Is New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie the Republicans’ Bill ClintonBill ClintonClinton slams Trump on immigration in Arizona op-ed The Trail 2016: Berning embers Poll: Most say Trump should cut business ties MORE, Chris Cillizza asks in his Washington Post column on Friday. But is it humanly possible for conservatives to think beyond 2016? Or, as Cillizza suggests here, must they pretend it is 1992 all over again?
But this is the core issue below, and how do Christie/Bush and their New York billionaire bundlers address it?
This Sunday on “The McLaughlin Group,” commentator Pat Buchanan suggested that heading into 2016 there is a division between the “establishment” and the “populist” movement, an apparent reference to the contemporary hoot which is the Tea Party. Proposed here that this is actually the rowdy awakening — as all movement beginnings are rowdy — of people and economy heading west post-war from the Northeast. It has created a new cultural, economic and political paradigm, and a fundamentally different and newer America.
The difference today of establishment vs. populism, or passing generation (McCain/Graham) vs. rising generation (Paul/Cruz) could better be understood as a shift from old America (Kennedy/Bush) to new America (Rand PaulRand PaulRepublicans question Trump's trip to Scotland Hate TV customer service? So does your senator Overnight Cybersecurity: Senate narrowly rejects expanding FBI surveillance powers MORE, Ted CruzTed CruzO'Malley gives Trump a nickname: 'Chicken Donald' Va. GOP delegate files lawsuit over bound convention votes Our most toxic export: American politick MORE, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, Marco RubioMarco RubioRubio: 'I didn't run for the Senate to run for president again' Sunday shows preview: Next steps after Trump upheaval O'Malley gives Trump a nickname: 'Chicken Donald' MORE, Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, Mike Pence, Sam Brownback, Newt Gingrich, Michele BachmannMichele BachmannFalwell faces flak for posing with Trump in front of Playboy The Trail 2016: On faith and the economy Michele Bachmann to advise Trump on evangelical issues MORE) with Christie leading the Lost Cause Conservatives in their Pickett’s Charge on behalf of old America.
Because there is a vast cultural and economic difference between places like Boston and New Jersey, which were settled and evolved here for 500 years and were eyed by the adventurous since Henry and Anne Boleyn squabbled and Virginia was named after their daughter. Texas was barely settled in the 1880s and carries little European interest and baggage. It is born free in the desert. And Utah, the Mountain states, the plains and California fall into this same purview.
The contentions which are risen today are essentially between new and old America, much as those in 1776 were between new and old England.
To hear the National Review crowd talk post-war history, it appears to run Churchill, Reagan, Bush I and II. Real-life observers might instead consider Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan as the great conservative influences. It is they, two Californians and a Texan, who naturally emerged in American leadership as demographics led us west.
The rising Christie/Bush paradigm is an attempt to walk it back across the desert to New York, New Jersey and the East, but fate does not serve well those who turn back.