However, none of these tactics have worked for the past three weeks and instead I come home and fling myself onto the bed and Nathaniel asks, "Where are we going for dinner?" It's a charade, and we both know it.
This week we went to Red Bowl to enjoy some sushi (made with cooked shrimp, for anyone concerned about the health of the baby.) We were seated in the bar area where there are many, many TV's. There were two news stories on the television and our conversation vacillated between Chris Christie's broader GOP appeal and whether Richie Incognito is a villain or victim (riveting, I know).
During our dinner, Nathaniel asked me if I thought that Chris Christie was going to be the savior of the Republican party. I thought for a minute and then I gave this answer:
Maybe.
Chris Christie has a huge personality that somehow bridges the gap between demographics that traditionally vote liberal and those that traditionally vote more conservative. His polling numbers in the wake of his recent re-election victory are truly impressive:
Christie beat his female opponent, Barbara Buono, 60% to 39%. He bested her by 16 points with women, by 20 points with independents and by 30 points with moderates. He won the majority of voters who make less than $50,000/year and voters who make more than $100,000/year.
Additionally, Christie made an impressive showing with other demographics that traditionally favor democratic candidates heavily. Christie raked in:
- 49% of 18-29 year olds
- 30% of people who identified themselves as liberals
- 50% of Latinos
- 20% of African-Americans
So Nathaniel's question is a good one:
"Is Chris Christie the savior of the Republican party?"
Again, I'll say "maybe."
Chris Christie surely has the force of personality to unite an odd coalition of individuals behind him. He projects an aura of independence from the "establishment" and I think that this is the root of his broad appeal. He has also been able to jettison some of the negative baggage that many Republicans in office deal with. My hesitation with Christie, however, is due in large part to what I see as a lack of ideology.
Ideology is important to me. I want to vote for a candidate who supports or opposes legislation based on principle rather than what is popular with voters. I think most people would agree with me here.
Additionally, I want to vote for a candidate who makes decisions based on well-thought out and reasonable arguments. I don't want a candidate or a leader who makes decisions based on gut-instinct.
Chris Christie has not demonstrated that he functions from a clear ideological framework. His mantra and his apparent winsomeness appears to revolve around his ability to size up a situation and act decisively. That may work as a governor, but Washington, D.C. is something different and I am skeptical of his ability to effectively lead when nothing is leading him except his intuition.
Christie and Gay Marriage
Christie's stance on gay marriage provides an excellent example of a man who doesn't seem to know what he thinks or what he wants to do. Christie is Catholic and he has stated that he does not think that homosexuals have a Constitutional right to marriage. Instead, he supports a civil union. He also vetoed a bill from the New Jersey State Legislature that would approve gay marriage. Both of these actions would reasonably lead a person to believe that he takes a rather conservative stance towards homosexual marriage.However, he has also stated that sexuality is something a person is born with and is not a sin. Furthermore, he recently signed legislation into effect in New Jersey that bans gay-conversion therapy. Both of these actions indicate a more liberal approach to gay marriage and gay rights in general.
Christie says that there is no contradiction in his stance, but I disagree. What is it that motivates Christie to act? What is it that guides his decision-making process? It's clearly not a close adherence to the teachings of the Catholic Church. It's also not a truly conservative or liberal ideology either. I don't know that I would even call it a moderate position because he has taken strong stances against homosexual rights and and then for homosexual rights. Additionally, Christie has been accused of pandering to the conservative right in order to boost his prospects for his inevitable 2016 campaign even though Steven Goldstein, the chairman of Garden State Equality, said "Frankly, I don’t think Chris Christie has an antigay bone in his body."
Am I ultimately commenting on Christie's apparent indecision regarding homosexual rights? I'm not. The purpose here is to demonstrate my point that Chris Christie doesn't appear to make decisions based upon a well-thought out ideological system. Instead, he acts out of necessity and with an in-the-moment attitude. Does his indecision and sometimes contradictions make me want to support his candidacy for the White House? Not really. I want to know not just what a candidate is going to do now, in the current situation, but I want to be able to confidently guess how he will respond to events in the future. Chris Christie doesn't provide me with that ability.
But who knows? Maybe Christie has a brilliant ideology that he has yet to fully articulate. If he can articulate his political ideology in the same clear and concise way that Mitt Romney did during the first presidential debate last year, I'll be listening.
Sources and Suggested Reading
Exit Polls: Christie and McAuliffe Took Different Paths to Victory- CNNNew York Times Exit Polls: 1980-2008- New York Times
On Gay Issues, Gov. Christie Says There's No Ambiguity- NJ.com
Christie Keeps His Promise to Veto Gay Marriage Bill- New York Times
Can Chris Christie be the Republican Bill Clinton?- Politico
