The Prejudice-Promulgating Professors

The following is my latest column in The Jewish Link of Bergen County, in which I take a deeper look at the academic boycott targeting Israel:

 

The Prejudice-Promulgating Professors

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

Academics traditionally wear the mantle of freedom of expression with great pride. They embrace the open exchange of ideas and embolden others to engage in independent thinking and knowledge-enhancing exercises. These scholars are generally well-respected and their disciplined pursuit of academic excellence in their respective subject areas is extremely noteworthy.

 

Like most things, however, there is an exception to the rule. Unfortunately, when it comes to professors encouraging freedom of expression in the world of academia, that exception is the State of Israel.

 

In a bizarre deviation from the norm in academic circles, there are a growing number of professors who seem to believe that a double standard is somehow acceptable when it comes to Israel. On one hand, they promote inclusiveness and individuality. On the other hand, they have inexplicably chosen to support an academic boycott of Israel.

 

This movement, which is known as Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (“B.D.S.”), has gotten some traction over the past several years. It gained further momentum when the members of the American Studies Association, a U.S.-based organization that is comprised of university professors, recently voted to endorse the boycott effort.

 

The rationale among supporters of B.D.S is that this movement is a means by which they can protest what they claim to be Israel’s inhumane and inequitable policies towards, and treatment of, the Palestinian Arabs.

 

The audacity and hypocrisy of these professors is incredible. They hold themselves out to be bastions of free expression, yet they have chosen to stifle a country that happens to be the sole democratic nation in the Middle East region, and which has made tremendous inroads in the academic world and great strides in developing innovative ideas and emergent technology. They have taken the extreme measure of condemning the State of Israel over its handling of the Palestinian Arabs, yet they turn a blind eye to the countless acts of terror perpetrated against innocent Israelis by its Arab neighbors.

 

The backers of the B.D.S movement allege human rights violations against Israel and single out the Jewish State, however, they apparently ignore the egregious and blatant human rights violations that are pervasive in other nations around the world.

 

In its 2013 World Report, Human Rights Watch, an organization that monitors and reviews human rights practices throughout the world, outlined a plethora of human rights violations that occurred in 2012.

 

For example, basic rights of freedom of expression and association are routinely restricted by the government in numerous countries, including Ethiopia, Rwanda, Afghanistan, China, North Korea, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Turkey, and Egypt.

 

In the Democratic Republic of Congo and Honduras, human rights activists and journalists are threatened, arrested, and killed. In Mali, political upheaval resulted in the displacement of 400,000 residents.  In Uganda, the government’s security force routinely engage in acts of torture. In Colombia, human rights defenders are under constant attack. In Cuba, the government suppresses all political dissent. In Venezuela, opponents of the government are intimidated and prosecuted. In Tajikistan, the government restricts religious expression and education, and domestic violence against women and children is commonplace. In Uzbekistan, torture is widely utilized in the criminal justice system, freedom of expression is limited, and the government sponsors forced child labor. In Iran, executions for various offenses are prevalent. In Iraq, detainees are arbitrarily tortured and peaceful protesters face intimidation and violence. In Syria, tens of thousands of people have been killed as anti-government protests morphed into an all-out armed conflict.

 

The twisted tales of heinous human rights violations that are taking place around the globe are sickening. Yet, remarkably, the professors involved in the B.D.S. movement do not seem too concerned, as they have not taken any steps to initiate boycotts against the countless countries that sanction these crimes against humanity.

 

As self-professed defenders of human rights, the academics’ silence in the face of such overt human rights violations is deafening. In fact, it makes me wonder if their Israeli boycott actually has anything to do with human rights at all.

 

The B.D.S. movement is nothing more than an anti-Israel and anti-Semitic exercise. The professors who enthusiastically support the boycott have shamelessly shed their academic integrity in favor of intolerance and traded in their scholarly books for bigotry.

