Yesterday, the managing editor of the digital magazine for conservative women, Palladian View, posed a question on the publication's Facebook page and the interactive write-in section of the web site. She asked the reader(s) whether they "support Chick-fil-A and whether they planed to eat at Chick-fil-A today to show support?" The query yielded the highest response for a single question in the sites history. Moreover, while100% of those responding were in support of Chick-fil-A, 92% of the supportive answers indicated the reader "would eat there today if they were in my area, or had already been". Palladian View presents a snapshot of one demographic and the take away is the intensity of reaction.
It is of no surprise therefore that nationwide, photos and statuses across social media outlets mentioned Chick-fil-A in both positive and negative ways. Conservative politicians displayed lunches piled on their desks; and those that could find receptive press frequented the restaurant as a sign of support. Politicians mirror those they represent, and the effect of Mr. Cathy's comments engender strong reactions from both.
What an interesting juxtaposition to that of the Starbucks CEO who formed a pact with 100 other CEOs refusing to give political donations until gridlock in Congress had been addressed…there was no Starbucks appreciation day. Why not?
The significance of the Chick-fil-A founder's comments is the "raw nerve" or intensity of reaction by the public and politicians alike. This simple, non apologetic statement by Mr. Cathy may be the new litmus test for self-defining conservatism, and thus a significant development in the political landscape.
