• 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!

Report: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate probe clears gov

Perotista said:
I tend to agree with you that the damage was done. Christie has lost about half of his one time independent voter support. It is not impossible for him to get it back, but it will be awfully tough and he probably will never have the support among the indies he had prior to bridgegate.
Click to expand...

Smear campaigns work, don't they, which is why they are used. It's like trying to live down a rumor about yourself that was false...some doubt remains, I guess. It would crack me up if he ran in 2016 and won, though!
 
Find a place where I talked about regional power Romney.
tres borrachos said:
The thread is about Chris Christie, not Mitt Romney.
Click to expand...
Should Christie be paying over one million dollars of state money to a firm with close ties to him to exonerate him?
This will end up in the Sen. Rockefeller committee where it belongs, not with Mr. Issa .
 
NIMBY said:
Find a place where I talked about regional power Romney.

Should Christie be paying over one million dollars of state money to a firm with close ties to him to exonerate him?
This will end up in the Sen. Rockefeller committee where it belongs, not with Mr. Issa .
Click to expand...

I was talking to sangha about a link he put up talking about Romney. You told me to focus on the subject of the thread, and not the link. The thread is about Chris Christie. You're jumping in the conversation I'm having with sangha about his link from Politifact.

I don't live in NJ and don't care how they spend their money. It is a state issue, not a federal issue. Mr. Rockefeller would be wise to focus on federal issues and leave the state issues where they belong.
 
Governor Chunk Chunky will forever be tainted by this scandal. With good reason.
... it was so close to his office and from people he empowered is reason enough to never trust him with executive decision making again.
Not that the republicon party would have ever nominated him anyway...
Bahdah Boom, Bahdah Bing!
 
polgara said:
Smear campaigns work, don't they, which is why they are used. It's like trying to live down a rumor about yourself that was false...some doubt remains, I guess. It would crack me up if he ran in 2016 and won, though!
Click to expand...

Morning Pol, it does seem that is all we get these days is smear campaigns, mud, attack ads and nothing of substance. Instead of ads that extolls the vision, the virtues, the ideas and solutions a candidate has we get the mud and find out when a political opponent at the age of two months bit his mother’s nipple. The idea is to get you, the voter to hate his opponent more than you hate him. Today, neither parities candidate care if you hate them or their candidates, as long as you hate the other party and the other party’s candidates more. Then you will vote against the other party, but not really for yours.

I think this is one of the reason why today we have so many people who identify themselves as independents instead of Republican or Democrat. They dislike both political parties. 25 years ago 72% of all Americans said they were either Republican or Democrat, only 28% identified themselves as independents. Then campaigns changed from being more positive to purely negative. Today according to Gallup, 55% of Americans now say they are Republican or Democrat, 45% say they are independents. The dislike factor is very high for both parties, 60% for one, 61% for the other. It use not to be this way, but this is what all the negative advertising does, it turns off the voters to both parties and makes them hate, but it also get one or the other party their vote, even though it is a vote that just says, I hate you a bit less than I hate the other guy.
 
tres borrachos said:
Well well, sangha. It must have been tiring having to avoid my question. Let me remind you why I asked you about Politifact by pointing to your post #525 in this thread:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/obamacare-aca/188822-gop-nightmare-obamacare-popularity-soars-53.html

I posted something from Politifact just the other day. Your response? Let me post it for you again:

Politifact? You're citing a blog?

:lamo



Thank you for allowing me to expose your hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

You don't realize the difference between citing a blog to support a claim about health care and doing the same for politics?
 
sangha said:
You don't realize the difference between citing a blog to support a claim about health care and doing the same for politics?
Click to expand...

No. I do know that you laughed at my using Politifact, and then you use them yourself. Your hypocrisy is on full parade here.

Oh, and by the way, the link I posted to Politifact was an analysis of a claim made by Tim Kaine, who made statements that were the same as statements that were being made in that thread by you and other incorrect posters. Maybe you don't know this, but here is what Politifact does, in their own words:

PolitiFact is a project of the Tampa Bay Times to help you find the truth in American politics. Reporters and editors from the Times fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups and rate them on our Truth-O-Meter
 
tres borrachos said:
No. I do know that you laughed at my using Politifact,
Click to expand...

