Might Gov. Christie's decision to put the Senate election on a different date help some Republicans?

Christie's decision to have the US Senate election on October 16th makes it more likely that the Democrats will take the Senate seat because Christie being at the top of the ballot won't be there to help.  Of course, the Senate race would also bring more Democrats to the polls and help out on other races if it were held in November.  The trade off may then be a weaker US Senate candidate, but a better chance of picking up the state legislature.  If so, the polls are divided on whether this going to work.  The Senate race looks like it is getting close (though whether it is close enough is the question), and the polls discussed below indicate that they won't be able to take the state houses.  We will soon see who is right.

From Business Week:

As New Jersey Governor Chris Christie leads his opponent by as much as 34 percentage points in his bid for a second term, some Democrats say they’re worried that votes for the incumbent Republican will trickle down the ballot. 

At stake may be control of the legislature, where all 120 seats also are up for grabs. Christie’s dominance over state Senator Barbara Buono, the Democratic candidate for governor, is giving hopes to Republican lawmakers that they could make inroads after being out of power for the past decade. 

Republicans would need to win nine seats to take over the Assembly and five for the Senate. Democratic control has stymied Christie’s efforts to reshape the state Supreme Court, which has ruled against some of his spending cuts. Though polls suggest Christie’s coattails won’t be long, Democrats say he may be able to swing enough of the races to shift power. . . . . 

Adding to Buono’s struggles was Christie’s decision to call a special Oct. 16 U.S. Senate election for the seat held by Frank Lautenberg, a five-term Democrat who died in June. That timing keeps the popular Democratic candidate in that race, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, off the November ballot and denies the opposition party any chance of its own coattails. . . . .

Gov Christie vetoes 50 caliber gun ban

I am not sure exactly how to interpret these vetoes because he may have thought he was going to run for president, but it is at least a reasonable sign.  On the other hand, he said that he would have signed a more narrowly tailored ban.  From Fox News:

Republican Gov. Chris Christie on Friday vetoed a ban on .50-caliber rifles that was vigorously opposed by firearms rights advocates and gutted a proposal overhauling the state’s gun permit law. 

Christie said the permit changes adopted by lawmakers were impractical because they rely on technology that hasn’t been developed. 

“None of the technology necessary for this system exists. … the smartcard called for by this bill cannot be implemented now or any time in the foreseeable future,” Christie said in his conditional veto message. 

The centerpiece of the bill, sponsored by Democratic Senate President Steve Sweeney, linked firearms purchases and law enforcement records into a digital smartcard maintained by the state police, Motor Vehicle Commission, mental health facilities and ammunition retailers. . . . 

The proposed ban on military-style .50-caliber rifles went beyond his task force-recommended ban on sales of Barrett .50-caliber long-range rifles and, he said, would have unduly restricted lawful recreational pastime activities. 

“Tellingly, the Legislature points to no instance of this class of firearms being used by even a single criminal in New Jersey,” Christie said. . . .

More on Christie's decisions regarding other gun laws is available here. 

Christie to NBC’s David Gregory: ‘I wish you guys were as tough on the president’

From Fox Nation:

“David, I wish you guys were just as tough on the president,” Christie said. “The president says he’s going to create a million new manufacturing jobs. He doesn’t say how. He says he’s going to reduce the long-term debt and deficit by $4 trillion. Doesn’t say how he’s going to do it. I mean, let’s be fair here. Gov. Romney has laid out a direction and a vision for the direction of this country. He’s not an accountant. He is not going to go line-by-line — as much as you would like him to do — through the budget. But let’s hold the president to the same standard and criticize him as well, because how does he create a million new manufacturing jobs, David? He hasn’t told anybody the specifics of that. How is he going to reduce $4 trillion in debt? We’re still waiting to hear what he thinks about Simpson-Bowles, which he commissioned. I mean, he’s been the president and hasn’t given us specifics. So, let’s be fair, here.” . . .

Put this in the possibly irrelevant column: Christopher Christie’s views on guns in 1995

PolitickerNJ has this old article on Christie's views on one gun issue. It may not be relevant today given that he has hardly spoken out much on this issue since then. There are also other issues than guns.

One hint on U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie’s political ideology comes from his 1995 campaign for the State Assembly, when he attacked two other candidates, Anthony Bucco and Michael Patrick Carroll, for supporting a repeal of the ban on assault weapons. A reader sent PolitickerNJ.com a copy of the mailer from that campaign after Matt Friedman’s story on conservatives wanting to know where the federal prosecutor stands on some state issues.

Christie's position won't hurt him as a general election candidate in a state where polls over the last decade have constistently demonstrated support for an assault weapons ban. His exposure is in the GOP primary against former Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan, a staunch advocate of the Second Amendment. . . .