• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did Chris Christie gun down Romney? [W:106]

Obama should've just said, "If you want federal aid, endorse me."

There is a good chance that is exactly how Christie saw it. That it was his ass or Romney's ass, and he decided to save his own.
 
What Christie did is give the media a sound bite of him with President Obama saying "The President is going a great job!"

Yet as of that moment, the only "great thing" Obama had done was walk down the street with Christie. Oh how great! Obama can walk. And after getting that sound bite, Obama didn't even visit any other area, including New York, and flew off to Las Vegas.

There are only a few possibilities - all plausible:

1. Christie was just star struck by being in Obama's presence, like an infatuated teenager
2. That he feared Obama would block all aid, living the crisis all landing on Christie and maybe then costing Christie re-election
3. Christie wants to leave 2016 open for himself - with Romney going from 10 points behind when Christie endorsed him to in a deadheat.
4. Christie is just a big mouthed fool.

Romney diverted significant sums of $$ from his campaign towards aid. Did any - even ONE - Democratic endorsing Obama praise Romney? Or did they only used that too as an attack - that Romney was playing politics with a crisis? Of course that is what they would do - that's politics. Nothing wrong with that. Its called playing to win, rather than being an idiot. If you HIGH PROFILE ENDORSE SOMEONE, you do not in the last minute declare the other candidate is "doing a great job!"

For Christie to give the media the sound bite for them to play over and over and over and over - Christie being Romney's keynote speaker - "The President is going a great job!" was ignorant and naive at best. That was the premier sound bite then of every network, when polls shifted to a majority of voters saying Obama's doing a good job, and that was when Romney's campaign begin losing ground.

If Christie was being anything but a fool at best, as of the moment Christie said that raving praise, can anyone name anything Obama had actually done - other than walk down the street with Christie? Anything "great?"

Christie's either is an idiot or a double-crosser. No other way to read it.

A while back I made a comment in a topic when this sound bite first came out I said, "Looks like Christie was a RINO all along." It was sarcasm but I knew it would come along eventually, and here it is.

By the way, are you really REALLY calling for politicians to be MORE dishonest?
 
Does anyone actually think this will change things?

Bloomberg's endorsement will have absolutely zero impact. Christie's statement will have absolutely zero impact.

I wouldn't say absolutely zero impact for either of those, but I do think the OP is overestimating the impact of the statement.
 
So you wanted Chris Christie to be dishonest?

As of the moment Christie gave the Democrats that devastating sound bite, what "great" things had Obama done besides walk down the street with Christie. BE HONEST - since you claim Christie was just being honest.
 


It's time to end this ****, right now.

/thread


You ignore the actual problem. Mittens has been running on the incorrect notion that Obama will not pork with republicans, and that he is not a good leader. Both of these arguments got blown away when we saw Obama and Christie working together and Christie says he was a good leader who did the right thing in New Jersey. Christie's endorsement doesn't mean a thing, it is him palling around with Obama for the past few days destroying the lies that Obama is some sort of super partisan jerk who never works with the right.
 
I wouldn't say absolutely zero impact for either of those, but I do think the OP is overestimating the impact of the statement.

Yes, it was foolish and wasted effort for the Obama team to repeat it incessantly and the reason MSNBC ran that clip so often was to divert from Obama's real campaign given how strongly MSNBC opposed Obama, right?
 
As of the moment Christie gave the Democrats that devastating sound bite, what "great" things had Obama done besides walk down the street with Christie. BE HONEST - since you claim Christie was just being honest.

Here's Christie to explain it



I mean if you're criticizing what he said, why don't you know what he said?
 
Chris Christie did what he was supposed to do, and that was help his people. Partisanship has no place in crisis, and the only reason this is hurting the republicans is because of their extreme hatred of bi-partisanship.

You praising Christie is proof of why Republicans should throw him under the bus - the way he did to Romney.

How, exactly, did Christie "help his people" by praising Obama? Because you know Obama is a retaliatory bastard who would have punished everyone in N.J. if Christie didn't? That's your point, isn't it?

Hmmm, Romney stood on a stage with Obama 3 times, and Christie only walked down the street with Obama once - and Romney repeatedly in the debates praised Obama and stated agreement with him - particularly the last debate.

So, please, in your next message, praise the bi-partisanship of Romney.
 
Yes, it was foolish and wasted effort for the Obama team to repeat it incessantly and the reason MSNBC ran that clip so often was to divert from Obama's real campaign given how strongly MSNBC opposed Obama, right?

I wouldn't say it was a wasted effort by the Obama campaign, but I do think it'll have a very limited effect. Hardly anything in Presidential politics actually affects the race much.
 
You praising Christie is proof of why Republicans should throw him under the bus - the way he did to Romney.

How, exactly, did Christie "help his people" by praising Obama? Because you know Obama is a retaliatory bastard who would have punished everyone in N.J. if Christie didn't? That's your point, isn't it?

