J Street has a very comprehensive look at American Jewish political opinions. You'll see that Jews massively disapprove of George W. Bush in general, and his foreign policy in particular, and his approach to the Middle East in particular particular. Jews are overwhelmingly backing Barack Obama and Democratic congressional candidates. Jews overwhelmingly favor more aggressive US diplomatic involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, clearly believe that only a peace agreement can provide real security for Israel over the long run, and recognize the need for the United States to exert meaningful pressure on both sides to get a deal.
« All News is Good News for McCain | Main | Overstretch »
The Jews Are Allright
17 Jul 2008 02:27 pm
Comments (57)
OT
Speaking of Jews, read "The Yiddish Policeman's Union" if you've always imagined Philip Marlowe as talking like Jackie Mason.
(Not really; more like if William Hurt's Arkady Renko from "Gorky Park" were secretly a Jew.)
Our foreign policy problems are not generated from average Jewish Americans. The problems are from the billionaire think tank bosses like Haim Saban and Race Warriors like Sheldon Adelson and Martin Peretz.
The billionaires and Jewish Race Warriors fuel the political machines of both Dem and Repub parties so that both adhere to a foreign policy in the interests of Israel, not the United States.
The normal Jewish American is only a problem when they do not speak out and reject the elites. Joe Klein is fighting this war as we speak and Yglesias and other progressives should rally to his banner and give him cover.
This is good news for John McCain!
.
It's an interesting survey, but I thought many of the questions were a bit leading.
The Jews Are Allright
I don't mind, other guys messin' with our state.
That's right. We'll stop the global caliphate.
/horrible Who parody
Well, it'll be interesting to see how long it takes for this thread to become an unflushed toilet.
Seven minutes, apparently.
.
Del, I think what motivates the "billionaires and Jewish Race Warriors" is war profiteering more than any Zionist dreams. They can line their pockets while the going is good, then claim "The Jews Made Me Do It" when the shit hits the fan.
"For example, only 26 percent of respondents were much more likely (and 48 percent total more likely) to support a Congressional candidate arguing that America should support Israel if it preemptively strikes Iran."
"Only"...
Del, I think what motivates the "billionaires and Jewish Race Warriors" is war profiteering more than any Zionist dreams. They can line their pockets while the going is good, then claim "The Jews Made Me Do It" when the shit hits the fan.
Are they alright or all right?
I don't mind, other guys messin' with our state.
That's right. We'll stop the global caliphate.
That made me laugh.
FYI, it's OK (and even encouraged) to not cite your sources on this blog, seeing as all the commenters here are lily-white college boys with encyclopedic knowledge of popular culture.
But what about the Arab terrorists!!! You anti-semite, you!!! Jeffrey Goldberg will have your hide for that.
(Satire is getting harder all the time)
If they're in the Who, its "...all right"; If they're in Supergrass, its "alright."
"Are they alright or all right?"
The term pundit suddenly acquires a new meaning..
"Are they alright or all right?"
The term pundit suddenly acquires a new meaning..
But Matt, don't you know that Obama has a Jewish problem. That's what the folks on the teevee and in the newspapers tell me all the time. I mean, they can't be wrong, right. All of those polls, including this one, that show Obama with a large lead over McCain among Jewish voters must all be wrong.
And this one must be totally wrong because not only does it have Obama beating McCain by a bunch, but it also says that only 37 of the folks polled approve of Joe Lieberman.
I want to know who exactly was polled here. I'll bet it was a bunch of self-hating Jews!
Clearly, all those jews who disagree with neocons hate jews.
Jews ... clearly believe that only a peace agreement can provide real security for Israel over the long run...
Jews, qua Israel, appear to suffer from the same political problems as Americans: only the lunatic fringe get to determine foreign policy.
Jews ... clearly believe that only a peace agreement can provide real security for Israel over the long run...
Jews, qua Israel, appear to suffer from the same political problems as Americans: only the lunatic fringe get to determine foreign policy.
As usual, Mr. Yglesias observes the glass as half full rather then half empty. The fact is that Jewish support for Senator Osama is less then for previous Democratic candidates, except for the human turd, James Earl Carter.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215330996069&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jews ... clearly believe that only a peace agreement can provide real security for Israel over the long run...
Jews, qua Israel, appear to suffer from the same political problems as Americans: only the lunatic fringe get to determine foreign policy.
SLC: You know very well that the poll you cited contrasted current polled support for Barack Obama -- presumably not for Osama bin Laden, but then, that's your Hama Rules! tic -- versus the actual voting for Al Gore and John Kerry.
Those are two completely different bits of data, and you know it.
Re El Cid
Mr. El Cid can spin the data anyway he wants to but the bottom line is that if the election were held today, Senator Osama would get at most 62% of the Jewish vote as contrasted with 80% for Gore and 74% for Kerry. Now, AFIK, 62 is still less then 74 or 80. Now to be fair, unless the election is very close, that probably won't make much difference as Senator Osame will carry New York and California, the two states with the largest Jewish population regardless. However, I would remind Mr. El Cid that it was a few hundred elderly Jews in Palm Beach County, Florida, whose confusion over the butterfly ballot caused them to vote for Pat Buchanan, that gave Dubya the election.
Jews are notoriously anti-semitic.
the human turd, James Earl Carter.
Seeing SLC call as good and effective a man as Jimmy Carter a "human turd" is kind of disgusting. Unlike Bush, who has harmed Israel's security on net, Carter actually helped Israel achieve a lasting peace with one of its neighbors.
Some people are annoyed because Carter correctly pointed out that Israel is gradually evolving into an apartheid state.
I didn't 'spin' anything. First of all, you're the maniac who calls a U.S. Senator "Osama". Second, a publication like the JPost has enough resources to at least compare apples to apples -- not 'if the election were held in our minds today and if chocolate had wings' -- and compare polls for similar time periods for the candidates Gore & Kerry.
The mention of the butterfly ballots is just nuttier, since that is the opposite of the example you would give from polling data. Polling data is assumed to be related to your actual intentions; complaints regarding confusing ballots (and relatedly awful vote counting supervision) have to do with factors deterring voters from expressing their preference.
So if Hama Rules! wanted to argue that from weaker than desired polling data representing Jewish American support for the Democratic candidate one should conclude that Florida's older Jewish voters will now vote for third party right wingers due to ballot confusion, he might wish to come up with some better rationalization.
Re mq
Actually, what James Earl Carter did to achieve an agreement between Egypt and Israel was to bribe both side to agree to behave themselves, to the tune of 3 billion/year for Israel and 2.2 billion/year for Egypt. IMHO, its' about time for the State of Israel to stop taking the bribe and start getting serious about crushing the terrorists in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon and their supporters in Damascus and Tehran. As former Secretary of State George Shultz put it, these terrorists are not even people and it's long past time to stop treating them as if they were.
Good...genocidal stuff from SLC. Now, Arabs are "not even people." You're an older guy aren't you SLC? How likely is it that I'll get my wish and you'll croak sometime soon?
It's a nice sentiment, but there is no deal to be had between Israel and many of it's enemies. The analogy with Egypt doesn't hold, because the Egyptian government had no real fundamental interest in protecting Palestinian interests, so a bribe and the return of Sinai was perfectly suited to end that dispute. There is a chance that the Syrian Baathists might eventually see such a path in their interests, but the Paestinins of the West Bank and Gaza are always going to get some outside support. Palestinian and Israeli interests are fundamentally at odds, and the gap is not bridgeable.
Some problems aren't solvable, and this one, with these parties in conflict, is one of them. If these paries were to change in some sort of extraordinarily fundamental way, then this may no longer be true, but there is little to nothing that the U.S. can do to bring that about, absent invading Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.
Nothing is going to change, absent some truly catstrophic event. The best thing for the U.S. to do would be to witdraw all aid to all parties.
Francisco, I disagree with SLC, but what has happened in your brain which has caused to decide that the terms "teerorist" and "Arabs" are synonymous?
Excuse the typos. Sheesh.
Most Jews in America think of themselves as Americans first, which signals a predisposition to reality, reason, and general alright-ness. Mazel Tov and Lechaim.
Some Jews think of themselves as Israel's ambassadors to the United States, which gives rise to such monstrosities as AIPAC and neoconservatism.
(Funny, how neoconservatives are never concerned with spreading universal democracy in any area of the world that is beyond a Scud's range from Jerusalem.)
Re El Cid
I may be old and I may be slow but Mr. El Cids' last comment doesn't make no sense. The statement is very simple. However, so that even a lamebrain like Mr. El Cid can understand, we'll do it by the numbers.
1. If the election were held today, Senator Osame would get, at most, 62% of the Jewish vote.
2. Gore got 80% and Kerry got 74% of the Jewish vote.
3. Thus, as we sit here today, Senator Osama is trailing the numbers put up by Gore and Kerry.
4. It would appear that Mr. El Cid is trying to argue that, when election time rolls around in Novermber, Senator Osamas' numbers will improve so that he will do as well at that time as Gore and Kerry did. He has produced no evidence that this argument has any validity. In fact, I would argue with the same validity that when the Rethuglican smear machine gets through with him, he won't even get 62%.
5. Obviously, my comment about the several hundred elderly Jews in Palm Beach County was too complicated for Mr. El Cids' single digit IQ. The point was that, if the 2008 election is close enough, a small defection of Jewish Democrats in a state like Florida could swing the state to McCain, just as the confusing ballot in 2000 in which a few hundred of these folks inadvertently voted for Buchanan, while thinking they were voting for Gore, threw the state and hence the election to Dubya. Since I believe the final figure when the Supreme Court stopped the recount, was some 200 or so votes difference between Dubya and Gore, clearly the Palm Beach fiasco decided the election in Florida and hence in the nation.
Hopefully this rather lengthy discussion will clear up the confusion in Mr. El Cids' head.
Obama has a Jewish problem!
Speaking of Haim Saban, where did the guy, whatshisname, who always talked about Haim Saban go? He was a bit obsessed alright, but generally well informed and not insane, like the little genocidal dimwit we seem to be stuck with forever.
SLC is obviously correct. There are no mechanisms one could imagine by which current polling levels might be altered at the time of an actual election. I have presented no evidence whatsoever, which is why the hypothetical of 'if the election were held today' is incredibly crucial, and it is completely unfair and intellectually unjustified for me to suggest the importance of comparing a poll of a candidate's support among certain communities at a certain point in the calendar with similar data for other candidates.
Only intellectual minds of vast caliber are capable of setting themselves free from such petty demands for comparable data, and those people who are insistent on making polls comparable over time obviously support Hamas and want to kill Israeli Jewish babies.
This is a brilliant insight, and it makes me wish we could have held the election at various other times in the past in which the numbers would be more favorable.
From this polling technique, we have also learned that Barack Obama could not possibly win in Pennsylvania and maybe not even California, since those people supported Hillary Clinton and if the election had been held in those states some months ago, we would have been avoided the spectacle of having this crazy jihadist so close to the Presidency.
Likewise, it turns out that John Edwards actually is the new President, since several national polls showed him as the most likely to defeat any Republican nominee. Congratulations, President Edwards!
Given that SLC has already proven that the Democratic candidate is a terrorist (look at his name) who will sell Israel to Hezbollah and this will result in a small number of Florida Jews throwing the election in Florida to McCain since such people are idiotic bigots in the mind of SLC, we have no course other than to babble mindlessly about how Obama's father was a Muslim and there was this one guy who talked to somebody who knew somebody that taught Obama as a little boy and like he one time heard that Obama said something Muslim.
These are the kinds of people who we can depend on to keep Israel, and our Florida Jewish voters, safe from dirty Muslims.
