This will sound petty, but now that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is "seriously considering" running for President, the question needs to be asked.

Is Christie too fat to be President?

We can't remember the definition of "obese," but it seems safe to say that Chris Christie is, at the very least, fat.

This is an attribute that Christie shares with millions of ordinary Americans, so it will probably help create some sympathy and support for him.

But being fat also creates two issues for Christie, one practical and one symbolic.

The practical issue is that Christie looks like he might have a heart attack at any minute, which is not a quality you really want in a President (or you also have to think seriously about who you're electing as Vice President). 

The symbolic issue is the obvious clash between the austerity and discipline message that Christie keeps preaching—and the tough personal choices that Christie himself seems unable to make.

Christie would presumably argue that he doesn't have to limit how much he eats because there's plenty of food in the world—while New Jersey does have to limit how much it spends because it's flat-out broke. But this doesn't ring true. New Jersey has serious budget problems, but it's how it solves them that is the issue, and many New Jerseyans disagree with the specific choices that Christie is making. And people don't like being told that there's simply no choice when there obviously is a choice—especially when they're being told it by someone who clearly has trouble making some tough choices himself.

So, yes, it sounds petty. And, yes, Christie says a lot of things that America desperately needs to hear. And, yes, it's possible that Christie is, in fact, the sleeper savior candidate that the GOP has been praying for.

But we suspect he'd be more electable if he lost 50 pounds.

POLITICO's Ben White also wrote about Christie's "fat problem" here >