The seven deadly sins are lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride. Numbers one and three have felled many politicans in recent memory. But in the New Jersey governor’s race, #2 appears to be affecting the race. A recent ad by incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine accuses Republican challenger Chris Christie of “throwing his weight around” by using his position as U.S. Attorney to escape punishment for dangerous driving. The ad’s wording, along with the photos of Christie, is an obvious double-entendre about Christie’s heft. The political website 538 surveys all current Governors for their fatness, with accompanying pictures. A new poll from Public Policy Polling find that 4% of New Jersey voters are more likely to vote for Christie because of his weight, while 19% are less likely. Notably, among that 19%, the majority are not current Corzine supporters.
So what do you think? Is it legitimate to consider a candidate’s enormous weight? Only if the weight is a result of sin #2, rather than of some medical condition? Is it more important, less important, or equally important as any of the other deadly sins? Is Jon Corzine the right guy to be raising questions about dangerous driving?
New Jersey, by the way, has the 8th-lowest state obesity rate in the U.S., according to CalorieLab. In the Colorado, which has the lowest national rate, in four decades that I have been following Colorado politics, I cannot remember any candidate as heavy as Christie winning any statewide office. Maybe somebody can point out a Board of Regents election in 1970, but in Colorado, Christie’s size would definitely be a political disadvantage. Although, personally, I think that Christie’s much bigger disadvantage is that he has run an extremely vague campaign, hoping to win mainly on the strength of not being Jon Corzine. As the PPP poll shows, being “not Corzine” is a defnite advantage in New Jersey, but perhaps not sufficient in itself.
Abdul Abulbul Amir says:
Its probably a gland condition. He ate so much his glands weigh 40 pounds each.
October 13, 2009, 2:00 pmAnderson says:
Pretty bitchy politics. If I were an undecided voter, Corzine’s jabs would not endear him to me.
October 13, 2009, 2:03 pmDave N says:
Good thing for Jerry Nadler that he’s from New York instead of New Jersey (or Colorado).
October 13, 2009, 2:03 pmDilan Esper says:
Politics ain’t beanbag, but I wish Corzine would stick to substance.
That said, I may have a bit of a double standard here, because even though I don’t agree with his politics, I always found the fact that Mike Huckabee LOST all that weight to be quite an admirable aspect of his character. So, the converse should be that it should be OK to draw negative inferences about candidates who are heavy-set. And yet I don’t agree with that.
October 13, 2009, 2:06 pmLarryA says:
New Jersey? I thought the relevant question there was, “Which way is the machine voting?”
October 13, 2009, 2:07 pmJK says:
I think it shows a certain lack of discipline, and I don’t have a problem with obesity being considered a negative when deciding on a candidate. It would certainly be pretty silly to base your vote in large part on such a factor, but I don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t be considered.
October 13, 2009, 2:18 pmChrisTS says:
I agree that these ads are mean.* But aren’t ‘looks’ always a part of politics in our country?
*Confession: the first time we saw one of the ads, my spouse and I both burst out laughing.
October 13, 2009, 2:19 pmrarango says:
What Larry A said. Seem to me the question: is Corzine going to buy this election again? This is New Jersey, after all. Unfortunately some 39 democrats recently were indicted, so the machine may have lost some of its dons.
October 13, 2009, 2:25 pmSteve says:
It’s obviously a cheap shot and nothing more, but no one is suggesting that it’s a substantive issue, so the question posed by this post is a fairly silly one.
Corzine makes a good point, though, that it’s really not much different from negative ads that accentuate his shiny bald head, or for that matter, virtually every negative ad ever run. Of course a negative ad uses images and video that casts the adversary in the most unflattering light. That’s standard politics and it’s the reason why there is unlikely to be some massive “backlash” against the mean old Corzine campaign. Frankly, “I voted against that guy because his ads were mean-spirited” isn’t that much better than “I voted against that guy because he’s fat and ugly.”
October 13, 2009, 2:30 pmFedya says:
As I wrote once in a different debate where people were making fun of the looks of those taking the opposing view, I almost wish I had the money to send in a bunch of leggy Brazilian supermodels to take that opposing view, just to watch people’s heads explode.
October 13, 2009, 2:45 pmGavin says:
I find it shocking that Corzine would bring up dangerous driving. After all, didn’t his 91mph motorcade kill an essentially innocent driver not very long ago.
October 13, 2009, 2:53 pmSuperSkeptic says:
you should, and I do. Your weakness is politically telling – and yet, JK is right.
October 13, 2009, 2:54 pmegd says:
I think voters can consider whatever they want. If they don’t like a guy because he always wears bad ties, then that’s a valid reason (for them) to vote that way.
That said, if you’ve reached the point where your best argument is “don’t vote for him, he’s fat,” then I would argue that you’ve lost most of the debate already.
October 13, 2009, 2:56 pmSoronel Haetir says:
We’ve come a long ways from the days of Taft it seems.
October 13, 2009, 3:00 pmBored Lawyer says:
Not really. There are plenty of negative ads that address substance: Candidate X raised your taxes and will do so in the future, Candidate X voted a certain way, Candidate X’s adminiatration had five members indicted on various charges, etc. Those are much more pertient than a candidate’s weight or bald head.
October 13, 2009, 3:00 pmSteve says:
After all, didn’t his 91mph motorcade kill an essentially innocent driver not very long ago.
…no?
October 13, 2009, 3:03 pmSteve says:
There are plenty of negative ads that address substance: Candidate X raised your taxes and will do so in the future, Candidate X voted a certain way, Candidate X’s adminiatration had five members indicted on various charges, etc. Those are much more pertient than a candidate’s weight or bald head.
Are you under the impression that Corzine’s ads are about nothing more than his opponent’s weight? That would be incorrect. They are rather typical negative ads, about the sorts of things negative ads tend to be about. It’s not like there’s 30 seconds of silence as Christie’s flabby gut flops around on your TV.
It is utterly common for an ad of the type “Candidate X raised your taxes” to include an unflattering black-and-white image of Candidate X. We have all seen these ads a million times.
October 13, 2009, 3:06 pmalkali says:
Former Michigan governor John Engler became substantially more hefty over his three terms in office. (Alas, my own record over that same period is nothing to brag about either.)
October 13, 2009, 3:55 pmRock Chocklett says:
How would you know if a candidate’s girth was based on his or her gluttony rather than a legitimate medical condition? I suppose you could go by anecdotal evidence or general reputation. But based on metabolism, a little bit of gluttony can go a long way for some folks. On the flip side, how could you know whether a candidate’s good looks or physique were not based on pride, another of the deadly sins?
October 13, 2009, 3:55 pmOff Kilter says:
On the Plantation, one field slave says to another,
“The Mastah done killed Jim. Whip ‘im to deth”
October 13, 2009, 3:57 pmThe other responds, “Yeah, herd dat.”
“And the Mastah forcin’ us ta work more.”
“Yeah, herd dat.”
“And the Mastah, he backin’ off on r vittals…”
“Yeah, herd dat. But he do cut a fine figure, dontcha think?”
A Reader says:
On the flip side, how could you know whether a candidate’s good looks or physique were not based on pride, another of the deadly sins?
Or that the in-shape candidate was neglecting their official duties to work out obsessively while the fat guy is fat because he’s ordering in take-out and working late every night.
There are really too many variables and possibilities to make fatness a useful proxy for fitness as governor.
October 13, 2009, 3:58 pmA.C. says:
For those who think it is relevant and whose inclinations are on the D side, recall that Clinton (Bill, not Hill) was kind of hefty. And W was a skinny jogger. If you look at those two, does your opinion change? If so, it’s a proxy for something else.
October 13, 2009, 4:13 pmBrian Garst says:
I’d expect little else from an incumbent governor who literally bought his office, whose corrupt party has been indicted at all levels of the state government, and whose national leaders are growing ever more unpopular. What the hell else does he have to talk about? How great life under democrats at all levels is? How wonderfully he has run New Jersey into the ground?
October 13, 2009, 4:15 pmPatent Lawyer says:
If Christie’s weight makes him less likely to impose Bloomberg-style nanny legislation making all of our diets the government’s business, that’s a major point in his favor.
And I don’t think a comparison of Ariel Sharon to either of our most recent fitness-obsessed presidents (W and Obama) comes out very favorably for the Americans.
October 13, 2009, 4:34 pmWidmerpool says:
Although this weighty matter might seem to have been fully fleshed out and explored from all sides, one pressing question has yet to be asked: What Would Wimpy Do? He’d vote Christie–although he’d probably do it next Tuesday for a hamburger today.
October 13, 2009, 4:50 pmScales of Justice says:
I have concluded that this whole issue is simply not worth weighing in on.
October 13, 2009, 5:04 pmRich says:
It is telling that the Star Ledger (NJ Newspaper) which in the past has been known to fawn over anything Democrat is not endorse either of them but an independent! Though knowing NJ politics, it was suggested that they were doing that to take votes away from Christie so Corzine could win. Neither Corziine or Christie is any good so it is a matter of which one stinks less.
