• 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!

Cuccinelli says Christie should quit RGA

I've read enough of the stuff you have posted on this forum to conclude you are indeed one with watered down principles in relation to what was once considered the basic principles of the Republican party.
I have dedicated much study to those who influenced the Founders. From Nicolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, James Harrington , John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill. And by no means is that a complete list! If you assume you know more than me, then that alone is a sign of a man who assumes too much. To characterize me as a "dangerous thing" because of "little learning" would be words that could only be from a very arrogant, pompous person. Does the shoe fit?

I assume nothing. Your posts are the basis of my assessment. If you actually understood what you claim to have read then you would not post as you do. Good night and good luck.:peace
 
I assume nothing. Your posts are the basis of my assessment. If you actually understood what you claim to have read then you would not post as you do. Good night and good luck.:peace
Baloney, and good night don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on your way out. Cheers!
 
The last thing I read on possible candidates for the GOP came to a total of 38 viable possibilities.

which of those 38 GOP prospects has a genuine chance to win the white house
 
which of those 38 GOP prospects has a genuine chance to win the white house

Hi Bubba, well I can see several of them having a genuine chance because they are quite articulate and can offer a convincing argument why conservatism is needed to bring back balance and could no doubt express the need to restore the Constitution/the rule of law. Some are governors that have turned their states around due to sound fiscal polices, some are members of Congress that have done a stellar job representing their districts on the fundamentals in which they campaigned. They are a rare breed as they actually took to heart what they told their constituents they would do. While the media likes to claim Christie is the only hope for the GOP one needs to remember they said the same thing about McCain. It is too early to tell who will be the front runners. But there will be several who will be stellar picks this time around, in my opinion.
 
Hi Bubba, well I can see several of them having a genuine chance because they are quite articulate and can offer a convincing argument why conservatism is needed to bring back balance and could no doubt express the need to restore the Constitution/the rule of law. Some are governors that have turned their states around due to sound fiscal polices, some are members of Congress that have done a stellar job representing their districts on the fundamentals in which they campaigned. They are a rare breed as they actually took to heart what they told their constituents they would do. While the media likes to claim Christie is the only hope for the GOP one needs to remember they said the same thing about McCain. It is too early to tell who will be the front runners. But there will be several who will be stellar picks this time around, in my opinion.

and of those 38 you could not point to a single one who stands a good chance to win the white house
which shows that there is no other GOP candidate on the horizon who can win the presidency
except the one his fellow republicans are bashing
 
and of those 38 you could not point to a single one who stands a good chance to win the white house
which shows that there is no other GOP candidate on the horizon who can win the presidency
except the one his fellow republicans are bashing

Morning Bubba, we will have to agree to disagree. I see several possible candidates but no one has really officially thrown their hat into the ring......not even Christie. When that happens, I'll be glad to give you the names of those I think would make a good president and why.
 
Morning Bubba, we will have to agree to disagree. I see several possible candidates but no one has really officially thrown their hat into the ring......not even Christie. When that happens, I'll be glad to give you the names of those I think would make a good president and why.

the point is you can name no one because there is no GOP prospect who stands a chance to win
without christie in the race, the white house remains the democrat's to lose
 
the point is you can name no one because there is no GOP prospect who stands a chance to win
without christie in the race, the white house remains the democrat's to lose
Bubba, before the presidential election, we have a very important mid-term election this year. The head of the RGA (Christie) who plays a big role in fundraising for other governor races. Every night the MSM continues to follow the Christie story, Bridgegate. There have been other allegations piling on top. When you have a governor being covered in a bad light nationally, it hampers their ability to raise the needed funding for the RGA. Do you remember the coverage that the MSM dedicated to the Mark Sanford scandal? Every night it was on the nightly news. More time was dedicated to that story about his infidelity than all the broken promises/abuse of powers in the first year of the Obama administration. While all this was going on Mark Sanford, governor of South Carolina was also the head of the RGA and was asked to step down and Haley Barbour of Mississippi took his place. Why? because of the scandal plaguing Sanford making him ineffective. By the way Sanford was also seen as a real contender for the next presidential election before the scandal broke. You can always count on the MSM to cover a story ad nauseam if it will make Republicans look corrupt. It's a crying shame they didn't do such in depth reporting on Obama in vetting him prior to the election and during his first term. For if they had done their job, good chance he never would have been elected in the first place.
 
For one thing he wanted to shut down the Department of Education and return the duties to the states.

Yes Reagan did say during the campaign of 1980 that he wanted to eliminate the Dept of Education but by 1983 he was actually using the Dept to promote the conservative idea of standardized testing of students. Like a lot of politicians, Reagan said lots of stuff on the campaign trail that he never pushed once he was in the Oval Office.
 
In RWR's own words:

"When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it.


"Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything.


"I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.'


"If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it."

Bit of a problem for the present GOP as the Tea Party types refuse compromise, acting more like religious fanatics than rational human beings.
 
I think Cuccinelli has a valid point and he isn't the only one thinking Christie should step down as head of the RGA. Christie has a Democrat lynch mob after him over piling scandals. He would not be productive as someone who could go around and help raise funds for other Republican governors with all the other crap surrounding him, innocent or not. And that was the reason behind Cuccinelli's statement. There are several Republican governors that would be very effective as head of the RGA that don't have a bridgegate following them around.

And if he did that you would call him a quitter just like Sarah Palin, who quit for the same reason.
 
Yes Reagan did say during the campaign of 1980 that he wanted to eliminate the Dept of Education but by 1983 he was actually using the Dept to promote the conservative idea of standardized testing of students. Like a lot of politicians, Reagan said lots of stuff on the campaign trail that he never pushed once he was in the Oval Office.

There is only so much a President can accomplish with a Congress ruled by the opposite party. There is only so much compromising one can do till he loses himself.
 
And if he did that you would call him a quitter just like Sarah Palin, who quit for the same reason.

Morning Mason, if Christie is asked to resign from the position of head of the RGA it will be because the majority of Republican governors want him to. I don't believe Palin was ever the head of the RGA.
 
Bubba, before the presidential election, we have a very important mid-term election this year. The head of the RGA (Christie) who plays a big role in fundraising for other governor races. Every night the MSM continues to follow the Christie story, Bridgegate. There have been other allegations piling on top. When you have a governor being covered in a bad light nationally, it hampers their ability to raise the needed funding for the RGA. Do you remember the coverage that the MSM dedicated to the Mark Sanford scandal? Every night it was on the nightly news. More time was dedicated to that story about his infidelity than all the broken promises/abuse of powers in the first year of the Obama administration. While all this was going on Mark Sanford, governor of South Carolina was also the head of the RGA and was asked to step down and Haley Barbour of Mississippi took his place. Why? because of the scandal plaguing Sanford making him ineffective. By the way Sanford was also seen as a real contender for the next presidential election before the scandal broke. You can always count on the MSM to cover a story ad nauseam if it will make Republicans look corrupt. It's a crying shame they didn't do such in depth reporting on Obama in vetting him prior to the election and during his first term. For if they had done their job, good chance he never would have been elected in the first place.


what IS noticed is that you have been unable to identify any other republican candidate who has a genuine shot a winning the presidential race in two years
the reich wing seems intent on eliminating from contention the only GOP candidate who can snatch the white house from the democrats' grasp
it makes no sense
to undercut the only republican prospect who has an opportunity to win the white house
yet, that is what is happening
 
It is Repubs like you who helped the Dems retain control of the Senate. Keep up the good work.:peace

With republicans like Christie, who needs democrats?

He is a dem. Run him or a dem, produces the same result, a democrat. One just uses republican funds to get in office, and the other uses bought votes from the uneducated.
 
With republicans like Christie, who needs democrats?

He is a dem. Run him or a dem, produces the same result, a democrat. One just uses republican funds to get in office, and the other uses bought votes from the uneducated.

so, what you are saying that you would prefer hillary to run and win against a GOP candidate who has no chance, but has been ideologically vetted as "pure" conservative, tea party adherent, whatever
like last time around, this is the reich wing GOP's opportunity to again snatch defeat from the jaws of white house victory
 
so, what you are saying that you would prefer hillary to run and win against a GOP candidate who has no chance, but has been ideologically vetted as "pure" conservative, tea party adherent, whatever
like last time around, this is the reich wing GOP's opportunity to again snatch defeat from the jaws of white house victory

If the GOP runs another RINO that can't energize the base, it's a guaranteed loss. Romney couldn't get the base to get off the couch. His campaign was square and textbook. He ran against a campaign rockstar, the GOP couldn't produce a viable contender (although I dare say, Rubio at the time could have done some damage).

