• 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!

Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109:573]

Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

j-mac said:
[...] I actually think that comparing this to IRS, Benghazi, NSA, reportergate, Fast and Furious, Obamacare website, etc. are a little much [...]
Click to expand...
Indeed, since there is no scintilla of evidence or rational conjecture that could link any of those to the White House, or at least as originating from the current White House in the cases of NSA ops and the Fast & Furious op, nor that there is any particular wrongdoing involved in any of those except perhaps from a Constititutional perspective (the Constitution not being exactly settled law, which may be shocking to some).

Clearly Bridgegate (I would have preferred Tollgate :2razz: ) is linked at least directly, and I do mean directly with no ifs ands or buts, to the Gov's deputy chief of staff. That's pretty far up the food chain, and the email indicates it was premeditated (the recipient know that to do without being explicitly told). That is a blatant and premeditated violation of the public trust -- no interpretation or settled law needed.

Being that close to Christie means that smoke is strong... much stronger than any of the congressional/conservative witch hunts you mention above.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Dittohead not! said:
I don't know how far he has gotten with his goals, but they seem to be goals to get the state headed in the right direction. Is this guy the best choice? I don't know. Would he be better than what we have now? Most likely, but, again, he's a sort of an unknown quantity. The point is that there are many possible candidates, and, if we can find one who is able to work across party lines, who has executive experience, who doesn't have a huge skeleton in his closet, who understands free market economics, who supports the Constitution, then we'd be way ahead to get behind him/her regardless of the party.

What I doubt at this point is the right wing of the Republican Party allowing such a candidate to be nominated, or for the party to be able to actually win an election. That could prove wrong, of course, but if it isn't, then the alternative is going to be whoever the Democrats nominate.
Click to expand...

They're going to nominate Hillary...Every liberal on tv, or radio today damn near has a convulsive orgasm at the mere mention of her possible running....But we are a long way out...By the end of the next couple of years America may not want anything with a D, or an R behind their name.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Karl said:
Indeed, since there is no scintilla of evidence or rational conjecture that could link any of those to the White House, or at least as originating from the current White House in the cases of NSA ops and the Fast & Furious op, nor that there is any particular wrongdoing involved in any of those except perhaps from a Constititutional perspective (the Constitution not being exactly settled law, which may be shocking to some).

Clearly Bridgegate (I would have preferred Tollgate :2razz: ) is linked at least directly, and I do mean directly with no ifs ands or buts, to the Gov's deputy chief of staff. That's pretty far up the food chain, and the email indicates it was premeditated (the recipient know that to do without being explicitly told). That is a blatant and premeditated violation of the public trust -- no interpretation or settled law needed.

Being that close to Christie means that smoke is strong... much stronger than any of the congressional/conservative witch hunts you mention above.
Click to expand...


I wonder why that is?

Two Republican lawmakers and a conservative legal group are crying foul over the Justice Department’s selection of a Democratic donor to lead the agency’s investigation into the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of advocacy groups during the 2010 and 2012 election cycles.

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) issued a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday saying DOJ trial attorney Barbara Bosserman’s involvement is “highly inappropriate and has compromised the administration’s investigation of the IRS.” They asked that the department remove her from the case.

Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
Click to expand...
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

reinoe said:
He did what a leader is supposed to do? The bridge was closed for four days and he didn't even start an investigation on that. You really are blindingly partisan.
Click to expand...

Untrue. There are 14 lanes on the GW bridge. Please do a little research before resorting to hyperbole and hysteria. Only local access lanes were closed - hardly the whole damn bridge. Geeze.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

reinoe said:
He did what a leader is supposed to do? The bridge was closed for four days and he didn't even start an investigation on that. You really are blindingly partisan.
Click to expand...

Nope - one ramp to the bridge was heavily restricted (by lane closures) for four days, the rest of the bridge commuters actually got a break from that action.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

j-mac said:
Not at all, don't get dickish dude....I agree....But, I should ask, what leads you to think that they aren't checking e-mails?
Click to expand...