October 13, 2009, 5:20 pmcookiemonsta says:
“recall that Clinton (Bill, not Hill) was kind of hefty. And W was a skinny jogger.”
W is 5’11″ and his weight ranged from 190 to 195.
Bill is 6’1″ and his weight ranged from 195 to 225.
Both are normal white-man size, good looking politicians.
Elections are partly beauty contests, so of course weight is going to be a consideration. Unless it’s extreme, it shouldn’t be, though…
October 13, 2009, 5:23 pmdrunkdriver says:
I don’t appreciate the ad, which is a low-class cheap shot. It’s like we are all back in 4th grade again.
But yes, I do think very obese people have poor self-control and are on average, less healthy and less energetic than those in decent shape. A guy who can’t stay under 300 pounds is usually not leadership material.
Especially in politics- how can he speak credibly about public health issues, including the enormous problems caused by the epidemic of overweight and obesity, which put such a dent in every state’s budget. I’d be unfavorably disposed to an obese candidate, not that it would be automatic.
October 13, 2009, 5:48 pmPersonFromPorlock says:
So, I guess Gore campaigning for Corzine is out, huh?
October 13, 2009, 5:51 pmJay says:
I’m not endorsing obesity, but I do find the “fat-people-are-obviously-lazy-slobs” meme that seems to frequently pop up in internet comment threads of this sort fairly absurd. Some are, but I tend to doubt the kind of fat guy who runs a U.S. Attorney’s office for eight years and then undertakes a serious campaign for governor is especially lazy.
Of course, it’s usually accompanied by the implication that the inverse is also true; the commenter is lean and mean, apparently showing his excellent self-discipline and all around greatness. But most exercise beyond the recommended 5 x 30 minutes a week is just vanity; don’t pretend your lifting routine or nutty desire to run your knees off is some higher calling. As for eating, sure, most people could do better, but eating healthily is more about simplicity and common sense than becoming the kind of obnoxious dietary snob most people who go on about how awful the average American’s diet is are.
Most of these conversations just become a way for people to unsubtly boost their own class status by talking about how much fat people suck, because being fat has come to connote lower social status in modern American society.
October 13, 2009, 6:04 pmSplunge says:
I think it’s great that Corzine made this ad. If you’re going to have the chance to elect a complete asshole, it’s efficient and just if the costs of informing the voters about the condition are borne by the asshole himself.
October 13, 2009, 6:32 pmTaxLawyer says:
The expression to throw one’s weight around is a pretty old one, and the conduct complained of in the ad falls squarely within the meaning of the idiom. Is it never to be used in reference to fat people — or if used in reference to fat people, must images of the fatty not be used? That seems like the kind of “political correctness” not usually favored in these parts.
October 13, 2009, 7:04 pmMark Field says:
32 comments and nobody has quoted Caesar about Cassius?
October 13, 2009, 7:17 pmDilan Esper says:
Mark:
Nobody thinks that Christie thinks too much, although some folks may think he’s dangerous.
October 13, 2009, 7:18 pmMark Field says:
I was thinking Christie might suggest that Corzine has a lean and hungry look.
October 13, 2009, 8:01 pmAdam B. says:
What — this blog’s libertarianism is going to disappear when it’s a Democrat’s First Amendment rights at stake?
October 13, 2009, 8:38 pmBen P says:
October 13, 2009, 8:40 pmRicardo says:
Is Jon Corzine the right guy to be raising questions about dangerous driving?
I’d say so, considering he wasn’t the one driving when the infamous crash (on the way to meet Don Imus to discuss the “nappy-headed hos” issue, by the way) happened. Corzine apparently voluntarily paid the fine for not wearing a seatbelt.
As a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, though, I would think his subsequent injuries were more of a punishment than the $46 ticket. Aside from the seatbelt violation, Corzine has two speeding tickets from 1992 while Christie has 13 tickets in total. Link here.
October 13, 2009, 9:09 pmBored Lawyer says:
How quickly we forget a little thing called “state action.” Libertarians are concerned with governmental restraints on free speech. What we have here is not only private but is not even a restraint — it’s criticism. I know of no tenet of libertarianism that requires one’s views and actions to be insulated from criticism.
Corzine has every right to act like a jerk — and we have just as much right to deride his jerkiness. That’s a free market in ideas. Sounds perfectly libertarian to me.
October 13, 2009, 9:11 pmSandy MacHoots says:
Come on, don’t be silly. This was a deliberate attempt to ridicule the man by calling him fat, drawing on the great comic stereotype of the lazy
black manfat man to belittle his opponent.Corzine has every right to do that, and I don’t see anybody here suggesting that he be censored. But we’re certainly free to feel contempt for him. And for the voters if they buy it.
