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.
Latest polls are out Christie still has a 59% job approval rating across the board. 67% across the board say this incident has not affected their trust in the governor.
Further proof that the news media, pundits, partisan lackeys, and online chat forums are making more out of this situation than most rational NJ residents.
this doesn't surprise me at all. again...i don't think people are making it out to be a huge deal, but any time more information comes out about it, it will be reported on. most friends i've been talking to think impeachment talk at this point is absurd, but if something comes out tieing it directly to him, you'll have that talk then.
there's always going to be people calling for one's head, no matter what party they are from. the Pew poll i posted about also indicates most people in the country aren't paying very close attention to it...which i suspected anyways. people don't usually follow what's going on to another state's governor, even if they are presidential hopefuls.
Either way it's not looking good for Gov. Christie. If he is found guilty of these new allegations involving his misuse of Sandy Hook funding, then he should probably do NJ residents a favor and resign from his position as Governor while he still has some dignity.
i doubt he broke any laws with it. if every politician that is guilty of giving contracts to their buddies is someone who should resign, then our government is done. i don't know NJ's bid process, but I'm willing to bet he followed the process, irrespective of who "won" the contract ultimately. It's not that difficult to follow the process and still give contracts, legally, to people you're connected to. And it's common practice also. That goes for Democrats and Republicans.
The Stronger than the Storm commercials? He chose to spend $2 million more, why is this the end of the world, as well? His intention for the campaign was to alert everyone that many businesses along the Jersey Shore were open and ready for summer. We weren't a complete mess anymore in many areas. He didn't want to lose tourism over fears the shore towns couldn't handle tourists and weren't ready. We lost enough in Sandy, we didn't need to lose revenue for the summer on top of it. Small businesses were at risk of not surviving without a typical summer season after suffering storm damage and rentals were down, even in houses untouched or fixed up in time.
He wanted to feature his family because the Jersey Shore is a family friendly place. He is passionate about rebuilding after Sandy, it's quite obvious, so I see no issue in him and his family appearing in a campaign to promote tourism after a devastating storm. This is blown out of proportion, as usual.
i mostly agree...as long as that $2m more added some value to the campaign. if he overpaid by $2m, then as taxpayers, we should all be unhappy with that move.
So we're just supposed to hand all the money over to every home owner? Look, I do feel sorry for those who lost first or second homes, but it's not our job to completely bail them out. It's a risk living on or near the ocean, bay, lagoon, etc. I take a risk living near a river and have flood insurance. If my home floods, it's not like I didn't see the possibility coming. I understand Sandy's surge affected areas that didn't expect flooding, but it's par for the course.
I live in Cranford and during Irene, streets that have never seen floodwaters flooded. But can't say I NEVER saw it coming, since the river winds through here so dramatically that our nickname is "The Venice of New Jersey". It's a risk you take. If you owned a second home you couldn't even afford to begin with, I feel less sorry for you. Come on.
It's not the state or country's job to help everyone. Dealing with FEMA and insurance is difficult, sometimes unfair and definitely annoying, but it's still not my responsibility to make sure your home gets rebuilt. Those who own businesses are just as important as those who own homes. People's livelihoods were at stake, and the commercial and STTS campaign was trying to help that. Helping homeowners is a much more difficult and complicated task. The campaign was to generate tourism for the state and for businesses who rely on the summer months to help them get by, and God knows plenty of businesses were destroyed, as well.
I bet if he never did a commercial and the STTS thing, people would be complaining he did nothing to generate tourism, especially if our summer season turned out to be a dud. He'd be blamed for that, too. As much as politicians can suck, sometimes they really can't win.
then why is it our job to run marketing campaigns for them?
Lanes closed! trucks carrying taxpayer cash to investigate CC cause traffic jam
How much much taxpayer money are the feds and state legislators like Pallone spending in the investigation of closing two lanes in a state where twice daily traffic jams and lane closures are a dailt occurrence?
Imagine the DOJ assigns a US attornet within 24 hrs of CC's news conference! Holder never acted so quickly unless it was to denegrate AZ's law before actually reading the brief legislation.
Holder should be so diligent about resolving far more important issue than a lane closure in NJ.
These actions clearly demonstrate the political venegence that motivates NJ legislators and the DOJ.
He spent money EARMARKED FOR RELIEF TO ACTUAL VICTIMS. That is the issue.
