Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will hold on before forming an opinion because we all know that when democrats fear someone they attack them with a vengeance with all kinds of false accusations.
I heard that what OP is saying is false.
Though we certainly are in agreement that the OP is false, the information FOR the OP's source came out of the Republican Governor's Association meeting, not exactly a hotbed of Democrats, and was attributed to Astorino's own people:
Quote:
The Post’s report on Christie’s plan to back Astorino was based on sources close to Astorino who were familiar with an hourlong private meeting between Astorino and Christie held last month at the RGA’s annual meeting in Arizona.
Note that the Post rewrote their article and removed that part, however here's a (potential volatile!) link to the original article: Original NYPost Article
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,437 posts, read 54,934,362 times
Reputation: 40964
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751
Actually burdell, I'm on the line with Christie but at this point in time believing it's just another democratic attack it makes me want to open my mind to Christie even more. It's having the opposite effect.
Nah, as long as the GOP insists on keeping its social conscience in the 19th century and spending MORE! MORE! MORE! on an already bloated DoD, I won't be voting Republican, (D) or (I) are the only choices I have.
He is probably looking to become President - and the further that he distances himself from the non-winnable ultra-conservative faction of the Republican Party - i.e. Tea Party and religious Evangelicals - the more likely that he will appeal to the moderates in the Party.
..unless he secretly wishes to become a Democrat.
So true! Plus, I've always thought it was transparently phony when people from the same party endorse one another just because they're from the same party. It's one thing if those two politicians' ideals line up (like, say, a TP politician endorsing a TP candidate), but it loses meaning when it's just for show.
Christie's shown that he doesn't give a ... about talking partisan talk or doing partisan things just because. He's all about walking the walk and getting things done!
That said, I'll agree with LauraC that Christie's convention speech was pretty lousy. Not Clint Eastwood bad, but nothing special either.
As much as I would enjoy seeing an all out slug fest in the GOP there really is nothing to see here. No matter who is the head of the Republican Governor's Association (which Chrisite is the head of), they typically do not endorse any candidates (who aren't Incumbents) until they are the official party nominee. At this point, Astroino is not even officially in the race let alone the GOP nominee, so Christie not endorsing him yet is not surprising considering his position within the RGA. Astroino is probably the strongest GOP candidate, but has no chance in hell, so its unlikely Christie would be that involved in this tace anyway because it would make zero sense from a resource standpoint.
Nah, as long as the GOP insists on keeping its social conscience in the 19th century and spending MORE! MORE! MORE! on an already bloated DoD, I won't be voting Republican, (D) or (I) are the only choices I have.
I do not think the party insists on keeping the DOD involved in spending too much money, they just want to keep our country safe and free. I do not want to see money wasted on wars that have little to do with us, but I do want to feel as safe as possible. As for social issues, which ones are you referring to and would you vote for a Republican regardless? I doubt it.
So true! Plus, I've always thought it was transparently phony when people from the same party endorse one another just because they're from the same party. It's one thing if those two politicians' ideals line up (like, say, a TP politician endorsing a TP candidate), but it loses meaning when it's just for show.
Christie's shown that he doesn't give a ... about talking partisan talk or doing partisan things just because. He's all about walking the walk and getting things done!
That said, I'll agree with LauraC that Christie's convention speech was pretty lousy. Not Clint Eastwood bad, but nothing special either.
I am not defending him nor am I sure I would vote for him, but I do agree, he walks the walk. As for his speech, too many people seem to forget, not everyone is a gifted speaker.
I said it more than a year ago, Christie will switch parties.
and I say to you, if for no other reason, but his lack of support for unions, it will never happen. Do you really think he would have considered holding the position as head of the governors if he had any intention in switching parties?
just like Democrats if Christie is nominated he promises to support the Republican platform.Most people give too much I think presients can control all the agenda. Both leaderships in congress also control a lot of it.otherwise most other presidential actions are not temporary while he is president and next president can change it all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