October 13, 2009, 9:48 pmVinny B. says:
Given the choice between having the fat guy or guy who continues to drive New Jersey into the ground through oppressive tax rates, over-regulation, and inspires a countless number of people everyday to evacuate New Jersey for other states, well, I just can’t have the fat guy as Governor.
Perhaps Christie should declare himself “an obese American.”
October 13, 2009, 9:57 pmJK says:
I read this post this morning, and just watched the video, and boy was I disappointed. I don’t think I would have even realized that they were picking on his obesity. There was one “throwing his weight around” line, and later maybe 5 seconds of Christi getting out of a car. Kopel raises a fun issue, but the add itself doesn’t even come close to a low blow in terms of modern politics.
October 13, 2009, 10:17 pmAdam B. says:
@BoredLawyer: I was referring to the notion that Corzine’s self-financing was a bad thing, nothing more.
October 13, 2009, 10:19 pmFedya says:
When the hell did “overweight” become a noun?
And it’s not an epidemic either, since it’s not contagious.
October 13, 2009, 10:53 pmSammy Finkelman says:
I don’t think this is officially an issue, and maybe people are reading somethingg into the ad that isn’t there. At worst it is a kind of a pun. (That pun shouild not help Corzine)
Not mentioned in these comments here so far is that there ia thirdird party candidate who is gaining perhaps a little, although he is still far from being another Jesse Ventura at this point.
October 13, 2009, 11:19 pmDiversityHire says:
since it’s not contagious
Are we sure about that?
October 13, 2009, 11:34 pmcookiemonsta says:
“When the hell did “overweight” become a noun?
And it’s not an epidemic either, since it’s not contagious.”
Overweight has been a noun for probably hundreds of years. As a medical term, it makes sense as a noun.
An epidemic does not have to be contagious or communicable or transmittable or infectious or transmissible. An epidemic is defined by how common or widespread an ailment is, usually an increased rate of occurrence compared to some earlier time.
October 13, 2009, 11:38 pmbgates says:
Clinton’s weight fluctuated between 214 and 236 pounds. He and W are probably both an inch taller than you’re saying too.
October 14, 2009, 12:29 amSteve says:
there is a third party candidate who is gaining perhaps a little
And they claim it’s not contagious.
October 14, 2009, 5:09 amPersonFromPorlock says:
Steve: LOL!
October 14, 2009, 8:03 amGavin says:
I owe you all an apology: I did not remember the facts of Corzine’s motor accident correctly, and I insinuated something that’s not true.
Nobody died in that crash, and I’m sorry I suggested anyone did.
Corzine is still, however, I think unwise to bring up dangerous driving. His driver was going 91mph, Corzine wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. I have a hard time believing there was any possible justification for going that speed that day.
October 14, 2009, 10:06 amSnowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » Too Fat to Be Governor? says:
[...] Dave Kopel covers the latest in the New Jersey Governor’s race, and it may end up swinging on …. I originally had a fair amount of optimism that Chris Christie’s campaign was going to pull it off, but the hope is rapidly dwindling as Corzine has narrowed and evened up the race. Corzine is outspending Christie three to one, and I just don’t see how that’s not going to help Corzine’s already surging numbers. [...]
October 14, 2009, 10:19 amSebastian says:
No, he didn’t kill anyone, but he did try to pin the blame on the accident on a 20 year old driver who had nothing to do with it.
October 14, 2009, 10:21 amAnonymous Troll says:
Winner.
October 14, 2009, 11:09 amohwilleke says:
Colorado has had a number of elected members of the state general assembly and district attorneys that are about the same weight as Corzine in recent years (I will refrain from identifying them by name). I can’t think of any statewide elected office holders, in recent history, although some of the 19th century ones look a bit stout in their painted portraits.
October 14, 2009, 1:22 pmKevin P. says:
I don’t know if obesity is always due to a lack of discipline. Some people (e.g. Samoans) just have the genes for it.
October 14, 2009, 6:10 pmSandy MacHoots says:
The Center for Disease Control calls it an epidemic.
October 14, 2009, 9:42 pmNickM says:
The New Jersey Democratic Party apparently thinks Chris Christie’s weight is a key issue.
PolitickerNJ
If you think your life would be different if your Governor is fat, seek help. [This does not apply if you're sleeping with the Governor.]
Nick
October 17, 2009, 12:08 amBrock Knotts says:
Interesting post… Subscribed!!
April 20, 2010, 7:12 pmanonymous free proxy find proxy