Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,967 posts)
1. I would have to disagree with her on this
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 10:47 PM
Nov 2015

I believe that Christie has been "toast" for some time now poll-wise and, more importantly, for the Republicans to retain their sanity, they would have had to have it in the first place (which they clearly don't anymore if they ever did). I have no idea who they will ultimately nominate but I doubt that it will be Christie and even if, by some miracle, it ends up being him, I don't view him as a seriously credible threat to HRC (or to Sanders for that matter), especially given the bridge scandal he's been embroiled in for awhile now back in NJ. What is her rationale for saying that he could be a serious contender?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I think Rachel's right, I...»Reply #1