They cook the same recipe: no discernible policy knowledge, beliefs, or expertise, and just one area of competence - fundraising. New York Magazine's recent Christie profile make that clear.
Romney was touted as a paragon of managerial competence: MBA (and Law degree) from Harvard; Successful Management Consultant at Bain & Co.; Job Creating Entrepreneur and spectacularly successful turnaround specialist at Bain Capital. But when everything he was given is stripped away - the plutocrat's rolodex of plutocrats (thanks to his father); the gaming of the tax system and the mortgaging (and second mortgaging) of clients' corporate futures for ginormous dividends to Romney - er, Bain Capital, same thing - Mitt Romney's role was always ultimately about attracting investors. He did not run the operations, come up with the tax gaming, or even hire talent. His job was to get his fellow plutocrats to write checks. He does not fundamentally know how to relate to anyone who isn't a plutocrat. His policies in Massachusetts were market testing for a national campaign - a campaign that ultimately repudiated everything he ostensibly stood for as governor. His only belief was that he should have more power. While necessary for all politicians, it is ultimately insufficient.
By contrast, Christie was more like Nixon, born of modest means. He got a law degree from Seton Hall, and made it a point to schmooze The Right People. He started differently, though. His first campaign:
In 1994, he ran for a seat on the Board of Chosen Freeholders in Morris County, the prosperous exurb where he and [his wife] Mary Pat, a Wall Street investment banker, had settled. It was time, he declared, for an end to the cycle of campaign contributions from those who did business with local government. “I’m sick and tired of people hiring their political friends,” he said.
But he only lasted one term. After another loss, he went to the back room, the smoke-filled and profanity-filled room. Advice was offered by a colleague, Rick Merkt.
He suggested to Christie that “the federal route might give him another bite at the apple.” What Merkt meant was that, instead of running for election, Christie should try to get himself appointed to an influential post. In New Jersey, that meant engaging in precisely the sort of grubby glad-handing Christie had condemned.
So Chris "Man of Principle" Christie went Full Romney, soliciting from the plutocracy.
Christie and [legal colleague Bill] Palatucci proceeded to pull in $350,000, more than enough for Christie to qualify as a Bush “Pioneer”; he and Mary Pat also personally contributed $29,000 to Bush and other Republicans between 1999 and 2001. After the election, it came time for Bush to nominate a U.S. attorney for New Jersey, one of the biggest offices in the country. Palatucci pitched Christie to Karl Rove. It was a competitive field, and Christie had zero experience in criminal law; indeed, he had never so much as filed a motion in federal court.
No qualifications, no problem - as long as the price is met. Competency and expertise is for fools. Power is all in who you know and how big the checks are. That's the GOP's alpha and omega. The myth of Romney was that he improved corporate performance. But he did no such thing. There were no innovations in operations, process, product or management that came from Romney or Bain. There was just systematic looting.
But what most voters don't know is the way Mitt Romney actually made his fortune: by borrowing vast sums of money that other people were forced to pay back. This is the plain, stark reality that has somehow eluded America's top political journalists for two consecutive presidential campaigns: Mitt Romney is one of the greatest and most irresponsible debt creators of all time. In the past few decades, in fact, Romney has piled more debt onto more unsuspecting companies, written more gigantic checks that other people have to cover, than perhaps all but a handful of people on planet Earth.
Romney was passionate about two things: money and power, in that order.
Christie is passionate about power and money. To both, policies are part of the marketing plan, to be changed from time to time to meet revenue targets. Christie made his name as a corruption-busting prosecutor who went after Republicans and Democrats alike. Like Romney's Job Creator marketing plan, it had and has broad appeal. But like Romney's plan it's a big lie. Christie wasn't fighting corruption, except as a way to prune the Small Bosses in favor of the Big Bosses, who are all still there and are Friends of Chris: most notably George Norcross and Joe DiVincenzo.
In hindsight, what is notable is how openly Christie embraced the bosses. He sent massive resources in their direction; when they came under fire, he vouched for them.
Christie ostensibly ran for governor to fight cronyism. But as Romney is only really comfortable with other plutocrats, Christie is only comfortable with other bullies, like the Big Bosses he clears the way for. His staff is filled with them. Even a charitable view of the many scandals Christie is immersed in details how extensive his own cronyism is. Romney and Christie are typical of the post-policy, post Bush GOP: What they accuse other of doing is what they themselves have done - destroying jobs, serving cronies not the common welfare. What they say they are doing is the opposite of what they really do - which is to wage class warfare on the 99%. What the GOP is best at is putting populist lipstick on the plutocratic pigs they front for. It's our responsibility to wipe the lipstick off and show them for what they are.