At least Connecticut’s governor can have the self-satisfaction of knowing he was right on the issue of handling state pensions. And his approval rating, while low, is not as low as that of his New Jersey rival. No photographer ever caught him sunning on a beach he had ordered closed.

Could it have been just a few years ago that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was a political star on the rise? The public and press embraced his in-your-face approach. Noting his liberality on cultural issues combined with a fiscal conservative agenda — cut spending, cut taxes, and reform his state’s grossly underfunded public pension system — many political pundits saw in him a Republican who could broaden the party’s base. His was presidential timber.

Elected New Jersey governor in 2009 by voters tired of ever higher taxes and spending, Christie in early 2011 began sparring through the press with his Connecticut counterpart, Democrat Dan Malloy, also elected in the midst of a budget crisis.

While Christie was all about cutting government spending, Malloy pushed a different, “shared sacrifice” agenda. He negotiated for labor concessions, consolidated agencies and trimmed spending, but also pushed for higher taxes, contending a balanced approach would serve Connecticut better in the end.

In February 2011 the governors, both former prosecutors, made separate appearances on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” political talk show. Their enmity began.

Asked about Malloy’s policy approach that included tax increases, Christie responded that he “would be waiting for Connecticut jobs at the border.” Then added, “(Malloy’s) got to read the governor’s owner’s manual.”

Questioned during his later appearance, Malloy took his own dig.

"The people in Connecticut are maybe a little bit different. They actually don't want to close nursing homes and put people on the street. They don't want to cut funding to local school districts. So I think we're taking a different path," Malloy said.

In the years to come, the exchanges would continue in the press. But it was a one-sided feud. Christie had the much higher national profile, Malloy only one of many progressive targets at which Christie took aim.

In 2013, a Quinnipiac poll would show Christie peaking with a 74 percent approval rating. Malloy would never get above 50 percent, making his re-election in 2014 all the more remarkable. Malloy’s “shared sacrifice” did not fix Connecticut’s problems. This year Malloy is sounding Christie-like, saying the legislature must address a $5 billion budget shortfall largely with spending reductions, not increased taxes.

Malloy got little media attention when he challenged Christie’s standing as a reformer. While the New Jersey governor had achieved pension concessions from labor, his administration failed to adequately fund the pension system so that Christie could brag about holding down taxes, said Malloy. And Christie’s ability to control spending in Trenton, said Malloy, came at the expense of big cuts in municipal aid.

In late 2013, news broke of the Christie administration’s participation in a scheme to cause traffic jams at the George Washington Bridge, a move intended to aggravate a local mayor who had failed to back Christie’s re-election. While prosecutors never directly implicated the governor, his reputation suffered serious damage.

When Christie turned his attention to running for president, only to fail miserably, and then backed Donald Trump, the anger among many New Jersey citizens grew. Turned out Malloy was right. Christie hadn’t adequately funding the state pension fund. Property taxes spiked as municipalities made up for those cuts in state aid.

With only a few months left in office, Christie has hit a record low, his approval rating down to 15 percent. That was before Christie ordered state parks and beaches closed due to a budget impasse, only to then be photographed at one of the beaches, empty except for his family.

Last spring, a Morning Consult poll found Malloy’s approval rating at 29 percent. Unable to agree on how to fix the badly unbalanced budget, the legislature has yet to approve a spending plan. Connecticut began the fiscal year July 1 without one.

But Malloy has improved Connecticut’s ability to manage its underfunded pension, using both concessions and a revised financing plan that should keep the state’s annual contribution at around $2 billion, a high but manageable 10 percent of current expenditures.

A tentative deal Malloy has reached with the state labor unions would place newly hired workers on a revised hybrid pension and 401(k)-type system, an adequately funded approach that would at least stop the bleeding. Union ratification is pending.

Christie ends his time in office this year, Malloy at the end of 2018. Maybe they will return to debate the issues on some future political talk show. But it won’t be the same.

Paul Choiniere is the editorial page editor.