All the points you make except #7 & #8 are equally applicable to a US Senate campaign. The difference with those points is that a Senate race would fit the Judge's already existing national policy focus without dealing with the deeply entrenched misinformation the public (especially in states like New Jersey) has about nullification.
Also, a Governor would need a majority in the Legislature to accomplish #7 & #8. A single Senator has the power to hold up new law, too, without a majority vote, so there is some power in a single Senate seat that isn't in a Governor's hands alone. And on some things there are other Senators that could join him on that, too.
Name recognition would be built if he started a race for Senate soon.
He would lose more credibility than he gains if he challenges Christie and loses the Republican primary.
If you succeed in drafting the Judge in the short time you have for a viable Governor's race (less than 7 months til the Republican Primary)I hope it won't have any bad repercussions on an attempt to draft him for US Senate immediately after that.
I hope that the Judge doesn't run for Governor because he will be less likely to be persuaded to run for Senate if he loses in the primary 7 months from now. With a popular incumbent Republican running for re-election there may be an unnecessary fight in the New Jersey Republican party over someone that would otherwise have time to build bridges in the party if the Judge starts his Senate race early this year.
We don't need more "passionate" people, we need more of the passionate people to be wise about how to persuade people about liberty and what races and campaign strategies have the best chance of success.
Political wisdom is our great need now, not merely hoping for the average New Jersey voter to get "passionate" about liberty by a Fox News host challenging the popular Governor on a platform of nullification.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: