Quote (EndlessSky @ Sep 7 2016 04:02pm)
Clueless statement.
What are your metrics this time?
The same metrics generally used to gauge a governor's performance, plus some state-specific idiosyncrasies mixed in? On the former front, when he announced for president the state was still net-negative for post-recession job creation (hell they might still be there, I don't know) and both their unemployment rate and economic growth rate were in the national basement. He stupidly slashed the state's revenues just trying to build a profile for national office he was never going to win, and that magnified already-bad poverty numbers. The tax burden on most people just kept growing because of his singular focus on winning the White House.
On the latter front: NJ has a very big pension problem. Christie made it considerably worse, and his saving grace was that the State Supreme Court simply found that his entire framework was simply unconstitutional and threw the entire thing out, overruling entire years of work on behalf of him and the machine-state allies he has in the legislature. The state's credit rating has been downgraded countless times on account of his bungling. He's bogged down the entire legislative process for
3 full years with his retribution scandal, all while vetoing popular bills passed by the legislature despite his abysmal job approval rating (once again solely out of concern for his national ambition). He's been an absentee governor and he's continuously gotten the state involved in pointless distractions based purely on his demagoguery (Kaci Hickox) or ambition (everything else).