Chris Christie aides' emails suggest intentionally created traffic nightmare

[DGuller]

It's possible that they're just attacking him to try and get rid of an electable Republican.  After all, it's not like the Republicans have a lot of prominent non-lunatics.

That may be true, but still irrelevant.  Of course the opposing party is always going to be a harsher critic and will be happy to damage a dangerous rival, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the criticism is unwarranted.  Abusing the power to spite the people for not being in your camp is a dangerous trait in democracy.

[DontSayBanana]

It's possible that they're just attacking him to try and get rid of an electable Republican.  After all, it's not like the Republicans have a lot of prominent non-lunatics.

He has his moments.  Get him started on teachers, he'll be frothing at the mouth in five minutes.

[jimmy olsen]

Do I need to drink a lot of kool aid to not see bullying tendencies in that video I linked?

I don't know what video you attempted to link to, but in any case, the claim wasn't about any particular video that may or may not have been cherrypicked.  The claim was about a pattern of behavior, where his team is always prepared to capture and broadcast him dressing someone down, and then in effect brag about it by posting in on YouTube.  That's literally building yourself up by tearing other people down, and if you take the fact in that previous sentence as a given and still don't see any bullying tendencies in that, then I'm not sure there is a way to get through, honestly.

In Nebraska that's bullying, in NJ, NYC and Boston that's just normal debate. People in the northeast are jerks and like it that way.

[Berkut]

As political scandals go, this one is pretty weak.

[Jacob]

As political scandals go, this one is pretty weak.

Yeah, I don't think the scandal in and of itself has much going for it, to be honest (though you never know where these things go). What may be significant is if it changes the perception of Christie's narrative. If "spiteful bully" becomes something that sticks over the next few years (and it will have to be bolstered by other things), that'll play somewhat differently than "forceful personality but does what's right" or whatever.

Ultimately, I think if this leads anywhere significant it'll show in the "likability" rating rather than in the "serious corrupt malfeance has been exposed".

[Sheilbh]

As political scandals go, this one is pretty weak.

I think if the story about the 90 year old woman who died in an ambulance is true then that changes. That would make petty political bullying have a human cost.

[DGuller]

As political scandals go, this one is pretty weak.

The actual act is small potatoes, but the mindset it reveals is, well, revealing.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, I don't think the scandal in and of itself has much going for it, to be honest (though you never know where these things go). What may be significant is if it changes the perception of Christie's narrative. If "spiteful bully" becomes something that sticks over the next few years (and it will have to be bolstered by other things), that'll play somewhat differently than "forceful personality but does what's right" or whatever.

Ultimately, I think if this leads anywhere significant it'll show in the "likability" rating rather than in the "serious corrupt malfeance has been exposed".

I think it indicates how people see Christie already though. It works as a scandal because it feeds into an existing view of Christie which is that he's confrontational.

Like the story over here of a Tory cabinet minister calling a police officer a 'fucking pleb' (which may not be true) - in itself it's not actually that big a deal. The guy's former army and has a reputation for having a very short temper. But that story lives because it's about a Tory with an attitude of entitlement having a go at an ordinary person.

[DGuller]

I think it indicates how people see Christie already though. It works as a scandal because it feeds into an existing view of Christie which is that he's confrontational.

Yes and no.  Personally, I'm not surprised that Christie would do something like this, but at the same time I didn't think he was doing things like this.  My impression of Christie was that his belligerence was genuine to some extent, but also exaggerated because he found it to be a shtick that worked.  He played it up as a negotiation ploy before settling for a pragmatic compromise.  This scandal really makes him look like a genuine thuggish asshole.

[Gups]

Reading Double Down (story of the 2012 election by a couple of hacks) at the moment. The authors discuss Romney's vetting of Christie. According to one of Romney's aides, there was so much dirt on him that theer was no way he could be picked and that if Christie had stood against Mitt in the primaries, he woudl have been destroyed to the extent that he wouldn't have been able to continue as Gov.

[jimmy olsen]

Reading Double Down (story of the 2012 election by a couple of hacks) at the moment. The authors discuss Romney's vetting of Christie. According to one of Romney's aides, there was so much dirt on him that theer was no way he could be picked and that if Christie had stood against Mitt in the primaries, he woudl have been destroyed to the extent that he wouldn't have been able to continue as Gov.

Then why didn't the Democrats do that during the last election?

[Gups]

Christie wasn't the nominee?

[jimmy olsen]

He was reelected last November.

[Gups]

My  understainding is that the spotlight is dimmer at the state level than the national. Presumably the Dems just didn't undertake the vetting that Romney's team did when considering the veep choice.

[grumbler]

My  understainding is that the spotlight is dimmer at the state level than the national. Presumably the Dems just didn't undertake the vetting that Romney's team did when considering the veep choice.

Are you arguing that Christie's opponent in the race for governor didn't scrutinize his record as well as someone who was merely looking at him as a potential running mate?  That's hard to believe.

As for the scandal, it doesn't seem to me that Christie or his aides had any particular motivation to order or engage in the behavior the aides seemingly engaged in.  I find the over-zealous aides scenario as plausible as the overbearing bully narrative, so don't draw any conclusions from the facts available.  I think that the situation merely allows the tribal among us to take the usual tribal positions, and leaves the non-tribal among us wondering why people are reading so much more into this than the facts support.  I agree, though, that this story could well be another straw on the camel's back, even if it isn't the one that beaks that back.

And Sheilbh, I am not sure that 90-year-olds dying in ambulances can be successfully elevated to full-scandal proportions.  That's not exactly a shocking event.