web analytics
July 29, 2015 / 13 Av, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Home » InDepth » Monitor »

Presidential Politics And Jewish Priorities


Media-Monitor-logo

Two decades ago, Jimmy Carter was closing out a stunningly unimpressive four years in the White House. His approval ratings were lower than Richard Nixon’s had been on the eve of his resignation, and even American Jews, that most doggedly loyal constituent group of the Democratic Party, were not immune to the disaffection with Carter suffusing the nation.

At the same time, Jews were hardly rushing to embrace either of the two main alternatives to Carter in the November 1980 election – Ronald Reagan, the conservative Republican former governor of California, and John Anderson, the little-known liberal Republican congressman running a quixotic third-party campaign.

What was it that in the end finally tilted the majority of Jewish voters against Carter (39 percent chose Reagan while 16 percent went with Anderson)? According to various exit polls and post-election studies, the issue that most resonated with a wide cross-section of American Jews – more than the basket-case economy or the Iranian hostage situation or Carter’s uninspiring leadership style – was what they perceived to be the steadily deteriorating relationship between the U.S. and Israel.

(Now, had times been good and Carter viewed as a great success, many of those Jews who voted for Reagan or Anderson would likely have gone with their reflexes and stuck with the Democratic incumbent, despite his increasingly chilly demeanor toward Israel. It was the unusual combination of Carter’s general ineffectiveness and his problematic handling of Israel that ultimately closed the deal for many Jews.)

But 1980 is an anomaly when compared with virtually every other U.S. presidential election going back to the very founding of Israel.

With the possible exceptions of 1948 (when Truman kept a wary eye on the polls as he navigated the minefields of Palestinian partition) and 1976 (when fresh memories of Ford and Kissinger’s “reassessment” of American-Israeli relations, short-lived as it was, helped many in the Jewish community overcome their initial discomfort with the unfamiliar born-again Southerner Carter), Jews have repeatedly demonstrated that when it comes to choosing a president, domestic issues clearly outrank concern for Israel.

It’s true, of course, that a relatively small number of Jews who might otherwise have been disposed toward Bob Dole in 1996 voted instead for Bill Clinton because they were uncertain of Dole’s commitment to Israel. And it’s equally true that some Jews who voted for George Bush in 1988 abandoned him in 1992 because of his Middle East policies. But one has to go all the way back to 1980 for the last presidential election in which the votes of an appreciable number of Jews were decided primarily by concern for Israel.

The one unchanging political rule of thumb in American Jewish life is simply this: It matters little whether a candidate is the incumbent or the challenger, whether his record on Israel is solid or not, whether Israel is at peace or at war. Ultimately the lion’s share of Jewish votes – anywhere from 65 to 90 percent – will go to the Democrat.

The average Jewish vote for Republican presidential candidates since 1948 has been just under 25 percent.

The phenomenon might be understandable in elections where there is no discernable difference between the candidates’ views on the Middle East – Eisenhower vs. Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, Bush vs. Dukakis in 1988 – but it takes on a more mystifying aspect when viewed against elections where the Republican candidate is clearly superior on Israel-related issues – Nixon vs. McGovern in 1972 and Reagan vs. Mondale in 1984 come immediately to mind.

In 1972, Nixon defeated McGovern in the country at large by a landslide margin of 60.7 percent to 37.5 percent (49 states to 1), and while Nixon did double his share of the Jewish vote from the paltry 17 percent he received four years earlier, the startling fact remains that McGovern – a weak candidate with no strong ties to Israel or the Jewish community running against an incumbent with a solid record on Israel and a relatively moderate domestic agenda – actually did better among Jews than Adlai Stevenson, a liberal Democrat beloved by Jews, had in 1952 and 1956.

Despite the requisite lip service by Jewish leaders and elected officials, Israel has rarely emerged as a decisive issue for Jews at election time (segments of the Orthodox community excepted). The reason for that is the slavish (no other word will do) devotion of most Jewish voters to liberal ideology and the Democratic Party. The rest is commentary.

About the Author: Jason Maoz is the Senior Editor of The Jewish Press. He can be contacted at jmaoz@jewishpress.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Presidential Politics And Jewish Priorities”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Obama on Iran Deal
Is Obama a State Sponsor of Terrorism?
Latest Indepth Stories
Obama on Iran Deal

If the Iran deal passes, Obama’s WH becomes world’s leading financier of terrorism against Americans

Open Tent

{Originally posted to the author’s website, FirstOne Through} Some passionate and eloquent liberals have bemoaned the state of inclusiveness among Jews today. Leon Wieseltier, editor of the New Republic penned an angry piece “J Street’s Rejection Is a Scandal” about the exclusion in 2014 of J Street from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. […]

Hamas on the Temple Mount - Jul 3, 2015

Magnanimity by Moshe Dayan, allowing Muslim control of the Temple Mount, led to today’s situation.

Community-Jewels-logo

It was modeled upon a similar fund that had been set up by Sephardic Jews in Venice. But Amsterdam’s Dotar was initially more ambitious in scope.

Rav Aharon Margalit is a bestselling author – his book, As Long As I Live, has been translated into four languages – and a standing-room only lecturer. Both religious and non-religious audiences flock to hear him. What makes him so extraordinary? Rav Margalit is a Chasidic Jew who experienced incredible challenges from a very young […]

J Street is the vanguard (Jewish face)in support of Obama’s Vienna Accords Nuclear Deal with Iran

“I hold the woman’s place over that of men in every fundamental aspect of public and private life.”

The US-UNRWA accord is another example of this White House, hostile to Israel, disregarding truth.

On the saddest day on the Jewish calendar, Tisha B’av, a reflection on the dangerous deal with Iran

The Kotel gained significance around 1550. Previously, many Jews prayed on the Temple Mount itself.

All Jews MUST stand together to oppose boycotts against Israel. So why does NIF & JCF support BDS?

This year it is hard to concentrate on anything but Iran building nuclear weapons to destroy Israel

Bibi failed the moment he transferred Israel’s Iran problem to the international arena.

I was entranced by Kaddish, a song of sorrow of the whole of Israel for the 1000s of years of exile

Like the Avos, we are invested with the mission to inspire humanity to become nobler and greater

Iran accords are worse than Munich; even Chamberlain would be shocked at what is transpiring again.

More Articles from Jason Maoz
Assemblymember Bichotte speaking in the New York State Assembly.

The bills I’m proud to have sponsored are less controversial, more responsive to yeshiva and parochial school parents, and were gaining traction in the Assembly until the negative campaign began…

Zechariah Schwarzberg, z”l

Though intimately acquainted with mankind’s darkest side, he never lost his faith&love in God or man

Some of the president’s defenders took to arguing that the overwhelming majority of German military personnel interred in Bitburg were regular Wehrmacht soldiers who died on the battlefield and likely were not involved in atrocities against civilians.

Note also the response to the speech by the top Democrats in the House and Senate, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, both of whom have been outspoken in their criticism of Netanyahu’s upcoming visit.

The New York State comptroller manages the state’s $180.7 billion pension fund, audits the spending practices of all state agencies and local governments, oversees the New York State and Local Retirement System, reviews the New York State and City budgets, and approves billions in State contracts and spending.

While not all criticism of Israel stemmed from anti-Semitism, Podhoretz contends the level of animosity towards Israel rises exponentially the farther left one moved along the spectrum.

When you grow up in a home where your parents went through what my parents went through, you realize that life has to be meaningful. You have to be there for other people.

“It’s a lousy column and a dishonest one,” Halberstam wrote. “So close it. Or you will end up just as shabby as Safire.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/media-monitor/presidential-politics-and-jewish-priorities/2007/10/31/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: