Dirty Laundry for 2016 Candidate Christie

Black Swan

It has been revealed that staff members involved in New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's reelection (Republican) influenced the Port Authority to close two lanes of the George Washington Bridge during morning rush hour to conduct a traffic study, causing a huge tie-up in traffic. During a followup investigation, emails were discovered that these Christie staff members intended to punish Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich (Democrat), who did not endorse Christie for re-election.

Christie claims that he was uninformed of these staff member actions, but assumes responsibility, and apologizes accordingly. Further, he has fired Bridget Anne Kelly, his deputy chief of staff, and asked his campaign manager Bill Stepien to withdraw his name as a nominee to become the next head of the New Jersey GOP, both of whom had been associated with this scandal.

Many may think that this emerging scandal is making a mountain out of a mole hill, but such things can influence how voters act in Christie's bid to become the Republican candidate for president in 2016. Was this an unfortunate and minor incident, or the tip of a hidden abuse of power iceberg? Was he in fact uninformed, or conveniently exercising plausible deniability?

Until now, Christie has been seen as a moderate Republican that may unify the highly polarized American electorate in 2016, in both his divided party, and between registered Republicans, Democrats, and Independents nationally. The 2016 primaries and election are still far off. Will this affect his chances, or will the American voter forget by then?

P_1

Strange incident to say the least. If I understand correctly, the local mayor was causing some issue for Christie so his staff decided it would be a good idea to try get back at him by blocking off some lanes at the bridge. Quite how inconveniencing scores of commuters would have got back at the mayor in question is a concept that I can't quite understand mind.

Manach

Given the blow-back from the excerpts by Defence Minister Gates, especially on Biden, the timing of this is "fortunate".

the_monkey

And an innocent patsy is fired

InTheTrees

Well first of all using political power to punish political enemies is pretty sleazy. That kind of corruption is usually always a big deal. You cant let it go.

Initially Chrisities cronies claimed the closures were part of a traffic study, but it only took reporters a couple of phone calls to find out that was a lie and then the story started to snowball. And why wouldnt it.

That christie's staff were responsible is now without any doubt. Why they did it is the weird part. And whether Christie knew.

20Cent

Republicans will vote for a republican whatever they do. Could get interesting if the staffer who got fired decides to sue though.

InTheTrees

20Cent wrote: »

Could get interesting if the staffer who got fired decides to sue though.

The extent to which Christie threw his assistant under the bus means that either he made some kind of iron clad deal with her or that he really feels safe that she cant implicate him.

Its also possible that people who were effected by the road closures could sue too. That will surely happen if any criminal charges are made.

InTheTrees

20Cent wrote: »

Republicans will vote for a republican whatever they do.

The importance of this scandal is that Christie was the only moderate Republican with an eye on running in 2016.

If Christie doesnt run we would be left with the wacky extreme right wingers Cruz, Rubio, Palin and Ryan.

And if that happens the Democratic Candidate (Hillary?) would stand a much better chance of winning.

Black Swan

A class action complaint has been filed in the U.S. District Court (New Jersey) against Governor Chris Christie, et al, citing economic damages attributed to the politically motivated George Washington Bridge lane closure. If this case proceeds through the American legal system, along with all the typical delays, it could drag on into the 2016 campaign season. Not good news for presidential candidate Christie.

InTheTrees

Just in case there's anyone left who thinks fox news isnt biased and unbalanced; Roger Ailes who runs Fox News for Rupert Murdoch, is a major supporter of Chris Christie, He's the one who initially pushed Christie to run for President. So Fox "news" has been almost completely ignoring the entire scandal. Not a word about it. The other cable news outlets covered it all day, while the national news had it as their top stories. So basically fox news viewers have very little idea about what going on. (No surprise there though).

Its pretty funny really because it reveals them to be the creepy right wing propaganda organization they really are:

"The network's relative blackout of the story continued into the evening. A review of TVEyes, the website that lets users search through transcripts and video of past television broadcasts, shows that Christie didn't come up on the "O'Reilly Factor" or on "Hannity." Greta Van Susteren and Megyn Kelly both covered the story, though both led their shows off with other things—in Kelly's case, the criticisms of the Obama administration by former defense secretary Bob Gates. Bret Baier also briefly mentioned the scandal on his show. The story did get prominent play on the network's website."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/09/fox-news-chris-christie_n_4567231.html

InTheTrees

Black Swan wrote: »

Not good news for presidential candidate Christie.

Rand Paul is one of Christies main political rivals for the Republican Presidential candidacy in 2016 and they've had a few runs ins before when Paul criticized Christie for taking Hurricane Sandy aid.

Yesterday Paul made a very public joke in an interview about how he's been stuck in traffic jams many times and always wondered who was to blame and now he knew.

Ouch.

clairefontaine

It's Jersey politics.

Christie would never make it through the primaries for the simple reason he is too fat.

American voters won't vote for that in a representative. Ron Paul wore weird sweaters and looked too told and weak. We are a superficial voting community.

Conas

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's Jersey politics.

Christie would never make it through the primaries for the simple reason he is too fat.

American voters won't vote for that in a representative. Ron Paul wore weird sweaters and looked too told and weak. We are a superficial voting community.

Ron Paul was far better anyone else in the Republicans. He had more brains, and talked more sense than any of the sellouts on the stage, who were just putting an act for their donors.

Chris Christie is a good Republican so they'll try and ruin his chances for the 2016 election, Rand Paul would be another person I'd like, so they'll dig up the dirt on him soon enough, only a matter of time actually. Paving the way for another handpicked whimp, and a chickenhawk no doubt.

clairefontaine

Conas wrote: »

Ron Paul was far better anyone else in the Republicans. He had more brains, and talked more sense than any of the sellouts on the stage, who were just putting an act for their donors.

Chris Christie is a good Republican so they'll try and ruin his chances for the 2016 election, Rand Paul would be another person I'd like, so they'll dig up the dirt on him soon enough, only a matter of time actually. Paving the way for another handpicked whimp, and a chickenhawk no doubt.

Rand Paul will destroy Christie in the primaries and he will do the same to Cruz.

Conas

clairefontaine wrote: »

Rand Paul will destroy Christie in the primaries and he will do the same to Cruz.

That won't matter, the lobbyists are the one who call the shots in American politics. The Republicans have been bought and paid for by these lobbyists long ago. Go back and look at the Republican Presidential debates in 2011/2012. There was a competition on who could been more pro-Israel on the stage every-night.

They talk tough, but their obsession with this aggressive foreign policy would baffle anyone with any sort of political brain. A Paul/Christie partnership would be at this moment in time. But I think they'll go with someone like Marco Rubio, and Jeb Bush instead. Lobbyists and not the ordinary American man and woman decide these things, and people are naive if they think otherwise.

clairefontaine

Conas wrote: »

That won't matter, the lobbyists are the one who call the shots in American politics. The Republicans have been bought and paid for by these lobbyists long ago. Go back and look at the Republican Presidential debates in 2011/2012. There was a competition on who could been more pro-Israel on the stage every-night.

They talk tough, but their obsession with this aggressive foreign policy would baffle anyone with any sort of political brain. A Paul/Christie partnership would be at this moment in time. But I think they'll go with someone like Marco Rubio, and Jeb Bush instead. Lobbyists and not the ordinary American man and woman decide these things, and people are naive if they think otherwise.

No chance in hell will Jeb Bush win.

Conas

clairefontaine wrote: »

No chance in hell will Jeb Bush win.

Yeah, but they'll dig up the dirt on Chris Christie anyway they can, and it's started already. I think a lot of Republicans hate Christie over the Hurricane Sandy hug with President Obama before the election. Many do believe it hurt Romney, and benefited Obama. It's ugly, but that's how it's done, and Christie should still run, and give these people a taste of their own medicine in return.

The Bushes get a pass on everything, so don't be suprised if everyone else gets sabogated except Jeb. Despite his grandfather funding the Nazis during World War 2, and tried to lead a coup against Roosevelt. His father lying about where he was when John F Kennedy was assassinated, and not being able to recall where he was when questioned (in Dallas on the very day by the way) Their close ties with the Bin Ladens. There close ties with the Hinckley family, from which one of those nuts tried to kill Reagan, and a host of other things. I just think it's so sad that good American politicians, get destroyed, and their chances for the Presidency get ruined with this kind of stuff that Christie is subject too. I liked Chris Christie, one of only two Republicans that I like.

He needs to fight back big time. Look at what they did to the war hero John Kerry in 2004, with the swift vets for truth lies. Tried to destroy the reputation of a war hero, in favour of a draft dodger.

I'd give it back just as hard to be honest

clairefontaine

Conas wrote: »

Yeah, but they'll dig up the dirt on Chris Christie anyway they can, and it's started already. I think a lot of Republicans hate Christie over the Hurricane Sandy hug with President Obama before the election. Many do believe it hurt Romney, and benefited Obama. It's ugly, but that's how it's done, and Christie should still run, and give these people a taste of their own medicine in return.

The Bushes get a pass on everything, so don't be suprised if everyone else gets sabogated except Jeb. Despite his grandfather funding the Nazis during World War 2, and tried to lead a coup against Roosevelt. His father lying about where he was when John F Kennedy was assassinated, and not being able to recall where he was when questioned (in Dallas on the very day by the way) Their close ties with the Bin Ladens. There close ties with the Hinckley family, from which one of those nuts tried to kill Reagan, and a host of other things. I just think it's so sad that good American politicians, get destroyed, and their chances for the Presidency get ruined with this kind of stuff that Christie is subject too. I liked Chris Christie, one of only two Republicans that I like.

He needs to fight back big time. Look at what they did to the war hero John Kerry in 2004, with the swift vets for truth lies. Tried to destroy the reputation of a war hero, in favour of a draft dodger.

I'd give it back just as hard to be honest

at he American personality is one of frontiers, not history. No one will care about what happened 50 years ago.

Christie is not going to win. He will not have the GOP base. The Bushs do their little empire building along side the Clinton's. They are all in it together.

Rand Paul is leading a class action suit against the NSA. He will win the support do independents and libertarians and will destroy Christie and Cruz in the primaries. Will he win against the Dem candidate? I have no idea.

John Kerry a war hero?

Clinton was a draft dodger and McCain sang like a canary.

InTheTrees

Conas wrote: »

Yeah, but they'll dig up the dirt on Chris Christie anyway they can, and it's started already. I think a lot of Republicans hate Christie over the Hurricane Sandy hug with President Obama before the election. Many do believe it hurt Romney, and benefited Obama. It's ugly, but that's how it's done, and Christie should still run, and give these people a taste of their own medicine in return.

The Bushes get a pass on everything, so don't be suprised if everyone else gets sabogated except Jeb. Despite his grandfather funding the Nazis during World War 2, and tried to lead a coup against Roosevelt. His father lying about where he was when John F Kennedy was assassinated, and not being able to recall where he was when questioned (in Dallas on the very day by the way) Their close ties with the Bin Ladens. There close ties with the Hinckley family, from which one of those nuts tried to kill Reagan, and a host of other things. I just think it's so sad that good American politicians, get destroyed, and their chances for the Presidency get ruined with this kind of stuff that Christie is subject too. I liked Chris Christie, one of only two Republicans that I like.

He needs to fight back big time. Look at what they did to the war hero John Kerry in 2004, with the swift vets for truth lies. Tried to destroy the reputation of a war hero, in favour of a draft dodger.

I'd give it back just as hard to be honest

As a Democrat I'd had some respect for Christie as being one of the last old school moderate republicans who were willing to work with the other side.

So its sad to see him go down in flames but on the other hand he's a republican and getting him out of the picture leaves the presidential field looking even thinner for the republicans which makes it easier for the Democratic candidate. Paul, Cruz, Rubio and Ryan are pretty much jokes at this point but they wield a lot of power and one of them will probably get the nomination, and they're going to work hard to exclude anyone else from emerging to challenge them.

But Christie was a major ally/protege of Ailes at Fox news so it'll be interesting to see how fox reacts.

Black Swan

"Bridgegate" will be discussed on Sunday's talk shows, including CBS' Face the Nation, NBC's Meet the Press, ABC's This Week, Fox News Sunday, and CNN's State of the Union. More bad news for Christie.

Amerika

Taken from the Wall Street Journal:

Which brings us to the Obama Administration, which quickly leaked to the media that the U.S. Attorney is investigating the lane closures as a criminal matter. Well, that sure was fast, and nice of Eric Holder’s Justice Department to show its typical discretion when investigating political opponents.

This is the same Administration that won't tell Congress what resources it is devoting to the IRS probe, and appears to be slow-rolling it. It has also doubled down by expanding the political vetting of 501(c)(4) groups seeking tax-exempt status. Lois Lerner, who ran the IRS tax-exempt shop and took the Fifth before Congress, was allowed to "retire," presumably with a pension. Acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller resigned under pressure but no other heads have rolled. Yet compared to using the IRS against political opponents during an election campaign, closing traffic lanes for four days is jaywalking.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304347904579310832305028924?KEYWORDS=christie+irs&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304347904579310832305028924.html%3FKEYWORDS%3Dchristie%2Birs

So obviously the Obama administration IS using their political clout to shamelessly go after political opponents in sleazy manners, all the while disregarding their own abuses... with impunity for the most part. And the outrage is... where exactly?

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's Jersey politics.

Christie would never make it through the primaries for the simple reason he is too fat.

American voters won't vote for that in a representative. Ron Paul wore weird sweaters and looked too told and weak. We are a superficial voting community.

You honestly think that's why Ron Paul didn't get the nomination? Seriously?

I'd agree with the 2nd part though, style over substance usually wins out. Obama is actually a fine example of this.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

Rand Paul will destroy Christie in the primaries and he will do the same to Cruz.

No he won't. He'll flatter to decieve in early primaries and fall away once it really heats up. The GOP machine will throw in behind someone far more moderate because they know Paul Jnr hasn't a hope in the general.

They just need to find a new Mitt Romney who is slightly less robotic and flip flops less.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

No chance in hell will Jeb Bush win.

No chance eh? Would you like to place a wager on that?

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

No chance eh? Would you like to place a wager on that?

I'll be convinced it's rigged.

But I was already convinced when Obama won last time.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

John Kerry a war hero?

3 purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star. It's a disgrace how he was treated in the 2004 campaign. If he's not a war hero who is?

Brian?

InTheTrees wrote: »

As a Democrat I'd had some respect for Christie as being one of the last old school moderate republicans who were willing to work with the other side.

So its sad to see him go down in flames but on the other hand he's a republican and getting him out of the picture leaves the presidential field looking even thinner for the republicans which makes it easier for the Democratic candidate. Paul, Cruz, Rubio and Ryan are pretty much jokes at this point but they wield a lot of power and one of them will probably get the nomination, and they're going to work hard to exclude anyone else from emerging to challenge them.

But Christie was a major ally/protege of Ailes at Fox news so it'll be interesting to see how fox reacts.

Christie always stands a chance while he has Ailes behind him. The primaries will be tricky though, he needs a big swing right in his policies to bring in the votes needed win the nomination. Look what Mitt Romney did, I can't see Christie doing the same.

Most of the Christian right in the GOP will have an inate mistrust of Christie as he's relatively centerist on social issues. I can't see him getting those votes. If he does he stands a very good chance of being the next POTUS. The Christian right will vote for him in the general as the lesser of 2 evils and he'll win over the undecideds.

I still think Jeb has it to lose. I've been saying it for a while, Bush v Biden in 2016.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

I'll be convinced it's rigged.

But I was already convinced when Obama won last time.

If you honestly think that Obama won a rigged vote, I give up.

He won the populare vote by 5 million votes. The electoral college was 332 to 206.

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

If you honestly think that Obama won a rigged vote, I give up.

He won the populare vote by 5 million votes. The electoral college was 332 to 206.

There's a lot of voter fraud. SO yeah, maybe you are right.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

There's a lot of voter fraud. SO yeah, maybe you are right.

Right so. That's me out.

InTheTrees

Brian? wrote: »

Christie always stands a chance while he has Ailes behind him. The primaries will be tricky though, he needs a big swing right in his policies to bring in the votes needed win the nomination. Look what Mitt Romney did, I can't see Christie doing the same.

Most of the Christian right in the GOP will have an inate mistrust of Christie as he's relatively centerist on social issues. I can't see him getting those votes. If he does he stands a very good chance of being the next POTUS. The Christian right will vote for him in the general as the lesser of 2 evils and he'll win over the undecideds.

I still think Jeb has it to lose. I've been saying it for a while, Bush v Biden in 2016.

I agree. Having the support of Fox News means a lot.

And also I agree that christie is a north eastern Republican who wont play well in Kansas or Texas, or those southern religious states.

Jeb? He'll have to start making his presence felt sometime soon if he intends to run. He'll also have to deal with the lunatic tea party who seem hellbent on self destruction.

InTheTrees

Brian? wrote: »

3 purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star. It's a disgrace how he was treated in the 2004 campaign. If he's not a war hero who is?

LOL.

Its the fox news bubble.

clairefontaine

InTheTrees wrote: »

I agree. Having the support of Fox News means a lot.

And also I agree that christie is a north eastern Republican who wont play well in Kansas or Texas, or those southern religious states.

Jeb? He'll have to start making his presence felt sometime soon if he intends to run. He'll also have to deal with the lunatic tea party who seem hellbent on self destruction.

Who actually watches Fox? They are not a republican channel. They are a MESS.

Exactly. Christie is northeastern. That's like being a diet republican, as in not the real thing at all.

In NYC I look conservative. In Utah, I look like a flaming liberal. You have to take geography into account.

Jeb,just no.

Brian?

InTheTrees wrote: »

LOL.

Its the fox news bubble.

Laughing at war heroes. That's a new low.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

Who actually watches Fox? They are not a republican channel. They are a MESS.

Exactly. Christie is northeastern. That's like being a diet republican, as in not the real thing at all.

In NYC I look conservative. In Utah, I look like a flaming liberal. You have to take geography into account.

Jeb,just no.

Who watches Fox News? The number 1 rates cable news network? I'd say quite a lot of people to make it no. 1.

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

Who watches Fox News? The number 1 rates cable news network? I'd say quite a lot of people to make it no. 1.

It's number 1? Really?

Ugh.

They all suck, CNN, FOX, all of them.

CSPAN is good.

Brian?

InTheTrees wrote: »

I agree. Having the support of Fox News means a lot.

And also I agree that christie is a north eastern Republican who wont play well in Kansas or Texas, or those southern religious states.

Jeb? He'll have to start making his presence felt sometime soon if he intends to run. He'll also have to deal with the lunatic tea party who seem hellbent on self destruction.

I'm quite looking forward to the primaries just to see how the candidates pander to the tea party. No doubt we'll see more Aynd Rand loving.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's number 1? Really?

Ugh.

They all suck, CNN, FOX, all of them.

CSPAN is good.

I stick to Al Jazeera.

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

I'm quite looking forward to the primaries just to see how the candidates pander to the tea party. No doubt we'll see more Aynd Rand loving.

Libertarians like Ayn Rand. Tea Party is more conservative.

InTheTrees

clairefontaine wrote: »

Who actually watches Fox? They are not a republican channel.

Yes. They are a republican channel.

They tend to be be more traditional right wing rather than tea party extreme right though.

The endless obsession they have with criticizing others rather than addressing their own issues is probably a major reason why the republican party is in self destruct mode right now.

clairefontaine

InTheTrees wrote: »

Yes. They are a republican channel.

They tend to be be more traditional right wing rather than tea party extreme right though.

The endless obsession they have with criticizing others rather than addressing their own issues is probably a major reason why the republican party is in self destruct mode right now.

They have such low production values.

Everytime I pass through channel flipping all they seem to do is pick up things they read on the web and reiterate them.

No onlocation reporting either. Election coverage was awful.

Cheap cheap bottom shelfing. Lousy journalism. All opinion.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

Libertarians like Ayn Rand. Tea Party is more conservative.

Didn't you claim recently that Ron Paul founded the Tea Party? Although wrong there was an element of truth, it grew from his 2008 presidential campaign. It's definitely libertarian leaning.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

They have such low production values.

Everytime I pass through channel flipping all they seem to do is pick up things they read on the web and reiterate them.

No onlocation reporting either. Election coverage was awful.

Cheap cheap bottom shelfing. Lousy journalism. All opinion.

I agree with all of that. I can't believe we've found common ground. However, Fox are most certainly pro-Republican, to deny that is delusional.

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

Didn't you claim recently that Ron Paul founded the Tea Party? Although wrong there was an element of truth, it grew from his 2008 presidential campaign. It's definitely libertarian leaning.

Did I?

I don't believe he did. A lot of them don't like him.

The Black Oil

Watching Fox News is a strange experience. Any time I dip into it I imagine it's like gorging yourself in a sweet shop and running to your dentist half an hour later. It's just bizarre, entertaining and weirdly hypnotic. But, if you need to find an example of poster child for self-serving narrative and talking points then FN is it. Lazy analysis, soft interviews with friends, backslapping, pretend debates with their opposition purely served up to blame the other guy with no real effort to grind out the real issues. 'And Joe, do you feel you're being discriminated against because you hold Christian beliefs? Yes, sir, absolutely. Joe Bloggs, thanks for joining us tonight on FN'. Case closed. No, the left wing equivalent isn't any better. A sad reflection on the state of broadcast news media. In a way, I'm thankful RTE over here is so hum drum and boring.

As for the recent Christie situation...where that may go in 2016 I've no idea. It'll certainly continue to harm his image for now.

Brian?

clairefontaine wrote: »

Did I?

I don't believe he did. A lot of them don't like him.

A lot of them don't like a lot of things. Different things.

They all hate Obama though.

clairefontaine

Brian? wrote: »

A lot of them don't like a lot of things. Different things.

They all hate Obama though.

A lot of democrats also hate Obama. Especially Hillary supporters.

Black Swan

One-two-punch for Christie? What's the 2nd punch? First Bridgegate, now Sandygate?

It has been revealed that Chris Christie is being investigated by inspector general of the Housing and Urban Development Department for the misuse of Jersey Shore Hurricane Sandy relief funds to benefit his 2016 presidential campaign.

Will Christie recover, or will this 2nd Sandygate punch TKO him for 2016?

jank

I have a feeling you are loving this Black Swan.
There seems to be an effort from someone (cough Obama) regarding the quick succession of these 'scandels'

InTheTrees

jank wrote: »

I
There seems to be an effort from someone (cough Obama) regarding the quick succession of these 'scandels'

This story was broken by a local reporter who was curious about the "Traffic Study" that was used as cover for the lane shutdown and phoned the port authority to ask.

That christies cronies were too dumb to add a little more depth to their subterfuge (maybe they really should have had some kind of study?) is entirely their own fault.

Black Swan

jank wrote: »

I have a feeling you are loving this Black Swan.

No. I am sick of the polarization between the two major parties in the US. Both party leaders, and many of their supporters, act like selfish children in a sandbox, fighting over the toys. The art of politics is the art of compromise, not what has been happening in America during recent years. Once again, I agree with what John Adams cautioned about America: "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

jank wrote: »

There seems to be an effort from someone (cough Obama) regarding the quick succession of these 'scandels'

Democrats want to win the presidency in 2016, so it's obvious that their leaders (and special interests) are taking advantage of these 2 Christie scandals. It's also obvious that those Republican candidates (and special interests) that want to win the presidency in 2016 have jumped on the bandwagon to eliminate party rival Christie. Both parties are taking advantage of these scandals to thin down the 2016 competition.

If the two party primaries where held today, more than likely Hilliary Clinton would win the Democrat party nomination. In 2016, who knows? Before leaving Secretary of State after only one term, Hilliary looked like a complete burnout, exhausted by the demands of office. How could you expect her to carry the more demanding presidency for 4 to 8 years?

Until these two recent scandals, it appeared that Chris Christie was a moderate Republican that may be able to achieve compromises across party lines, and reduce the absurd and counterproductive 2 party divisiveness. Who's left if Christie is eliminated but those Republicans who have already contributed greatly to the highly emotive and dysfunctional polarization between parties?

I was hoping for both parties to nominate moderates that may have a chance to reduce the divisive 2 party polarization through the art of compromise. Foolish me. Adams was right.