Christie is a guaranteed win for Hillary. 100%. He doesn't have a shot in hell, she will own him in debates.
Rand...now Rand on the other hand....he's largely a centrist on social issues. He's young, pro-drug reform, pro immigration reform, pro freedom across the boards, and well liked. He's made some waves, gained a TON of fans, certainly sharp as a tack, and has the support of the base whole heartedly. The GOP needs to go "all in" on this one. He CAN debate her. Christie simply isn't there mentally, he's not on her level. Hillary is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them. Don't run an ogre against her.
 
what IS noticed is that you have been unable to identify any other republican candidate who has a genuine shot a winning the presidential race in two years
the reich wing seems intent on eliminating from contention the only GOP candidate who can snatch the white house from the democrats' grasp
it makes no sense
to undercut the only republican prospect who has an opportunity to win the white house
yet, that is what is happening

Excuse me but I don't believe it is the Right that caused these scandals for Christie. And it isn't the Right that is covering them ad nauseam in the media. It isn't the right forming a lynch mob in New Jersey to go after him. It is the Democrats. They are the ones hurting him.

According to the survey, Christie, who's seriously considering a White House bid, trails former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, 38%-46%, in a hypothetical 2016 general election matchup. The Governor had a one point 42%-41% margin over Clinton in Quinnipiac polling last month. The biggest shift is among independent voters who were split between Christie and Clinton in December but now go for Clinton by a 15-percentage point margin.

Last month, by a 49%-31% margin, voters said Christie would make a good president. Now they are divided.

Poll: Controversies hurt Christie’s 2016 standing – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

From the current polling Christie could not beat Hillary Clinton. So the campaign against Christie designed by the Democrats and promoted by the MSM seems to be working. So if they can manage to keep him embroiled in controversy as they have managed to do the past month, it won't get any better for him. So maybe you should start looking for another "savior".
 
Baloney, and good night don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on your way out. Cheers!

"All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter."
--Edmund Burke:peace
 
With republicans like Christie, who needs democrats?

He is a dem. Run him or a dem, produces the same result, a democrat. One just uses republican funds to get in office, and the other uses bought votes from the uneducated.

This is an uninformed post.:peace
 
Excuse me but I don't believe it is the Right that caused these scandals for Christie. And it isn't the Right that is covering them ad nauseam in the media. It isn't the right forming a lynch mob in New Jersey to go after him. It is the Democrats. They are the ones hurting him.



Poll: Controversies hurt Christie’s 2016 standing – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

From the current polling Christie could not beat Hillary Clinton. So the campaign against Christie designed by the Democrats and promoted by the MSM seems to be working. So if they can manage to keep him embroiled in controversy as they have managed to do the past month, it won't get any better for him. So maybe you should start looking for another "savior".
i think it would serve you well to recognize that it is a GOP GOV wannabe who is asking him to step down ... simply read the thread title
 
i think it would serve you well to recognize that it is a GOP GOV wannabe who is asking him to step down ... simply read the thread title

Cuccinelli voiced his opinion so what? He made a valid point. Whether Christie is guilty/innocent is irrelevant. Perception becomes reality and Christie loses his ability to raise the needed funds for the governors plus with the perception of possibly wrongdoing hanging over Christie's head, some governors may not want him helping them campaign for the obvious. There appears to be a growing wariness about Christie in the GOP’s rank-and-file. Cuccinelli only stated other's concerns. The recent poll I posted already shows this ordeal has been particularly damaging and eroding support for Christie especially with Independents. Bottom line if the Republican Governors get too uncomfortable with Christie's "situation", they will personally be asking him to step down as head of the RGA.
 
How so? The dem base is flooded with the uneducated, essentially bought votes with the promise of hand outs. This isn't some big secret.

Christie merits support on the basis of the Buckley Rule: He's the most conservative electable POTUS candidate.:peace
 
Back
Top Bottom