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.
Save yourself the facetious posts and read the OP. You don't think the GWB lane closures were an act of retaliation. So be it. There is enough critical mass out there who thinks otherwise, including from within his own party. But yes, you can keep denying as more and more information gets released in the public domain up to the day Christie drops out of the 2016 elections. He will drop out, that's a given.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakeJones
Those are false choices. It's your personal opinion that having a staffer betray you makes you a buffoon
Remember Guillianni? Like him or hate him no one can argue he was a straight shooter and responsible manager. Yet his police chief of 4 years, Bernard Kerik, who he trusted turned out to be crooked and a serial liar.
Guiliani wasn't fit to be president of the US either and even his own party refused to nominate him. He even finished behind Huckabee and Ron Paul. Goes to show what a lousy POTUS people think he would have made.
Like retaliating as a first option against petty political opponents isn't
poor judgement?
It's normal human nature, not admirable, to retaliate against someone who has beaten you. But when you have WON, to retaliate against those you have soundly trounced borders on psychotic or at last vicious.
Christie is most assuredly finished politically. The only question is whether he will be allowed to hold onto the governorship.
I'll bet a LOT of champagne has been guzzled in the Bush households this last month.
Those are false choices. It's your personal opinion that having a staffer betray you makes you a buffoon
It wasn't "a" staffer.
Quote:
Remember Guillianni? Like him or hate him no one can argue he was a straight shooter and responsible manager. Yet his police chief of 4 years, Bernard Kerik, who he trusted turned out to be crooked and a serial liar.
Was it just incompetently bad judgement or was he exactly who Giuliani actually wanted?
It's normal human nature, not admirable, to retaliate against someone who has beaten you. But when you have WON, to retaliate against those you have soundly trounced borders on psychotic or at last vicious.
Yes, that's what I mean about exercising poor judgement. For all we know the mayor of FL may have himself been a petty scoundrel. But why continue to throw mud when CC had already won by a large margin, and when he had plenty of time and political capital to negotiate a more cooperative relationship? At least Guiliani knew how to keep petty squabbles away from the public view, even if it meant choosing his fights. This fellow Christie just showed the country how little self control and statesmanship he has.
Save yourself the facetious posts and read the OP. You don't think the GWB lane closures were an act of retaliation.
Woah there, hold on cowboy. That was retaliation initiated by Christie staffers on their initiative. If you have hard evidence to show that this was directed by Christie or that he had knowledge of this action then by all means provide this for the the public to see. And I don't mean a city-data poster's title on a vindictive discussion thread.
At this point such accusations are at best speculative and at worst slanderous
Woah there, hold on cowboy. That was retaliation initiated by Christie staffers on their initiative. If you have hard evidence to show that this was directed by Christie or that he had knowledge of this action then by all means provide this for the the public to see. And I don't mean a city-data poster's title on a vindictive discussion thread.
At this point such accusations are at best speculative and at worst slanderous
On their own initiative? Yeah right.
Nobody is saying he should go to jail and few are calling for his impeachment so you can throw away your request for hard evidence.
Much fewer people now want to vote for him and they don't need hard evidence to support their opinion.
they don't need hard evidence to support their opinion.
Thank you, at last we have it, it's your opinion he's lying. Not based on fact, but your opinion
Nothing wrong with that, but let's not all pretend that Christie has been shown to have lied or has known about the lane closings, because no such evidence exists
Thank you, at last we have it, it's your opinion he's lying. Not based on fact, but your opinion
Nothing wrong with that, but let's not all pretend that Christie has been shown to have lied or has known about the lane closings, because no such evidence exists
Oh please. If what's available in the public domain is not compelling enough then his poll numbers would not have taken such a big hit. Nobody's waiting for a note with his handwriting. Like I said, he'll drop out of 2016. Most of the people in this thread seem to agree.
That was retaliation initiated by Christie staffers on their initiative.
It is amazing that you are able to believe this.
What possible motive would they have to initiate this retaliation? Why would they risk their jobs doing something without their boss's permission--to retaliate on behalf of their boss? It's nonsense.
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.
