Unwittingly, Christie may actually be correct about an important issue of elective import.

<<<  Christie,  as uncompromising a buffoon in his own rite,  as those whom he so freely criticizes, does make a good point.

The Washington Post as quoted in The Daily Beast,  gives us this story.  I cannot "cut and past' as is my publishing style,  due to unresolved issues with my computer,  so I will  print my best publishing offering(s) before taking this technical marvel back to  the shop. After clicking on and referring to the brief at The Daily Beast,  consider the following commentary:

Editor's notes:  Perhaps without knowing it,  Chris Christie,  a Republican with some of the worst political instincts of all time,  is making a point that needs to be given a great deal of attention.  I am a member of the teaparty conservative movement and was a "member"  decades before there was such a thing as a "teaparty."  I believe that the GOP needs to allow and encourage "common folk" to come out of their kitchens and shops,  and become politically involved while allowing them their conservative values and principles.    At the same time, however,  those same folks need to understand that there is a process that MUST be entertained,  not challenged or ignored,  and I am only talking about the process of getting elected.  There are things that can be said during a campaign and things than simply cannot be said.  

Keep in mind,  as "politicians,"  party conservatives may be attempting to court the vote of those who do not support,  fully,  the values of the particular candidate. With Blacks,  for example,  part of this process is a thing called "racialization."  It is a straight forward  strategy  of sounding "white" in a white district for the purpose of getting elected.  Obama did this in 2008,  singing all the notes of  "red,white and blue,"  bi-partisanship and congeniality,  only to be very much on the opposite side of the fence in each of these categories.  

While the Left hides its racist/partisan/Utopian intentions,  so too must the  Right understand the necessity of populace issues on a national scale,  and what must be given over to the individual states.  

As a example of this point,  we have various social issues that are best dealt with on a regional (state) level,  such things as gay marriage,  the expansion of certain welfare programs,  and, even, abortion.  Understand that if we go "national" with a given campaign, the success of that campaign is an "all or nothing" matter.  

Take the issue of abortion:   When we consider the life of each unaborted child as "saved,"  certainly,  millions more (of the unborn) will be allowed life if the battle is waged from state to state.  So,  why not practice a little commonsense, for the sake of the unborn,  and follow an elective strategy that actually works?