 

This misguided group of professors is unapologetically promulgating prejudice. Instead of singling out Israel for fallacious human rights infringements, the B.D.S. group should turn its attention to the myriad cases of serious human rights violations that occur on a daily basis around the globe.

 

Stop picking on Israel solely because it is a Jewish State and focus on places and situations that are actually worthy of protestation. My dear professors, your narrow-mindedness is unbecoming, unprofessional, and unpardonable.

 

N. Aaron Troodler is an attorney and a principal of Paul Revere Public Relations, a public relations and political consulting firm. Visit him on the Web at TroodlersTake.blogspot.com, www.PaulReverePR.com, or www.JewishWorldPR.com. You can also follow him on Twitter: @troodler

 

What Merits Top Billing, A Shooting Or The Snow?

The following is an article that I wrote for The Times of Israel blog, in which I examine the New York Times’ coverage of the senseless killing of an Israeli soldier:

 

What Merits Top Billing, A Shooting Or The Snow?

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

Jews throughout the world have watched with wonderment as the biggest snowstorm in a half-century blanketed Jerusalem and various cities throughout Israel. We saw numerous photographs and video footage of Israel being transformed into a veritable winter wonderland.

 

At the same time, we are well aware of the crippling effect that this storm has had on Israel. Thousands of people were left without electricity for several days, countless cars were abandoned on the roads due to the heavy snowfall, and main thoroughfares were shut down, impacting travel in and out of Israel’s capital city. Jerusalem, in effect, was under siege from the snow.

 

While I am certainly cognizant of the adverse effect that the snowstorm has clearly had on Israel and the news making event that it undoubtedly is, I have to confess that I was shocked when I read an article in today’s New York Times relating to this virtually unprecedented weather event.

 

The article, which is entitled “Gaza, Vexed by Floods, Gets Fuel and Power,” begins by recounting how Gaza is faring in the aftermath of the storm.

 

Reading the first nine paragraphs of the article, I learned that Gaza’s sole power plant is once again operational after being offline for a month-and-a-half, and that a $10 million grant from Qatar is going to be used to pay for the industrial diesel that is being trucked into Gaza.

 

More than halfway through the article, the writers switch gears and spend three paragraphs discussing the effect that the storm had on Israel, and how Israeli authorities are responding to criticism about their handling of the big snowfall.

 

And then I got to paragraphs 13 and 14 of the article. The final two paragraphs of the story noted that an Israeli soldier was shot and killed last night by a Lebanese soldier as he was on a routine patrol in proximity to the Lebanese border.

 

What bothered me immensely about this is that the article seems to give the impression that reporting on the unprovoked murder of an Israeli soldier was almost an afterthought.

 

The title of the article is related to the snowstorm. The first 500 words of the article are all about the snowstorm. Throughout the first 81% of the article, there is absolutely no mention of the fact that an Israeli soldier was killed.

 

Then the reader arrives at word 501 of a 618 word article and sees, “In a separate development…,” which seemingly gives the impression that this portion of the article was essentially an add-on.

 

Let me be clear about what happened. 31-year Master Sgt. Shlomi Cohen, a resident of Afula, lost his life when a Lebanese soldier arbitrarily and capriciously decided to open fire at an Israeli army patrol that was traversing Israeli territory, on Israeli soil.

 

Master Sgt. Cohen leaves behind his wife, Ma’ayan, and an infant daughter, whose first birthday is next month. His death is an absolute tragedy, and the fact that his loving wife lost her husband and that his young daughter will now grow up without a father is utterly heartbreaking.

 

Yet, The New York Times did not see fit to dedicate an article, or even a brief, to this horrible tragedy that transpired. Instead, it inexplicably included it as somewhat of an addendum to an article about how Gaza is coping after the snowstorm.

 

I imagine that if the situation was reversed, and an Israeli soldier shot and killed a Lebanese solider for no apparent reason, there would have been a bold headline condemning the attack and an entire article dedicated to how awful it was.

 

Admittedly, the snowstorm that paralyzed Israel is a major news story. However, I personally do not believe that it trumps the terrible tragedy of a young man’s life being cut short simply because he was performing his duties as an Israeli soldier and safeguarding the people of Israel.

 

Let us hope that The New York Times recognizes the error of its ways, and next time, if and when there is a next time, they get it right and give the senseless murder of a brave Israeli soldier the attention that it rightfully deserves.

 

The Hebrew Humanitarians

The following is my latest column in The Jewish Link of Bergen County, in which I examine a possible antidote to Israel’s PR problems, namely, its altruism and benevolence:

 

THE HEBREW HUMANITARIANS

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

There is no denying the fact that the press coverage of Israel by media outlets around the world is often less than flattering. Indeed, Israel is routinely maligned in the media and vilified by those who are theoretically tasked with providing the public with impartial reporting of the news.

 

As a result of this adverse exposure in the press, Israel’s reputation on the world stage is inevitably tarnished. Although it is undeserved and unwarranted, once the negative coverage about Israel hits the newspapers, the damage is done.

 

From a public relations perspective, the Israeli government has its work cut out for itself. They are engaged in a constant struggle to counter the disparaging news stories with positive and informative pieces about all that Israel has to offer and all that it has accomplished. Misstatements in the media are promptly rebutted by Israel, and biased coverage of the Jewish State is generally brought to light.

 

Yet, for all of the negativity that Israel has been forced to endure in the media, there is one issue that has traditionally generated positive press for the Jewish State, and rightfully so.

 

Several weeks ago, in the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan, which absolutely devastated the Philippines and resulted in a great loss of life as well as extensive property and infrastructure damage, I watched a wonderful segment on the NBC Nightly News.

 

Dr. Nancy Snyderman, the Chief Medical Editor for NBC News, provided a report from the ravaged nation. What was especially interesting to me was that the focus of her report was Israel.

 

Following the massive storm in the Philippines, the Israeli government did what they always do in the wake of a natural disaster – they sent help.

 

In her report, Dr. Snyderman spoke about how she was in awe of the medical professionals and other personnel from the Israeli Defense Forces who came to the Philippines. She discussed in glowing terms how well the Israelis assist those in need by delivering emergency medical care in exceedingly poor conditions. She noted that the Israeli team chose to set up their sophisticated medical operation in Bogo, a small village that had been hit extremely hard by the storm, yet was off the beaten path and therefore was not necessarily getting as much aid as some of the other areas.

 

This report on NBC was overwhelmingly positive, and Dr. Snyderman spoke about the Israelis in an almost reverential manner. The story enabled the world to get a glimpse of some of the good that emanates from the State of Israel.

When the Israeli team finally left the Philippines, they had provided medical treatment to nearly 3,000 patients and had helped repair a number of damaged buildings, including schools.

In fact, since its founding in 1948, the State of Israel has provided humanitarian aid to more than 140 countries.

Following a powerful earthquake in Turkey in 2011, Israel sent a team to construct temporary structures that were needed in order to assist those who were displaced and injured.

In 2010, an Israeli team traveled to Haiti to provide aid in the aftermath of a powerful earthquake that decimated the small nation. The Israelis set up a temporary hospital and treated countless Haitians who desperately required medical attention.

Israel sent four tons of medical aid to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2008 to assist the refugees there who were suffering greatly.

After Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005, Israel sent a delegation equipped with 80 tons of food and supplies to help all those who were affected by the storm.

In addition, Israel provided emergency relief aid to Sri Lanka after the 2005 tsunami, to Indonesia after the 2004 tsunami, and to India after the 2001 earthquake. And the list goes on and on.

When tragedy strikes, Israel is always there to answer the call for help. And it is time that the world finally takes notice of Israel’s benevolence and acknowledges its altruistic acts.

While the United Nations never passes up an opportunity to issue baseless condemnations of Israel, the Israeli government never misses a chance to lend a helping hand to some of those very same countries that have denounced her.

Unfortunately, Israel’s public relations problems will not disappear overnight. Those wishing to denigrate the Jewish State will continue to do so.

As such, Israel will keep on employing communications strategies intended to counter the partiality in the press. But one of the best ways that Israel can deflect the daggers that are being thrown at her is to keep doing what she has been doing for so many years, namely, helping people and nations in need. By being the humanitarians that they have proven themselves to be, the Israelis can demonstrate to the world that they are not the villains that their antagonists make them out to be.

N. Aaron Troodler is an attorney and a principal of Paul Revere Public Relations, a public relations and political consulting firm. Visit him on the Web at TroodlersTake.blogspot.com, www.PaulReverePR.com, or www.JewishWorldPR.com. You can also follow him on Twitter: @troodler
 

Thanking the Maccabees

In honor of “Thanksgivukkah,” here is my latest column from The Jewish Link of Bergen County:

 

Thanking the Maccabees

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

There has been much ado this year about the fact that the first day of Chanukah coincides with the holiday of Thanksgiving.

 

The last time that Thanksgiving overlapped with the first day of Chanukah was in 1888, 125 years ago. According to Dr. Jonathan Mizrahi, a New Mexico-based physicist, the next time that the first full day of Chanukah will fall out on Thanksgiving is in 79811, which is 77,798 years from now.

 

Do not despair, however. According to physicist Dr. Eli Lansey, the first night of Chanukah, as opposed to the first day, will fall out on Thanksgiving in 2070 and 2165, 57 and 152 years from now, respectively.

 

This great anomaly has caused a sense of giddiness amongst entrepreneurs, marketing professionals, people in the food industry, and various individuals whose creative juices began flowing. We have seen the birth of the “Menurkey,” which is a menorah shaped like a turkey, t-shirts with slogans such as “Light, Liberty, and Latkes,” latkes with cranberry sauce, and pumpkin rugelach. It is a veritable bonanza for people hoping to capitalize on this once in a lifetime event.

 

But for all of the excitement that people feel due to “Thanksgivukkah,” the fun and games that people have conjured up are mostly superficial. I would like to take a closer and more analytical view of this calendric abnormality.

 

Thanksgiving is a day full of family, football, and fun. It is an annual American Pastime that is eagerly anticipated and widely commemorated.

 

I have fond memories of our entire family gathering at my grandparents’ house on Thanksgiving for a festive holiday meal. After Grandpa carved the turkey and everyone settled down to eat, we would happily enjoy each other’s company and share some quality time together as a family.

 

Yet, there was always a deeper, more meaningful side to the day. As we consumed the delicious turkey and delectable side dishes, we would go around the table, and one-by-one we would tell everyone what we were thankful for.

 

It was a relatively simple exercise, yet it compelled us to recognize and acknowledge that there were many things for which we had to be grateful.

 

The holiday of Chanukah is somewhat comparable to Thanksgiving in that regard. We generally associate Chanukah with giving and getting presents, consuming latkes and jelly donuts, spirited games of dreidel, and spending time with our family.

 

However, like Thanksgiving, there is a more profound element of Chanukah that warrants our attention and reflection.

 

The religious significance of Chanukah is well-known, yet often overlooked. In 176 BCE, King Antiochus and the Greek Empire attempted to incapacitate the Jewish nation and capture the Land of Israel. Antiochus’ methodical attempt to overwhelm the Jews was done via Hellenization, in which the Greeks exerted their control in an effort to cajole and then coerce the Jews into abandoning Judaism and converting to paganism.

 

The foundations of the Jewish faith, such as observing Shabbos, teaching and learning Torah, and conducting circumcisions were outlawed by the Greeks. In an attempt to strike at the very core of the soul of the Jewish people, the Beit Hamikdash was defiled and decorated with forbidden idolatry.

 

Given the impossible choice of forgoing their religion or facing death, many Jews unfortunately succumbed to a life of Hellenism.

 

And then the Maccabees arrived on the scene. Mattathias and his five sons refused to capitulate to the Greeks and in 167 BCE they rose up and led a rebellion against Antiochus. Led by Judah Maccabee, as he is commonly referred to, this small band of Jews, which was greatly outnumbered by the mighty Greek army, ultimately prevailed and was successful in driving the Greeks out of Israel. It was the unlikely and miraculous victory of the Maccabees that saved the spiritual being of the Jewish people and led to the establishment of the holiday of Chanukah.

 

As we sit here in the 21st Century and enjoy all of the wonderful gifts we have been given, it behooves us as Jews to take a moment to reflect on what we have to be thankful for.

 

We live in an era in which it is very easy to be a Jew.

 

As Jewish-Americans, we are extremely fortunate to live in a country that allows us to practice our religion in accordance with the tenets of our faith, whenever, wherever, and however we choose. We live in a place in which we are free to build shuls in which we can pray and schools in which our children can receive a quality Jewish education.

 

We live in a time in which we have a Jewish State that we can call our own. We live in an age in which we can easily travel to Israel and enjoy unfettered access to the holy sites that play such an integral role in Jewish tradition and history.

 

So, as we celebrate “Thanksgivukkah” and partake in the festivities, we should all make a concerted effort to set aside some time to contemplate what we have to be thankful for.

 

Aside from being thankful for tasty turkey, delicious donuts, and luscious latkes, we should make sure that we thank the Maccabees. Without their intervention and heroism, who knows what might have become of the Jewish people?

 

One thing is for certain. Without the Maccabees, there would be no Chanukah, and thus no Thanksgivukkah.

 

N. Aaron Troodler is an attorney and a principal of Paul Revere Public Relations, a public relations and political consulting firm. Visit him on the Web at TroodlersTake.blogspot.com, www.PaulReverePR.com, or www.JewishWorldPR.com. You can also follow him on Twitter: @troodler

 

We Can Agree To Disagree

The following is an article that I wrote for The Times of Israel blog about the state of the U.S.-Israel relationship in the wake of the Iranian nuclear agreement:

 

We Can Agree To Disagree

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

There is a distinct chill in the air. Contrary to what you may be thinking, it has nothing to do with the unseasonably cold temperatures that we are experiencing in the greater New York area. The chill to which I am referring has to do with the current state of the relationship between the United States and Israel.

 

With the news that an interim agreement was reached between the P5+1 and the Iranian government concerning Iran’s seemingly unquenchable desire to produce nuclear weaponry, the U.S.-Israel relationship, which has seemed somewhat tenuous at times over the past several years, took a nosedive.

 

As the United States chose to engage with Iran in a diplomatic effort to curtail its nuclear capability, Israel did whatever it could to present its case to the world as to why such an agreement is not just counterproductive; it is downright dangerous.

 

Calling it a “historic mistake,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was unbridled in his criticism of the accord after it was announced.

 

“Today the world has become a much more dangerous place, because the most dangerous regime in the world has taken a significant step toward attaining the most dangerous weapon in the world,” said Prime Minister Netanyahu.

 

Israel’s opposition to the agreement is understandable. Iran will reap the benefits of sanctions relief totaling nearly $7 billion dollars, yet they will essentially give up very little of substance in return. As a result of the apparent lopsided nature of the agreement, it would not surprise me if President Hassan Rouhani and Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei are laughing all the way to the bank with this sudden infusion of “free money.”

 

Despite the protestation of the Israeli government, Iran can continue to enrich uranium pursuant to the agreement, although they do have to limit the enrichment to five percent. In addition, Iran is not required to dismantle its centrifuges or its plutonium reactor, which ensures that whatever progress they have made thus far in their nuclear pursuit will remain intact.

 

In a television address to the Iranian people today, President Rouhani spoke about Iran’s continued uranium enrichment under the agreement as an entitlement. “Enrichment, which is one part of our nuclear right, will continue, it is continuing today and it will continue tomorrow and our enrichment will never stop and this is our red line,” said a defiant Rouhani.