So you are suggesting that they did read the emails but didn't see anything wrong with an email saying ""time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee." while investigating the traffic problems in Fort Lee? :lamo
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

sangha said:
So you are suggesting that they did read the emails but didn't see anything wrong with an email saying ""time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee." while investigating the traffic problems in Fort Lee? :lamo
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that what ever investigation Christie called for included e-mails.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

j-mac said:
No, I am saying that what ever investigation Christie called for included e-mails.
Click to expand...

What the hell investigation do you think Christie called for??
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

j-mac said:
No, I am saying that what ever investigation Christie called for included e-mails.
Click to expand...

The emails you are claiming Christie investigated (btw, Christie did no investigating) included an email from one of the participants saying ""time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

If they looked at the emails they either were too stupid to recognize this evidence of a conspiracy (incompetence) or ignored it (corruption)
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

rocket88 said:
Yes. Still do.
Click to expand...

The economy ... 5 million tossed off healthcare plans ... 70 million more to come ... scandals up the wahzoo ....... that would have been the same?
Please don't make me lose respect for ya rocket.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

bubbabgone said:
The economy ... 5 million tossed off healthcare plans ... 70 million more to come ... scandals up the wahzoo ....... that would have been the same?
Please don't make me lose respect for ya rocket.
Click to expand...

Economy would still be about the same. Mitt didn't have any magical pixie dust to sprinkle on it. No way he would have gotten rid of Romneycare. Some of the scandals might be different, but there's always scandals.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

j-mac said:
They're going to nominate Hillary...Every liberal on tv, or radio today damn near has a convulsive orgasm at the mere mention of her possible running....But we are a long way out...By the end of the next couple of years America may not want anything with a D, or an R behind their name.
Click to expand...

The Democrats might nominate Hillary, or maybe not. It's pretty soon to be making predictions. As for America not wanting anything with a D or an R behind their names, that would really be a paradigm shift in politics.

Time to run a real libertarian?
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Fishstyx said:
Yeah, was just basing it off the scanning of the emails. Like I said, they were a mess.
Click to expand...

Something that I heard Christie say in a local interview was when he was asked to show anything that indicates that a traffic study was being done and he said he wouldn't show anything because it wouldn't matter. That there makes it kind of look like he was in on the lie somewhat.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

rocket88 said:
Economy would still be about the same.
Mitt didn't have any magical pixie dust to sprinkle on it. No way he would have gotten rid of Romneycare. Some of the scandals might be different, but there's always scandals.
Click to expand...

Thats the best you can do ?

Make assumptions ? Romney Care was a State iniative, not a Federal inaitive.

He wouldn't have had to worry about covering his ass when ObamaCare caused more and more misery and joblesness.

It could have fixed it, gotten rid of it, whatever.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

rocket88 said:
Economy would still be about the same. Mitt didn't have any magical pixie dust to sprinkle on it. No way he would have gotten rid of Romneycare. Some of the scandals might be different, but there's always scandals.
Click to expand...

Oh man ... are we ever far apart on this.
How you or anyone else could ever imagine a Romney (or even a McCain) Administration would look like this one will forever be a mystery.
It just ain't possible, my friend.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Verax said:
I think that's the official story of the Republican party but its not the truth. The tea party crew have been beaten back a bit, even publicly with Boehner. The GOP will give lip service and denigrate RINO's here and there but they want a more moderate Republican like Romney to run. Its the same story every election... A lot of Republicans want the most conservative person in the room but the country will not elect them so they have to go with a "RINO" while conservatives moan about it, "if only we elected a real Conservative we'd win". I see no reason why history won't repeat itself, especially after the weakening of the tea party wing.

Ted Cruz is far, far, far too polarizing. He will make a lot of noise, possibly be in 2nd in the polls for a week and be brushed off to the side near the mid to end of the primaries as a joke. I can almost imagine Rand going far but... its really shaky. If he were to moderate himself and sound more reasonable without losing too much of libertarian / tea party appeal he could do it but I have my doubts.

Christie is their best chance by far as long as he can squeak out of this without any damning evidence cropping up. He can fight and win people over in debates with his tough guy no nonsense personality.
Click to expand...

As of today, yes it looks like Christie is the best choice and has a realistic chance to win. But with almost 3 years to go before the election and 2 years before the primary season begins in earnest, who really know what will happen. What events that will take place, what issues will come to the forefront and become important.

Christie's appeal may fade if someone like Kasich, present governor of Ohio, Pence present governor of Indiana or Daniels the former governor of Indiana throws their hat into the ring. There are others that may jump to the lead of the list if they become interested and announce they are running. Christie is the media's darling among Republicans especially after Hurricane Sandy. Christie show the world he put the people of New Jersey ahead of party politics and the media has promoted him ever since.

You want the name of someone who may just beat out Christie if he falters. Mike Huckabee the former governor of Arkansas. Among Republicans his favorables are far better than Christie 65-47%. That right only 47% of Republicans look upon Christie in a favorable manner. Huckabee is the only other Republican that leads Clinton among independent voters besides Christie. Huckabee would win independent voters 41-37 over Hillary in the hypothetical match up.

You may think me crazy to even mention his name, but I have a feeling Huckabee right now may be the establishment Republicans number two choice behind Christie. Just beware of him. Huckabee hasn't really shown any interest as to date. But it is still early.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

bubbabgone said:
Oh man ... are we ever far apart on this.
How you or anyone else could ever imagine a Romney (or even a McCain) Administration would look like this one will forever be a mystery.
It just ain't possible, my friend.
Click to expand...

No need to speculate, here's what a Romney Presidency would have looked liked.
Romney Readiness Project: Retrospective & Lessons Learned: Christopher Liddell, Daniel Kroese, Clark Campbell: 9780615799865: Amazon.com: Books

Because the thing we need to fix the country is a new mission statement. Politics aside, a Romney presidency would have been a managerial disaster. Obama certainly has his failings, but at least he knows his limitations. Romney thought that managing a hedge fund was equivalent to being President.

Anyone who's ever worked for a large company knows people like Romney. They come in to a profitable company, talk a lot of BS, make superficial changes, gut all investments in the future, cut jobs, double everyone’s workload, make short term profits, and then preen about like they're some financial genius. Basically, they're leaches that don't have any idea what it's like to actually build a business, make a real product, or create a real idea. The GOP should consider itself lucky that Romney wasn't elected.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Dittohead not! said:
Yes, you're right. Time will tell, and we don't know what issues might be hot in '16. However, one thing that seems likely at this point is that:
any moderate Republican, read "electable", like Christie will have to play to the right wing to be nominated, like Romney did.
then, said moderate Republican will have to move, or appear to move, more into the mainstream, like Romney.
Then, said candidate will be called a flip flopper, like, well, you know.
And being a flip flopper is going to make it more difficult to get elected.
Click to expand...

That is the way it is, all republican candidate must move right in the primaries and then toward the middle for the general. This also happens to the democrats, they too have to move left in their primaries and then toward the middle for the general. But when your party has a sitting president running for a second term, especially if unchallenged, there is no tacking left needed as Obama proved in 2012.

Flip flopping wasn't really what Romney did in the general election. He did that back in 2008. He discarded a life long political views and stances to run in 2008. He did a 180 on many of his positions. It didn't help him in 2008, it hurt him. That carried over to 2012. For something like a flip flopper to really stick, there has to be substance to it. More substance than just tacking right for the primaries and then back toward the center for the general. For Romney it was changing his whole political philosophy back in 2008 and being a flip flopper stuck like glue to him. He was never able to over come that.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Perotista said:
That is the way it is, all republican candidate must move right in the primaries and then toward the middle for the general. This also happens to the democrats, they too have to move left in their primaries and then toward the middle for the general. But when your party has a sitting president running for a second term, especially if unchallenged, there is no tacking left needed as Obama proved in 2012.

Flip flopping wasn't really what Romney did in the general election. He did that back in 2008. He discarded a life long political views and stances to run in 2008. He did a 180 on many of his positions. It didn't help him in 2008, it hurt him. That carried over to 2012. For something like a flip flopper to really stick, there has to be substance to it. More substance than just tacking right for the primaries and then back toward the center for the general. For Romney it was changing his whole political philosophy back in 2008 and being a flip flopper stuck like glue to him. He was never able to over come that.
Click to expand...

