Jonathan Tobin notices the gaping hole in Chris Christie’s resume:

But whatever his motivation, if he really wants to be president, he’s going to have to start speaking on foreign affairs with the same abandon and gusto that he employs on domestic issues.

Christie’s lack of foreign policy experience wouldn’t necessarily be an insurmountable problem if there were any indication that he was giving these issues serious attention, but there’s no sign of that, either. It would be much better for him and for the quality of the debate if Christie took the time to inform himself about these issues before speaking about them with “abandon and gusto.” There are already more than enough blowhards in the GOP that are only too happy to sound off on a foreign policy issue without understanding it, so Christie shouldn’t try to do the same. Since Christie doesn’t seem to have much interest in or familiarity with these issues, it’s likely to blow up in his face if he makes a point of commenting on each new development or crisis. Half of Romney’s weakness on foreign policy was that he thought he knew a lot about things he didn’t understand very well, which led him to make one blunder after another.

I don’t think Christie has much of a chance as a presidential candidate for other reasons, but whatever chance he does have can only be reduced by establishing a reputation as an ignorant loudmouth on foreign policy. If Christie wants to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, he would do well to keep quiet on this subject until he has learned enough to be able to say something worth hearing. If he can’t or won’t do that, he would be a terrible nominee and a worse president anyway and should be rejected by the voters.