usually cover their bets, just look at Trump's donations.
We have no idea whether these people voted for Gore and Kerry. They indicated they abandon McCain out of concern over Palin. They are not reliable, and they live in a region we are very unlikely to carry.
The North East is not competitive. 1988 was the last time Republicans carried a majority of the New England states. GWB only carried New Hampshire in 2000. Since 1988 even when Republicans win they have normally lost DC, MD, DE, NJ, PE, NY CT, RI, MA, VT, NH, ME.
Against Obama Republicans lost Virginia, North Carolina and Florida. Those are states Republicans need to be recovered not states they have not carried in 2 decades. Republicans need to try and get Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada back.
I will point out Republicans have been losing RI whether her Governor is Republican or a Democrat so I would not assume any recent Gubernatorial or Senatorial elections will change Presidential dynamics. The only way Republicans carry the North East is if the Republicans win a landside.
If Republicans carry the North East they carry the Pacific coast too. Republicans need to fight for New England like they fight for California.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExactly - that just speaks to the fact that being wealthy or a great investor or business man...doesn't necessarily mean much at all. Of course, it also says that NYT's and its media mavens really do have a tremendous effect on our nation. Without the media's all out attack...we'd likely have had a different outcome. It also means that Conservatives or Republicans need to form strategy on winning...by destroying the mainstream media. Not by regulation or anything like that...but by highlighting the lying and partisan nature...and knowing and understanding the ideas and principles on which our country was founded. There has to be the ability to circumvent the media death spiral. It is simple - they will attack and destroy any they see as dangerous. In that respect Limbaugh is better than any pundit. He says the media will show you who they and the Democrats view as dangerous to their remaking of America project (incidentally, he was also correct in that the way to defeat the Dems and Obama was to attack rather than try to get along...so take that RINOS).
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse