Can the Democratic Party really hope to get the Jewish vote when Bush's

policies have been so pro-Israel? Many folks here seem to feel that Kerry's comments yesterday on MTP will give the Jewish vote to the Democratic Party. But, since Bush is pursuing a policy of making the ME safer by having occupation of Iraq and bases there for years, and supporting the assassination of Hamas Leaders and has left the policy of diplomacy behind, how can Kerry think that he will make a difference?

Or, is it more a possibility that the Jewish vote will be split between those who are grateful to Bush for breaking with the policy of other Presidents and bending to give Sharon what he wanted, and being tough on terrorism which makes Israel safer? The remaining Jewish voters may be the ones who are more moderate in their views and care more about environmental and social issues, but is that vote large enough to make the difference Kerry is hoping for with his comments yesterday?

Should we be obsessing about the Jewish vote if we are going to lose a portion we would traditionally had to Bush anyway? Is it worth Kerry following the "Bush Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Strike" to get the Jewish vote? :shrug:

Please don't make this an IP Battle. :-( It's about the VOTE and whether it's worth it for "Bush Doctrine." Not about who gets what portion of land or Israel's right to exist.

I support Israel, I want peace there. I'd never vote for Bush in a million years. He can stuff it.

others will rightly understand that Zionism is not in anybody's best interest.

Also, you have to count the Arab-American vote that formerly leaned toward Bush is now wildly Anti-Bush.

and in what states they are located. If we could look at Swing States and figure out the Jewish Population numbers and political persuasion it might help us figure out Kerry's chances. What percentage of the vote supported Gore as opposed to those who supported Bush last time.

Is the US Muslim population anywhere near close to the Jewish population and in States like Florida is the Cuban vote more important than the whole Jewish vote or a portion of it?

Does anyone know? And, is it correct to assume that Zionists (Likkud) would support Bush over Kerry in the first place?

Edited: for those who feel Zionist is not the correct term for extremist supporters of Sharon.

Not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews...

NT

most Americans are Zionists then, right?

I am a Zionist by that definition...


I also support a two state solution for moral as well as prudential reasons....

I don't see how Israel can permanently stave off three and one half million Palestinians supported by 200,000,000 Arabs and 1,000,000,000 Muslims...

Israel's right to exist without bulldozing Palestinian houses or building a huge, effing wall.

I associate Zionism with racism, the belief that because somebody is born to the right parents, they have a right to kill "unbelivers" for their own personal gain.

Kinda like Al Qaeda, except a different religion. (If you don't like the comparison, look at what the English used to call Menachim Begin after he and his comrades blew up a hotel full of women and children when Palestine was under the British Mandate.)

who distort it so you associate a movement to create a jewish homeland in Israel (a VERY broad definition, open to all kinds of two-state outcomes) as racist.

In fact, the original zionists at the time of partition were relatively satisfied with the partition plan which would have created two states. It was the Arab countries around Israel/Palestine who started the 1948 war...

So stop calling zionism racism...just because the UN says so (at the demanding of the 40 whatever muslim nations and european antisemites) doesn't make it so.


Edit: From now on I'm calling reactionary leftism because I find it counterproductive as well as rarely based on fact instead of emotion so...Reactionary Leftism Alert

Palestine. I'm not saying the Palestinians/Arabs are blameless--far from it. Their inflexibility when the Balfour declaration (etc.) was setting the stage for Israel and their armed attacks as well as the continuing violence does nothing except foment more violence and reprisals.

Still, if kicking Palestinians out of their homes, stealing their land, and giving them no voice in their own country (because they aren't the right religion) isn't racist, then I don't the meaning of the word.

are also Democrats who would NEVER vote for Bush. Personally, I don't think what Bush has done is in Israel's long-term best interests, but I'm not there.
Not surprising that the village idiot is losing the Arab-American vote.

our Right Wing Fundies in the US who are aligned with PNAC. Probably I mean Likkud. Sorry!

I'm sure there are many Zionists in Israel who wouldn't touch Sharon and Likud if they weren't in fear for their lives. Likud is not the only political party in Israel. Would you like it if other countries regarded all Americans as repukes?

