Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

If you believe the report that he commissioned, he had no knowledge of bridgegate. Does this irreparably damage him going into the primaries, or was he even a viable candidate in the first place?

I was a Christie supporter, but I'm not buying this. There are other reports (two I think) still being worked on, I'd like to see those findings.

Too convenient that the report Christie commissions comes out first and clears him. I also think the responsible parties should face some legal action. Lets get these people in court, under oath, and find out what really happened.

ASUG8 wrote:If you believe the report that he commissioned, he had no knowledge of bridgegate. Does this irreparably damage him going into the primaries, or was he even a viable candidate in the first place?

Nope. He'll be fine.

Independent voters are what matters, and if he runs against Hillary they will both have somewhat similar integrity issues, so I would say it will be a wash.

That is assuming that he gets through the GOP primary process. I'm still anticipating a Scott Walker run, so at this stage of the game it is hard to say how the GOP primaries will shake out.

I also voted "no". Christie was going to have a tough time in the primaries, there was no guarantee that he would make it though, this just makes it that much tougher.

BlueHen86 wrote:I also voted "no". Christie was going to have a tough time in the primaries, there was no guarantee that he would make it though, this just makes it that much tougher.

I guess in a roundabout way that's kind of my question. I'm not hearing much about who he might run against, but I'm hearing he's not a true conservative by some measures (not necessarily a bad thing BTW) and others have said he wouldn't survive the primary. I want to like him...kind of a no bullshit guy, a little bit of a bully, but we need someone with a spine going forward IMHO.

ASUG8 wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:I also voted "no". Christie was going to have a tough time in the primaries, there was no guarantee that he would make it though, this just makes it that much tougher.

I guess in a roundabout way that's kind of my question. I'm not hearing much about who he might run against, but I'm hearing he's not a true conservative by some measures (not necessarily a bad thing BTW) and others have said he wouldn't survive the primary. I want to like him...kind of a no bullshit guy, a little bit of a bully, but we need someone with a spine going forward IMHO.

Those are the reasons that I like him. However, I think he did know about the bridge lane closures; if a neutral report clears him I may change my mind but right now I have my doubts.

He is a bully, I could see him ordering payback, and I don't think his underlings would do it on their own. That's why I want to see them in court. Will they take the fall, or will they spill the beans?

BlueHen86 wrote:I also voted "no". Christie was going to have a tough time in the primaries, there was no guarantee that he would make it though, this just makes it that much tougher.

No shit. You've cavorted with known and convicted terrorists? No problem. You fuck with my commute? Fuck off and die, buster!

There is only one question...well two.

Is he less of a scumbag that those currently in office?
If yes, he doesn't have the right people around him to fit in.
If no, he might pose a threat to those in office and shouldn't be allowed in.

Eh, he's still fine. If he doesn't become President it won't be because of this. He has his work cut out for him getting through the primaries, and if the Dems run Hillary he'll have his problems against her, but he's not going to miss the chance being President because of this.

I thought all fat people lived in the south

Depends if Wall Street is still willing to back him.

OL FU wrote:I thought all fat people lived in the south

I blame chemtrails.

It work well for Christie. Assuming they don't find anything on him, which they haven't yet it boomerangs back on the liberal media witch hunt that jumped all over him. That will play well with many GOPers across the land.

I still think he's the only/most electable candidate the GOP has for 16.

bluehenbillk wrote:It work well for Christie. Assuming they don't find anything on him, which they haven't yet it boomerangs back on the liberal media witch hunt that jumped all over him. That will play well with many GOPers across the land.

I still think he's the only/most electable candidate the GOP has for 16.

This isn't a "liberal media witch hunt". Somebody in the Christie administration did something that they shouldn't have. Investigating to see who ordered what, who did what and who knew what is part of the process. No way this incident ends up helping him, best he can hope for is that the other reports clear him and this issue goes away.

Besides, the liberal media is the least of Christies worries, the hard part for him is getting through the GOP primaries. This was going to be a tough task for Christie even if everything went right, there are of lot of people that don't like the fact that he spoke well of Obama after Sandy.

ECB...

Christie is ONLY viewed as viable by the numbskull NE U.S. conks (all 12 of them), who are unable to view the world past a 300 mi radius of of Manhattan.

Being a quasi-bad-ass, smart-mouthed Jersey boy

ARE NOT

the skills needed to become the leader of the United States.

Over the past 55 years, our nation has suffered under faux leaders chosen principally due to their N.E. U.S. "pedigree" rather than their intelligence, integrity and vision.

Being an Ivy League alum DOES NOT ensure temperance and wisdom...as has been painfully aware for the past 6 years.

