Did Gov. Chris Christie Intentionally Cause Traffic Backup As An Act Of Retribution?

The George Washington Bridge (busiest US bridge in Sep) connects NY to NJ with three access lanes. Two of these lanes were shut down Sep 9-13 by a high ranking Port Authority official David Wildstein, a Christie ally. This caused massive backups in Ft. Lee, NJ (bridge entrance town). Turns out democratic mayor of Ft. Lee, Mark Sokolich, refused to endorse Christie's reelection bid a few weeks prior. A "traffic study" was cited as the reason for the lane reduction.

If the GOP POTUS-wannabe would screw with the general public over being butt-hurt on a non-endorsement, what could he do on the world stage? I hope this kills his run at the presidency.

Article Link

It wouldn't surprise me if he did. And if he did, then he'd be acting like all the other D.C. politicians ... being petty and arrogant and using political position to satisfy personal whims. Sounds like perfect POTUS material to follow in Obama's footsteps. barf.

Sounds about right to me. Cant get what you want? make a fuss in any way shape or form.
That ought to help his position.

reply to post by eggman90


it shouldn't be shocking. Christie was know as petty and vindictive long before he took office. He was a lap dog for Madoff as well. He's really all the GOP has though.

antonia
He's really all the GOP has though.

Washington Post - Top GOP Candidates for 2016

10. Mike Pence: Indiana governor
9. Paul Ryan
8. John Kasich: Ohio governor
7. Bobby Jindal: Louisiana governor
6. Marco Rubio - Florida Senator
5. Jeb Bush
4. Scott Walker -Wisconsin governor
3. Ted Cruz - TX Senator
2. Rand Paul
1. Chris Christie

I'd be looking at a Scott Walker and Ted Cruz combo ...
(not that I'd vote for that, but that is a viable combo for the republicans IMHO)
Christie isn't as popular with Republicans as people think.
The Democrats like him. He's got high $$$ donors from the Dems ...

FlyersFan

antonia
He's really all the GOP has though.

Washington Post - Top GOP Candidates for 2016

10. Mike Pence: Indiana governor

Who? (this is the response you will get from the general public)

9. Paul Ryan

He's cute, but doesn't have the fundraising power to make it work.

8. John Kasich: Ohio governor

Same problem as ryan, also not enough name recognition.

7. Bobby Jindal: Louisiana governor

Not enough name recognition.

6. Marco Rubio - Florida Senator

Not a fundraising power by any means. Call back in a few years.

5. Jeb Bush

After the last Bush you must be absolutely off your rocker if you think another one is getting it. Well, Americans are kinda dumb, so I really shouldn't put it past them.

4. Scott Walker -Wisconsin governor

Too divisive, also lacks a college degree, the odds are not in your favor without.

3. Ted Cruz - TX Senator

Too divisive.

2. Rand Paul

As much as it would amuse me to see a guy with pubes growing out of his head in the white house-Nope, too divisive.

1. Chris Christie

The one to beat. The faux-moderate (he's about as moderate as all the other people on the list actually, but then again he hugged the antichrist so the GOP can't put him in). Even if he ran he'd have a difficult time of it considering the state the GOP is in. The demographics are not in favor of the GOP and the choices you've presented are not going to make the general public excited.

Christie isn't as popular with Republicans as people think.
The Democrats like him. He's got high $$$ donors from the Dems ...

Indeed, you'd probably see a split if he ran and the GOP would lose.

reply to post by antonia

Those are you opinions ... and I disagree with most of them ... but that's irrelevant.
You stated that the GOP 'only had Christie'. That's not true. They have many more.
And Christie is not very different from Obama/Bus43 (who are pretty much the same).
He isn't liked by the GOP base. Walker is. Cruz is. Rand Paul is gaining popularity.

That being said, if Christie gets the GOP nod, I'd bet he'd pick Rubio for VP.
He'd get Florida and the hispanic vote.

FlyersFan
reply to post by antonia

 

And Christie is not very different from Obama/Bus43 (who are pretty much the same).
He isn't liked by the GOP base. Walker is. Cruz is. Rand Paul is gaining popularity.

I addressed that already. Really, you act like I must like Christie. It doesn't matter who is popular with the base. The GOP is going to nominate the guy they think can win. None of the other people you listed can win a general election. How do you think Mitt Romney got in when the GOP base pretty much hated the guy? It's not about the base, it's about the general public. The GOP base is shrinking every year, it's not big enough to win elections.

antonia
Really, you act like I must like Christie.

Really, I don't know where you get that. IMHO you are acting like a far left winger.
I don't think you like ANY of the GOP. Which is fine. (I don't like 9/10 of them)
But the statement that he's the only one they have ... is wrong.

Whatever.

On topic - Christie is acting like a typical Washington politician.
If he were to win, he'd step right in Obama's shoes and no one would know the difference.
(Just as Obama stepped in Bush43s shoes )

FlyersFan
IMHO you are acting like a far left winger.

Am i supposed to be insulted by that? Not working out for you today.

But the statement that he's the only one they have ... is wrong.

Except it's not, I said the only one who can win a general election. It is simply machiavellian style analysis. You look at the numbers and make a call. Sorry, he's the only one who can get close to the numbers.


And really, I like Ryan, he's good to look at.

antonia
Am i supposed to be insulted by that? Not working out for you today.

Nope, not an insult. I was polite. Chill out. You are paranoid. I made a observation statement.
You are far left. You don't think any of the contenders are really contenders. That simply isn't true.

Whatever. Think what you want.

I gave the list of those who are thought to be contenders and who have shown interest.
It's WAY too early to say who 'has the numbers' and who doesn't.

At this point ... years and years before elections ... Bill Clintons numbers were in the basement.
And yet, he went on to win and be re-elected. So this far out, the numbers mean nothing.

FlyersFan


At this point ... years and years before elections ... Bill Clintons numbers were in the basement.
And yet, he went on to win and be re-elected. So this far out, the numbers mean nothing.

In a very different time. You can't compare the environment Bill was in with what we have today. Bill clinton was also a likeable person who resonated well with a large portion of Americans. Most of the people you listed are disliked by large swaths of the American public or simply unknown. Cruz and Walker especially are very jarring personalities. You can't win an election like that today. The hype machine and fundraising have to start early or you won't make it. Obama started his hype and fundraising the moment he made the Senate, so you can't bring that up as an example.

You simply discount my opinion because you think I'm liberal. That is why you said that crap. I knew what it was intended for and that is why I rightly pointed out you intended to be insulting. It was belittling language intended to discount my opinion. I didn't discount your opinion simply because you seem to be a right-winger. You could afford others the same treatment they give you. My political affiliation has little to do with the numbers (and most people in my life who aren't harshly right wing just think I'm a moderate, so really, you don't know me). If you can show me that any other of the 10 you listed beyond Christie is polling high and raising massive amounts of dough then I will be willing to accept them as a contender. Plenty of people on the right have voiced opinions similar to mine. I haven't even discussed the Democratic field. You'd probably be shocked to know that I don't think Hillary Clinton can win.


But you are right about one thing. It's early, I will give you this: If there is a mass populist upsurge then Christie will be unlikely to win. But, if there is one no member you listed is likely to win a general election.

Christie made a couple of speeches that gained him some attention.

The MSM still spews out junk like this, see if you can read all the way to the end without getting a can of air freshener> Christie All The Rage At The GOP Governors Meeting

We can see the picture, fists in the air, blah blah, rah rah.....

I personally can't stand him. Rand Paul would be an interesting candidate, I supported and voted for his father.

If it's not a democrat then TPTB will insert yet another Bush from the dynasty. The POTUS is an acting job. We all know the dems/repubs are two sides of the same coin.

antonia
In a very different time. You can't compare the environment Bill was in with what we have today. Bill clinton was also a likeable person who resonated well with a large portion of Americans.

Um ... yes we CAN compare. Bill Clintons numbers at this point were in the basement. Popular members of his own party said he was irrelevant because he was Gov of 'just' Arkansas and because his numbers stank and because of the Jennifer Flowers crap. He wasn't 'likeable'. He wasn't 'resonating well'. And large numbers of the American public didn't think twice about him. 3 years from elections ... your description of Clinton was not happening.

Most of the people you listed are disliked by large swaths of the American public or simply unknown.

That's not true. Most of them ARE well known. And the left wing has just as many 'large swaths of the American public' who don't like the left wing candidates as the the right wing does. So 'not being liked by large swaths of Americans' is a non issue. The left and the right candidates, who are disliked by bunches of partisan folks, also have bunches of other partisan folks who like them.

You simply discount my opinion because you think I'm liberal. That is why you said that crap. I knew what it was intended for and that is why I rightly pointed out you intended to be insulting. It was belittling language intended to discount my opinion.

You are paranoid and obsessing. Seriously. Get a grip. (and get on topic)

But you are right about one thing. It's early

Good. You are back on topic. Excellent. Yes, it's early. And just like with Bill Clinton, who his own party said was irrelevant, it's ANYONEs race. Christie is a buffoon. He'll probably step in his own B.S. and track it all through the race. He'll be his own worst enemy.

there is one no member you listed is likely to win a general election.

They said the same thing about Bill Clinton. And we see how that turned out.

Again .. Christie is NOT the 'only person the GOP has'.
Just like Hillary isn't the 'only person the DEMS have'.

There are plenty more corrupt players in both parties to pick from.
PLENTY.

FlyersFan

You are paranoid and obsessing. Seriously. Get a grip. (and get on topic)

And you are still being insulting.

there is one no member you listed is likely to win a general election.

They said the same thing about Bill Clinton. And we see how that turned out.

You conveniently butchered what I said:

But you are right about one thing. It's early, I will give you this: If there is a mass populist upsurge then Christie will be unlikely to win. But, if there is one no member you listed is likely to win a general election.

In this context, what you have said has no bearing.


And you keep bringing up Clinton, Clinton was relatively unknown (to the general public) when he began his run in a very different media world. The internet didn't even exist as we know it when he ran. Clinton won because the economy was down. If it had been up then Bush wouldn't have lost. Obama has had a down economy for years and the GOP still couldn't beat him. That should tell you that you are dealing with a very different situation.

Christy is a horrible human being. A petulant liar and bully.

To me he is the Zimmerman of politics…picks on woman and children.
He claims to be an education governor but has gutted the urban education by cutting 1 billion dollars in education funds for the inner city.

He literally HAS DONE nothing to advance the Jersey economy, look at the statistics.

But just like Obama conned the American electorate, this dangerous man has conned the NJ voters that he is a tough guy and for the people, so they stupidly voted him in twice.

I hope this scandal shows him for the person he truly is.

I believe that his 2 cronies who resigned had to have done this for political reasons…if not why did they resign?

One of them was making a quarter of a million a year!

If you did no wrong, why resign.

antonia
And you are still being insulting.

No. I am correct. You imagined something negative and are STILL obsessing about it.
Move on and address the issue

You conveniently butchered what I said:

No. I addressed it correctly.

Willtell
Christy is a horrible human being. A petulant liar and bully.

He's a typical corrupt politician and this self indulgent incident that the OP started a thread about
speaks to how he'd fit in Washington DC perfectly. Christie would fill Obama's shoes perfectly.
He's DC material. YUK.

reply to post by antonia


"Too devisive" clearly means "Conservative." God forbid the GOP actually snaps out of their marginalized morass and moves forward with a conservative candidate for the first time in 28 years.

If Chris Christie gets the GOP candidacy, I will never cast another vote in this country.

burdman30ott6
reply to post by antonia

 

"Too devisive" clearly means "Conservative."

i would not define any of the aforementioned people as conservative. Reactionary is a better term. Conservatives generally seek to preserve things as they are. None of the aforementioned people advocate that. They generally seek some pretty big changes. You cannot deny people like cruz and walker elicit strong reactions from people.

di·vi·sive
diˈvīsiv/
adjective
1.
tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people.

I didn't say conservative. There are many people on the left who are divisive such as hillary clinton.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

God forbid the GOP actually snaps out of their marginalized morass and moves forward with a conservative candidate for the first time in 28 years.

I'd actually love to see the Republican Party move forward with a candidate that is considered conservative by current standards. The Democrat candidate would win in a landslide. I'm actually worried about Christie vs. the Democrat nominee. Not worried at all otherwise.

It's funny, Mitt Romney (who I consider to be ultra conservative) is blamed for losing the election because he wasn't "conservative enough". In reality, he kept the election close because he wasn't "conservative enough". Put Ted Cruz up against a bucket of paint and the paint would win; and win big.

The ultra conservative movement is a dieing movement in the US. You guys just don't have the numbers to win nationally....and that number dwindles more and more with each passing day.