The Newark Star-Ledger fired back Tuesday at the New Hampshire Union Leader over its endorsement of Chris Christie for the Republican presidential nomination.
The Star-Ledger’s charge: The Union Leader newspaper “knows almost nothing about” Christie’s gubernatorial record in the Garden State.
The Union Leader announced its endorsement on Saturday with the headline “For our safety, our future: Chris Christie for President.”
The endorsement highlighted Christie’s “tells it like it is” personality and time as a federal prosecutor. It also mentioned Christie’s face-offs with public unions. But Star-Ledger editorial page editor Tom Moran noted the endorsement did not bring up the so-called “Bridgegate” scandal or, as he put it, Christie’s “dismal record” on job creation.
Union Leader publisher Joseph McQuaid explained why the endorsement didn’t mention those parts of Christie’s record during an appearance on Sunday’s “Meet The Press.” McQuaid told NBC News the paper was only seriously considering governors:
“I think after the experience of the past eight years, freshmen senators without a lot of experience aren’t good,” he said, explaining why the newspaper discounted Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).
Moran also fumbled the New Hampshire newspaper’s name. The column says the endorsement was from the “Manchester Union-Leader.”
The candidate endorsed by the Union Leader historically has seen a jump in the polls of the nation’s first primary state. In 2012, the newspaper endorsed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and in 2008, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).
The Star-Ledger later published regrets about the editorial page’s endorsement of Christie’s 2013 re-election campaign.
What can we conclude from this endorsement: They have a history of endorsing losers…not good for Christie.
As a native of New Hampshire it pains me to no end that one family at one paper can have this impact on our Presidential politics. It really is a throwback to an earlier time when there were just a few key gatekeepers. For all the internet’s problems I’m really glad it has democratized a lot of voices that would never have been heard before and diminished the power of the old school gatekeepers. For example I love how Peggy Noonan was eviscerated for her “vibrations and lawn signs” observations before the 2012 cycle.
Listening to Joe McQuaid on Meet the Press I couldn’t help but think that this guy was no more informed or qualified to recommend a Presidential candidate than my uncle. You could have transported Chuck Todd’s little MTP table to my parent’s house in the seacoast this thanksgiving and set up a camera. In either scenario you’d be listening to a bunch of cranks.
Yep - in the post-Reagan era they have picked one winner, and that was when Daddy Bush ran unopposed.
One thing that endorsement highlighted was the durability of a so-called “narrative,” in this case that Christie “tells it like it is.” He’s brusque and rude, certainly, and he was able to translate that into a reputation for being honest, but as far as I can tell from reading about him the people who’ve seen him in action over time consider him to be a chronic liar. It seems for every instance of his showing some sort of candor, there are four or five of obvious hypocritical pandering or having to deny some scandal that doesn’t pass the smell test even if the indictments haven’t come down the road yet. It’s like with Trump: Being a loudmouth jerk does not necessarily mean you’re also an honest, open person.
I heard an interesting analysis of the Union Leader’s move: they want Christie to do what he can to take out Trump. That might explain Christie’s more aggressive rejection of Trump’s “millions of demonstrators in Jersey City on 9/11” yesterday. I agree that the Union Leader has a habit of picking candidates who finish 4th or 5th in the NH primary. But, still . . .