Is Bush successfully dividing the Democratic Party with Israeli support?

[kentuck]

And more specifically, is he dividing the Jewish vote that traditonally goes to the Democrats? Will this make a difference in the next election? Will the effects be much more far-reaching than we see today? Or is this a "bi-partisan" issue?

[Gman]

1. No, it's just another issue that divides DU

for no good reason. Why would you think Democrats are united on anything? After all, we're Democrats.

[kentuck]

8. Are we leading or following...

public sentiment?

[itzamirakul]

17. I think we are not leading or following, but rather BEING LED by the

DLC, DCCC and DSCC, and I will always believe that those who secretely back those organizations (I don't mean the politicians, but the money groups and corporations behind them) are using those groups to deliberately lead us to do as they WANT us to do.

That is why we have not had any real say-so in selecting our presidential candidates in the past decade. It is this that is causing the divide that I sense in our Party.

Which of those groups keeps putting Hillary in the forefront of potential candidates for 2008? Why the DLC, of course. The DLC seems to be in bed with the GOP when it comes to promoting Hillary, no matter how much opposition they get from the rest of us.

Then what does the DLC DO? They blame the Progressive members of their own party instead of fighting the GOP. Like Lieberman, they back GOP ideas, and want us all to be moderates and the reason for that is because the moderates are easy to go along with the hardliners and rightwingers. They call any of us who dissent, "the fringe element."

The DCCC and the DSCC are merely arms of the DLC.

I deliberatelyleft the DNC out of this mix for right now because I believe that Dean really does try to show that the majority of the party is Progressive and not RW-Moderates.

[EFerrari]

48. Is there a user name "fringelement"?

:yourock:

[itzamirakul]

52. I bet it's still open...but what a great one it would be!

;-)

[Gman]

56. The DLC/DSCC/DCCC are all to some Democrats...

what "The Man" is to some Blacks. Just an excuse to use.

I"m not affiliated with any of these and I wholeheartedly support Hillary and will work my butt off to get her the nomination.

For the record, I agree that "The Man" really did institute the 3-point shot in the NBA to give white boys a chance!

[itzamirakul]

59. I agree with part of your statement...I think reference to

"the man" by some African Americans is used to indicate "those in power" or "those with the power to cause unnecessary pain." "The man" is someone who is in position to legally inflict punishment, justified or not...so it is not a racial indicator. "The man" could well be Clarence Thomas or Ken Blackwell. (My take on the term only). IMO "the man" has specific usage and is not "an excuse" but rather an accusatory term.

My own usage of DLC, DCCC and DSCC has the same inherent accusatory connotation. It refers to groups who have CONFERRED UPON THEMSELVES THE POWER THAT ONCE RESIDED IN THE INDIVIDUAL AMERICAN CITIZEN.

If you are FOR Hillary, then so be it. You have given your statement that you will work your butt off to get her the nomination and that won't be so difficult if the DLC ,the GOP and the Corporate Lobby have also decided that she is the perfect candidate to lose the presidential election THIS TIME. Good luck for the America that Hillary supporters envisage for the rest of us.

[Buzz Clik]

2. No.

Supporting Israel always has been US policy; Bush is no exception. The Jewish vote has not been exclusively the privilege of the Dems for quite some time; they're not a one-issue constituency.

The policy of Bush's that is most divisive is his view on immigration -- and he's splitting the GOP, not the Dems.

[cornermouse]

3. No.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I've asked this question before, but nobody gave me an answer:

In the last ten years, where was the Jewish-American vote trending? I distinctly got a feeling from the data I did read in the papers that it was steadily going to the right.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Last I Checked The Jewish Vote Was Still > 70% Democratic

eom

[DoYouEverWonder]

44. The biggest impact of the Jewish vote

is in the Metropolitan NYC area. That's why Joe and Hillary are so hardline about Israel. They would never have gotten elected without the Jewish vote and they know it.

[itzamirakul]

53. Truer words were never spoken. How else would Hillary, a woman who

had NEVER LIVED IN NY have been elected in this state?

[fujiyama]

60. I believe Bush did better in '04

compared to '00, mainly due to the hands off policy. Of course, it's difficult to say how much of an impact in '00 was due to Lieberman being the first Jewish VP.

