Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Arid Filch

Chris Christie for President 2016 +1,200

Recommended Posts

He is the ONLY Republican with a shot of winning. Naturally the Tea Party types hate him because he's (1) not crazy (2) believes in treating Obama and the Democrats with respect and civility. He's the closest thing we have to Alan Alda's character from The West Wing.

Personally I'd prefer Huntsman, but he has no shot. So I'll gladly vote for Christie if given the chance.

:no: He wants to take a bat to people.

-QG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Christie runs for the President then (as it stands now), he's got my Independent vote. He has made a number of what could be viewed as "unpopular" decisions which have made NJ more financially sound. My favorite was his pulling the plug out on the additional tunnel from NJ to Manhattan. Although it had a large chunk of Federal and NY cash, any cost overruns would have been carried by NJ. That was a money pit waiting to happen and when he boxed the thing I was jumping for joy (even though I'd have benefitted personally by the project).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The heck with Chris Christie. How about our own Christo for President?

Instead of a First Lady we would have a First Lardy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

This is what people say when they can't keep up. The country has rejected your principles because your principles suck. And now you're pledged mainly to obstructionism. Why should we listen to anything your bunch has to say anymore?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TPW is :moneybag:

Edited by Doctor Detroit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

This part isn't exactly inaccurate. Been watching that happen for about twenty years.

eta* might as well elect the candidate you want. At worst, you get to have a dialogue and help set the terms of the debate instead of mere line-drawing.

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

Umm, thanks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what people say when they can't keep up. The country has rejected your principles because your principles suck. And now you're pledged mainly to obstructionism. Why should we listen to anything your bunch has to say anymore?

"America doesn't agree with me so I'm going to the corner to pout."

Edited by cstu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very interested in seeing how Jeb Bush does in the primaries since he's been positioning himself as a moderate who can win the general election for years. We'll if there are enough traditional Republicans to get him in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very interested in seeing how Jeb Bush does in the primaries since he's been positioning himself as a moderate who can win the general election for years. We'll if there are enough traditional Republicans to get him in.

Compassionate conservatism worked so well the first time around. Better than Obama but that's not saying a whole lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

So all the money pumped in from groups like the Club for Growth into Senate and presidential campaigns is being purposely wasted? Might want to rethink this argument a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Dem/Independent leaning voter, i would enthusiastically embrace Christie is a candidate. He appears to be ver practical in his approach, and I have high hopes that he would drop the pretty social agenda Repubs have had to embrace lately to get the nomination. I would like to know his stance on science...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very interested in seeing how Jeb Bush does in the primaries since he's been positioning himself as a moderate who can win the general election for years. We'll if there are enough traditional Republicans to get him in.

His last name will be his undoing. No matter what he turns out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very interested in seeing how Jeb Bush does in the primaries since he's been positioning himself as a moderate who can win the general election for years. We'll if there are enough traditional Republicans to get him in.

His last name will be his undoing. No matter what he turns out to be.

He should change it.. Jeb Beaver maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be tempted to vote for Christie if he can manage to get the Republican nomination.

After getting through what I'd call stage 1 of healthcare reform with ACA, the next biggest issue on the table is a major overhaul of our tax system. I think we're likely to get a better outcome with a Republican in the White House, and I'd much rather have a social moderate like Christie be the one driving it.

Why? Aren't Democrats supposedly looking out for the middle class and poor while Republicans the top 1%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the majority criticism against Christie in this thread isn't his politics but his weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rand Paul is a deeper and more complex person that most give him credit for. It's an insult to Paul for Palin and Cruz to be mentioned in the same breath with him.

Kind of hard to really buy into this.

Paul supporters are :loco:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn Beck on Christ Christie: "A fat nightmare"

Coming up Friday evening at 9, Piers Morgan vacates his own New York studio, as CNN colleague S.E. Cupp cozies up to his desk, and gets comfortable in his chair, taking a turn as the program's guest host.

Normally accustomed to the early evening hours, tomorrow will see Cupp perform in primetime, as she welcomes Glenn Beck for an hour-long, face to face interview.

Colleagues at TheBlaze TV, Beck and Cupp spend much of their time talking politics, and the conversation quickly jumps ahead to 2016 and the next general election.

"Let me ask you about the real world. Chris Christie is the real world," begins Cupp, referencing a man many assume will make a run for Washington and the nation's highest office.

Beck, suffice it to say, will not be backing the Garden State governor:

"No, Chris Christie is a fat nightmare," blurts Beck. "He is a nightmare."

Even as Cupp lists Christie's strengths, including the fact that he currently leads Democratic favorite Hillary Clinton in the Quinnipiac national poll, Beck maintains his position:

"Don't care ... don't care ... don't care," Beck exclaims, before categorizing Christie in a way that contradicts his own political positions. "He's not a conservative. He's a progressive ... have you ever looked into his, uh, nightmare of global warming?"

In addition to environmental issues, the conservative television and radio host also has concerns with Christie's stance on guns, and assumes his interviewer – and fellow Republican – agrees:

"You should be well aware of where he stands on guns," he says. "Are you comfortable with that?"

Cupp admits to agreeing with her guest:

"I'm not, no."

So, if Christie isn't Beck's pick to lead his party, who then would he like to see representing the red states in three years time?

"I don't know, because I don't trust any of them," he says, before Cupp moves to the Republican's rising star:

"You like Ted Cruz a lot," she asks.

Beck, in fact, does like the junior senator from Texas:

"I like Ted Cruz a lot."

However, viewed as a long shot, and a man unlikely to ride his government shutdown initiative all the way to Pennsylvania Avenue, will Cruz's underdog status force Beck to abandon ship in favor of a more viable candidate:

"Yes ... I'm not going to play the game of ... I'm not going to sell my principles out anymore."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

lmfao

You are all so ####### crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if the far right has learned a lesson from 2012. The candidate they like best probably can't win a general election and would probably lose by a bigger margin than Mitt did. But they're compelled to support someone just like that in the primaries. That's some catch, that Catch 22.

I could be all wrong about this if the far right has been quietly winning over millions of voters into thinking that we need less gay marriage and more god in the schools. Maybe the young people are turning back to the traditional American values of making it more difficult to get contraception and having less science in general.

Ah, yes. I love it so when the left gives the right advice on whom to select, usually the most milquetoast individuals they can find. Then when election time comes around the gloves come off and those same candidates become 'right-wing extremists' out to rob women of their rights and starve children. It's utterly predictable.

The "far right" isn't concerned about winning national elections. With Hollywood, the media and organizations like the Internal Revenue Service actively working against us around the clock, we know that popular culture and the confiscatory power of the state are not on our side. What you guys simply just don't get is that we're no longer interested in reforming the system. Washington, D.C. is bankrupt both morally and financially and we're done with it.

Oh, we'll do our part locally and I suspect the House of Representatives will retain a strong element of conservatism to act as a bulwark against the rest of the madness coming from our federal government. As for the rest of it, enjoy the ride downhill. You guys own it all now.

lmfao

You are all so ####### crazy.

I let that response from brother TPW slide, didn't I? Wait'll he finds out that we lefties are aiming to take out his precious House of Representatives, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the majority criticism against Christie in this thread isn't his politics but his weight.

Well that is whats most important isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the majority criticism against Christie in this thread isn't his politics but his weight.

Well that is whats most important isn't it?

BOLD prediction: Democrats make fun of Christie's weight for the next 2 years.

The Democratic party trots out the first woman presidential candidate, with a 2-term President as her "backup"/ confidant. Americans forget completely about Obamacare (which will continue for at least 2 more terms), and embrace the women's lib/Bill lovefest angle with the Democrats winning in a landslide.

The Republicans will fight internally with the Tea Party throughout the Republican primaries, and emerge giving the impression to any Americans who might even potentially be on the fence that the party is disorganized and non-unified.

In terms of fighting the uphill battle of a constantly growing Democratic voting population, the rock will fall on Sisyphus during the general election campaign, and the Democrats run away with this on election day. Republicans then move into fringe status and start to splinter, not having been in the White House for over a decade.

Am I in the ballpark here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the majority criticism against Christie in this thread isn't his politics but his weight.

