CNN Poll: Christie Beats Hillary Head to Head.

[dcraelin]

MSNBC's Kornacke has actually done some great reporting on Christy and politics and real-estate developments in NewJersey.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

 

[dcraelin]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

 

[Redfish]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

Huh?

 

[dcraelin]

.
Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.
Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.
.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

Huh?

trying to say that MSNBC (or rather Kornacke) is doing a good job exposing this kind of corruption.........that Fox hasnt done something similar.

Kornacke exposed the Rockefeller group as being tied into this, EVEN tho That same group developed the building in which he works (and other MSNBC shows I suppose)

 

[OODA_Loop]

I will not vote for Christie.

 

[HenryBHough]

OK, so Fox favors the right.

Now THAT'S classic redistribution.

And there's nothing at all wrong with taking from the rich - NBC/GE/Comcast - and giving to the poor, now is there?

Of course in this instance it's not money - just ratings.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

I'll be happy to respond to your attempt at deflection: Of course Fox leans right.

Does that make MSNBC's behavior acceptable to you?

.

 

[racewright]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

I'll be happy to respond to your attempt at deflection: Of course Fox leans right.

Does that make MSNBC's behavior acceptable to you?

.

The rules of engagement are never followed by todays media outlets it is just that liberal sites hit below the belt under the shadow of they are right and only looking out for the greater good. And by the way this hits home with some and the ones that it doesn't you could not get them to even watch Fox.

You see they justify there position with well FOX DID THIS AND FOX DID THAT and what about what she did or he said....lame ploy at excuseing wrong doing.

 

[Rozman]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

There have been stories kicking around that the Obama campaign during his run for
State senate and then Senate of the US would go after the opponent early and often
trying to either break them or severly weaken them

Does anyone really believe MSNBC is doing this on their own.
Anytime you tune into MSNBC now it's all about Christie.
Looks like there's blood in the water and the sharks are out.

 

[Derideo_Te]

.

Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.

Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.

.

There have been stories kicking around that the Obama campaign during his run for
State senate and then Senate of the US would go after the opponent early and often
trying to either break them or severly weaken them

Does anyone really believe MSNBC is doing this on their own.
Anytime you tune into MSNBC now it's all about Christie.
Looks like there's blood in the water and the sharks are out.

Given the appalling weak carpetbagger candidate that the Republicans picked to run against Obama in the 2004 US senate race it appears as though you are implicating the GOP in your MSNBC paranoia.

 

[dcraelin]

.
Indeed, we can count on MSNBC to be very aggressive and comprehensive in reporting on any alleged wrongdoings of anyone with an (R) after their name.
Non-stop, like a pit bull, big time.
.

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

I'll be happy to respond to your attempt at deflection: Of course Fox leans right.
Does that make MSNBC's behavior acceptable to you?
.

My main point was that I think that MSNBC is doing a good job in this case. Would you rather have them sweep it under the rug in the interests of bi-partisanship?

 

[Mertex]

Isn't this interesting. Hillary was supposed to be the invincible monster, but according to CNN polling she would lose to Chris Christie by two points were the election to be held today. Christie beats Clinton in the poll 48% to 46%.

The other two recent polls also show Christie leading. The Democrat Pollster PPP has Christie up 45% to 42%. Quinnipiac has Christie up 42% to 41%.

So to my liberal friends....what gives? I thought Hillary was unbeatable? Shouldn't she be up like 10%-15%. How is this possible? What about all of those threads about how crappy the Repubs are....why isn't Hillary killing any challenger?


Here's the link. Let the deflection begin.


2016 CNN Poll: Clinton deadlocked with Christie but leads other GOP presidential possibilities ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Er, this must have been before Bridgegate?......according to the latest poll

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pulled sharply ahead of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in a hypothetical match between the two potential presidential candidates, leading him by 13 percentage points, according to a new poll released Wednesday.
The NBC News/Marist poll has Clinton leading Christie with 50 percent of registered voters surveyed saying they’d vote for her if she were up against the New Jersey governor; just 37 percent of those would back Christie against Clinton.
Poll: Hillary Clinton widens lead on Chris Christie - Jose DelReal - POLITICO.com

 

[Listening]

And this freaking election is next week.....right ?