[cali]

9. I don't know if this is helpful

but it's a chart that shows the division of the Jewish vote in the Presidential elections between the years 1916 and 2004. It looks like bushco gained 3% more of the Jewish vote in 2004 than he got in 2000.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/jewvote.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. The High Water Mark Was Reagan Who Actually Got 44% Of The Jewish Vote

in a three way race.

[The Backlash Cometh]

29. Wow.

As everything else, the media probably exaggerated the 3% that Bush got from the Jewish-American vote. I remember feeling there were fault lines being created between them and Democratic ideals.

[The Backlash Cometh]

30. Is there any way to determine if the same 3% for Bush applied

to New York, as it did on a national level?

And, I assume these numbers are based on exit poll data or just polling in general?

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. My gut tells me that in November yuo may see a

switch... Seattle... chelfly will be the effect, or leading cause...

Now my gut has been known to be wrong before... but if this is the case, for god sakes the Jewish vote is truly influential in five counties in the US... and probably I am exagerating. Though NYC happens to be one of them

[bowens43]

5. No.

Come November there will be no divisions.

[leveymg]

6. The question is, is Israel dividing the GOP nearly as much?

This is the wedge issue of wedge issues for us. I wonder how much this had hurt the GOP's ability to effectively wage electoral politics? I would guess, not nearly so much.

Anyone seen anything sensible written about this?

[jpkenny]

11. In a word, yes and the new polls prove this.

His upswing or ability to just stay level is a direct result of his not calling for a ceasefire and giving Israel a free hand at the slaughter taking place in Lebanon. These numbers reflect the feeling of the American Jews and evangelicals who back Israel first, right or wrong. For them, Iraq is secondary. Otherwise Bush would be sinking like a lead balloon in the polls. And Condis high number also reflect these same sentiments. She is viewed as a big friend of Israel, not a true diplomat heading a diplomatic organization.

[cali]

12. Welcome to DU

and please post the polls you state prove your assertion.

[MyNameGoesHere]

22. I swear on DU

even i saw a link where the cheerleaders are bumping support for * up because as usual he is doing nothing. Well nothing except allowing more death and destruction but that isn't a positive thing. But yes I think just from what has been posted on the site that he probably has got support from liberal because of this. Hell i bet some here are secretly supporting him if you look at all the cheerleaders for war posting.

[kentuck]

13. "Go away from my window..."

(Hands over ears) I can't hear you!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. There's Really Not Enough Jews To Move Public Opinion Polls

Evangelicals are a different matter.

[sendero]

50. Not only that..

... but there is not universal support of Israel's actions of late among American Jews, not even close.

[DemonFighterLives]

19. Welc ome to DU!

:hi:

[Ravenseye]

20. I think this is a good point

As long as our attention is on Lebanon and Israel, our attention isn't on Iraq or the New Orleans reconstruction, or our Environment, or any of the other things which he has butchered.

I hate to say it but this is just the latest Natalie Holloway for them. Just another thing to distract us.

[EFerrari]

49. Whose polls are they? I'd love to see them.

:hi:

[peacetalksforall]

15. I 'don't know nothing' any more. I've been sleeping. I didn't think

Israel was capable of destroying a country in response to someone taking one of their soldiers as a hostage.

I can't take the the destruction anymore. I may drop out from the news. Israel is making enemies faster than they are importing our weapons.

There is too much propaganda. Our leaders and Israels leaders must have been pumped up for warring for their ME agenda and they decided to go Lebanon, Syria, Iran instead of Iran, Syria, Lebanon.

I'm so disgusted with human beings, it is just too difficult to take.

I cry for the Lebonese people, especially the children. All of those Lebonese people are not criminals.

There is no sense anywhere.

The leaders of Israel, US, and the UK are not of the human race.

27. Isreal is just smashing a country

like it is nothing at all.

[DemonFighterLives]

16. When everyone comes to their senses and sees all the bodies

strewn about- they will know that dubby's policies are no damn good.
:nuke:

[mmonk]

18. Very well could be if this is the "Clean Break" policy coupled

with "full spectrum dominance". Is the democratic party on board with that extreme of a policy or not? I started two threads asking the question and none of them were replied to.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. Elaborate

I think the fact that there was a vote in the House and 98% of Democratic members voted to support Israel's actions in Lebanon demonstrates the likelihood of the Democratic party divorcing itself from Israel.