There is a bid process for state contracts and he violated that process and went with a bid that cost almost twice as much (5 million vs 2.5 million) as the next one just because this one proposed having him in it. There was nothing that showed HE needed to be in those commercials and he certainly did not need to use money set aside for the victims of the storm to essentially make campaign commercials for his election.
actually, i believe all the reports say the state got $25M earmarked for marketing campaigns to rebuild the tourism industry. i don't remember exactly where i read that, but I do remember reading it. if that's the case, it's entirely possible that the $25M could only be spent on marketing campaigns...I don't know those specifics though, but sometimes that's how the funding works.
I wouldn't say I'm "outraged" about Bridgegate. I think that it's despicable, but I also believe Christie that he didn't know. At the same time, I agree it is still his responsibility (as he said in his press conference) as governor and boss to those aides who actually had a direct part in this. There is no proof he knew, as of yet. It's a confusing situation if you ask me. I'm not sure why anybody would close the GW to punish the mayor of Fort Lee. I'm especially not sure why that would happen given that NJ is a blue state with many local politicians who don't support Christie, so why go after that one guy? Buono had no shot, everybody knew this including Buono so I don't even understand why the effort was put in at all? I guess I just really don't see him as caring about this one mayor so much to actually do this, when issues like Sandy are ongoing and emerging.
The day the news broke, he was going to hold a press conference on Sandy housing progress, or something along those lines. It was canceled after this scandal broke but my point is with issues like Sandy, why waste time on a bridge and one mayor? I just don't think it adds up that he knew. At the same time, it doesn't add up that his aides would care this much, either. I guess I just have a lot of confusion and a lot of questions. If it comes out that he did know, of course my opinion would change. I would be disappointed, too.
The day of the boardwalk fire, September 12, Bridget Kelly is glued to her phone in most photos. Christie, meanwhile is engaged in talk with the first responders and clearly worried/upset about the fire. Phone records prove Kelly was texting/emailing about the bridge closures and effects it had. She knew, and was engrossed in her phone and this issue more than the fire. Christie, on the other hand, was engrossed in the fire. It's just something I think about because if he knew that day what was actually going on, it sure doesn't look like it while it's obvious Kelly knew and was more worried about it than the fire. Also, at first Christie said he was told the bridge was closing for a traffic study. If you look at the conversations between Kelly and the PA official Wildstein, they mention this so called study. I think it's plausible that Christie, and in turn the PANYNJ (what did they know about the closings??), was lied to. Just some things I've thought about. I think a lot, I analyze a lot, and I'm not going to sit here and assume he knew when to me, at this time, it doesn't make sense yet that he must have known. Just my opinions. Sorry this is so long, but you asked.
so, given all the questions you have, the next question for me is....why would his aides do this all on their own, for just one mayor, unless they had some reason to believe Christie wanted to get back at this specific mayor, or for some larger reason (as theories have been thrown out there)? of course, this is pure speculation, but given all the questions you just posted, that's what leads me to it being hard to believe that he didn't know at least that this type of stuff was going on, even if he didn't "order" it.
Christie had to be worried about the fire. If he did know about it, it's entirely possible he was able to not worry about it while there was a massive fire going on, no?
As for the study....even if he was lied to...if you were in his shoes, wouldn't you be looking for proof of this study? That's the piece that gets me. He just said "oh, ok, you're doing a study" and never worried about it again?
And anyone who knows anything about media agencies knows Sigma is not even in the same league as MWW. Politcal connections or not.
which is why, as long as the bid process was followed, i think it's fine. it'd be like complaining that the state went with PriceWaterHouseCooper instead of Rothstein & Kass. RK is a regional accounting firm with lower rates than PWC, but when you're a certain size entity (i swear....not a christie fat joke!) you're gonna go with the bigger players (again....not a fat joke!).
The sharks smell blood, but Christie could fight them off yet. If he manages to avoid a direct link to himself in the bridge thing, it won't make any difference in the primaries. No one outside of NY and NJ will care by then.
i think you're probably right. a few states might. it really depends on whether his opponents go below the belt in their attack ads. if no one mentions it, it'll barely be talked about other than the pundits on MSNBC whom almost no one is watching anyways.
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.
Lanes closed! trucks carrying taxpayer cash to investigate CC cause traffic jam
