At Tablet, Tevi Troy, a former top aide to President George W. Bush, casts Ed Koch as a bellwether both of Jewish swing voters and of whether a president wins reelection.
The former New York mayor’s picks have all won, Troy argues, although he finesses it a bit: Koch didn’t vote for Ronald Reagan, but admitted to liking him lots.
In any case, Troy argues that Koch’s post-Middle East policy speech disappointment with President Obama could be bad news for the Democrats. He pointed to this column on Real Clear Politics, but look at Koch’s full quote:
If President Obama does not change his position, I cannot vote for his reelection. I’ve already made clear I won’t vote for some crazy who urges we jettison Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as federal programs. I can stay home.
So this is not good news for either party, if one accepts the premise that Koch is a bellwether. And the warning to Obama is conditional, whereas the repugnance with Republicans is less so …
Still, I agree with Tevi that Koch epitomizes the institutional Jew: Not the grassroots, necessarily, but the voice that matters to donors and whose loss of support can mean the difference between Bush’s 19 percent of the Jewish vote in 2000 and 24 percent in 2004. As Tevi points out, Koch was unabashedly pro-Obama just a few weeks ago — as bellwethers go, I’d venture a guess that this is at least causing Democrats heartburn.
In the department of On The Other Hand, the New York Observer canvasses Jewish Democratic donors and concludes that those institutional Jews may matter a little less than they think they do.
Writer David Freedlander notes — as I have — that Haim Saban’s recent stated unhappiness with the president is less than all that, because the entertainment mogul has never liked Obama.
Freedlander continues:
Mr. Obama’s New York supporters said most of these accounts rely disproportionately on voices like that of Mr. Saban, or, more often, the heads of major national Jewish organizations, who have long been lukewarm about Mr. Obama.
"You’ve got all the professional Jews who are mouthpieces and speak for themselves. They don’t like Obama," said one real-estate executive who has collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for Democrats. "There are people who talk to the press all day long, and they probably didn’t support Obama last time."
That’s not stopping the Republican Jewish Coalition from robo-calling what it has identified as likely Jewish swing voters. Laura Meckler at the Wall Street Journal describes the call:
The script reads: “We’re contacting you right now to inform you about an ongoing emergency situation affecting Israel’s safety. In a significant shift in U.S. policy, President Obama recently called for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be based on the 1967 borders as a starting point. Those borders are physically indefensible. Asking Israel to return to those borders is unacceptable and places Israel in a vulnerable and dangerous position.”
The caller than asks if the recipient will answer three questions on the subject by pushing buttons on the phone. The questions all assume that Mr. Obama’s policy is anti-Israel.
They are:
–“Do you agree with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the creation of a Palestinian state must not come at Israel’s expense?”
-“Do you agree that the Obama administration’s current approach has not been helpful for Israel?”
-“Do you agree that President Obama should retract his statements, and support secure and defensible borders for Israel?”
The phrasing "called for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be based on the 1967 borders as a starting point" leaves out "mutually agreed land swaps" and Obama’s pledge that any new border would take into account Israel’s security needs and would be "different."
But it is not a misrepresentation of what he said, unlike other GOP statements which describe Obama as calling for a return to 1967 lines, period. "Based on the 1967 borders as a starting point" is accurate enough to pass the smell test for political copy, although it wouldn’t pass muster as journalism.
Unfortunately, this is mitigated at least a little by what follows: Obama is not "asking Israel to return to those borders" and he has repeatedly said he supports "secure and defensible" borders for Israel.
Finally, we reported last night that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives initiated a resolution that would reconfirm Congress’ support of the Bush administration commitment not to return to 1967 borders. All 37 sponsors were GOP — until today, when Rep. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) signed on. (Hat tip: RJC).
Help ensure Jewish news remains accessible to all. Your donation to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency powers the trusted journalism that has connected Jewish communities worldwide for more than 100 years. With your help, JTA can continue to deliver vital news and insights. Donate today.
