Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) all but rigged his recent landslide re-election victory, but you know what makes a better story? See if these themes sound familiar:
- Sixty percent win lands Christie at top of 2016 presidential contenders
- Huge victory shows Christie’s broad, non-partisan appeal to voters
- Christie’s re-election signals end to divisiveness in politics
These are the lines we’ve heard since election night, when Christie did indeed take 60 percent of the vote over former NJ state Sen. Barbara Buono (D). But that’s hardly the whole story.
The media seems unable to remember a few short months ago, when Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) died. At the time, Newark Mayor Cory Booker (D) had already acknowledged he would likely run for the seat when it was next up in 2014. Lautenberg’s death accelerated Booker’s campaign, which left Christie with a decision:
- Appoint a placeholder to fill out Lautenberg’s term
- Put Lautenberg’s seat on the ballot in the 2013 governor’s race
- Spend $12 million on a special primary and $12 million on a special general election to be held THREE WEEKS before the already scheduled election
The governor chose option 3. But why, might you ask, would Christie, who like all Republicans, hates wasting taxpayer funds,* squander $24 million on a redundant voter exercise?
Because, like all Republicans, Christie sought his best advantage in the election, and the folks who would turn out to vote for the charismatic Booker, who is younger and is African-American, were also likelier to vote for Christie’s Democratic challenger. What’s $24 million if it keeps the “wrong” people home on the governor’s election day?
Indeed, the Nov. 5 election had one of the lowest turnouts recorded: only 38 percent of registered voters participated. The 60 percent of them who voted for Christie represent a small number of New Jersey residents, especially when you take people not registered to vote into account.
Buono blamed her loss on a lack of support from New Jersey Democratic party officials, whom she implied were bought off by Christie. Those claims are unproven and unspecified, but exit polls from the governor’s race showed that Christie’s “broad, bipartisan” appeal is over-hyped and his national electability less assured than post-election pundits claim.
When people who had just voted for Christie were asked if they would vote for him or for former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, only 44 percent said they’d choose Christie. Nationally, only 36 percent said recently that they would support him over Clinton.
One can’t help but suppose that Christie’s re-election numbers would have been lower if the Senate election that included the Booker candidacy had been held at the same time. Thanks to Christie’s $24 million splurge and the media’s short memory and preference for the “broad appeal” story, we’ll never know.
*Republicans always say they hate to waste tax dollars, unless it’s for issues of importance to them, like forcing women to have unnecessary and intrusive medical procedures, to humiliate public aid recipients with drug tests, or to hand the money to crony private contractors. Or, in this case, to tip the odds that the “wrong” voters stay home.
