I disagree. He is known nationally as a Romney spokesman. He cannot be perceived to be playing politics with the storm. He is going out of his way to be nice so the MSM cannot portray him as a Romney attack dog damning the President with faint praise.
What storm? It’s bad enough the press overhyped Sandy, let’s not do it here. I mean, this hurricane fizzled. There is no disaster.
I don’t think most Americans want to see this disaster politicized. I know I don’t. If Christie is satisfied with Obama’s response for NJ, what is wrong with saying so? That being said, my worry is now the media is pointing at Romney’s statement regarding getting rid of FEMA. If FEMA performs well, people will not agree with Romney.
I take your side in this. The last thing they need right now is for the Romney campaign, or his spokesmen, to be seen politicizing a natural disaster. Romney used his campaign bus to aid hurricane relief. That speaks volumes more than slamming Obama. I think Christie's playing this smart.
yes. He is trying to get help for his state, from lousy hack.
Thanks for your perspective: with Cristie as a major spokesman for Romney, this statement really is the best way to avoid “playing politics” with the storm. That, plus the earlier poster’s observation that “Christie has a tendency to over-exaggerate.” which for clarity I would modify as: “Christie has a tendency to super-mountain-over-exaggerate with far over-the-top rhetorical excesses.”, has reversed my initial reaction to his “great credit”.
Most people who know Christie will read this as “Obama did his job for a change.” People who are enemies of Christie will put this statement in ads that others will laugh at regarding the ability for Christie to show his enemies’ gullibility.
Well then Romney's in trouble. Just last night Cristie said "I could give a damn about the Presidential election."