Hmmm, Romney stood on a stage with Obama 3 times, and Christie only walked down the street with Obama once - and Romney repeatedly in the debates praised Obama and stated agreement with him - particularly the last debate.

So, please, in your next message, praise the bi-partisanship of Romney.

The GOP shouldn't throw Christie under the bus anymore than they should throw Romney under a bus for agreeing with Obama in the debates. Sometimes its the right thing to do.
 
Jesus Christ...

Now what if Christie isn't actually a Republican, but a Kenyan, Marxist sleeper agent working for the White House? Obama used Al Gore's weather machine to create Hurricane Sandy, secretly destroyed the East Coast, and took all the credit for the rebuilding. Then Christie would seal the deal by congratulating the President who would be able to use knowledge given to him in the Presidential Book of Secrets to find the 7th seal, release the anti-Christ, and destroy humanity. Makes way more sense than Christie simply being an actual, ****ing adult about this.
 
Well of course it's apostasy in conservativeliberalworld to suggest that the president Romney is anything but the anti-Christ.

I'm afraid two can play at that game, my friend.
 
I wouldn't say it was a wasted effort by the Obama campaign, but I do think it'll have a very limited effect. Hardly anything in Presidential politics actually affects the race much.

That's as wrong as can be. Romney's "I like to fire people" and "47%" pounded him. The first debate totally reversed the direction of the election. And when Christie endorsed Obama the polling also reversed.

It would be little different than if Nancy Peolosi declared "Romney did a great job as governor." And then said, "well, its the truth" when asked about it later.

Once Christie agreed to be the keynote speaker for Romney, he lost the option of declaring Obama is doing a great job without being a double-crosser - regardless of why he did it. You just don't torpedo someone after you put yourself in that strong a position to do so. Christie - as MSNBC noted - appears to possibly have been "the October surprise."
 
That's as wrong as can be. Romney's "I like to fire people" and "47%" pounded him. The first debate totally reversed the direction of the election. And when Christie endorsed Obama the polling also reversed.

It would be little different than if Nancy Peolosi declared "Romney did a great job as governor." And then said, "well, its the truth" when asked about it later.

The first debate is the only real event that actually shifted the race. From the end of the primary season until the first debate, the race was almost completely stagnant, aside from the convention bounces. Romney's 47% comments and his "I like to fire people" statement did not dramatically affect the polling. I don't see Christie's comments as being terribly significant, it certainly hasn't produced any shifts in the polling yet.
 
As a factual matter, Romney's momentum was stopped about three weeks before Christie's statement. Obviously we can only speculate about what Christie was thinking. I don't know enough about him to form a reasonable opinion as to how much of it was sincere gratitude and how much political calculation. Some people are speculating that it may have been, in part, REVENGE for Romney picking Ryan instead of Christy for VP. Some claim that Romney didn't handle it very well, i.e., he supposedly didn't tell him for several days after the decision had been made and he didn't inform him personally.

Either way, I don't think it materially changes the outcome.


Christie is up for re election next year...All his loudmouthing posturing about how screwing public workers would fix NJs fiscal problems was a LIE...NJ is worse off than when he became gov...hes used tricks and gimmicks and they still didnt work...property taxs have gone up...theres been no tax cuts...unemployment went up and its the hightest in the nation...He doesnt care about romney or obama hes worried about his own large...well huge behind.
 
You ignore the actual problem. Mittens has been running on the incorrect notion that Obama will not pork with republicans, and that he is not a good leader. Both of these arguments got blown away when we saw Obama and Christie working together and Christie says he was a good leader who did the right thing in New Jersey. Christie's endorsement doesn't mean a thing, it is him palling around with Obama for the past few days destroying the lies that Obama is some sort of super partisan jerk who never works with the right.

I ignore nothing. One event doesn't make a leader. If it did, Christie might vote for him. Obama is a partisan jerk, this changes nothing.
 
No. He had to think about his own duties, and he couldn't add a negative to Romney's campaign by trashing Obama's handling of the storm when no obvious problems were forthcoming. That it may have helped Obama more than Romney is a consequence of Obama's Job responsibilities, not Romney's handling of it.
 
The first debate is the only real event that actually shifted the race. From the end of the primary season until the first debate, the race was almost completely stagnant, aside from the convention bounces. Romney's 47% comments and his "I like to fire people" statement did not dramatically affect the polling. I don't see Christie's comments as being terribly significant, it certainly hasn't produced any shifts in the polling yet.

Yes it has. This is a tight race at least in polls. Since the media ran Christie's praised the numbers have been reversing. It is no longer a question of "dramatic" changes. Only minor - thus decisive ones.

When Christie agreed to be keynote speaker for the convention and Romney - a HUGE potential boost to Christie on the national scene - with it came certain levels of trust. Christie violated that trust.

There is a big difference between Christie having told the president "thank you" and giving Obama the word "great."

