Do not make that assumption.
Rather than dismissing Christie as an also-ran and presuming that Cruz will just blow past him, we should pro-actively support Cruz and position him.
Christie is an excellent debater and very personable.
Cruz is far superior to Santorum as a conservative champion, but Christie is a better campaigner than Romney.
Many people on FR assumed that weak candidates like McCain and Romney would never prevail in the primary.
Don't let that same attitude saddle us with Christie.
The problem last time was that we couldn't unite behind a single conservative. We all knew that was the problem, but we couldn't avoid it, because there was no clear frontrunner.
This time, we have a frontrunner. Cruz' only competition is Paul. But I think Cruz will prevail over him fairly easily.
Another difference this time is that the Tea Party/Collaborator battle lines are drawn more clearly than at any time in my life.
The only thing we have to fear is Christie's money. But this time, the RINO money is surmountable. Cruz will receive an unprecedented amount of small, grassroots donations.
I disagree that Romney was a weak campaigner ... he was very active at trashing conservatives. Trashing 0bama? Not so much ...
I completely agree that we should pro-actively support Ted Cruz. He is a good man, a good Senator, can be a good President.
Fat boy is head and shoulders above Romney in speaking skills. Romney is like a French poodle while Christie is like a pitbull. He will attack Hillary in debates without fear without sounding mean and with humor which Mitt lacks badly. But I hope it will be Cruz, Rand, Walker or Perry getting the nod over Christie. The country needs a 180 turn, not a bi-partisan nonsense to survive for the long run.
I remember it well. Plenty of others were on FR warning that Romney was going to get it, and were shrugged off. Very sad. Instead they legitimized Romney, made him "Republican." The wrong thing to do.
Don't let that same attitude saddle us with Christie.
Pro-actively support Cruz and position him -- absolutely. But also, and this is the dirty work no one wants to do, go on offense and hound the liberal Republicans, the ones who think "Republican" is barganing for the R side on Democrats' terms, out of the party. Either that or be prepared for a forced third party.
I don't like the threat of third party, but it doesn't care, just like it didn't care that Romney was going to rise from the dead after 2008 and get 2012. It happened regardless, some saw it coming, and I think moves have to be fast and aggressive to save the day in 2016 if it's going to be "Republican."
The face of the Republican party is a crap shoot, you don't really know what kind of government power you're voting for, just that it isn't Democrat. The face of the Democrat party is a sure bet -- Democrats know exactly what their votes will be pushing for.
But Republicans? What "brand"?