Democrats beware: Jewish money is on the move.
Barack Hussein Obama bows to Saudi King Abdullah |
From Financial Post
By Lawrence Solomon
Even before the Supreme Court upheld
Obamacare last Thursday, leading more than 50,000 outraged Americans to
send Mitt Romney more than $5-million by the following day, the Obama
re-election campaign was hurting. “I will be the first president in
modern history to be outspent in his re-election campaign, if things
continue as they have so far,” Obama wrote small donors early in the
week, in imploring them to open their pocketbooks. By the end of the
week he was making a similar plea to big donors, stressing urgency in
getting cash fast, to secure ads for the fall.
“What we don’t want to do is be in a situation where, because
everybody thinks that somehow we’re gonna win or people will just think
Mr. Romney doesn’t know what he’s talking about — and then suddenly we
get surprised later because it turns out that a couple of billionaires
wrote $20-million checks and have bought all the TV time and we find
ourselves flat-footed in September or October,” Obama explained to them
in a telephone call from Air Force One.
At the launch of its re-election bid in April 2011, Obama’s campaign
famously boasted that it would raise a record $1-billion, enabling it to
vastly outspend its Republican contender, as in the 2008 election where
Obama’s $778-million more than doubled John McCain’s $384-million.
Today, Obama’s campaign fears it will fall far short of $1-billion.
Suddenly, it is Romney who is expected to exceed the $1-billion mark —
last month he raised $100-million, a record for a Republican candidate,
despite recent criticism from other Republicans that his campaign is
lacklustre.
What happened to Obama’s missing money and where is Romney’s windfall
coming from? The unexpected $5-million Romney received after the
Supreme Court decision doesn’t begin to explain the hundreds of millions
of dollars that are materializing for the Republicans, or the hundreds
of millions in the Obama projection that went “poof.” Only one
explanation plausibly explains the sea change that appears to be
underway: Jewish money is on the move.
Jews, who represent but 2% of the U.S. population, rarely loom large
in discussions of presidential politics and on the few occasions when
Jews are discussed, the context is usually the ballot box. The Jewish
vote can be a factor in some swing states, particularly Florida, where
Jews comprise almost 5% of the population. Yet Jews are electorally
important out of all proportion to their numbers because of their
jaw-dropping willingness to underwrite liberal causes and Democratic
candidates.
The precise extent to which Jews fill the Democratic Party’s war
chest in each campaign is unknown because the Federal Election
Commission does not require donors to disclose their religion. But
informed estimates abound. Jews account for 50% to 60% of the total
campaign monies that Democrats receive, according to political writers
at various newspapers, among them The Washington Post and The Jerusalem
Post. The Washington bureau chief of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, a
venerable international news agency supported by the world’s leading
Jewish donors, believes that the figure could reach 67%.
These estimates roughly jibe with those of many academics who have
written on the subject. As one example, Prof. Steven Windmueller, author
of Jewish Polity and American Civil Society, believes that Jewish
donors have accounted for up to 45% of Democratic funding. As another,
Henry Feinstein, also an authoritative historian of Jewish-American
politics, puts the number at over 60% in his book, Jewish Power in
America. These estimates, which vary in part because they refer to
different election cycles, stem from numerous sources, including
scuttlebutt from Democratic Party fundraisers, from scrutiny of the
publicly disclosed names of donors, and from marketers of lists of
Jewish donors.
The passion with which Jews support Democratic candidates is matched
by an almost visceral allegiance — even in elections where most
Americans abandon Democrats, such as in 1984 when Ronald Reagan swept 49
states against Walter Mondale, 67% of Jews voted for Mondale. According
to pollsters, Jews are more than twice as liberal as the rest of the
American population as a whole and more likely to vote Democratic than
members of any other religion, than single women, than youths, than
almost any other demographic in American political life. In the 2008
presidential election, close to 80% of the Jewish vote went for Obama.
In 2012, the Jewish allegiance to Democrats and liberal causes will
mostly remain unchanged. As for the Jewish allegiance to Obama, change
is afoot. Many Jews have taken the measure of the man and found him
wanting. Although many will continue to support him financially, if only
modestly, much of the smart money is going elsewhere.
Take George Soros, arguably the most astute and the most
consequential philanthropist in the political arena. In 2008, he
marshalled many of his philanthropies to assure that Obama would win
both the Democratic nomination over Hillary Clinton and the presidency
over John McCain. But Obama came up short as president, as Soros has
publicly stated, leading him to place his money — US$100-million of it
this election cycle — elsewhere. Instead of working to re-elect Obama,
whom he views as no better than Romney, Soros is promoting liberal
causes such as abortion rights and the environment and improving the
Democratic Party’s infrastructure, to enable it to win elections at all
levels.
Numerous other affluent Jews are likewise disenchanted with Obama.
Mort Zuckerman, the billionaire CEO of Boston Properties and publisher
of U.S. News and World Report, told The Wall Street Journal that Obama
had lost moral authority by being divisive, by inciting populist anger,
by failing to lead — in effect by putting politics ahead of his
country’s interests. “I long for a triple-A president to run a triple-A
country,” this former backer of Obama laments, making it clear that he’s
not alone in his dismay. What other Democrats “say about [Obama] when
he’s not in the room, so to speak, is astonishing.”
Obama’s financial loss from diehard Democrats who have cooled on him
would explain little of Romney’s gain. The bulk of Romney’s gain —
measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars — is coming largely from
Jews who previously hadn’t seen the presidential stakes as being so
high. Obama’s first term has awakened them from their slumber, making
some Jews suspicious of him, others fearful, still others angry. The
irony is that the man who has lost the goodwill of so much of America’s
Jewry believes he knows more about Judaism than any other president in
history, as he told a gathering of American rabbis. This misplaced
confidence in his understanding of Jews, as we will see in the next
instalment of this series, could cost him the election.
No comments:
Post a Comment