For those too dense to exist in reality...note that Christie only received 9% of the straw poll vote at CPAC. Get a clue, Tri-Staters.


(Rand Paul 2016 )

travelinman67 wrote:ECB...

Christie is ONLY viewed as viable by the numbskull NE U.S. conks (all 12 of them), who are unable to view the world past a 300 mi radius of of Manhattan.

Being a quasi-bad-ass, smart-mouthed Jersey boy

ARE NOT

the skills needed to become the leader of the United States.

Over the past 55 years, our nation has suffered under faux leaders chosen principally due to their N.E. U.S. "pedigree" rather than their intelligence, integrity and vision.

Being an Ivy League alum DOES NOT ensure temperance and wisdom...as has been painfully aware for the past 6 years.

For those too dense to exist in reality...note that Christie only received 9% of the straw poll vote at CPAC. Get a clue, Tri-Staters.


(Rand Paul 2016 )

Fuck Ayn Rand Paul.

D1B wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:ECB...

Christie is ONLY viewed as viable by the numbskull NE U.S. conks (all 12 of them), who are unable to view the world past a 300 mi radius of of Manhattan.

Being a quasi-bad-ass, smart-mouthed Jersey boy

ARE NOT

the skills needed to become the leader of the United States.

Over the past 55 years, our nation has suffered under faux leaders chosen principally due to their N.E. U.S. "pedigree" rather than their intelligence, integrity and vision.

Being an Ivy League alum DOES NOT ensure temperance and wisdom...as has been painfully aware for the past 6 years.

For those too dense to exist in reality...note that Christie only received 9% of the straw poll vote at CPAC. Get a clue, Tri-Staters.


(Rand Paul 2016 )

Fuck Ayn Rand Paul.

He'll have to kneel before the altar of Wall Street to have a chance. He'll be like any Rand on SS.

Rand Paul is the Republican version of Obama...
He looks great / sounds good / talks a big game / appears to NOT be a part of the old boy network
etc. etc.

But once the job at hand is secured he'll be just another lying scheming politician
Succumbing to the entrenched powers and rolling over on the American people

Good Luck: That's all... the end

BlueHen86 wrote:

bluehenbillk wrote:It work well for Christie. Assuming they don't find anything on him, which they haven't yet it boomerangs back on the liberal media witch hunt that jumped all over him. That will play well with many GOPers across the land.

I still think he's the only/most electable candidate the GOP has for 16.

This isn't a "liberal media witch hunt". Somebody in the Christie administration did something that they shouldn't have. Investigating to see who ordered what, who did what and who knew what is part of the process. No way this incident ends up helping him, best he can hope for is that the other reports clear him and this issue goes away.

Besides, the liberal media is the least of Christies worries, the hard part for him is getting through the GOP primaries. This was going to be a tough task for Christie even if everything went right, there are of lot of people that don't like the fact that he spoke well of Obama after Sandy.

Of course it is a liberal media witch hunt. The media is choosing which "distractions" they broadcast...and the liberal media consistently runs with stories that denigrate conservative figures. That is their job.

Obama goes after his opponents almost every day...he is a vindictive SOB, with Holder acting as a lap dog enforcer solely of Obama's will rather than of American law. Christie gets accused of being vindictive and slowing traffic...and the media (and the stupid Liberal whack job lemmings) make it a big issue, while Obama gets away with the daily murdering the Constitution and attacking the freedom of the press and those same Liberal whack jobs dismiss it as business as usual.

You can't make this stuff up.

travelinman67 wrote:


Being an Ivy League alum DOES NOT ensure temperance and wisdom...as has been painfully aware for the past 6 years.

Uh, while I like the boost in perception, Christie is a Delaware alumni - unless something's changed recently, Delaware is not a member of the Ivy League.

GannonFan wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:


Being an Ivy League alum DOES NOT ensure temperance and wisdom...as has been painfully aware for the past 6 years.

Uh, while I like the boost in perception, Christie is a Delaware alumni - unless something's changed recently, Delaware is not a member of the Ivy League.

I think he was referring to BHO there.

Here's the problem the GOP has. If you don't think Christie can get the nomination, I don't see anyone else out there that can even significantly challenge to be the next President much less win.

Rand? Rubio? Ryan? Walker? Jindal? Jeb? Cruz? etc?

bluehenbillk wrote:Here's the problem the GOP has. If you don't think Christie can get the nomination, I don't see anyone else out there that can even significantly challenge to be the next President much less win.

Rand? Rubio? Ryan? Walker? Jindal? Jeb? Cruz? etc?

I'd give Rand, Walker, and Jeb decent chances...probably Ryan too.

Christie will be endorsing diet drinks in 2017.