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.
I certainly don't agree with Christie on everything, but I do think he is a good leader. I will definitely consider voting for him, but it depends who he runs against.
I think he will win hands down and I didn't vote for him. He has the art of bull****ting down to a T just like Obama. With this new Unaffordable Health Care being jammed down the working class peoples throats and thier rates skyrocketing and changed they"re going to take it out on the democrats. Without the ACA in the mix I would think the dems would have held onto the POTUS seat in 2016.
Just because a person acts like a bully doesn't make them a leader. He is a self-serving, greedy, politician, not a leader.
He has done nothing for NJ! Over his term unemployment and taxes remain high in NJ. The whole Sandy thing is a joke, he used a devastating event to promote himself. Every move he makes is for his own self interest.
Christie is scum. If for some reason christie wins, which he won't, look for our country to be divided into the haves and the have-nots. Christie will favor the rich at the peril of the middle class and poor.
Amazing how so many people are fooled by a persona, yet do not look at substance. Sickening really, and fundamentally the reason we favor reality stars and athletes over innovators and scientists. Our world is full of morons that are easily fooled.
if the tea party has the house & senate, it probably wont matter much who is the republican president. so the key is to win. however, picking the "moderate" candidates has been a losing formula for republicans in the last two elections.
if the tea party has the house & senate, it probably wont matter much who is the republican president. so the key is to win. however, picking the "moderate" candidates has been a losing formula for republicans in the last two elections.
The 2 "moderates" were both very weak candidates, but even if they were strong, they would have still lost. After Bush's second term, there was enough GOP fatigue to last 2 election cycles. I think a "moderate" republican stands a fair chance of winning next time around. Nominating true social conservative is a sure fire way to guarantee a loss. The country has moved past that, and nobody wants another bible thumper in the white house. The only chance they have of winning is with a fiscally conservative, socially "moderate" candidate. This creates a huge challenge in the primary where bible belt republicans have so much influence. If the choice is between Hillary and a social conservative, Hillary will win by a landslide.
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.
