They say that battles in academia are so nasty because so little is at stake; the same might be said of the Jewish vote. At 3% of the country and dropping, with Muslims eclipsing us for place number one in the list of non-Christian religious minorities, Jews are an important voting bloc in a few states, and a few Congressional districts. Moreover, even in those areas where Jews are a significant constituency, their votes have not necessarily been objects of great contention, mostly because the conclusion concerning their destination has often been forgone.
As a rule, the real Jewish primary is fought in "The Green Party". Jewish political power is at its most potent when Jews vote with their wallets. While both parties benefit, especially from those who view politics as transactional and money as coming in categories “A” and “B” (despite Tom Delay’s noble efforts to eliminate from politics the nefarious influence of “B” money), “Jewish Money” is for Republicans mostly ice cream on the cake (although these folks are junkies for their sweets), while for the Democrats, it’s three courses, drinks, desert and a midnight snack.
This year, the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) claims that exit polls show that Jews voted for Democratic congressional candidates by a margin of 87% to 12%. The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) (judging by their ads, the only group in the country which still thinks Jimmy Carter has any political relevance) disagrees, saying their polls show the Jews broke for the Democrats 74% to 26%.
Interesting that anyone would cite losing 74-26 as some sort of victory.
For the record, the Democratic numbers are from the Exit Poll Pool. However, the Pool does seem to undercount Orthodox Jews. I note that the mostly Orthodox Long Island Village of Lawrence (which should really change its name to "Lazer") gave 49% of its votes to John Spencer. I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between the two parties' numbers.
Even the Republican numbers indicate a higher Democratic vote than was cast by either Asians or Hispanics. The old Milton Himmelfarb joke about Jews living like Episcopalians and voting like Puerto Ricans would appear to be dated. If these polls are to be believed, then these days the Puerto Ricans aren’t that much more Democratic than the Episcopals, while if the Democrats' poll numbers are right, the Jews' voting preferences are barely distinguishable from African-Americans (and if one factors out the more Republican Orthodox, probably more Democratic on average).
Of course, factors like the Spitzer blowout in the state with, by far, the greatest Jewish vote, may have exaggerated the Democratic vote amongst Jews this year. However, despite this, the long range trend seems to be a gradual elevation of Republican strength.
The biggest factors underlying this trend are Orthodoxy, assimilation (ironic, given the right wing’s strength amongst the Orthodox), and Israel.
ORTHODOXY:
Jews are hailed by liberals for voting their values as opposed to their interests (something they fail to salute when done by church-going blue collars workers who like to hunt). Orthodox Jews have different values. Once there was rough consensus in the Jewish community on certain issues which served to hold it together politically. Now, that consensus exists less and less. Even among Jews who proudly call themselves pro-Israel, the disagreements concerning which policies would best advance that cause are often so grave as to be insurmountable.
The power of the religious right amongst Republican office holders has been a near-universal turnoff for Jews in general, even amongst Orthodox Jews, who are in agreement with religious conservatives on many issues. But, religious conservatives have not been shy in reaching out and trying to make common ground with the Orthodox, albeit with mixed results; the efforts of the religious right to evangalize about their political leanings often serves as an unpleasant reminder to Jews that political conversion might not be the only kind of conversion on the religious right's long range agenda.
Along with the religious right, the best friend the Democrats have among the Othodox is self interest. When rich Reform Jews from Scarsdale vote for the Democrats, they are voting their values instead of their interests. When poor Orthodox Jews from Brooklyn vote for the Democrats, they are doing exactly the opposite. And, when the Village of Kyrias Joel delivers the winning margin to John Hall for Congress, then champagne is not the only liquid likely to be flowing (but it should be remembered that, in such transactions, the mohel's knife is capable of slicing both ways).
ASSIMILATION:
As long as Jews labor under the delusion that they are “white people”, they are going to act like them, or at least those “white people” with whom they have the greatest cultural commonality, which, for most Jews, would seem to be non-“born again”, non-evangelical, mainstream white Protestants. Teddy Roosevelt once called Episcopalians "The Republican Party assembled for Prayer"; but these days things have changed; according to exit polls, non-“born again”, non-evangelical white Protestants cast the majority of their votes for Democrats, but by margins far smaller than those amongst Jewish voters. However, as time goes on, it is likely that the number of Jews who embrace what we think of as "Jewish Cultural Values" is going to decrease with each passing year.
"Jewish Cultural Values" are not merely religious values, although religious values do inform them; they are the values of an outsider. African-Americans like to say that the most segregated hour in America is 12 noon on Sunday; well, we don't even enter into that equation. School prayer was once a daily reminder of our outsider status; now we mostly rely upon December, with its rituals of movies and Chinese food. But, when one is no longer an outsider, and one’s values are replicated in society at large, then one is more likely to vote their interests.
In 1988, my father came to me with a dilemna about voting. “Bush” he said, “wants to outlaw abortions, and I don’t like that. He’s for putting prayer in the schools and I don’t like that either. I can’t stand that Quayle, and I’m totally convinced that Bush is dedicated to making the rich richer.”
“So, what’s your problem?” I said, puzzled.
“I’m rich”.
ISRAEL:
While most Democratic politicans have pro-Israel records, many Democratic voters are trending in a different direction, and it has already resulted in the election of some not very pro-Israel legislators. John Dingell, hardly a left-liberal, is just voting the sentiments of his district, which has a sizable Arab minority, but others are just going along with a common and growing strain of left-of-center opinion.
As a supporter, over time, of Camp David, then Oslo, then unilateral withdrawal, I think reasonable people can differ over the meaning of "pro-Israel". My criticism of Jewish extremists has attracted the unlikely praise of folks like Mo Gumbs, so I know from what I speak; in some Jewish circles, I am considered anti-Israel.
But, while definitions of “pro-Israel” may differ, definitions of anti-Israel are pretty clear, and voices like Chuck Barron no longer qualify as anomalies within our party (although Barron himself is probably sui generis). Moreover, an even larger and growing group are those who, although not anti-Israel, do not qualify as pro-Israel in any meaningful manner (Chris Owens comes to mind). In most races where Jews can make a difference, candidates holding these views are not a factor (but, see Congressman Jim Moran of northern Virginia), but they do contribute to pushing many Jews into the swing category, and not just the Orthodox.
The answer among some Democrats is to say this should not be the case; that Jews should not cast their votes on this basis. But, American voters have let their foreign ties influence their voting since our democracy began. Just ask the Irish. When Carolyn Maloney ran for Congress in a district which included Astoria, she practically promised to ride in on the first tank should the Greeks ever feel the need to invade Macedonnia for their crime of calling themselves Macedonia.
But, in the end, it doesn't matter whether objections to Jews voting on the basis of Israel are valid or not. The fact is that many of them do, and this will not change. When the question is whether the Republicans may be able to make future inroads amongst Jewish voters, the answer is Israel might help them. For the purposes of this discussion, that answer is value neutral, my personal bias notwithstanding.
If it was 1965, and I noted that the recent passage of the Civil Rights Acts might help the Republicans in the South, it would not necessarily be taken as evidence of my position on Civil Rights. In fact, history notes that the person who made this observation was the author of the Civil Rights Acts, one Lyndon Baines Johnson.
And, not that GOP doesn't have their own anti-Israel fringe, which inflicts some Republicans of every ideological stripe, including Lincoln Chaffee, Darryl Issa, John Hostetler, the Sununu family and James Baker, amongst others.
In the end, Jewish suppport for Democrats is not an an automatic given; if it was, there would be no need for an NJDC. I don’t think there are many Jewish Republicans, but there are plenty of Jewish swing voters, and their numbers are growing. This year, like other swing voters, they swung Democratic, but Democrats cannot rest on our laurels.
(And, yes, the title is a "Borat" reference. It's not in the movie, which is why God made Youtube.)