[mmonk]

24. What kind of answer did you just give me?

What needs elaborating on in my question?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. What Is Clean Break And Full Spectrum Dominance?

eom

[mmonk]

28. Here goes.

Full spectrum dominance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_spectrum_dominance

Clean break
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1438.htm

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Thank You

It seems the "Clean Break" proponents advocate that Israel voluntarily stop receiving U S aid, ally themselves with Jordan and Turkey, and adopt a more militaristic foreign and defense policy.

I think it would be good for Israel to voluntarily decrease the aid it receives from America though the two nations should remain allies. I don't think the interests of Israel, Jordan, and Turkey coincide as much as the "Clean Break" advocates suggest. As far as being militaristic, Israel should work for a two state solution while maintaining its deterrent ability.


As far as the "full spectrum dominance" I believe Israel should be strong enough to deter any constellation of forces from attacking it.

[mmonk]

32. Full spectrum dominance is basically us.

We'll attempt to control the world by military garrisoning and warfare through overthrow. No more trying to lead the world and thus it's economies but controlling it militarily by force. I don't the world will think that is ok and I don't think we'll ever know peace as long as this is our foreign policy.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. O K

Here's my take.

In a world where some nations have a small stick, some nations have a medium stick, and some nations have a big stick I want my nation to have the biggest stick of all , but I want my nation to use that stick wisely, prudently, compassionately, and sparingly.

[mmonk]

38. I'm sure most conquerors who set out to rule the world

thought they were just in some regard and reasonable.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. Well

Because some have been unreasonable or unjust in their use of power that doesn't mean all uses of power are unreasonable or unjust.

Morphine is a wonderful drug. It is the best pain killer known to man but when used unwisely (in excess) it will kill you.

[mmonk]

43. True, but since ruling the world by the classical empire

model has a 100% failure rate, I don't prefer it. We were left with a defacto empire after World War II and one which we could set up just systems and behavour norms and also benefit while keeping our form of democracy alive and well at home. We're throwing it all away for this new (but old classical) model whereby we are no longer a world leader but a beligerent pushing dominance through force only (which requires the fall of civil liberties according to history) and eventual rejection by the rest of the world and possible bankruptcy both financially and morally.

[itzamirakul]

54. The read that I got from the "Clean Break" paper was that the U.S. would

be equal partners with Israel. They would be declaring their independence from us by giving up our foreign aid to them, however they would keep military aid in all forms until they felt secure in being able to obtain supplies without relying soley on the U.S.

Being equal partners would indicate sharing world power (which of course is what is happening now as we follow Israel's dictates in this latest Lebanese conflict.)

Israel has (according to a financial program on either Cnn Or MSNBC today) allowed businesses and offices which are also located in NYC to open there and the point came up as the person giving the report said that the workers in Israel were continuing to work despite the rockets and said this was something that Americans needed to learn to do. As though Americans did not work during and after crisis. Large corporations now have major offices in Israel and if an attack like 911 happened again, those business headquarters would never have to come back to America.

I read this to say that America will become the bully, the thug, to push out "undesirable" regimes and replace them as Israel replaces America, specifically, New York City as the business capital of the world.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

23. No because they all have to support Israel unconditionally

If they don't they will not be electable any more and they will be considered an anti-Semite and anti-war on terror.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Seeing how the Dem "leaders" are lining up behind Bush's policy

and cheering on Israel, why would Jews leave the party on that account?

[robcon]

33. There is no division within the party,

just as there's no division in the country. The overwhelming majority of politicians and voters favor full support for Israel.

What division?

[mmonk]

36. Because they (voters) don't know our policy of violent world dominance.

They only view all this as terrorists attacking both us and Israel for no reason.

[Doctor_J]

34. I posted a poll on this a few days ago, and the response was NO

overwhelmingly.

[Mr_Spock]

37. If that were the only issue that mattered

But isn't and it likely will be less an issue by election time.

[mmonk]

40. It's all tied together or can you not see it?

Taking care of people at home (by having the funds and means to do so), instituting a police state here at home where the bill of rights no longer matter, always engaged in war and deception of your populace of why, etc.

[Mr_Spock]

42. I'm not sure the average voter even sees this

Which means people will likely vote as they traditionally have and thus the Republican over-reaching will motivate enough people to put a serious hurting on them. At least this is how it has historically happened here in the US (& in most other long-time democracies).

I am worried about the apathy of many voters & the fear mongering aspect of this - but that apathy also makes those less motivated folks just not show up at the ballot box.

[Jacobin]

39. To some extent

That happened in the 2004 election after he decided to blitzkrieg Iraq. Take a look at the Palm Beach vote that year.

This has been a simmering possibility for a while and it is now in the forefront.

Likud equals neo-con. A portion of the Jewish vote supports the Likud philosophy in the U.S. and so yes, to some extent you are correct.

It also helps bolster his fundie base who consider Jews God's chosen people.

[robcon]

45. Huh? You think the Jewish vote is up for grabs?

1. Jews account for less than 5% of voters. The Jewsish vote is not decisive in any national election.

2. Jews vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

3. Most Americans support Israel. Most Democrats (politicians and voters) support Israel.

Where is the "division?" Where is the "simmering possiblity" except under some made-up scenario

?

[mmonk]

46. Some might seek a path back towards a peace process.

[Jacobin]

55. Did you read the post?

I don't think the Jewish vote is monolithic. There are those who support the Likud party both in the US and in Israel. The 2004 vote in Florida showed that.

In politics we've discovered, a few points shaved off one group or another can be decisive in a national election. Look at what the anti-gay position of the RW has done for the hispanic voting block in the last two cycles.

I'm not suggesting that any group is a monolith. I'm suggesting that there is a group of Jewish voters who are liking the "re-making of the middle east" in accordance with the neo-con ideology. AIPAC is an example. Those votes are certainly going to the RW.

[robcon]

57. Of course I read the post.

Why do you mention "supporters of Likud?" I am talking about Americans, not Israelis. You cannot vote for Likud in the U.S.

No one argues that the Jewish vote is monolithic. It's just a small group that is majority democratic, and a change, for example, of 10 pts. one way or the other among Jews will not change any national election. I don't argue we ignore the Jewish vote, but it's not critical to our prospects for '08.

[Jacobin]

58. The Likud party is the equivalent of the RW in the US

AIPAC is an Israeli lobbying group that is Likud/RW.

Just because you can't vote for the Likud party in the US is utterly meaningless. They have the same goals

[robcon]

63. But given the statistics, your equivalence is meaningless.

Who cares who "prefers" Likud?

The OVERWHEMING percentage of Jews vote Democratic. Who cares whether there are a small minority who don't?

[lonestarnot]

47. fuck no. fuck no. and fuck no and yes.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[deutsey]

62. The Dems do a fine job of dividing themselves, thank you

They need very little help from Bush.

:evilfrown:

[JackNewtown]

64. No, plus Jews are less than 2% of the population

There is no divide since both parties have the exact same position on Israel, as they always do. Moreover, the Jewish population is too small to cause a rift in either party.

There is often talk about the Jewish vote but there is rarely talk about the Muslim and Arab vote. If we are going to analyze this politically, instead of scaring ourselves into backing anything Israel does by fearing losing the Jewish vote, we need to factor in the two generally pro-Palestinian groups as well. Their numbers are similar to the Jewish population (probably a bit larger) but there are two major differences. One, they have not solidified themselves as supporters of a particular party yet. They are real swing voters. Two, their populations are rapidly rising while the Jewish population is declining, not only proportionately, but in absolute terms as well. As far as votes are concerned, the best policy for the Democrats would be a balanced, pro-peace policy with no sacred cows. We could risk losing votes in the long-term by slavishly supporting anything Israel does, especially in key swing states Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. We forget at our peril that Kerry would have lost Michigan if it weren't for Muslim and Arab backing.

There also is no evidence that a significant percentage of Jews base their vote on Israel. Bush is the most "pro-Israel" president ever and his gain in the Jewish vote from 2000 to 2004 mirrored his gain among the general population. In other words, he gained nothing among Jews--despite much hype and hope from conservatives--for supporting anything Sharon did. There are certainly some Jews, as there are among other groups, that vote chiefly based on foreign affairs relating to a foreign country they have some sort of emotional attachment to, but the vast majority of Jews, like all other Americans, vote based on domestic issues. On domestic issues there is no question which party is closer to the views of the vast majority of American Jews.

[Cleita]

65. Since it's the same ideologues who are leading Israel to

a bad place that have led us to a bad place, I think that it is their intent.