The NYT plies Chris Christie with its guilt-trip theory and gets results.

The article, by Jonathan Martin, is "In New Hampshire, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie Add Guilt Trips to Campaign Stops":

"Are you trying to imply that an Italian from New Jersey would use guilt?... I think what I’m saying to them is, it would be a shame for the country if New Hampshire makes the wrong choices. Guilt was a frequently used weapon of my mother. So some of it just comes out naturally."

But Mr. Christie did not deny that he was in effect telling New Hampshire voters not to send their reputation for discriminating tastes in candidates down the drain.

“Yeah, that’s exactly what I’m saying,” he said, again invoking how much the “country is counting on them” and noting their “huge responsibility.”

The article cites Christie and Jeb, but it's Christie who's providing the material:

There are differences in the subtle shaming Mr. Bush and Mr. Christie employ. Mr. Bush is far more explicit about targeting Mr. Trump, while Mr. Christie, who would like to win some Trump voters, tends not to mention him directly. (“I’m not as judgmental about it as Jeb is,” Mr. Christie said.)

Well, you're judgmental about Jeb, calling him judgmental. As for this idea of shaming people into voting for you, I predict that, like everything else used against Trump, it will backfire. It's such a beta game.  You're supposed to pick Jeb or Christie because it's shameful or embarrassing to be for Trump. If only the ballot weren't secret, they might have a shot with that.