I agree but would add that one of the reasons why he lost was that he didn't slide back to the middle after winning the GOP primaries. Instead he continued to be a champion of the right (maybe as compensation for his appearance as a flip-flopper) until the debates. By that time, the public's perception of him had been set in stone.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

polgara said:
Good morning, Pero. :2wave:

:agree: on possible candidates. I think a lot will depend on the 2014 election outcome.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY today, my friend! Going to the Wat to celebrate? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Thank You. No the wife took me out for lunch to a Thai restaurant. Yeah I too think 2014 will have a lot to do with 2016, especially if the Republicans somehow can take the senate. A 50-50 proposition at the moment. Personally I think we should be concentrating on 2014 instead of 2016. But I am happy talking about 2016, it is fun to speculate.

But the election of 2014 could very well decide the ACA once and for all. Right now I give it a 50-50 chance of surviving or being repealed, which ever side you are on. We will probably know its chances one way or the other come late spring/early summer. The same for the senate.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

sangha said:
I agree but would add that one of the reasons why he lost was that he didn't slide back to the middle after winning the GOP primaries. Instead he continued to be a champion of the right (maybe as compensation for his appearance as a flip-flopper) until the debates. By that time, the public's perception of him had been set in stone.
Click to expand...

I would say pretty much so. The Republican right never really accepted him. They didn't trust him. I seen that here in Georgia. Georgia stayed in the lean Romney category until around 2 weeks before the election meaning it was still in play but the republican had the advantage. There just wasn't the enthusiasm for him down here that you normally see. One could see plenty anti-Obama, but few pro-Romney. There were very few bumper stickers supporting Romney to be seen, you seen more bumper stickers with Obama's name on it with the O crossed out than ones with Romney's name on it. We Georgian's never trusted any politician from Massachusetts and Romney was no different.

I think an exit poll conducted by ABC I think showed it all for Georgia. 71% of those who voted for Romney did so because they wanted Obama to lose, only 27% voted for Romney because they wanted him to win. The opposite was true for Obama, 73% of Georgia Obama voters voted for him because they wanted him to win, only 23% voted for Obama because they wanted Romney to lose. I guess the reason why didn't matter, but I think it showed the mindset of the voters down here and what most Republican voters thought of Romney. Any Tom, Dick or Harry would have gotten the same votes Romney did. The passion was on Obama's side, not Romney's. How this carried through the rest of the nation I do not know, but I would imagine the numbers weren't much different.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

Fenton said:
Thats the best you can do ?

Make assumptions ? Romney Care was a State iniative, not a Federal inaitive.

He wouldn't have had to worry about covering his ass when ObamaCare caused more and more misery and joblesness.

It could have fixed it, gotten rid of it, whatever.
Click to expand...

Speaking of making assumptions, you assume that he would have gotten rid of Obamacare. To the contrary, he thought it was a great idea, at least when he did it. We'll never know for sure, but I kind of wish he had won so I could ask all the Repubbots when he would get around to it...
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

rocket88 said:
Speaking of making assumptions, you assume that he would have gotten rid of Obamacare. To the contrary, he thought it was a great idea, at least when he did it. We'll never know for sure, but I kind of wish he had won so I could ask all the Repubbots when he would get around to it...
Click to expand...

Had Romney won, ACA would have already been repealed, or at least rendered inoperative by the simple expedient of refusing to appropriate funds for it.
 
Re: Emails link top Christie aide to GWB lane-closing controversy - [W:77,109]

rocket88 said:
Speaking of making assumptions, you assume that he would have gotten rid of Obamacare. To the contrary, he thought it was a great idea, at least when he did it. We'll never know for sure, but I kind of wish he had won so I could ask all the Repubbots when he would get around to it...
Click to expand...

The reality of the situation is even if Romney won, he still couldn't have gotten rid of Obamacare. To do that the Republicans would have had to gain control of the senate and they didn't. They lost two seats. Senator Reid wouldn't bring any bill for the repeal to the floor. It wasn't a political reality. I think anyone with two cents worth of knowing politics could have told you that. Repealing Obamacare was impossible without the senate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom