HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Chris Christie - Republic...

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 10:26 AM

Chris Christie - Republican Future?

I do not trust this man.

However, he is light years better than just about any other Republican in office. I watched him on Joe Scar this morning. If Christie is to be believed then he actually values WE, THE PEOPLE over any "conservative" ideology and he scoffs at his fellow Republicans for not doing the same. He was talking about how he works with his Democratic Senate and House and how he wakes up thinking about what he can actually get done, as opposed to what he wants. That's pretty good but is Christie to be trusted? And can that philosophy co-exist with right wing radical nutjobs?

By the way, that's also a concept that I wish left wing radical nutjobs would assimilate. You don't get everything you want in or system. That's not how Madison designed our system and it's not how it works.

Christie talks like an adult. Is he an adult? Is he genuine? Is he the real deal or is this some kind of Trojan Horse type strategy? Not that I would ever dream of voting for him, mind you, but I would very much like to see improvement over the 112th do absolutely nothing Congress. It would be nice to see Republican grow up.

I have a problem seeing "conservatives" as anything better than their more wars, less taxes on the rich, racial dog whistles, and more concentration of wealth iteration that they are at present.

41 replies, 2051 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply Chris Christie - Republican Future? (Original post)
Cary Jan 2013 OP
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #1
Cary Jan 2013 #2
WeekendWarrior Jan 2013 #12
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #15
Sunlei Jan 2013 #35
WeekendWarrior Jan 2013 #38
Sunlei Jan 2013 #40
CheapShotArtist Jan 2013 #25
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #27
CheapShotArtist Jan 2013 #33
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #36
Sunlei Jan 2013 #34
Creideiki Jan 2013 #31
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #32
Sunlei Jan 2013 #3
NewJeffCT Jan 2013 #4
CitizenPatriot Jan 2013 #5
Cary Jan 2013 #8
Sunlei Jan 2013 #41
politicaljunkie41910 Jan 2013 #6
CTyankee Jan 2013 #7
Cary Jan 2013 #9
CTyankee Jan 2013 #11
tallahasseedem Jan 2013 #19
CTyankee Jan 2013 #20
tallahasseedem Jan 2013 #21
CTyankee Jan 2013 #23
Filibuster Harry Jan 2013 #10
Cary Jan 2013 #13
NewsCenter28 Jan 2013 #14
Cary Jan 2013 #16
madinmaryland Jan 2013 #22
Nay Jan 2013 #29
craigmatic Jan 2013 #17
CTyankee Jan 2013 #24
tallahasseedem Jan 2013 #18
CheapShotArtist Jan 2013 #26
Politicub Jan 2013 #28
DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #30
cbrer Jan 2013 #37
Cary Jan 2013 #39

Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 10:37 AM

1. How would you define "left wing radical nutjobs"?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 11:13 AM

2. Are you suggesting there are no left wing radical nutjobs?

I think they exist but I am not going to engage in a debate over who and what they are. I intentionally left the term undefined and have no intention of going any further, myself. However you're more than welcome to state your thoughts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:56 PM

12. I think that's a pretty good definition right there

And there are plenty of them around. Nutjobs aren't the exclusive territory of the right.

EDIT: But I'll define it for you—the way I see it, anyway. A leftwing radical nutjob is the same as a rightwing radical nutjob. A person with ideas that are extremely far from the mainstream and takes an attitude that it's his (or her) way or the highway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:13 PM

15. True.

 

I've come across those.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:20 AM

35. people like Crazy Bachmann or Snowbunny Palin those kind of nutters are exclusive to the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #35)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:31 AM

38. It's the same strident, take no prisoners attitude

that marks extremists on both sides. The only difference is their political point of view. And if you had grown up during the sixties, you'd know that leftwing extremists can be just as violent as extremists on the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #38)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:43 AM

40. Todays new republicans are downright dangerous because they fund groups like NRA, JBS and KKK

The republican primary couple years ago even had the JBS sponcer their venue, allowed them a booth to pull in members. Someone funded them in a big way, probably Koch as he is the one who founded jbs.

Someone else about 4 years ago funded the KKK in a major way. They upgraded their website, did a name change, got TV stations!, singing groups, and went international.

sure there are lone wolves on either side but they tend to act alone rather than spread major hate, and social unrest, political propaganda similar to that arm of the republican party 'fox-lies.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:37 PM

25. Cornell West and PETA are 2 examples that come to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CheapShotArtist (Reply #25)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:46 PM

27. Cornell West is not a nutjob.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:35 AM

33. IDK about that...

this is the same guy who called Al Sharpton, Melissa Harris-Perry, and Prof. Dyson "sellouts", and made some comment about Prez. O not being black enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CheapShotArtist (Reply #33)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:41 AM

36. Over the top? Yes.

 

Nuts? No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CheapShotArtist (Reply #25)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:16 AM

34. I don't think Peta is a nutjob either, they did a lot of good things and follow their agenda.

Just in 2012, they exposed several really cruel animal testing issues and got them to stop.

Like the navy trauma labs on live goats, they got that to stop. Some chinese labs testing on animals, they got that to stop. Fedex and UPS halted transporting any animals to labs. Many other things too.

And they promote a vegan diet that a lot of the general public is starting to switch to, Pres. Clinton for one.

Excellent ads, cut to the point.

I'm not a member of Peta, I think some of their people are a bit excessive but they are a legit. org that has done a lot of good things.

http://www.peta.org/

a lot of their bad name comes directly from the demonising corporate media has done against peta and HSUS...they don't like their factory farms messed with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:56 PM

31. Anyone to the left of him? *shrug*

That's usually how the conservatives (of both parties) feel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Creideiki (Reply #31)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:09 PM

32. Yep.

 

They make no distinction between liberals who criticize the government and real radical leftists who hate the government no matter what it does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 12:06 PM

3. Clean up & federal $ is one thing. Christie hasn't done much at all to think about the next storms.

I have family homes in Brick, NJ and Ortley beach, NJ was where my Grandparents lived for 50 years. The Brick home did ok as it's couple miles from the beach and a half mile from inland water. luck of location. The Ortley beach house, 8 blocks from the Ocean had never flooded, not even the streets ever flooded. This time it was a total loss.

Christie may talk up a good talk today, he is not planning for the future disasters at all. His own future maybe in politics, but not the future of his states citizens with global warming extreme weather.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 12:21 PM

4. Mitt Romney used the debates to highlight

how well he worked with the overwhelmingly Democratic legislature in Massachusetts - neglecting to mention that they overrode his veto like 800 times in four years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 12:27 PM

5. Don't fall for his bs

He only looks sane in comparison, but he's a bully at his core and he only worked with Obama because he had to if he wanted to get what he needed. Really, it should have been news that Obama was willing to work with him, after the things Christie said about Obama. Instead everyone fawns over Christie while refusing to give Obama credit for putting all of the name calling aside when the people are in need. Yes, every leader should do that, but show me a Republican who would do that if the shoe were on the other foot. Would Christie have helped Obama help all the people of the country? No. Because their job is to obstruct Obama until they need something. Get back to me when he sticks up for something that doesn't impact his ratings as a governor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CitizenPatriot (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:44 PM

8. I'm only talking comparison here.

There is no danger of me ever becoming a Republican. As I said I would never vote for him and I do not trust him. My query here is really whether Christie, who looks sane in comparison to any elected Republican that I know of, represents any kind of improvement in Republicans.

If he does, is this a problem? Why might it be a problem? You can find a lot of evidence that "conservatives" realize that their agenda is unpopular and that they have to lie to people in order to effect that agenda. So is Christie just doing some kind of Trojan Horse type strategy here?

I don't trust him. I don't trust him. I certainly don't trust "conservatves." Why would anyone in their right mind trust them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:53 AM

41. I do like General Powell, he is a very reasonable man one of the best Rs out there. Even he backed O

If McCain ran with Powell instead of the airhead snowbunny he would have won. But I don't think todays republican party cares at all about honor,morality or 'we the people'. They are selfish, its all about them. They don't even like Christie because he speaks back to them. Big republican money may not even donate to Christie for his next run at anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 01:00 PM

6. Although I think Christie's straight talk express works on the local level, I don't think it would

Last edited Wed Jan 9, 2013, 09:38 PM - Edit history (1)

on a national level; because nobody righteously thinks the President (any President) is going to come off of his soap box and actually kick their behind. Sometimes I'm not so sure about Christie. Some days he's so over the top he looks like he is a half step away from going upside someone's head and that state of being out of 'control' just ain't cool.

I'm also tired of the Governors making the comparison between their job and that of the president.

What's always missed in the discussion is the fact that most states have a constitutional requirement to balance their budget, so when a governor balances his budget, it's because he's required to.

If the Dems and Repubs as state legislatures are obstructionists and don't do their jobs, than nothing gets done and there's usually an immediate impact or the evidence is usually apparent right away and the public can see that, unlike problems at the fed level most of which the impact won't be felt until the next decade or two.

The federal government is always the credit card of last resort. The states don't have to invest in expensive flood control infrastructure. The feds will bail out the stupidest of governors and they know that. The can just wait until the water overflows the banks and then stick their hand out to the feds.

The money spent at the local levels are smaller and you're responsible for far fewer people. Again, you can always count on the federal government as a last resort. So when Florida's governor kicks sick people off of medicaid, someone else will pick up the tab.

Look at how things work when one party dominates both state houses and the governorship. It's hell to pay for the party our of power. Same as at the federal level.

The President has to deal with wars, foreign leaders who may be idiots with a nuclear weapon, national disasters, man-made fiscal crisis, birthers, fake news channels, and the job that never ends. One wrong word can set off fundamental extremists in the middle east and people die, etc, etc, etc.

So while both may be leaders of their respective Executive Branches; I don't think anyone envies the job of the President. Sure everyone thinks they would like to be the President usually at the moment when it looks the most glamorous, in the final analysis, I'm sure most would not want the headache that comes with it for all the tea in china.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicaljunkie41910 (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:33 PM

7. He also said on MJ that it was the redistricting of House seats that has caused

the wingnuttery problem. He's the first Republican I've heard identify it. I must say I was surprised tohear it come out of his mouth!

My guess is that he has realized that his thuggishness has not played well and when he realized that working with Obama on Sandy relief went over extremely well, he decided to take it down a few notches.

However, time will tell...we'll see if he'll revert to his snarling self, altho if I were him I would take a good look at all those photos of him snarling open mouthed and ugly did NOT look presidential, it made him look like he was crazy...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:47 PM

9. Leopards don't change their spots

If he actually realizes that his thuggishness has not played well and that working with Obama was of mutual benefit, then that's actually cognitive improvement. "Conservatives" somehow fail to understand that their policies are wildly unpopular. "Conservatives" are in denial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:55 PM

11. well, I'd say he's crafty. He knows that being a very large man can be quite

intimidating in and of itself, just standing there. But when you add the out and out meanness you lose a lot of people. Maybe he just makes nice when on TV, tho. Wouldn't surprise me...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:48 PM

19. He'll revert back...

Look at how he has gotten to this point in this career (fundraising dollars, etc). He has no choice.

Unfortunately, I believe I'm going to be be stuck with him beyond 2014 unless Dems can come up with a strong candidate (which will be hard after his performance with Sandy).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:52 PM

20. well, we'll see how well he does going forward, won't we? If he reverts, he'll feel

the heat, if he doesn't he'll get the rewards.

It's like that, isn't it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:56 PM

21. Unfortunately, yes...

but we're really feeling the heat here in NJ from his "style" with Teacher Unions, Police Officers, property taxes, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 08:13 PM

23. wehave to keep fighting, that's for sure, esp. on unions who have a more tenuous

footing in public opinion. My husband was a union worker, municipal level, laid off in early 2009 with a meager pension.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:53 PM

10. Not sure if he will run in 2016 but if he does he could be very tough to beat. Interesting

to see the right wing nuts against him in primaries. Also, if he is elected President -- do you think he has the names of those house R idiots who voted "no" on the sandy relief? I wouldn't want to be one of those 67!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Filibuster Harry (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:00 PM

13. It works 2 ways.

He would go after right wing nuts but how pissed are they at him for his rhetoric?

It's very interesting. But what exactly does it mean? Does it mean anything in terms of "conservative" revolution?

Part of me wants to see them implode further, and part of me wants to see them morph into something healthier and more functional. And then yet another part of me doesn't understand how they can ever morph into something healthier and more functional because to do that really means they have to become more like us.

And then there are parts of us that really aren't so healthy or functional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:05 PM

14. Christie is the new Guilani

I respect and appreciate Gov. Christie and his ounce of sanity that he brings to the GOP but there is no way that he will ever get through the 2016 GOP national primary. No..., the GOP will nominate a nut-job aka George W. Bush style who can pretend to be moderate such as Marco Rubio or far more ominously Jeb Bush or Sarah Palin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:37 PM

16. I'm afraid you're correct. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:58 PM

22. Uhh. Christie also pretends to be moderate. Until the hurricane that's all he did.

He is as far reich as the other union busting governors that have gotten their asses handed to themselves.

Walker, Scott, Kasich...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Reply #14)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 06:40 PM

29. I also think Jeb Bush will be a frontrunner in 2016. I don't think that the Bush name is that

hated by the Pubs; it's amazing how just a few years goes by, and down the memory hole it goes. Have you noted that the 2007 bailout has been successfully characterized as a Dem/Obama bailout? And who can deny that Reagan, that senile, evil old fool, has been successfully resurrected, partially by our own Dem president?

Believe me, Jeb will be the one to beat, even if he does have a bunch of sleazy relatives on both his and his wife's ancestries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:00 PM

17. If he ever is elected president, he'll be just like bush co- stubborn, dismissive of any other view

point, and a conservative idealogue. I'm not fooled by what he says now. You can just listen to him talk for five minutes and tell that he's a smug asshole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to craigmatic (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 08:15 PM

24. Oh, I'll never vote for him but I just wonder how many other Dems he'll fool...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:45 PM

18. It's easy to fall for his BS, let's hope...

that the majority wont. Trust me, I have to live in this gasbag's state!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:40 PM

26. I don't know if the GOP would ever nominate him,

but he does seem to have crossover appeal. His approval rating with Democrats is actually higher than that within his own party, and he's one of the few politicians who has come out against the Drug War. I think he'd be very tenacious in a general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:55 PM

28. Opportunistic and arrogant? Sounds like the same kind of puke to me

So yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 06:52 PM

30. Unlike Florida

NJ has plenty of real liberals to pick from. The only reasons people are thinking of accepting Crist are:

A) he defended Obama long before it was expedient to do so and
B) There is the dread thought of Alex Sink losing another election to Rick Scott without a fight.


Christie does not have that luxury, as Jersey can pick from hard liberal to DLC pap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cary (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:17 AM

37. Fat chance

 

Sorry, couldn't resist...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbrer (Reply #37)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:58 AM

39. That's heavy, man.

It's a whopper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread