The Story Changes
- 05.14.2008 - 4:25 PMFirst, the Left blogosphere insisted there was no Jewish problem for Barack Obama. Then the line was that if such a problem existed, it was irrational and based on false internet rumors about Obama’s secret Muslim past. The latest take? He doesn’t need the Jewish vote.
This Huffington Post column makes the case, even finding an unnamed Jewish fundraiser for Obama to pipe up: “Obama doesn’t need me and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.” The same article does acknowledge, by way of a Jerusalem Post column, that “a relatively moderate Republican candidate with rock-solid Israel-supporter credentials like John McCain may well reach or even surpass the Jewish-vote record for a GOP presidential contender–especially if his opponent is Barack Obama.”
There is an argument that this thesis is correct–if you believe Rep.Wexler is wrong, Florida is not at risk, and Jews don’t make up enough of the population to make a difference in New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, or any other state. And maybe that’s the calculation Obama’s team has made. I suspect John McCain’s team may have a different view of things.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
May 14th, 2008 at 4:39 PM
The Jewish vote is decidedly pro-Israel, which the Republicans own now thanks to Bill Clinton’s bumbling peacemaking and Bush’s decidedly pro-Israel policy. But the Jewish vote is also pro-secular, which the Democrats own because one of the core Republican constituencies is Christian conservatives. The tiebreaker is economic issues. Historically Jews have favored an expansive socialist state, as embodied in FDR’s New Deal and the Kibbutz mythology. In practice though, Big Government confiscates income from hard working Jews, and transfers it to non-Jewish special interest constituencies, such as rich farmers. The key ‘08 question is whether Jewish voters will recognize the reality of government expenditures, or whether they will continue to believe in the myth of Big Government acting as a hammer for social justice.
May 14th, 2008 at 5:11 PM
These stereotypes about the Jewish vote are all old and worn out by now. There is no Jewish vote anymore, there are many subsets to the Jewish vote that vote differently based on their own priorities. No one will know how it all washes out until polls are done after the election.
The only group that still votes fairly monolithically anymore is the black vote. Every other generalization is either outdated or a gross oversimplification. It would be correct to repeat the old joke here: “All generalizations are false.”
May 14th, 2008 at 6:12 PM
“Including this one.” Isn’t that how the dictum — not joke — ends? If Hillary were to be nominated, Jews would return to the Democrat Party in their traditional numbers.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Ellen S: I wish it were so but I am afraid you are wrong. Name an election — other than Reagan’s first — when the Jews voted for the Republican nominee in numbers greater than approximately 20-25%? That the Jews will vote for the Democratic nominee in overwhelming numbers is about as sure a bet as you can get.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:15 AM
Obama’s Jewish problem is pandering, not as bad as Clinton but still unproductive. It will take pressure to make Israel accept international norms of behavior (an end to collective punishment, respect for land ownership).
May 15th, 2008 at 12:02 PM
lgm, what planet do live on?
Israel behaves in a far more measured manner than the opponents she faces on a daily basis. If rockets and mortars were being fired regularly by terrorists from Canada into the U.S. you know very well what the response would be.
Re: Land ownership. I know you don’t get it but for most of us the hypocrisy is crystal-clear. When a Jew can buy land in Mecca and Medina I’ll defend a Muslim’s right to own property in Israel, Judea and Samaria.
Re: Pandering. Israel turns over Gaza (”land for peace”) only to be repaid with mortars and rockets. Meanwhile, people in the State Department and other political elites in the U.S. call for Israel to give up _more land_. This is pandering?
May 15th, 2008 at 3:25 PM
lgm
Having to read the drek in your post, is “collective punishment” enough, for everyone past the first reader.
New Centrist has aready more than adequately addressed the specifics of the many ways in which you are in error.
How “today” of you, that you should presume to pronounce to the great unwashed on the “rules and norms of international behaviour”, to no purpose other than to reveal your own advanced level of utter hypocrisy, or, indeed, possibly something even more sinister.
The yidden, inclusive of their modern progeny over there in the promised land, wrote the book on correct moral codes of behaviour towards the “Ger”.
And, having regard to your little aside on land ownership, they also wrote a small handbook on what do do when the Ger becomes homocidal and wants to drive you and yours, from off of our own quarter acre.