If the election were held today, Senator [Obama] would get, at most, 62% of the Jewish vote.
That statement doesn't make sense. If the election were held today, he would get at most 100% of the Jewish vote.
The real question is what percentage he is likely to get. The poll is helpful on that question, but hardly the final word. You would have to look at margin of error, leaners, any other polls looking at the issue, etc. It is not at all improbable that Obama would get more than 62%.
Re blah
The 62% includes both those who say they would vote for Senator Osama if the election and those who say they are leaning towards Senator Osama.
Re El Cid
1. Mr. El Cid, the schmuck, is now claiming that one should compare the numbers for Gore on July 17, 2000 and for Kerry on July 17, 2004. I would be happy to do so if Mr. El Cid has such numbers.
2. Mr. El Cids' rather lame attempt at sarcasm is about as humorous as AIDS. Better luck next time.
Re novakant
Mr. Don Williams seems to have disappeared from this blog as he has not been heard from for some 2 months. Maybe he is occupying a cell on Guantanamo. One can hope. If so, hopefully Mr. Richard Steven Hack and Mr. Trevor will be joining him shortly.
I feel just terrible that noted fantastic writer The Mr. SLC is disappointed in my sarcasm, when he is so known for his wit sharper than any razor. Hama Rules!
The 62% includes both those who say they would vote for Senator [Obama] if the election and those who say they are leaning towards Senator [Obama].
I realize that. It does not include those who are leaning toward McCain or another candidate in that particular poll. And in any event, your observation does not invalidate my point.
"For example, only 26 percent of respondents were much more likely (and 48 percent total more likely) to support a Congressional candidate arguing that America should support Israel if it preemptively strikes Iran."
Which is why Obama will lose if Bush attacks Iran. There's your ten point war bounce for McCain right there. OTOH, Obama is likely to support a strike against Iran when it happens, so maybe he'll gain a couple points as well. But he isn't the "war hero", so he won't do as well.
SLC: Keep wishing me to Guantanamo, and I'll "wish" you into the bottom of San Francisco Bay.
What's the matter, given up on your stupid shit about "Obama is not a citizen" or whatever crap that was about?
And who cares if Obama gets 62% of the Jewish vote vs. 80 or 100? That's better than McCain will get. If Clinton were the Democratic nominee, she'd get way more than McCain, according to the Haaretz poll. The only guy who'd do really well was Giuliani - since he was as fucking nuts as you are.
You misspelled 'alright.' But I still love you.
SLCunt is as Jewish as John McCain's pet iguana.
(Funny, how neoconservatives are never concerned with spreading universal democracy in any area of the world that is beyond a Scud's range from Jerusalem.)
Posted by Ubbabukknamupnamummup | July 17, 2008 6:43 PM
And especially not within range of Israel, not since Hamas and Iranian allies have been elected in the Palestinian Territories and Iraq.
SLCunt is as Jewish as John McCain's pet iguana.
Posted by pseudonymous in nc | July 18, 2008 4:07 AM
Neither mensch nor macher.
Re pseudonymous in nc
Mr. pseudonymous is a fucking asshole whose only contribution to this blog is to post insulting comments about other commentors. Doesn't Mr. pseudonymous have anything substantive to add? At least Mr. Hack provides some amusement in addition to invective.
SLC: "IMHO, its' about time for the State of Israel to stop taking the bribe and start getting serious about crushing the terrorists in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon and their supporters in Damascus and Tehran."
Realpolitik at its finest! Last time, when IDF went ahead to "crush the terrorists in Lebanon", it did not worked out too well. So, "getting serious" can be a disaster.
And when attacking Iran is discussed, either it would be some pin prick, or Iran will block the exit from the Gulf and we will have 10 dollar per gallon gas, and I do not see any certainty that such prices would boost the popularity of GOP.