Or Ultra-Orthodox?

Those who want biblical borders (stretching into Syria and Jordan as well as the west bank)

The only candidate I wouldn't vote for is one who is against Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. Other than that I'll vote for the candidate who will do the best to make peace. Bush is not that candidate.

Thank you for putting it concisely.

And you make a good point when you highlight the fact that Likud is not the only political party in Israel. I think they have 13 official parties now, and Likud only had 38 seats in a Knesset of 120 seats. Many cabinet ministers are not Likud, but moderate or Labor party members.

You say that you want Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state...

And whoever doesn't support that wouldn't get your vote. It seems to me, not racist, but wrong.

You wouldn't support a State of Israel that recognizes freedom of religion?? But only as a JEWISH STATE?

I think that's pretty one sided, because do you beleive that America is a GUIDO CHRISTIAN nation?? I know many people on the right want to believe that, but I don't think many americans are ready to call the U.S. a CHRISTIAN nation and represent that to the rest of the world, Seeing as how we always proclaim our GREATNESS as being the GREAT LIGHT in the world that allows FREEDOM...of RELIGION, and that we aren't just fundies but people who raise our Constitution for all the world to see.

It would be pretty lame for you to sit there and say that you support only a JEWISH state and then try to RAM a constitution in Iraq that says you have to be a NATION of FREEDOM of religion, and not an ISLAMIC state......

and Im not just talking to you personally, but to all Jews in general.

Israel is a rather secular society and it's government is not beholden to Jewish religious issues. I support any society that wants to be secular, as I think that religion certainly clouds government issues.

When I say "Jewish state" I mean with a majority Jewish population. People who are against this usually make statements like "Jews have no right to live in that area", "Jews have no ties to modern-day Israel", or they advocate the so-called "one state solution", which is a road to disaster.

I think that freedom of religion is essential in an area with a rich multi-religious history. I do feel that Israel has the right to maintain a majority Jewish population if it wishes, although not by violent or discriminatory means. Most importantly, there should be equal opportunity for all Israeli citizens regardless of religious belief.

:)


Umm, Now, suppose we take for example AMERICA, where there seems to be a growing HISPANIC population, and other minorities. It seems to me then, that if White America wants to keep the U.S "WHITE", there has to be policies and such to CHANGE THIS COURSE IMMEDIATELY, because my GOD....WE can't have THAT! like, we can maybe cut the U.S in half, like
cut off AZ, CA and Eventually TX(The Republican Capital) oh what an ironic day 50 years form now if TX isnt even the Repug state it is today.....but on to my point.... And we Cut off NY , because LORD knows NY AND places like MA are friggan liberal scum centers of the world, so as to keep the Majority of the NEW WHITE AMERICA , well WHITE. Then we can retain political POWER and RUN this dam show.

So what your advocating in ISRAEL should really apply here in America as Well....SHOULDN't IT?

I'm just wondering. your thoughts.


Im not trying to say your HAVE TO HAVE the solution to the mess there , lord knows I doubt anyone can predict it, and I wouldn't put that on you or anyone else.


I think the bottom line is......it's really about HATRED there in the Middle East. These two peoples have been riled up to hate each other, and it's horrible. It's like Black people VS the Conservatives in the South (pre 1960 and pre-yond) who to this day still want black people dead.

The only solution I think , is when they finally get to the point where they both join together against violence and hatred.

The US was not created as a country for anyone in particular. Israel was. A similar situation can be found in Japan, where the Japanese aren't too keen on letting other people live on their islands, particularly Koreans and Chinese. Some countries are for everybody, others are just for some. That's the way I see it.

The US was created as a small bastion of democracy in a totalitarian world. It welcomed everybody that wanted to live a life of freedom and have a representative government. That is our national heritige and I'm proud of it. Personally speaking, this country is the only reason I'm alive today, without it my ancestors probalby would have been murdered by the Russian Tsar and his thugish, anti-Semitic police.

Other countries such as Switzerland, Japan and Israel are primarily for certain groups. I'm not calling any of them discriminatory, but they have a different national heritage than we have. I think that some of it has a lot to do with having an established culture. Places like Japan and Israel have cultural traditions that are thousands of years old, and based largely on the existance of homogeneous populations. The US is home to so many different ethnicities that we don't really have a culture of our own, mostly a mixture of other people's cultures. Therefore, we are not threatened by immigrant cultures in a way that places like Israel, and Japan are. Imagine what would happen if a million people from New York moved to Iceland tomorrow. It wouldn't really be Iceland anymore. See what I mean? Here in the US, 5 million Latin Americans can move in but it's still pretty much the same country.

I know that's kind of confusing but I hope it makes my point a little more clear.

so the proper term is Likudnic.

Define it for me...

Clearly you don't.

some back the war because of Israeli interest

but

they see *'s support for SA


=

exploding heads and votes for kerry

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2003%20Opinion%20Editorials/August/6%20o/Arab%20Americans%20and%20American%20Jews%20agree%20on%20path%20to%20peace,%20By%20James%20Zogby.htm

Palestinian State:
Both communities expressed strong support for the right of Palestinians to live in a secure and independent state of their own. Among Jewish Americans, 82% either strongly or somewhat agree with the notion of such a state. In the Arab American community, 93% either strongly or somewhat agree with the right of Palestinians to a state.

Israeli State:
When asked if Israelis have a right to live in a secure and independent state of their own, Jewish Americans almost unanimously (99.5%) either strongly or somewhat agree with the proposition, as do almost all Arab Americans (95%).

Road Map:
Jewish Americans and Arab Americans both voiced strong support for the Road Map to Middle East peace as laid out by the Bush Administration. 71% of American Jews either strongly or somewhat support the Road Map, just as 74% of Arab Americans either strongly or somewhat support the Road Map. Only 16.5% of American Jews expressed some level of opposition. Similarly, just 11% of Arab Americans said they somewhat or strongly oppose the Road Map.

Road Map Implementation:
The survey asked respondents what needs to be done first in order to ensure the success of the peace plan: "Israelis need to start dismantling settlements and outposts in the West Bank and Gaza and freeze settlement expansion; Palestinians need to declare a ceasefire and stop the suicide bombings; or both Israelis and Palestinians need to take these steps at the same time." A majority of Jewish Americans (57%) said that both sides need to take these steps at the same time; the second-most selected answer was that the Palestinians need to first declare a ceasefire and stop the suicide bombings (37.5%). Among Arab Americans, 73% said that both sides need to take these steps at the same time; the second-most popular answer was that Israelis must first dismantle settlements and freeze expansion (18.5%).

Settlement Freeze:
Respondents were asked their level of support or opposition to a freeze on all Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank and Gaza. A significant majority of Jewish Americans (70.5%) either strongly or somewhat supports a settlement expansion freeze, with a plurality (46%) strongly backing such a freeze. Only 21% somewhat or strongly oppose a settlement freeze. Arab Americans also strongly or somewhat support a settlement freeze (80%).

Ending Israeli Occupation:
When asked their level of support or opposition to Israel ending its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, a majority of American Jews (58.5%) said they either strongly or somewhat support an end to the occupation, 29% said they either somewhat or strongly oppose ending it. In the Arab American community, the majority of those polled (83.5%) said they either strongly or somewhat support ending Israeli occupation.

Final Status Agreement:
The survey asked respondents about their support or opposition to a final status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, roughly along the lines of where the parties ended their last formal negotiations in Taba, Egypt: "the establishment of an independent, secure Palestinian state alongside an independent, secure Israeli state, the evacuation of most settlements from the West Bank and Gaza, the establishment of a border roughly along the June 4, 1967 border, a Palestinian right of return only to inside a new Palestinian state, and establishing Jerusalem as the shared capital of both countries." Among Jewish Americans, 59% expressed support for such an arrangement, 31% did not support it, and 10% are not sure. Among Arab Americans, 85% said they support this kind of plan, while six percent do not support it.

I am Jewish, and I went to Brandeis- grab any 5 people there and you'll find five completely different political opinions.

Bush can't get the entire Jewish vote. I bet he couldn't even get a quarter of it. For every Jew who sees Bush as a boon to Israel, there are probably 5 who remember who Prescott supported in WWII.

Vote which is about the norm for Republican presidential candidates...


Ronald Reagan did a little better because of his affinity for Israel and Papa Bush did a little worse because of his perceived animosity....

to the Jewish vote at all? Are there some who would feel that Israel has gone too far by assassinating two Hamas Leaders? Or would that policy attract others to Bush, is what I'm trying to get at.

He'll get 25% to 30% as most Republicans get....

We can debate targeted assasination but I don't see how anyone can defend preemptive war unless your enemies are massing at your border...

I doubt many Americans let alone American Jews support Bush's preemptive war doctrine as I understand it...

our foreign policy with respect to Israel, then?

than voters

The polling shows Jews are not monolithically right wing on settlements.

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2003%20Opinion%20Editorials/August/6%20o/Arab%20Americans%20and%20American%20Jews%20agree%20on%20path%20to%20peace,%20By%20James%20Zogby.htm

to monolithically LEFT wing.

where it seems to make sense that it's not about "Votes" at all, really.

Will Get >70% of the Jewish vote in a two man race...

That's the historical record....


As you know, Jews, blacks, and Hispanics are the most loyal Democratic voters....


I doubt this trend will change....


As for Sharon and Bush I don't think Sharon's policies are in the best interest of Israel...

Unlike America, Israel is not a superpower that can afford to run rough roughsod over the world....

Because of it's superpower status America can afford foreign policy misadventures like Viet Nam and Iraq... Israel doesn't have that margin of error....

I seriously doubt Bush would appeal to very many. Hell, I bet Kerry gets an even greater percentage.

that the Fundies want them to die in fire when Jesus comes back.

That's the only reason they are so pro-Israel.

:)

Some fundies believe that the Jews will get a second chance to acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah before the end of the world...

At least that's what I remember fom my Sunday School lessons...

we get a last chance (which only 40,000 or so will take...how they can approximate this i can't figure) and then the rest go to hell...awesome

Well, since we don't believe this will happen, why not just take their support?

strongest supporters. Many of them consider issues other than what is happening in the middle east. Many of Jews are liberal and on domestic issues very anti-Bush. Middle Eastern politics doesn't necessarily determine who they will vote for any more than the Pope dictates who Catholics will vote for.

2% or so. It's more about "Jewish support", in a more general sense, as Jews have considerable influence and control (due to management and ownership) of our press, mass media, communications, banking, and finance. This is undeniable fact, proved with a simple reading of the ownership and management rosters of the leading media and banking corporations (so spare me, a Jew, the anti-Semitic crap). It is this factor (read: power) that so intimidates both Democrats, and Republicans, and leads them to be subservient to Israel's demands.

If one looks at the membership roles of AIPAC, JINSA, and even PNAC, one can see an overwhelming amount of support for the current Likud government and it's policies, hence, the groveling of our politicians here, regardless of the morality involved. Sad but true.

As far as the "vote" goes, I still feel most Jews (at least those not allied with the neocons) will vote Democratic, because they neither support Sharon's policies, nor those of the Bush junta, and truly want the best for our nation. Because of this, we'll get better than 50% of that 2%. Still, of concern, is what influence conservative Jews will exert on our political climate, vis-a-vis their influence on the "machinery".

power brokers of money and influence who might be Jewish that may be in support of "Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Strike" and that's why Kerry and others need to get on their good side. ????

So, maybe Kerry is looking for more favorable Media Coverage and Business support rather than the Votes by supporting the "Bush Doctrine."

I can't really see why he needs to go that far, then. Big Business and Media support Bush and the RW Think Tanks support PNAC. But Kerry isn't exactly having to grovel for money lately so why does he need to seem to support the PNAC philosophy? The Media isn't going to give him a break because of this, they are doing just fine with the Repugs.

It doesn't make sense that he needs to move to the Right to get the Jewish support when Democrats basically have tried to challenge big business so they won't be interested in having a Democrat in, anyway. :shrug: If he's not doing it for votes then why?

I think the formulation that the Jews control America is overly simplistic not to mention some other things and because of that control candidates have to say nice things about Israel...


Also, I will defend targeted assasination in some circumscribed situations but I will never defend Bush's pre emptive war doctrine....


For instance, if I was alive and had the opportunity to take out Hitler I would have as would most folks..

What crap. Why do some people always respond like this, and deny the influence and power that some Jews have in this nation? Would some Catholics deny power they have, in say, Italy? It's not something to be ashamed of, or defensive about, it's just the way it is. Denying it, implies shame, or a hidden agenda. It just kills me how fearful some are about the truth, no matter how benign.

"Influence and power" is not defined as "control" in my Websters. They are what they are, and something, along with many other factors, that should be paid attention to.

Abortion and Sodomy are legal....

Those are two big no no's of the Catholic church...


If Jews control the banking industry how many of the nation's twenty largest banks are owned by Jews?

I'll save you the research...

Zero


I'll bet of the Forbes five hunred list Jews are represented no higher than their percentage of the population...

Yeah, Jews are "overrepresented" in medicine, the law, and the media but Bill Gates, Rupert Murdoch. the late Sam Walton and Paul Allen aren't Jewish unless they're hiding it...

Without getting into the merits or demerits of support for Israel maybe leaders in governement support Israel cuz the folks back home like it...

I can remember as a youngun in my Sunday School class at Deltona Baptist Church being taught that the Jews were the apple of God's eye and that's why we supported Israel...

I doubt my Sunday School teacher was on the AIPAC payroll...

You give them too much credit...


P.S. Let's not play word games... To say the definition of power, control, and influence vary is a distinction without a difference....

If somebody has power and influnce over me they essentially control me...

"If somebody has power and influnce over me they essentially control me..."

Only if you let them.

Semantics, shemantics. I get your point, but you assume I am over-stressing the amount of "influence". On this, we disagree. Personally, I am proud my people have attained such lofty positions, but not always so proud about what they do there.

diminished by the power brokers. Even more important, Bush is/has been digging his own hole, and even the brokers can't save his ass now. I think the only thing that can derail Kerry now, is Kerry himself, and let's pray that doesn't happen!!

I wouldn't vote for the guy even if someone had a gun to my head. What really pissed me off, though, was how maganimous Bush was about allowing Sharon to keep land won in the Six Day War. Excuse me, but that land is not Bush's to give unless, of course, he would like to ride on a bus in Israel or perhaps eat in an Israeli restaurant, or, maybe some of his relatives were led to gas chambers during the Holocaust...BITE ME GEORGE!

There are only voters all over the scale who happen to be Jewish.

Most of the Jews I know personally, both here and in Oregon, absolutely loathe Bush, Israel or no Israel. (Some of the most avid Bush haters have actually lived in Israel for up to five years.)

I encounter the occasional neocon sympathizer, but only rarely.

The Jewish vote will probably go 70+% to the Democrats. Bush will get some of the Jewish vote just like most Republicans before him. The State of Israel is important but most Jews do not agree with everything that Israel has done.

Miles ahead in polls ins states that have the largest Jewish populations in the United States, New York and California, and he is ahead of Bush in Florida as well, even though that race is close, Kerry has a significant lead in the SOuther Democractic Counties of that State. Ohio Also has a relatively large Jewish population, and this time, that state is also falling into the too close to call.

In fact when one looks at Kerry's strategy, and the states that Kerry has certain leads in, Kerry has significant advantages in most of the nine largest electoral vote states. No president has won an election without carrying more than half of those states and right now those states are tipped heavily towards Kerry.

I think that Bush may make some small gains when it comes to the jewish vote in 2004 because of his pro-Israel stance but most jewish voters are liberal on domestic issues.

For instance, the local synagogue held a meeting on support for gay marriage last week. Bush's support for the FMA is likely to turn off many jewish voters, who tend to be more tolerant of gays than others. A Zogby poll in NJ last summer showed that 69% of likely jewish voters support gay marriage while out of all NJ voters 55% support same-sex marriage.

So, views on social issues as well as other domestic issues may override a lot of the issues involving Israel and Iraq.

...so I think Kerrys comments are sort of "solidifying the base"..in this case the Jewish vote, similar to Bushes support of an anti-gay-marriage amendment works for the Rellgous Right..