Posted on 02/13/2007 10:00:19 PM PST by Mount Athos
It is no secret that Jews in America have historically not favored the Republican Party. Several polls estimated that only 25 percent of Jews voted for Bush in 2004. Although disputed for of its small sample size, the National Jewish Democratic Council's 2006 poll showed only 12 percent of Jews voted for the GOP. The Jewish Community Relations Council estimated that Bush got just 19 percent of the Jewish vote in 2000.
Commentators in the Jewish community and party pollsters debate endlessly why Jews are not more favorably disposed toward the GOP. Jews are wealthier and more educated than the average American, generally oppose affirmative action and favor strong support of Israel. On these counts the GOP should, many say, have greater appeal.
Is it because Jews have an historical affinity for FDR and the party of immigrants and the "little guy"? Is it because of Jews' religious devotion to "tikkun olam" — repair of the world — which they translate to support for governmental social services? Maybe some of each but perhaps something else is at work
The dustup over the location of Mitt Romney's presidential announcement — the Henry Ford Museum — may be revealing. For Jews over the age of 40 or so, the name Ford means more than Mustangs and American innovation. Ford, of course, was a notorious anti-Semite, publisher of the International Jew (an update of the Protocols of Zion), and an apologist for Hitler who received the Grand Cross of the German Eagle from Hitler's Nazi government in July 1938. In many Jewish homes, owning a Ford was verboten.
He was no cultural icon.
Fast forward to today. As soon as Romney announced that he would make his presidential announcement at the Ford Museum, the accusations and statements started to fly. The National Jewish Democratic Council came out first, chastising Romney for making a pilgrimage to the site of this famous anti-Semite. Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks fired back in a press release today, saying, "I'm saddened and disappointed by the attack today by the NJDC against Gov. Romney."
Pointing out that former President Clinton had once said nice things about Ford, the RJC said that "The RJC believes that the NJDC does a disservice to Gov. Romney's strong record of support for the Jewish community and to their own reputation by their actions."
The NJDC responded, ""Presidential campaign announcements are as much about symbolism of the location as the substance of the speech. Mitt Romney went to a museum named after the most premier anti-Semite and xenophobe in American history. But his choice of location suggests that he should do his homework on basic American history."
It is doubtful either of these groups believe Romney is really an anti-Semite. Democratic consultant Dan Gerstein perhaps said it best: "I don't think Romney is guilty of anything other than obliviousness.
But you could argue that obliviousness is indicative of a broader problem with the social conservatives Romney is trying to court, which is a lack of sensitivity to the concerns many Jews have about their place in American society."
Indeed, the incident may say something not only about Romney but about the GOP's problem with Jews. In his boatload of advisers, Romney apparently did not have anyone to say, "You know, a lot of Jews really hate Ford, and it might mess up your message. Let's try Edison's lab to make a point about American innovation."
The GOP has become a rural, overwhelmingly Christian and Southern party. It is not populated by urban ethnics who, even if they aren't Jewish, understand Jews' cultural references and sensibilities. Ask an Italian New Yorker in October why the restaurants are empty, and he'll say "It's Yom Kippur, silly." You would never catch a Greek from Chicago saying, as a Republican from southern Virginia just did, that asking the state to apologize for slavery was like "asking the Jews to apologize for killing Christ."
In short, the Republicans are not just our kind of people, many Jews say. They don't sound like us, they don't talk like us and they don't understand us. Unless and until that changes, Jews likely will likely be voting overwhelmingly Democratic for years to come.
My sister is very, very, orthodox --- and became so after not being able to take the reform democratic politics.
That only flies if there was opposition to his policies from the right. There wasn't.
Don't lose them, don't win many either, just validate stereotypes about right wingers.
I won't argue that, since I agree, though perhaps a little less strongly. My best friend won't buy a Ford because of Henry. I have pointed out to him at times that Henry I is long dead, and does he think the current Fords are also anti semites? There's no evidence of that IMO, not to mention that Ford is a publicly held corporation. There are just some things more worth worrying about than Henry Ford's antisemitism of 50 years ago.
Thanks for the info on the Ford products, it would be nice for a change if American cars competed favorably with foreigners.
So they drive BMWs and Mercedes instead. Makes sense :-)
Actually, I know more than a few Jews with dislikes of those cars, as well... and, especially, with Volkswagens.
Jews are the Dems second most loyal constituency. Here is how they vote in Presidential elections. Despite being only 2% of the population, the Jewish vote is important because of high turnout and location, i.e., they can tip elections in key states.
It really has less to do with religion than political philosophy. There are 43 Jewish members of Congress. Only three are Reps--Coleman, Cantor, and Specter--and only one can be considered a conservative. The rest are among the most liberal in Congress.
Or perhaps we would be better off discussing why Jews also vote conservative - .......
That is fine if you are trying to figure out how a strategy to attract more Jewish voters for the GOP. The same kind of analysis could be used for blacks.
And a large number of Jewish conservatives on the national scene whom we all would recognize and whom we applaud:
The fact that you can name them shows how exceptional they are. How about these names?. Schumer, Boxer, Feingold, Levin, Sanders, Rahm Emmanuel, Barney Frank, Lantos, Lowey, Nadler, Waxman, Weiner, Harman, et. al. And that is just Congress. For every conservative Jew you list, I could name at least a hundred liberal Jews who are influential on the national scene.
Religiously reform Jews are liberal - but there are conservatives among them - take my work for it - I am there.
I have no doubt that there are conservative Jews just as there are conservative Blacks, but they represent the minority. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
"Don't lose them, don't win many either, just validate stereotypes about right wingers."
Given the: (1) inevitable exodus (pun intended) of Jewish people from the thrall of the Democratic party and (2)active and stated intent of Dim operatives to fake-blog-as-Republicans (witness the over-the-top evolution threads and the immigration theads for this in action) to spread dissent among Republican base . . .
I wonder how many of these type of white shoe Pat Buchanonesque posts are intended to stem/slow the exodus.
"That only flies if there was opposition to his policies from the right. There wasn't."
Very true. The Republicans at the time, lock, stock and barrel, refused to get America into the war AT ALL. Had Japan not attacked at Pearl Harbor, the Republican Isolationists were willing to allow Hitler to conquer Europe, which he probably would have but for American intervention.
FDR's turning back of the Liberty and denial of entry to Jewish Refugees was a bad things, no doubt about it. It sent people to their deaths. It was one of FDR's bad decisions. But FDR was, nevertheless, the American leader who saved Western civilization. Had the Republicans been in charge, the Germans would have been allowed to sweep Europe. They were NOT interested in getting involved, period. The 50 overage destroyers FDR rushed to Britain in the darkness of 1940 on Lend-Lease? Not forthcoming, and that alone might have made the U-Boat War against Britain decisive. Without Lend-Lease alone, never mind US troops and forces, the UK may very well not have survived. The USSR probably would not have survived. Without US intervention in Europe, the Nazis would have probably won. And had the GOP been running the show, there would not have been US intervention in Europe.
"are they that controlled by their culture?"
Aren't most people?
People are most likely their parents' religion and parents' politics.
Why should Jews be any diffent than any body else?
What exodus?
We don't feed site pests here any longer.
So what is your point? To disparage a group of people?
I really do think that people who make it a point to do this are saying something else entirely.
It is a much better idea to celebrate - treasure and welcome - those who would join us rather than harp on those who do not.
For ever liberal Jew you have name in Congress - I could name hundreds of Christians who are liberal.
But I wouldn't do that. I don't judge Christians that way. I judge each person according to his/her individual actions - not because of church affiliation.
I don't disparage people because of their religious affiliation - unless they wear bomb belts.
Petroleum Engineer. Geologist. Jewish by birth; Christian by grace. Army. Mason. Texan. Capitalist employer of many, many serfs.
I have no idea what you mean by site pests, but some may find facts to be very stubborn and irritating things. I am all in favor of the GOP making an effort to attract more Black and Jewish voters, a few percentage points could make a huge difference in elections, but the question is how much effort [time and money] should be invested and how successful will it be.
Dittos....can't get out of New Jersey, but I don't understand my relatives love of the left except to say that maybe they think when the left finally takes over, they will also have power........duhhhh....no you won't....haven't you learned anything yet???
I was waiting for you to pull the anti-semite card. My point is that Jews represent the Dems second most loyal constituency. There is no discernable groudswell of Jews leaving the Dem party for the Reps. They have been voting overwhelmingly for the Dems for 90 years. It has nothing to do with disparaging a group of people. It is a fact and should be accepted as such. I don't hate liberals, I just disagree with them.
But I wouldn't do that. I don't judge Christians that way. I judge each person according to his/her individual actions - not because of church affiliation. I don't disparage people because of their religious affiliation - unless they wear bomb belts.
Jews are a political force in this country in much the same way that Evangelical Christians are. AIPAC is a very effective lobbying group, which has a political agenda. It has nothing to do with religion.
FWIW, my earliest memories include riding in the Ford my parents owned, when I was 3 years old....
OTOH, my father was a Jewish kids from Brooklyn, who registered Republican, straight out of high school (beating his classmate, Norm Podhoretz by a good several decades).
Very few. These views aren't unique to the left, the political left is simply more tolerant of them.
Then again, as most of these threads, maybe Jews are just a bunch of dumb anti-American communist dupes.
****Jews are a political force in this country in much the same way that Evangelical Christians are. AIPAC is a very effective lobbying group, which has a political agenda. It has nothing to do with religion.***
Then don't identify them by religion.
The point truly is - and I see this again and again at this board - is to put the conservative Jews on the defensive.
That's not the way to welcome people to our side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.