•
W orld
COMMENTARY
Don't Misinterpret
The Jewish Vote
Jonathan S. Tobin
Special to the Jewish News
Philadelphia
A
lthough the presidential election
is still one week away, and no
one should assume the outcome,
it is safe to say that Democratic candidate
Barack Obama has secured the lion's share
of American Jewish votes.
This is despite the dedicated efforts
of supporters of Sen. John McCain to
increase the number of Jews who vote
Republican and an aggressive ad cam-
paign by the Republican Jewish Coalition
that has driven Democrats up the wall.
While some in the GOP had spoken
optimistically of McCain matching, or
even exceeding, the nearly 40 percent of
Jewish votes that Ronald Reagan received
in 1980, it was wishful thinking that Jews
would forego their longstanding commit-
ment to the Democratic Party.
Conservatives may dismiss the persis-
tent affection of the majority of Jews for
the Democrats as being rooted as much
in nostalgia for Franklin Roosevelt and
Harry Truman as in the merits of their
successors. But Republicans know too
well that Jews are second only to African
Americans in their dogged refusal to vote
for anyone but a Democrat. And, in what
must be considered one of the most par-
tisan moments in American history, their
expectation that a sizable number would
bolt across the aisle was unrealistic.
Jewish Voting Myths
Chief among the reasons why the
Republicans have failed to create a politi-
cal realignment was that their wedge issue
— support for the State of Israel — is not
the only item on the list of Jewish concerns.
Domestic issues, particularly those
related to the separation of church and
state, and social issues, such as support
for abortion rights, are seen as matters of
profound personal concern.
On a deeper level, most Jews have tra-
ditionally interpreted Judaism's impera-
tive for social justice as a mandate for
liberal politics. Conservatives may jibe,
not without justice, that the faith of liberal
Jews may be defined as the Democratic
Party platform with holidays thrown in,
but there's no denying the power of these
ideas.
That said, Republicans were poised to
make some gains. McCain's strong stands
on Israel and Islamist terror gave the GOP
reason for hope. Also helpful to the GOP
was the victory of Sen. Barack Obama of
Illiinois, a virtual political unknown, over
Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, who had
strong support among Jews. Obama's long
association with a radical anti-Semite like
the Rev. Jeremiah Wright rightly troubled
many voters.
However, by late September, GOP opti-
mism fell victim
to the panic on
Wall Street. But
more important
at sounding the
death knell, at
least among the
Jews, was the
Sarah Palin factor.
Though the
Alaska governor's presence on the ticket
has energized the Republican base, her
identity as a social conservative and
Evangelical Christian has had the opposite
effect on most Jews because their views
on domestic matters run contrary to
hers. The hostility that she has generated
among liberal Jews, especially women, is
visceral and nasty.
There's little doubt she is going to cost
McCain some Jewish votes.
So, no matter who is sworn in next
January, the Democratic dominance of the
Jewish vote will almost certainly remain
unshaken. Unfortunately, that has already
led a few pundits to jump to some unjusti-
fied conclusions.
In the October issue of Harper's
Magazine, writer Bernard Avishai, an
Israeli who is a strong critic of the way
American Jews fervently support his
country, states his belief in an essay titled
"Obama's Jews," that the unwillingness
of Jews to vote Republican, despite their
supposed superior record on Israel, means
that they are indifferent to such appeals.
He blithely assumes that this Democratic
majority is sticking with its party's can-
didate precisely because it has rejected
the mantra of down-the-line support for
Israel.
Ironically, his view seems to echo the
laments of Jewish Republicans, who fear
that the vote for Obama means that Jews
no longer care about Israel. That is a par-
ticularly bitter reflection for them because
conservatives have long held that, sooner
or later, American Jews would switch par-
ties because they were bound to eventually
conclude that the Democrats were inher-
ently unreliable on Israel.
It is no secret that there is a large ele-
ment of the American left that is inher-
ently hostile to Israel and Zionism. They
wield proportionally more influence
among Democrats than that portion of the
American right that is similarly hostile to
Israel (think Pat Buchanan).
To the
extent that any
Democrat can
be identified as a
clone of former
President Jimmy
Carter, whose
view of Israel as
an apartheid state
has thoroughly
discredited him as a mainstream figure,
the Republicans do gain.
Yet, as the results of 1980 proved,
when Jewish voters are presented with
a Democrat who is perceived as hostile
to Israel, they will vote for his or her
opponent. In that election, Carter (whose
animus for Israel wasn't nearly as pro-
nounced as it has since become) received
a record-low Jewish vote.
But, contrary to the conclusion of
Avishai and the pessimistic Republicans, if
Democrats have held their own among the
Jews since then, it is not because they have
chosen to flout the sensibilities of support-
ers of Israel, but because they have never
allowed themselves to be wrong-footed on
Israel as they were in 1980.
The Republicans' wedge
issue — Israel — is not
the only item on the list
of Jewish concerns.
They Do Care
In line with this insight, throughout this
year's campaign Obama has wisely never
allowed much daylight between his posi-
tions and that of the pro-Israel communi-
ty. His goal was not to prove that he had a
better record than McCain, but to show an
inherently sympathetic audience of Jewish
Democrats that his pro-Israel stance was
plausible enough to allow them to vote
for him, and against his opponent, on the
basis of other issues.
In response, the RJC ad campaign has
focused on branding Obama as a radical
who is hostile to Israel. But, if it fails to
move voters, as it appears to, it will not
be due to the fact that Jews think Obama
is weak on Israel and don't care. Rather it
will be because the majority of Jews who
are Democrats believe the assertion to be
false.
Growing assimilation is altering the
demographics of the Jewish community,
and most American Jews are still more
afraid of Pat Robertson than they are of
Hamas, Hezbollah or even Iran. But it
would be dead wrong to think that most
don't care about Israel.
Republicans may question Obama's
sincerity and point to his personal history
and waffling on issues, such as Jerusalem,
to back up their cynicism. But his consis-
tent statements of support for Israel have
effectively parried the claim that he is
another Carter, which is all he really need-
ed to do to hold on to the Jewish vote.
The proof, of course, will be in the pud-
ding. Should a President Obama prove his
critics right and go back on his word on
Israel, he will discover that Jewish voters,
including many Democrats, are every bit
as capable of punishing him as they were
Jimmy Carter 28 years ago. ❑
Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of the
Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia. His e-mail
address is: jtobin@jewishexponent.com .
Answering
Israel's Critics
The Charge
Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League,
last week said Israel obstructs and
hinders the work of the U.N. Security
Council. Additionally, he described the
Middle East peace process as a mirage.
The Answer
Israel is one nation at the U.N., facing
23 Arab states and their allies from
the non-aligned bloc. The Middle
East peace process is unconditionally
supported by the U.N., the European
Union, Russia and the U.S. Moussa is
a long-time propagandist for the Arab
cause.
— Allan Gale,
Jewish Community Relations Council
of Metropolitan Detroit
© Jewish Renaissance Media, October 30, 2008
October 30 • 2008
A25