Well that is whats most important isn't it?

BOLD prediction: Democrats make fun of Christie's weight for the next 2 years.

The Democratic party trots out the first woman presidential candidate, with a 2-term President as her "backup"/ confidant. Americans forget completely about Obamacare (which will continue for at least 2 more terms), and embrace the women's lib/Bill lovefest angle with the Democrats winning in a landslide.

The Republicans will fight internally with the Tea Party throughout the Republican primaries, and emerge giving the impression to any Americans who might even potentially be on the fence that the party is disorganized and non-unified.

In terms of fighting the uphill battle of a constantly growing Democratic voting population, the rock will fall on Sisyphus during the general election campaign, and the Democrats run away with this on election day. Republicans then move into fringe status and start to splinter, not having been in the White House for over a decade.

Am I in the ballpark here?

Sounds about right to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the majority criticism against Christie in this thread isn't his politics but his weight.

Well that is whats most important isn't it?

BOLD prediction: Democrats make fun of Christie's weight for the next 2 years.

The Democratic party trots out the first woman presidential candidate, with a 2-term President as her "backup"/ confidant. Americans forget completely about Obamacare (which will continue for at least 2 more terms), and embrace the women's lib/Bill lovefest angle with the Democrats winning in a landslide.

The Republicans will fight internally with the Tea Party throughout the Republican primaries, and emerge giving the impression to any Americans who might even potentially be on the fence that the party is disorganized and non-unified.

In terms of fighting the uphill battle of a constantly growing Democratic voting population, the rock will fall on Sisyphus during the general election campaign, and the Democrats run away with this on election day. Republicans then move into fringe status and start to splinter, not having been in the White House for over a decade.

Am I in the ballpark here?

Sounds about right to me.

Agreed. I'll also add the prediction that by the end of HillBillary's 4th term in office our national debt will be +/- 25 trillion with unfunded liabilities in the +/- 125 trillion range. As a replacement for the rolling disaster which is Obamacare, there will additionally be a major push for single-payer healthcare similar to their original attempt at such in 1993.

As a result of their successful identity politicking and naked vote buying via handouts, the Democrats will become entrenched at the federal level for many decades to come in a manner similar to the Institutional Revolutionary Party of Mexico during most of the 20th century. This de facto one-party state will cause the United States to face similar corruption related difficulties and a steadily declining standard of living for most Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Dem/Independent leaning voter, i would enthusiastically embrace Christie is a candidate. He appears to be ver practical in his approach, and I have high hopes that he would drop the pretty social agenda Repubs have had to embrace lately to get the nomination. I would like to know his stance on science...

His stance is whatever is convenient at the given moment: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/environment/global-warming/gov-chris-christie-now-says-there-no-proof-climate-change

-QG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of Christie any which way.

I get irritated when people bring up the weight thing at all - it's bad form and bad politics to do so IMO. Just makes him a martyr.

That said it's interesting that Beck used Christie's weight as a go-to component of his attack on him.

-QG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Dem/Independent leaning voter, i would enthusiastically embrace Christie is a candidate. He appears to be ver practical in his approach, and I have high hopes that he would drop the pretty social agenda Repubs have had to embrace lately to get the nomination. I would like to know his stance on science...

His stance is whatever is convenient at the given moment: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/environment/global-warming/gov-chris-christie-now-says-there-no-proof-climate-change

-QG

As opposed to every other politician?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Dem/Independent leaning voter, i would enthusiastically embrace Christie is a candidate. He appears to be ver practical in his approach, and I have high hopes that he would drop the pretty social agenda Repubs have had to embrace lately to get the nomination. I would like to know his stance on science...

His stance is whatever is convenient at the given moment: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/environment/global-warming/gov-chris-christie-now-says-there-no-proof-climate-change

-QG

As opposed to every other politician?

Just busting myths - that he is somehow different. He very much is not.

-QG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Dem/Independent leaning voter, i would enthusiastically embrace Christie is a candidate. He appears to be ver practical in his approach, and I have high hopes that he would drop the pretty social agenda Repubs have had to embrace lately to get the nomination. I would like to know his stance on science...

His stance is whatever is convenient at the given moment: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/environment/global-warming/gov-chris-christie-now-says-there-no-proof-climate-change

-QG

As opposed to every other politician?

Just busting myths - that he is somehow different. He very much is not.

-QG

I don't see how that is contradictory to begin with, but this doesn't bust any "myths" even if it were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a CNN poll among registered voters, Hillary is the runaway leader against every Republican candidate but one: Chris Christie.

:popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should be fun for him to explain...

Private messages between Governor’s Christie’s deputy chief of staff and two of his top executives at the Port Authority reveal a vindictive effort to create “traffic problems in Fort Lee” by shutting lanes to the George Washington Bridge and apparent pleasure at the resulting gridlock.

The messages are replete with references and insults to Fort Lee’s mayor, who had failed to endorse Christie for re-election and they chronicle how they tried to reach Port Authority officials in a vain effort to eliminate the paralyzing gridlock that overwhelmed his town of 35,000 which sits in the shadow of the bridge, the world’s busiest.

The documents obtained by The Record raise serious doubts about months of claims by the Christie administration that the September closures of local access lanes to the George Washington Bridge were part of a traffic study initiated solely by the Port Authority. Instead, they show that one of the governor’s top aides was deeply involved in the decision to choke off the borough’s access to the bridge, and they provide the strongest indication yet that it was part of a politically-motivated vendetta—a notion that Christie has publicly denied....

http://www.northjersey.com/news/christie_kelly_bridge_lane_closures_emails.html

Edited by Don Quixote
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those emails are real bad. Now the woman will come out and say it was all her idea, Christie had no involvement, etc. But this is the exact type of bullying maneuver that Christie would actually pull just to piss off those he considers his opponents. Which is a shame because it's probably the same attitude that makes him good at his job when he really tries to dig in.

Edited by RUSF18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better get used to the term President Clinton again.

Right now, and I know it's early, I'd vote for Christie. But I'm pretty sure the Republican establishment will do their best to lay waste to the guy before we even get close to the nomination. Which will force me to pull the lever for a Democrat for the first time in my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those emails are real bad. Now the woman will come out and say it was all her idea, Christie had no involvement, etc. But this is the exact type of bullying maneuver that Christie would actually pull just to piss off those he considers his opponents. Which is a shame because it's probably the same attitude that makes him good at his job when he really tries to dig in.

Well, she can say it and can resign or Christie can fire her. But the problem is that on December 13, 2013, Christie said that the lane closures were "absolutely unequivocally not" political - which either means he lied or if he was telling truth, has no idea what his staff is doing (either one reflecting poorly on him).

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know who wouldn't do this?

Gary Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those emails are real bad. Now the woman will come out and say it was all her idea, Christie had no involvement, etc. But this is the exact type of bullying maneuver that Christie would actually pull just to piss off those he considers his opponents. Which is a shame because it's probably the same attitude that makes him good at his job when he really tries to dig in.

Well, she can say it and can resign or Christie can fire her. But the problem is that on December 13, 2013, Christie said that the lane closures were "absolutely unequivocally not" political - which either means he lied or if he was telling truth, has no idea what his staff is doing (either one reflecting poorly on him).

The former screws him, the latter he can come back from though. So I'm willing to wager on which approach he tries to take. Doesn't mean the voters will buy it of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those emails are real bad. Now the woman will come out and say it was all her idea, Christie had no involvement, etc. But this is the exact type of bullying maneuver that Christie would actually pull just to piss off those he considers his opponents. Which is a shame because it's probably the same attitude that makes him good at his job when he really tries to dig in.

Well, she can say it and can resign or Christie can fire her. But the problem is that on December 13, 2013, Christie said that the lane closures were "absolutely unequivocally not" political - which either means he lied or if he was telling truth, has no idea what his staff is doing (either one reflecting poorly on him).

Sounds familiar... :coffee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christie cancels only public event today.

Every bully has a plan till they get punched in the mouf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a CNN poll among registered voters, Hillary is the runaway leader against every Republican candidate but one: Chris Christie.

:popcorn:

There goes that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.