 

What will happen at the expiration of the six-month interim agreement remains to be seen. There is doubt on the part of many whether Iran will honor the terms of the deal or whether a final agreement can be reached prior to the end of the six-month period.

 

One of the most telling parts of this situation is that Israel and its Arab neighbors, including Saudi Arabia, have united in expressing their skepticism and unease about the Iranian nuclear deal.

 

In the United States, the reaction to news of the agreement created new headaches for the White House.

 

Many Jewish groups, including those who have a tendency to tread lightly when it comes to critiquing the White House, publicly expressed concern about the agreement, including the Anti-Defamation League, AIPAC, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the World Jewish Congress, and the American Jewish Committee, among others.

 

On Capitol Hill, in addition to the Republican lawmakers who condemned the agreement, a number of prominent Democratic leaders took the unusual step of breaking ranks with the White House to voice their displeasure.

 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, and New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez, who serves as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, made their opposition public. Congressman Eliot Engel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was one of a number of congressional representatives to question the terms of the interim agreement.

 

There is no question that Israel has strong and supportive allies in Congress who have demonstrated time and time again that they will look out for Israel’s best interests. The issue is whether the White House will do the same.

 

The general sentiment amongst those in the pro-Israel community is that this was a bad deal not just for Israel, but for the world. By agreeing to provide a respite from some of the sanctions that many believe caused Iran to come to the table in the first place, it is widely believed that the leverage that the United States had over Iran has now dissipated.

 

Although the White House is going to great lengths to defend the agreement and to reassure Israel, its only democratic ally in the Middle East, the damage was done when the U.S. signed on the dotted line and threw Iran a lifeline.

 

Let us not forget that as the parties were negotiating the terms of the agreement in Geneva, the Iranian Supreme Leader reminded the whole world of how much Iran detests the Jewish State when he referred to Israel as a “rabid dog,” a “threat to the world,” and a “fake regime.”

 

The Iranian regime’s longstanding desire to annihilate the State of Israel just makes the interim nuclear deal all the more perplexing. By extending a hand to Iran and providing them with a reprieve that they clearly desired but did not deserve, the White House drove a further wedge between the Administration and the Israeli government.

 

While some are cautiously optimistic that the interim agreement will ultimately lead to a permanent agreement that puts an end to Iran’s quest to obtain a nuclear weapon once and for all, many others, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, believe that it will further exacerbate what was already a very perilous situation.

 

It is not unusual for good friends to feud now and again. Having a disagreement does not necessarily signal the end of a relationship. Like any friendship, the relationship between the United States and Israel inevitably has its ups and downs. It is important to remember that friends can agree to disagree at times.

 

We will have to wait and see over the coming weeks and months if the chill that has descended upon the U.S.-Israel relationship will thaw. For both Israel’s sake and the United States’ benefit, let us hope that it does.

 

Shades of Red Amidst A Sea of Blue

The following is my current column in The Jewish Link of Bergen County, in which I take a closer look at New Jersey’s recent gubernatorial election and look ahead to Governor Chris Christie’s 2016 presidential prospects.

 

Shades of Red Amidst A Sea of Blue

 

By: N. Aaron Troodler, Esq.

 

As New Jersey voters went to the polls on Election Day, there were those who questioned whether the race at the top of the ticket could even be considered a “race.” The gubernatorial contest, which ordinarily would be replete with intrigue and suspense, was totally devoid of any drama. The race for governor was, for all intents and purposes, over before it even began.

 

Riding a wave of popularity that propelled him to rock-star-like status, Governor Chris Christie garnered 60 percent of the vote and easily cruised to a 22-point victory over Democratic State Senator Barbara Buono. In doing so, Christie became the first Republican in New Jersey in twenty-five years to get over 50 percent of the vote in a statewide election.

 

As for Barbara Buono, she found herself in the unenviable position of being in a political Catch-22. She had virtually no name recognition and therefore had difficulty raising money, yet without adequate funds she was unable to boost her profile statewide.