 

[LoneLaugher]

so FOX is just being non-partisan when it doesn't examine the crooked dealings of Democratic governors?

I'll be happy to respond to your attempt at deflection: Of course Fox leans right.
Does that make MSNBC's behavior acceptable to you?
.

My main point was that I think that MSNBC is doing a good job in this case. Would you rather have them sweep it under the rug in the interests of bi-partisanship?

Pretty much.

FOX and MSNBC are exactly the same...except for their political leaning. Didn't you know that? There is no difference between them.

 

[Mertex]

I'll be happy to respond to your attempt at deflection: Of course Fox leans right.
Does that make MSNBC's behavior acceptable to you?
.

My main point was that I think that MSNBC is doing a good job in this case. Would you rather have them sweep it under the rug in the interests of bi-partisanship?

Pretty much.

FOX and MSNBC are exactly the same...except for their political leaning. Didn't you know that? There is no difference between them.

Well, except for the fact that Faux gets caught making up stuff more often than MSNBC...

 

[HenryBHough]

Well, except for the fact that Faux gets caught making up stuff more often than MSNBC...

Source?

 

[FA_Q2]

no...this is a meaningless poll, for attention and nothing more.

It is pretty much meaningless. We're three years away from the election. Anything can happen.

It's not meaningless. It is worthless in answering the question who the nominee will be and who will win. But it does indicate general levels of approval for different candidates and parties. What is Clinton's platform? No one knows. What is Christie's? No one knows. So how do voters make any kind of choice? It is based on their overall view of the candidates and their respective parties.

Whether or not that statement is true does not change the fact that such polls are entirely meaningless. Case in point:

Er, this must have been before Bridgegate?......according to the latest poll

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pulled sharply ahead of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in a hypothetical match between the two potential presidential candidates, leading him by 13 percentage points, according to a new poll released Wednesday.
The NBC News/Marist poll has Clinton leading Christie with 50 percent of registered voters surveyed saying they’d vote for her if she were up against the New Jersey governor; just 37 percent of those would back Christie against Clinton.
Poll: Hillary Clinton widens lead on Chris Christie - Jose DelReal - POLITICO.com

Those general feelings that you are referring to are incredible fickle and change directions on a damn dime. There is virtually nothing that such info can be used for this far out in any meaningful way. Questions on the presidential race are irrelevant anyway before any real primary has begun to take shape as the ‘results’ of such a question do not take account of a single primary factor. The general is ALWAYS a balancing match for the candidates to win the primary without obliterating general election chances.

If we really wanted meaning from polls, there would be more questions regarding actual policy and/or perceived factors to determine what the general public wanted in a candidate. The only real information that can be utilized meaningfully at this moment is local congressional/senate information anyway and that has zero similarity on what the national stage looks like.

 

[blackhawk]

Presidential match up polls for the 2016 election in 2014 are good message board fun but that's about all there good for.

 

[dcraelin]

My main point was that I think that MSNBC is doing a good job in this case. Would you rather have them sweep it under the rug in the interests of bi-partisanship?

Pretty much.
FOX and MSNBC are exactly the same...except for their political leaning. Didn't you know that? There is no difference between them.

Well, except for the fact that Faux gets caught making up stuff more often than MSNBC...

I dont know about making things up but I havent seen them actually do much investigative reporting that I can recall.
"The 5" is just a lazy bullshit session and shows like O'reilly just go thu their same list of guests, That IS like most of MSNBC too but Kornacke has really been doing some digging and exposing the crooked political game. THe EDshow has also been railing against the TPP trade deal which is something havent seen on any other cable show.

LoneLaughter, I kind of like your attitude towards the cable stations but when you say "Pretty much" you mean youd actually rather see them sweep it under the rug??