I do think, however, that flipping from Barack Obama to Mitt Romney because of Obama's (non-existent) anti-Israel policies is, well, not very bright:
Mr. Goldstein said he gradually became disenchanted with Mr. Obama when his promises to change Washington did not come to pass. He said he was particularly incensed by the administration’s stance toward Israel, particularly the president’s view that the 1967 borders should be a starting point for negotiations for a two-state peace solution. He said he also believed that Mr. Obama showed disrespect to Mr. Netanyahu.Or this:
Mr. Goldstein...conceded that some of his frustrations at Mr. Obama were also a result of what he saw as the president’s failure to uphold liberal principles on gun control and some social issues. But he said that his discontent was strong enough that he would cast a vote for Mr. Romney and that he intended to campaign aggressively in Pennsylvania.Again: if you vote Republican because you're anti-abortion, or support GOP tax policies, or oppose unions...well, then you should vote Republican. If you vote Republican because you identify with a group that generally supports Republicans and in turn is supported by Republicans when they win, then you certainly should vote for Mitt Romney. That would include, I'd say, anyone who has flipped on those issues or identifications since the last election. Look, I'd probably even say that if your main concern is Israel and you believe that Mitt Romney is unusually suited for handling policy there because of his long friendship with Netanyahu...well, I don't think that will matter at all for a Romney presidency, but it's not nuts to believe it might, I suppose.
But flipping from Obama to Romney because Obama hasn't done enough for liberal social issues? And because you believe some mischaracterization of Obama's policies on Israel?
So I don't know that I should be picking on Michael Goldstein, who is apparently the star of Sheldon Adelson's anti-Obama ad campaign targeted at Jews, although he volunteer himself for the role. I'll just say that if that's the pitch Adelson is using, he's really looking for very stupid Jews. My guess? He won't find many. Oh, I expect Mitt Romney will do better than John McCain did with the Jews, but I'll be that it winds up all being the result of general reasons (that is, the economy), not because of anything to do with Israel or specifically Jewish concerns.
Posts
Seems like the problem here isn't stupidity, but mendacity.
ReplyDeleteAt least in Goldstein's case (assuming he's being truthful), his disdain for Obama appears to stem from his belief in "mischaracterization[s] of Obama's policies on Israel."
Well, if people like Sheldon Adelson weren't lying to people like Goldstein about Obama vis-a-vis Israel, then there wouldn't be a problem.
(Now, if he switched to the GOP because Obama hasn't been socially liberal enough - well, there really is no other word to use for that than stupid!)
If Goldstein really cares about Israel (and, as you said, if he's honest) then he has no business believing transparent lies. Adelson is looking for people who (1) care deeply about something, but (2) are willing to believe transparent lies about it. IOW, people who aren't very bright.
DeleteI think I'll vote for Romney because Obama hasn't done enough to tax the rich...
ReplyDeleteI'll vote for Romney because Obama hasn't released enough of his records.
DeleteI'll vote for Romney because Obama won't tell us his specific proposals to create more jobs. (this is fun!)
DeleteI'm voting for Mitt because Obama is a Harvard-educated smarty-pants.
DeleteAm I to infer that "the 1967 borders should be a starting point for negotiations for a two-state peace solution" is not the president's view? The paragraph you quote doesn't seem obviously stupid to me unless that's true.
ReplyDeleteIt's been U.S. policy for at least 30 years.
DeleteAbandonded by GWB, who replaced it with "do whatever you want to the Palestineans, we support you"
DeleteThat's just the liberal media again.
ReplyDeletePerhaps, but according to Gallup, Americans in general are pro-life.
ReplyDeleteGotta break that down a bit, Anonymous: "the figures for Catholics mirror those for the population as a whole within 5 percentage points or less. ... Sixteen percent believe abortion should be legal in all cases, and another 32 percent say it should be legal in most cases. Just 18 percent said it should be illegal in all cases; 27 percent said it should be illegal in most cases."
ReplyDeleteI am a member of the Republican Jewish Coalition, and there are basically 4 groups of Jews who tend to vote Republican, at least some of the time: (1) The Orthodox and ultra-orthodox (and a few "conserva-dox", members of Conservative Jewish congregations which lean more orthodox than reform); such Jews are more socially conservative than the US Jewish norm: (2) Immigrants from Russia, who are strongly anti-socialist (one such recently won a special election for State Senate in Brooklyn); (3) Likudniks, many of them elderly, of whom Sheldon Adelson is clearly one; they tend to dominate the active ranks of the Republican Jewish Coalition: (4) supporters of the free market and low taxes like myself, who vote Republican for reasons having little to do with being Jewish. The Adelson-funded ad noted here is trying to convince more Likudniks to support Romney even if they are socially liberal. The goal of the RJC is to get 30% of the Jewish vote for Romney, a level of Republican Presidential voting exceeded from 1972 to 1988, but not achieved since 1992.
ReplyDeleteI think that's a good analysis.
DeleteAs I said, I don't think there's anything stupid about socially conservative Jews choosing to vote Republican, or Jews who like GOP economic policies to vote Republican.
I think the idea that there's a real difference between the parties on Israel is nuts, though, especially in the form expressed that Obama in office has revealed such a split by being anti-Israel.
The best way to analyze this appeal to Jews is not to use the usual logic since, as JB shows, the message isn't logical. Instead, you have to consider its source, Sheldon Adelson.
ReplyDeleteThis is the person who gave millions to Gingrich even though most level-headed people thought Gingrich had so much negative baggage that his entire campaign was a publicity campaign gone wrong. Adelson doesn't see the world using criteria the rest of us can comprehend. His logic defies explanation from the outside. Unless he or one of the makers of this commercial explains it, we won't have an explanation.
Here's an explanation of Adelson's support for Gingrich, but it doesn't help with the "not upholding liberal principles" part of the commercial.