Yes, you used Politifact's opinion to counter well-researched and documented claims about the health care system that were reported by credible non-partisan health care advocate groups like The Commonwealth Fund, and the Kaiser Family Foundation. I used Politifact as a source of quotes.

Yeah, that's exactly the same thing :roll:
 
sangha said:
Yes, you used Politifact's opinion to counter well-researched and documented claims about the health care system that were reported by credible non-partisan health care advocate groups like The Commonwealth Fund, and the Kaiser Family Foundation. I used Politifact as a source of quotes.

Yeah, that's exactly the same thing :roll:
Click to expand...

You scoffed at Politifact when I used them as a source, then used them when you need them.

Your hypocrisy is on full parade, and I'm sure you're seething that I exposed it for anyone to read.
 
Ockham said:
Report: Chris Christie?s Bridgegate probe clears gov - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com


Surely just one important step showing the Gov didn't lie (unlike our many other prominent Washington politicians who have). The Christie haters will continue to hate, the Christie supporters will be rewarded for their steadfast support. The media will likely not say much since this denies a smoking gun and the demise of a rising star Republican. Whether or not Christie runs in 2016 probably hasn't changed - from a political standpoint the damage was done; mission accomplished.
Click to expand...

This is great news! I am from NJ and would love to see him as President, but this has indeed hurt his chances and will likely derail the campaign if he begins one... But I'm not so sure now he wants to leave NJ. He would have to leave his post if he wanted to be President.
 
sangha said:
you left out the words "that are as credible as organizations like The Commonwealth Fund and The Kaiser Family Foundation on the issue of health care"
Click to expand...

No, I didn't need to.

I posted a link from Politifact. You scoffed at it. In fact, you even inserted the cute little smiley of the green guy laughing at it. Your post laughing at Politifact made no mention of The Commonwealth Fund or Kaiser.

But when it's convenient for you to reference Politifact, you do so.

Your hypocrisy is noted. Don't get mad because I exposed it.
 
tres borrachos said:
No, I didn't need to.

I posted a link from Politifact. You scoffed at it. In fact, you even inserted the cute little smiley of the green guy laughing at it. Your post laughing at Politifact made no mention of The Commonwealth Fund or Kaiser.

But when it's convenient for you to reference Politifact, you do so.

Your hypocrisy is noted. Don't get mad because I exposed it.
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel better to think other people are having a specific emotional reaction to your words, then I advise you go with whatever works for you.
 
sangha said:
If it makes you feel better to think other people are having a specific emotional reaction to your words, then I advise you go with whatever works for you.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

Next time you may want to post more carefully so you don't get tripped up by your own hypocrisy.
 
eohrnberger said:
Of course he wanted to protect his election chances, the same way that he wanted to protect his 'Al Qaeda is defeated' campaign meme. He was trading one false meme for another in the hopes that the electorate wouldn't look any closer, and they didn't.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious on where he covered things up. You'd think if he was going to start a campaign of misinformation he would at least get rid of competing views on the cause. It's not like it was tough for reporters to find differing views. In fact it was part of the campaign when Romney brought it up.
 
tres borrachos said:
Rhino?

It's RINO. Don't make it sound like the Tea Partiers are calling him fat.

Wait, when you say "Baggers" you're talking about the gay men and their Earl Grey sex acts? Maybe they were the ones who wanted to bring him down, yes.

Sorry, carry on.
Click to expand...

The teabaggers were threatened by Christie more than anyone. He was their worst nightmare. The Democratic party, I'm sure, is thankful to the baggers for taking Christie out. He was the only real threat to the Dems keeping the whitehouse for another 8 years.
 
disneydude said:
The teabaggers were threatened by Christie more than anyone. He was their worst nightmare. The Democratic party, I'm sure, is thankful to the baggers for taking Christie out. He was the only real threat to the Dems keeping the whitehouse for another 8 years.
Click to expand...

I, for one hope you go right on believing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom