Opinion

August 2, 2011

Rob Eshman: Good Leaders

By Rob Eshman

Tweet

Share

If Republicans want a primer on how to keep losing the Jewish vote, all they have to do is look at what happened in Washington this past week.

The go-to assumption of many people on the right is that American Jews follow a single, unthinking, liberal party line. This became clear to me when my son invited a friend of his to go target shooting with us last weekend.

“Shooting?” the friend said. “I thought you guys were Democrats.”

Most Jews, myself included, are neither knee-jerk liberals nor reactionary conservatives. But many people will try to assert otherwise. How else to explain the June 2011 Gallup poll that showed President Barack Obama’s approval rating among U.S. Jews at 60 percent? The poll revealed that Jews approved of the president’s performance at an average of 14 percentage points above the general public.

The reason you’ll most often hear Republicans offer for this phenomenon is that Jews are locked naively into their parents’ or even grandparents’ voting traditions, as if they haven’t read a newspaper since Franklin Delano Roosevelt died.

It’s true that since 1945 Jews have voted for the Democratic presidential candidate by percentages of up to 90 percent.

But if you poke at the numbers, you’ll find that the Republican candidate who received the largest percentage of the Jewish vote — Dwight D. Eisenhower (40 percent) — was the model Republican moderate.

And if you drill down to state and local races, you’ll find that Jewish voters often vote for moderate Republicans, such as former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan (50 percent in 1993 and 71 percent in 1997) and former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (48 percent).

In other words, Jews are not liberal zombies. The record shows that they use their votes to reward candidates or parties they believe adhere not to certain labels, but to certain values.

The debate and vote over the debt ceiling, still dragging on as I write this, provides a step-by-step guide on how to alienate these voters.

Step 1: Let Ideology Trump Common Sense

Moderates, as New York Times columnist Tom Friedman pointed out, would debate the federal deficit in a thoughtful and deliberate fashion, exactly the way a business would take the time to review its budget. Extremists hold the nation’s credit rating hostage to a hurried, gun-to-the-head negotiation in order to get what they want. Linking the approval of an increased debt ceiling — which serves past commitments — to debate over future spending just defies logic.

Step 2: Assume We’re Stupid

Jewish voters are impassioned and informed. Is it a coincidence we are over-represented among the Pundit Class, left, right and center: Brooks, Friedman, Krugman, Krauthammer, Stephens, Podhoretz, Stewart, etc.? The Republicans who try to paint Obama as the progenitor of all our economic problems, ignoring the tax cuts, wars and deficits started by the previous administrations, sound like shills, not statesmen.

Step 3: Don’t Compromise

On CNN, Sen. Rand Paul (R- Ky.) told Anderson Cooper that his side had done all the compromising it could by allowing the nation to avoid default. That sounds just a tad extreme. Even the conservative editorial page of The Wall Street Journal took issue with the way the Republican center seemed to slouch fringeward.

“The same supposedly conservative Republicans and their talk radio minders may denounce this deal as a sellout,” The Wall Street Journal wrote on Aug. 1, “but we’ll be charitable and assume they’ve climbed so far out on the political ledge they don’t know how to climb back without admitting they were wrong. …

“The debt ceiling is a political hostage the GOP could never afford to shoot, and this deal is about the best Republicans could have hoped for given that the limit had to be raised. ... Sooner or later the GOP had to give up the hostage.”

Hint: If your strategy involves the words “hostage” and “ledge,” you will probably alienate Jewish voters.

Step 4: Avoid Nuance

Jews understand that black and white is for cookies, not politics. Things aren’t so simple — paradox and unresolved questions are at the heart of the universe.  

It’s not guns versus butter, but balancing guns and butter, balancing the need for jobs with the need to contain spending, fine tuning the effectiveness of the free market and the rights of the individual with the needs of the larger society.

Step 5: Attack Government Itself

The anti-government meme that infuses so much of the Tea Party rhetoric is off-putting to people who have thrived and prospered under a strong federal government. If it’s not perfect, you improve it, you don’t shut it down.

“After the debt crisis ends, the democracy crisis must be tackled,” wrote Jacob S. Hacker and Oona A. Hathaway in The New York Times. “Nobody wins when our constitutional system falters: not the president, who gains unilateral power but loses a governing partner; not Congress, which gets to blame the president but risks irrelevance; and certainly not the American people, who have to bear the resulting dysfunction.”

You can certainly win elections without the Jewish vote. But the money and activism Jews bring to the table is helpful, especially in state and local elections, and in the primaries.

If Republicans want the kind of landslide Jewish numbers Democrats rack up, find candidates who promote strong, effective and fiscally sound government that provides security for the nation, opportunity to the entrepreneur and help to the needy.

If you think that’s impossible, read about FDR.

A version of this article appeared in print.

---

Post your comment below!

Click here to return to the homepage.

COMMENTS

We welcome your feedback. Comments may not exceed 700 characters.

Privacy Policy

Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.

Terms of Service

JewishJournal.com has rules for its commenting community.Get all the details.

Compromise - Consider this a partial down payment on conservative compromise if on the other side of the ledger you have the first 2 years of liberal spending which didn’t involve an iota of compromise
Common Sense - if Jews would look at this deal with intelligence, they would see that the spending cuts are “rear loaded” with virtually no cuts taking place in the first 2 years. If Democrats reclaim the House, you can bet those later cuts will never happen.
In addition, in only controlling the House, this was the only opportunity the Republicans had to cut any spending, and not raise taxes. Any other separate legislation would surely be blocked in the Senate or vetoed by Obama.

Comment by Bill Bender on 8/03/11 at 12:36 pm

Rob, of course you are not “a knee-jerk liberal”. Why would anyone think so? So let’s cut through the chase and please explain what is your vision to the following (from today’s Yahoo News):

Comment by Mini on 8/03/11 at 4:42 pm

“Treasury borrowing jumped Tuesday, the data showed, immediately after President Barack Obama signed into law an increase in the debt ceiling as the country’s spending commitments reached a breaking point and it threatened to default on its debt.  The new borrowing took total public debt to $14.58 trillion, over end-2010 GDP of $14.53 trillion, and putting it in a league with highly indebted countries like Italy and Belgium.”

Comment by Mini on 8/03/11 at 4:43 pm

More from Yahoo News: “Public debt subject to the official debt limit—a slightly tighter definition—was $14.53 trillion as of the end of Tuesday, rising from the previous official cap of $14.29 trillion a day earlier.”

Comment by Mini on 8/03/11 at 4:45 pm

Rob considers himself a centrist both in politics and Judaism.  Living so far on the left edge,his perceived middle is actually far from it. As editor, he pays not one but two extreme left columnists to regularly promote the left wing of the democratic party with almost no Jewish content whatsoever: Sonnenshein and Kaplan, but narry one Republican. (Oh Dennis is not a one-topic political writer.) Rob’s ‘Jewish’ editing includes recipes for shrimp. So much for a Conservative ‘Rabbi’s’ spouse! For shame. Most importantly, he still does his utmost to promote the suicidal Peace Now agenda and every idea to the left of it.  But, no, he’s not a knee jerk leftist.  Just a jerk.

Comment by Abbushuki on 8/03/11 at 10:32 pm

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.  It is a sign that the US Gov. cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Gov.‘s reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.  Americans deserve better.”  -  Sen. Barack H. Obama, voting against raising the debt limit, Mar ‘06

Comment by Truth Teller on 8/04/11 at 9:50 am

Mr. Eshman: as one who fully supports and respects the Israeli Tent Protest, I can’t find in the JJ’s coverage of the unrest a single, not even one(1) article by an objective, centrist writers, though there are plenty around: Daniel Doron (WSJ), Ben Caspit (Maariv) Maayan Lubel (Reuters) and more. JJ’s coverage is leaning heavily to the left. Even the liberal LA Times has done a better job than you. Are you a knee-jerk liberal? If you look like a duck, walk like a duck and talk like a duck - guess what!

Comment by Avi on 8/04/11 at 10:33 am

“This became clear to me when my son invited a friend of his to go target shooting with us last weekend.” WOW, Rob. I’m so impressed. Who knew? Such an enlightened liberal!

Comment by Truth Teller on 8/04/11 at 10:37 am

Rob, you a knee - jerk liberal? Not a chance, I put you in the far left anti Israeli anti traditional Judaism crowd.  Between your constant moral equivalency arguments, your constant attacks on Glenn Beck (I’m sure in support of your financial benefactor George Soros), and your constant featuring of news from a leftist perspective, you have defined yourself well to the left of the your audience.  And your target practice impresses me not at all; just for fun, would you like to name the last “moderate” (or any) republican you voted for?

Comment by george on 8/04/11 at 11:35 am

I get talking points from White House, treasury,  Dem Nat Committee, Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi, Reid etc. & equivalent Republican talking points. Unfortunately, Eshman uses unfiltered the Dem talking points. This is the Jewish Journal of LA not the Democratic national committee mouthpiece in Los Angeles.

I suggest that Eshman consult Charles Krauthammer, Eric Cantor, Michael Medved, etc. & a host of other Jews in good standing who have opposite economic views from his before taking an editorial position in areas that are not his expertise. For example I offer:How the super-committee can strike a Grand Bargain By Charles Krauthammer, Published: August 4,2011 in the Washington Post

Comment by HOWARD LAITIN on 8/05/11 at 1:21 pm

Rob many respected community members feel that you are a knee-jerk supporter of left-wing Israeli & US groups .I am not one that has petitioned to have you removed .

I do suggest essential reforms:
1st,either cease writing an editorial column OR give up your position as editor-in-chief. It is a conflict for you to write a column propagating (or should I say propagandizing) your divisive views utilizing the resources of the Jewish community to subsidize them.
2nd I urge you have a debate with Michael Medved or Charles Krauthammer with the jury being your publisher and editorial board to see whether, under informed challenge, your opinions will withstand scrutiny.