SLC may be correct that Jewish support of Obama is lower than that of Kerry, Clinton etc. High time to concentrate on more important groups like single women, Hispanics, or even, imagine that! white blue collar workers. As far as Jewish support is concerned, you just cannot have it all under the current circumstances. Some will hate you for opposing neo-cons, some will hate you for supporting them. Given that, one can as well try to think what is the right policy.
Re piotr
"Last time, when IDF went ahead to "crush the terrorists in Lebanon", it did not worked out too well. "
The reason it didn't work out too well is because of the incompetence of the three musketeers, Olmert, Peretz, and Halutz who didn't have a clue as to how to how to go about defeating the Hizbollah terrorists. Well, Peretz and Halutz are history, and Olmert will soon join them.
"And when attacking Iran is discussed, either it would be some pin prick, or Iran will block the exit from the Gulf and we will have 10 dollar per gallon gas, and I do not see any certainty that such prices would boost the popularity of GOP."
Mr. Piotr is correct that if the attacks are pin pricks, they will fail to achieve anything worthwhile. The attacks to succeed must utilitze all weapons systems from precision munitions to take out above ground facilities to 15 megaton bombs to take out underground facilities. No quarter must be given. total and unconditional surrender must be the only option for the terrorist regime in Tehran.
So you're pushing the first use of high yield nuclear weapons? And in a pre-emptive strike against a threat that even if it exists is in no way imminent (unless you have information showing that Iran is a month or so away from building a bomb).
Do you really have no interest in Israel surviving into the next century?
So, it's June 27, 1914 all over again. History repeats itself: first as tragedy, then as worse.
All I can figure out is that GW Bush and his crew have bought into this rapture/apocalypse/jeebus crap, and they truly believe there is no future. That's about the only thing that explains their "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" position on almost every policy issue. Don't forget, these people actually had one of the nutballs who wrote those "Left Behind" books come to the Pentagon and brief them on the END™. If you really think there is no future, you don't plan for it. We are all truly doomed if we don't get these fucking people away from the levers of power.
All I can figure out is that GW Bush and his crew have bought into this rapture/apocalypse/jeebus crap, and they truly believe there is no future. That's about the only thing that explains their "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" position on almost every policy issue. Don't forget, these people actually had one of the nutballs who wrote those "Left Behind" books come to the Pentagon and brief them on the END™. If you really think there is no future, you don't plan for it. We are all truly doomed if we don't get these fucking people away from the levers of power.
All I can figure out is that GW Bush and his crew have bought into this rapture/apocalypse/jeebus crap, and they truly believe there is no future. That's about the only thing that explains their "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" position on almost every policy issue. Don't forget, these people actually had one of the nutballs who wrote those "Left Behind" books come to the Pentagon and brief them on the END™. If you really think there is no future, you don't plan for it. We are all truly doomed if we don't get these fucking people away from the levers of power.
All I can figure out is that GW Bush and his crew have bought into this rapture/apocalypse/jeebus crap, and they truly believe there is no future. That's about the only thing that explains their "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" position on almost every policy issue. Don't forget, these people actually had one of the nutballs who wrote those "Left Behind" books come to the Pentagon and brief them on the END™. If you really think there is no future, you don't plan for it. We are all truly doomed if we don't get these fucking people away from the levers of power.
SLC
I wonder if you should consult your doctor to adjust your medications.
What is it mental atrophy?
You can't atrophy what was never there. SLC has been brain damaged since birth - probably genetic.
Re Richard Steven Hack
Mr. Hack is the one who held up a bank, sticking a gun in an unarmed bank tellers' face, got caught and spent 9 years in the federal birdcage in Leavenworth. As someone who has never even been questioned by law enforcement, much less arrested, I think it is obvious that it is Mr. Hack who is brain damaged.
Re Hameed
If one want's to make an omelet, a few egg shells must be broken.
Comments closed July 31, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Well, it'll be interesting to see how long it takes for this thread to become an unflushed toilet. Chris Ford, Trevor and the others bobbing like turds.
Posted by Roto Rooter | July 17, 2008 2:38 PM