Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Top Democratic officials launched a concerted offensive Wednesday to define New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in a negative light, believing that he has emerged from his reelection landslide as the Republican Party’s strongest potential presidential contender for 2016.
Some Democratic strategists said the party made a mistake by not spending more money to attack Christie during the gubernatorial campaign, which might have suppressed his margin of victory and denied the Republican a sweeping mandate in a blue state. In the months to come, Democrats say, they plan to chip away at Christie’s moderate image and present him nationally as a hard-edged conservative.
Scum of the earth and democrats? Can't tell the difference. Despicable people who do exactly what they accuse others of. Without a compliant media, stupid publicly *educated* voters, and dirty politics (what they did in Virginia to fool the stupid and split the vote) they wouldn't win any elections.
They're very good at being bottom feeding scum. Just as we see with their operatives on c-d. Mean, ugly, unpleasant people who were liked in school.
Typical - don't look at the guy being good across party lines, what he has done or the message he brings only look at his party affiliations. Same liberal attack as always.
Typical - don't look at the guy being good across party lines, what he has done or the message he brings only look at his party affiliations. Same liberal attack as always.
There have been many posts that have acknowledged that Christie uses bi-partisanship in many instances, but why does that make him above reproach? Christie has baggage and just like every other politician or possible 2016 candidate, he will be fair game for having his dirty laundry sifted through. Would you prefer that we bypass the nominations, campaign, debates and election and just insert him into the Oval Office come 2016?
There is a difference between reviewing the good and bad points of a candidate during an election, and actively campaigning against a potential candidate 3 years before the election. How many good people would be able to survive 3 years of having every statement and every decision, cast in the worst possible light? Were not talking about just questioning the statement and decision, but determining how to cast them negatively. In addition, for the next 3 years Democrats that used to work with him will have second thoughts, because in doing so it strengthen his position and goes against the parties propaganda.
As à Democrat I'm obviously not very welcome to comment here -- but I like Christie. In my opinion Democrats should lay off the guy because if things go much further south with Obamacare, it is likely a Republican could end up in the WH in 2017 and Christie is a better alternative than many.
I wish Christie would just lay off fueling speculation about a run for a while so people won't pile on so soon that he gets knocked out of contention before things even get rolling. Depending on who the Democratic nominee turns out to be, I would consider voting for him.
There is a difference between reviewing the good and bad points of a candidate during an election, and actively campaigning against a potential candidate 3 years before the election. How many good people would be able to survive 3 years of having every statement and every decision, cast in the worst possible light? Were not talking about just questioning the statement and decision, but determining how to cast them negatively. In addition, for the next 3 years Democrats that used to work with him will have second thoughts, because in doing so it strengthen his position and goes against the parties propaganda.
Why are so insistent that Christie is unique in a way that gives him saint status? Every time Obama sneezed it became a conspiracy theory and you want to talk about "propagnada"? Really? Even the Romney camp did not like things they ran across when they vetted Christie and you want to sweep his negative traits and agendas under the rug? Many in NJ are not pleased with Christie and his cooperation with Obama after Hurricane Sandy should not have been such a big deal other than the fact that the right wing has become so far right and radical that anyone seen talking the POTUS becomes taboo. Christie has done things that are not worthy of the halo you are tryng to place on his head. Are you kidding with this stuff?
Last edited by sickofnyc; 11-07-2013 at 09:29 AM..
Here we go again. The one thing Democrats are good at: personally attacking and smearing those who disagree with them.
They did something worse - President Obama personally called Chris Chistie to congratulate him. Wonder who leaked that one. I'm betting it wasn't Christie.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
