Like a Bridge Over Troubled Waters.

Originally posted by DanielG I believe all the left leaning newspapers want him to be the Republican candidate. (edit) Wouldn't that be Like a Troubled Bridge over Water?

lol.  That was my first thought, too. 

I actually hope he survives this.  I wouldn't mind hearing what he has to say on a world stage.  But I think he's perceived as too moderate for the Far Right $$$ contributors.

I think he is probably a little wacko. He is not moderate enough for the left or the right. I don't see how he get's enough votes. Not that he seems crazy... but just unpredictable politically... that is not necessarily good.

And I'm just going to mention the Elephant in the room... Christie himself. I don't have problems with people that struggle with their weight... but he is certainly obese... morbidly?... and I do not know how people pick him to lead the country with such personal issues... even if they don't say it out loud.

I am pretty happy about this myself, I don't see him as a viable candidate in 2016 so I would be more than happy for the media to quit talking about him running.

I agree that Dems would love to see CC as the nominee. He doesn't inspire the Conservatives, he doesn't inspire the Libertarians, he doesn't inspire the religious. Basically having CC run would be a slam dunk for whoever opposes him. He would get a worse reception than Romney among typical Repub voters and he would keep Inde's away from the polls. 

I actually kind of like Christie, at least compared to some of the other wacko's that run. Don't think he will beat BIllary however.

I do too. He's always been a bit arrogant, so I'm not sure people who have followed his career are too surprised. Remember the incident where he took a helicopter to his sons baseball game, and had a limo waiting to take him 100 yards to the field?

Yeah, I have a problem with that....now, if he would have taken a limo to the game, and then choppered over onto the field......well....that's different.

Saw some clips of the press conference yesterday. The whole thing is rather bizarre. Why would anyone punish the mayor of a town of 35,000 people? That is a drop in the bucket of the voter base in NJ, hardly going to make any difference in the election. Doesn't make sense for aide's to risk their job or for Christie to risk the bad rap to do this.

On the other hand his lack of action during the fiasco is rather suspect to me as well. Four days of major traffic problems for the sake of a "traffic study" and he doesn't call up the transportation department and ask what the heck is going on? 

Makes ya wonder what the real reason for the whole thing was and who was behind it. 

agree the whole thing is odd. as for the traffic tie-ups....they're not really unusual. i live in nj and use the bridge and tunnels regularly, although not from ft. lee.. in my experience, the GW is always backed up during rush hour. always. traffic snarls are the norm at that hour not the exception. i avoid it whenever possible. this particular event sounds like it was far greater than the norm but I dont even remember hearing about it until recent media coverage. 

Some liberal media outlets (MSNBC for one) are 'alleging' that CC was, in fact, trying to exact revenge on the Dem. (majority/minority?) Leader of the NJ Senate whose district includes Ft. Lee.  CC called her out by name in a press conference the day before the "traffic problem in Ft Lee" text was sent.

Interesting twist. Got a link? 

Found something. Looks like there was some tension and name calling over some State Supreme Court Justice nominations. The infamous email went out 24 hours after that showdown.

That might make a bit more sense. Still a dumb move either by Christie or his aides. 

I wish I would have lived during the times when you'd just knock the bridge down if you really wanted to get even......all this crap is ridiculous.

I'm in the same boat.  As I've mentioned before, the Dems and the media are pushing CC for a reason and it's not because they think he can win.

I disagree about Romney.  He didn't inspire conservatism at all, and pretty much all of the conservative blogs that I frequented down right hated the guy.  He's simply another big spending RINO was the general consensus.

Being a Mormon turned off a huge chunk of the religious right as well.  I'm sure that the percentage of religious folks probably voted for him similar to Bush and McCain, but I don't think I would say he inspired the religious right either.

In my opinion a fiscal conservative with a Libertarian slant socially would do exceptionally well in the national election.   There are fiscal conservatives in both parties, but they get caught up into forcing their social views on everyone and that's where it gets all whacky.

I feel Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul have the fiscal conservative credentials (at least in what they say), but I'm not sure how beholden they are to their social platforms.  If they take the approach of "I believe in this, but I don't feel it's the governments responsibility to impose it on others" then they could do very well in the general.  Certainly there will be militants on the right and left who will never vote for anyone who isn't going to militantly push their social agenda's, but I think those wash out.

I could be wrong for sure, but that's how I see it.

I don't think Romney inspired conservatives at all. I sure didn't vote for him. I went to the Repub primary in my state, they had us all in a big stadium and we went through rounds and rounds of voting to pick a candidate. A lot of the people I talked to wanted Ron Paul to be the guy, but they chose to vote for Romney because they thought he had a better chance of beating Obama. The hardcore religious voted for Santorum. 

IMO Romney was no where near "the far right". He failed to get the conservatives out to vote and independents weren't real interested in him. For me I was tired of voting for the lesser of two evils so I voted for who I wanted to. Johnson was the closest thing available and he got more of the vote than any L candidate ever has before. 

I think a lot of people are ready for a fiscal and regulatory conservative that does not stick their nose in the State's business or into social issues. Yes there are still some that vote on abortion and gay marriage, but even those would vote for a Libertarian candidate over Clinton. If the GOP had the guts to run Rand Paul or someone like him I think he would do very well, especially if O-care continues to implode and prove that government doesn't always know best. 

Unfortunately the GOP is much the same as the Dems, they seem to be just as in favor of big government as the dems are they just think they can do a better job of it. Because of that and the fact that it apparently takes $1bil to run a campaign, I am afraid we will get more of the same.

So no, I do not think that pandering to the religious right will help, but IMO CC is just the same as the last two moderates the GOP has run out, if not worse as I think he is an emotional loose cannon. His "straight talk" might be endearing to some but I don't want the POTUS running his mouth and shooting from the hip. They need a small government, fiscal conservative who lets the social issues fall to the states where it belongs. In short they need a Libertarian. 

Chris Christie is in a whoole lot of hot water these days. 

I think Trump summed it up nicely when he said that Christie is one email away from a disaster.  One email leak or one staffer saying he had knowledge or was involved and his political career is toast.

His poll numbers are already tanking, so it likely won't even take that.