Comment by HOWARD LAITIN on 8/05/11 at 1:43 pm

ROB THIS IS FROM MICHAEL GERSON (A CONSERATIVE)        Public spending on poverty and global health programs is a sliver of discretionary spending and essentially irrelevant to America’s long-term debt. A political argument giving equal weight to cuts in poverty programs and reductions in entitlement spending is uninformed about the nature of the budget crisis, which is largely a health-entitlement crisis. A simplistic philosophy of “shared sacrifice,” focused mainly on cuts in discretionary spending, requires disproportionate sacrifices of the most vulnerable. If religious people do not make this case, it is difficult to determine what distinctive message they offer.

Comment by HOWARD LAITIN on 8/05/11 at 1:59 pm

The JJ’S focus on radical Democratic politics has almost no Jewish Community reporting. The right wingers have been written off by JJ’s editorial board and in turn, held in disdain. Of course, it is the religious right which supports the kosher restaurants, observes ‘Jewish’ and responds to the needs of the Jewish community.

Comment by Abbushuki on 8/05/11 at 7:18 pm

Perhaps it is time for word to go out to all advertisers seeking the trade of LA’s Jews or Israel travel to put their ads in respectable journals, such as The Jewish Press, Hamodia or the Hebrew papers. If it requires economic pressure to influence the JJ’s radical editorial policy, then LET’S DO A BDS ON THE JJ until they wake up. Maybe money deprivation will wake them up.
they claim 600,000 Jews in LA. HA! What a fiction! Subtract Israel’s supporters and Republicans. We don’t need or want a paper that divides the community left vs. right, but one that serves JEWISH life and continuity.

Comment by Abbushuki on 8/05/11 at 7:21 pm

To be fair, the Journal probably reflects the political demographics of LA’s Jewish Community with the vast majority being Democrats and a significant slice or those being from the left wing of the party. However, for those of us who are conservative and vote Republican, it would be nice to have an intelligent conservative viewpoint (not a right wing nutcase) published on a regular basis in the Journal.

Comment by Bill Bender on 8/06/11 at 8:47 am

Bill, The question is whether the JJ should represent ANY political party to the extent it does, regardless of Jewish demographics. Does LA really need another liberal publication with Jewish advertisement? What is the mission statement of the JJ… Does this paper even have such thing?

Comment by Avi on 8/06/11 at 9:14 am

Rob Eshman’s “Good Leaders” establishes creds as a great comic writer. Time traveling a half-century he details how America’s Jews will vote for a “Republican Moderate”, informing “40% of Jews voted for Dwight Eisenhower;” not citing Ike garnered an average 85% of the popular vote in two winning campaigns. Even in crushing victory,  Jewish voters failed to muster a majority!  His labeling Arnold the Fertile a” Republican Moderate”  perhaps the most amusing punch line in an amazing comic piece. Kudos!
Aunty Mame

Comment by Mr. Againster on 8/06/11 at 9:23 am

Avi, you’re exactly right but since the Journal has made a decision to delve into political commentary, a reasoned voice from the Republican viewpoint would be nice.

Comment by Bill Bender on 8/06/11 at 9:47 am

Unfortunately, Rob Eshman and the Los Angeles Jewish Journal appear to be LA Times & NY Times wannabes . They demean conservative and fundamentalist Christians as well as politically conservative and Orthodox Jews.


  For example, Eshman followed the themes of the editorial writers and columnists for the NY Times and much of the mainstream media who labeled the Norway mass murderer a “Christian extremist.” This is an orchestrated attempt to diminish Christianity and Christian opposition to liberal causes. Anders Breivik did not kill in the name of Jesus. He was not a member of a Christian-based al-Qaida-like group, and his actions are counter to all Christian teaching.

Comment by CHRISTIAN SERVICE WORKER on 8/06/11 at 10:06 am

Even if the majority of readers today may vote Democratic, the Los Angeles Jewish Community needs a journal that is non-political. There is so much that already divides us: Liberal vs. Ortho, Affiliated vs. not-interested Jews, J St. vs. Israel, etc. why in the world does the board of the Tribe, Inc. promote even more division by deliberately pushing away all Conservatives and most all Orthos. With the cost of Jewish education for 6 kids and Jewish life, few Orthos have the means to establish a needed competitor. So Rob takes advantage to push his own agenda. Fortunately in 40 years, his brand has extremely few educated progeny who will even want to be Jewishly affiliated. Be patient.

Comment by Abbushuki on 8/06/11 at 10:14 pm

Mr. Againster: Ike didn’t “average” 85 percent of the popular vote in 1952 and 1956. Not even close. Try 55 percent and 56 percent. Look it up.

Comment by joe on 8/08/11 at 3:24 pm

Post a Comment

Name:
Email:

Type the word you see below:

Comment:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?