 

What makes Governor Christie’s colossal win so remarkable is that he achieved this historic feat in a state where registered Democrats outnumber Republican voters by a whopping 700,000. Despite the enrollment advantage that Democrats have in this overwhelmingly “blue state,” Christie scored an easy victory.

 

In retrospect, it appears that Christie fared extremely well among voting groups that tend to favor Democratic candidates, rather than Republicans.

 

According to the exit polls, 57 percent of women voted for Christie, versus just 41 percent for Buono. 21 percent of African-Americans, a group that traditionally favors Democrats, cast their ballots for Christie, a noteworthy number considering that when he ran in 2009, only 9 percent of African-American voters supported him.

 

In an extraordinary show of support from Hispanic voters, who typically vote Democratic, Christie got an astounding 50 percent of the vote.

 

Christie also did extremely well among independent and moderate voters, union members, and young voters. Even 33 percent of Democratic voters cast their ballots for the Republican governor.

 

How did Governor Christie perform so well among voting groups that customarily back Democrats? How is it that the Republican candidate turned the gubernatorial contest on its head by running so strong across the board?

 

Chris Christie bucked conventional wisdom by very skillfully and deliberately building a broad bipartisan coalition that swept him to victory. He successfully cultivated strong relationships and alliances with various constituent groups that generally tune out Republicans. Christie masterfully assembled a groundswell of support that was just too much for Buono to overcome.

 

It is quite clear that Chris Christie is not your typical politician. The popular governor is a “tell it like it is,” “say what he thinks” type of person, and it certainly appears that the overwhelming majority of New Jersey voters appreciate his outspoken and brash personality and actually find it refreshing.

 

In addition, New Jersey residents cannot forget the fact that Governor Christie was there for them as they struggled to pick up the pieces after Superstorm Sandy. The images of a concerned, caring, and courageous Chris Christie consoling storm victims were extremely powerful and they undoubtedly left an indelible mark in the hearts and minds of New Jersey voters.

 

On Election Day, Chris Christie did not just win a second term as governor; he catapulted to the front of the pack of likely 2016 Republican presidential candidates.

 

Christie’s record-breaking win sent a loud and clear message to the national Republican Party that he just may be their guy in 2016. The crossover appeal that he demonstrated in New Jersey may be exactly what the Republicans are looking for as they struggle to overcome a barrage of negative publicity relative to the Tea Party movement’s rise within their ranks.

 

The recent government shutdown in Washington, DC adversely impacted the Republican Party’s desperate attempts to get back on track. Many people placed the blame for the shutdown squarely on the GOP and the consensus tends to be that the conservative arm of the Republican Party forced the hand of their congressional leaders and essentially boxed them into a corner.

 

With his inimitable style, Chris Christie may be the cure for what ails the national Republicans. The question is, however, whether Christie’s unique brand of bipartisanship outreach will resonate with more conservative voters throughout the nation. It also remains to be seen how Christie will fare in the context of a national Republican campaign if and when the ultra-conservatives who may be angling for the GOP presidential nomination, such as Senators Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, try to paint him in a more liberal light.

 

With his celebrity status and widespread appeal, Chris Christie has definitely claimed his spot on the national stage. The question is how well he will do as the GOP’s guy in the spotlight.

 

On Election Day, Chris Christie swept into the governor’s office for his second term with a powerful mandate that is virtually unprecedented. The meteoric rise of a Republican governor is something that one would expect to see in a “red state,” not in an overwhelmingly Democratic “blue state.” Chris Christie, however, has proven that there can be shades of “red” amidst a sea of “blue.”

 

N. Aaron Troodler is an attorney and a principal of Paul Revere Public Relations, a public relations and political consulting firm. Visit him on the Web at TroodlersTake.blogspot.com, www.PaulReverePR.com, or www.JewishWorldPR.com. You can also follow him on Twitter: @troodler