I understand Christie's panic. What got obliterated was the rich ocean side homes. If those folks don't come back, Christie's gone in his re-election. Christie may have acted stupidly in such a panic. Kartrina dramatically altered Louisianna politics with a couple hundred thousand African-Americans moved out not to return. Christie in a panic may see himself in the same, though opposite partisan direction with a core of his Republican and money base literally just obliterated - thus leaving him in a panic to seem "bipartisan."

Christie now may be between a rock and a hard place. I hope so.
 
Last edited:
What Christie did is give the media a sound bite of him with President Obama saying "The President is going a great job!"

Yet as of that moment, the only "great thing" Obama had done was walk down the street with Christie. Oh how great! Obama can walk. And after getting that sound bite, Obama didn't even visit any other area, including New York, and flew off to Las Vegas.

There are only a few possibilities - all plausible:

1. Christie was just star struck by being in Obama's presence, like an infatuated teenager
2. That he feared Obama would block all aid, living the crisis all landing on Christie and maybe then costing Christie re-election
3. Christie wants to leave 2016 open for himself - with Romney going from 10 points behind when Christie endorsed him to in a deadheat.
4. Christie is just a big mouthed fool.

Romney diverted significant sums of $$ from his campaign towards aid. Did any - even ONE - Democratic endorsing Obama praise Romney? Or did they only used that too as an attack - that Romney was playing politics with a crisis? Of course that is what they would do - that's politics. Nothing wrong with that. Its called playing to win, rather than being an idiot. If you HIGH PROFILE ENDORSE SOMEONE, you do not in the last minute declare the other candidate is "doing a great job!"

For Christie to give the media the sound bite for them to play over and over and over and over - Christie being Romney's keynote speaker - "The President is going a great job!" was ignorant and naive at best. That was the premier sound bite then of every network, when polls shifted to a majority of voters saying Obama's doing a good job, and that was when Romney's campaign begin losing ground.

If Christie was being anything but a fool at best, as of the moment Christie said that raving praise, can anyone name anything Obama had actually done - other than walk down the street with Christie? Anything "great?"

Christie's either is an idiot or a double-crosser. No other way to read it.

so basically you just dont like facts and the truth and would have preferred christie to be partisan and dishonest. Got it!
You biased, is showing.

see post 17
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...hristie-gun-down-romney-2.html#post1061104479
 
Last edited:
Christie was wrong.

It's election season, Christie needs to be a good soldier and find a reason to criticize Obama.

that would make him an idiot and a bad politician and it also wouldnt fool objective honest americans.

Christie was right by showing integrity and he gain respect among honest americans.
 
Yes it has. This is a tight race at least in polls. Since the media ran Christie's praised the numbers have been reversing. It is no longer a question of "dramatic" changes. Only minor - thus decisive ones.

When Christie agreed to be keynote speaker for the convention and Romney - a HUGE boost to Christie - with it came certain levels of trust. Christie violated that trust.

The numbers were reversing before that. Obama's been trending slowly upward for about two weeks now. They've been going up slightly faster since the hurricane, I'll grant you, but how much of that is do to Chris Christie, and how much of that is due to Obama just handling the hurricane well is up for debate.
 
Of all the things Romney could have predicted and tried to deal with, Chris Christie - his convention keynote speaker - double-barreling Romney in the back with a raving praise of Obama with "The president is doing a great job!" and as a bipartisan leader in a crisis with Obama at his side just days before the election is not one of those.

From that moment, Romney's creeping up momentum came to a halt and reversed, with 79% of Americans polled agreeing the President is doing a great job. All Republican pollsters back peddling and Democratic pollsters declaring victory for Obama now all but certain.

Generally, a person is most vunerable to those closest to you. As the expression goes, with friends like that who needs enemies?

And thus went Christie potential future presidential run. Republicans will never forget this and many believe it deliberate to leave an open race for himself in 2016.

Did Chris Christie just blow Romney's last victory chance by - for how the media editted and ran it 10,000 times - personally endorsing Obama as a "great president? as the last key moment and final word of the campaign?"

There are several ways to look at this

1) that Christie thought Obama was going to win anyway and wanted to suck up to a guy he will have to deal with for four years-of course if this is true he is toast in 2016. Portman or Rubio will be the nominee, not the fat man who has no chance of getting the GOP endorsement anyway

2) that he believes Romney is going to win anyway-no harm no foul because if Romney wins no one will be blaming C2 8 years from now which would be the first time he would be able to run as the GOP candidate

3) he didn't think it mattered since so many people have already voted and most have made their minds made up
I doubt more than a few thousand at most would change their minds and not in states that matter
 
The first debate is the only real event that actually shifted the race. From the end of the primary season until the first debate, the race was almost completely stagnant, aside from the convention bounces. Romney's 47% comments and his "I like to fire people" statement did not dramatically affect the polling. I don't see Christie's comments as being terribly significant, it certainly hasn't produced any shifts in the polling yet.

If Obama hadn't screwed the pooch on that, he would likely have this election in the bag. I haven't met any reasonable person here who thinks Mitt is a good candidate.
 
Back
Top Bottom