TRENTON, NJ – The political rumor mill is very active in New Jersey, but one rumor spreading this week has some legs to walk on.
The rumor is that former Governor Chris Christie could soon formally endorse Kamala Harris for President of the United States. Christie’s hatred for Trump is no secret, but the big guy has been on a roll this campaign season after performing dismally on the campaign trail.
Now, insiders claim Christie is mulling an endorsement of Harris.
The recent rumors surrounding former Republican Governor Chris Christie potentially endorsing Kamala Harris for president are nothing short of astonishing, given his political history. Christie, once a staunch supporter of Donald Trump, now seems to be on the verge of aligning himself with a candidate considered by some as one of the most progressive figures in national politics. The idea alone of a former GOP heavyweight like Christie endorsing Harris is enough to make waves in the political landscape, but digging into the background reveals a story full of political twists, personal grievances, and shifting loyalties.
Chris Christie’s political ambitions have always been clear. He first ran for the presidency in 2016, hoping to translate his tough-talking, straight-shooting reputation as the governor of New Jersey into national success. Christie was known for his aggressive prosecutorial background and his brash, no-nonsense leadership style.
However, his presidential campaign floundered in the face of a crowded Republican field. Despite notable debate moments, including his memorable exchange where he skewered Senator Marco Rubio for his robotic talking points, Christie was unable to build enough momentum to challenge the frontrunners, particularly Donald Trump. His exit from the race in early 2016 marked a significant moment when he became one of the first major Republicans to endorse Trump, a decision that stunned many political observers.
Christie’s endorsement of Trump seemed, at the time, to be both strategic and pragmatic. Trump’s outsider campaign was gaining traction, and by aligning with the frontrunner, Christie likely hoped to secure a place in what he assumed would be a Trump administration. Indeed, Christie went on to play a role in Trump’s campaign, but the relationship was not without complications. Christie had already been a controversial figure within the GOP, but his decision to back Trump solidified his standing as a loyal supporter of the man who would soon become the president.
When Trump won the presidency, many expected that Christie would be rewarded for his loyalty with a prominent role in the new administration. Christie had been tapped to head Trump’s transition team, which suggested he was well-positioned for a significant appointment. However, Christie’s role was abruptly cut short, reportedly due to lingering tensions with Trump’s inner circle, particularly Jared Kushner. Years earlier, as a U.S. Attorney, Christie had prosecuted Kushner’s father, which created a longstanding animosity between the two men. This tension ultimately led to Christie’s removal from the transition team, and despite his early support, he was never given a major position in Trump’s government. This snub marked a turning point in the relationship between Christie and Trump, though Christie remained a supporter of the president’s broader agenda during the early years of his administration.
Christie’s support for Trump persisted through the 2020 election, though cracks in their relationship were beginning to show. Christie continued to offer public endorsements of Trump and even helped him with debate preparation during the campaign. However, after contracting COVID-19 following those debate prep sessions—held at Trump’s golf club in Bedminster—Christie began to distance himself from the former president. The fallout from that incident was a highly publicized spat, with Christie blaming Trump for his infection and Trump reportedly accusing Christie and his signature hearty laugh, dubbed “Chortles,” of being the source of the virus. This episode, while seemingly petty, underscored the deteriorating relationship between the two men.
Following Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election, Christie’s public criticism of the former president grew more pronounced. Now a political analyst for ABC News, Christie has routinely criticized Trump, particularly over his handling of the election results and the subsequent attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Some have suggested that Christie’s critiques are part of a broader strategy to reposition himself within the Republican Party, possibly as a voice for the party’s more moderate wing. Others see his turn against Trump as personal, rooted in the various slights and humiliations Christie endured during Trump’s presidency.
It’s against this backdrop that rumors of a Christie endorsement of Kamala Harris seem both shocking and, in some ways, unsurprising. While Christie remains a Republican by affiliation, his current role as a commentator on a network often perceived as left-leaning has led many to question his political loyalties. Furthermore, Christie’s increasingly vocal criticisms of Trump have set him apart from much of the Republican establishment, particularly those who remain loyal to the former president. Endorsing Harris, who has been described by some as more progressive than even Bernie Sanders, would be a seismic shift for Christie and would undoubtedly alienate him from much of the GOP base.
Aligning with Harris would also place Christie alongside other moderate Republicans who have shifted leftward in recent years, such as former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman. Whitman, who also served as EPA Administrator under President George W. Bush, has been a vocal critic of Trump and has even endorsed Democratic candidates in recent elections. For Christie to follow in Whitman’s footsteps by endorsing a candidate as far to the left as Harris would suggest a complete break with the Republican Party as it currently stands, signaling his disillusionment not only with Trump but with the broader direction of the party.
Christie has often stated in interviews that he acts in what he believes is the best interest of the country.
His potential endorsement of Harris would undoubtedly be framed in those terms, with Christie likely emphasizing his belief that Harris, despite her progressive politics, represents a path forward for the country.
Whether or not this is the case, such a move would likely be interpreted by many as an act of political self-preservation or even revenge against Trump and the party that sidelined him.
The political landscape is nothing if not unpredictable, and if Christie does indeed endorse Kamala Harris, it would be one of the most surprising moves in recent memory. It would cement Christie’s break from Trump and the current Republican Party and place him firmly on the opposite side of the ideological spectrum, supporting a candidate widely considered to represent the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Whether Christie’s motivations are driven by a genuine belief in Harris’s platform or by personal grievances, the implications of such an endorsement would reverberate throughout the political world.
