Has the Republican Party sentenced itself to permanent political irrelevance? I realize a sentiment like this is a dangerous one to consider. After observing American politics for a few decades one begins to realize that, as in life, there is no such thing as permanence. You can have a decade or more of one party dominance and it can evaporate rather quickly to be followed by a decade of the other side. So one should always hesitate and be wary of triumphalism.
In fact, it’s one of the reasons I predicted in the middle of the celebration of George Bush’s rousing 2004 Presidential victory, that he’d sown the seeds of not only his own demise, but that of the entire Republican Party. I didn’t realize at the time it would result in eight, and possibly even twelve or sixteen years (if Hilary Clinton wins two terms) of consecutive Democratic presidents. But what I do realize is that Republicans won’t always be in as sorry shape as they are today.
Nevertheless, I’m afraid the GOP stands to remain a minority Party for the foreseeable future. Why? Let’s go back to the presidency of the first George Bush. In that era (the 1980s), the Republicans could rally their hardcore constituency with red meat issues. Bush and his capo di tuti, Lee Atwater, called them “wedge” or social issues (or “culture wars”). They were then crime, school prayer, race (welfare), homosexuality, abortion.
These were issues the Republican leadership knew it could or would do little to address. But that this is what aroused the fiery determination of the party faithful. Therefore, like Pavlov’s dog, every four years the leaders rang this bell to bring the voters to the polls. After victory, it put the issues back in the closet and went about legislating and governing on terms set by the leadership (and not the party grassroots).
But a funny thing has happened between then and now. These wedge issues, which were overwhelmingly powerful ones for the GOP have stopped ringing any bells for the majority of Americans. That’s because of the demographic shift in the American population. Instead of being overwhelmingly white, the nation is far more diverse. It is far more brown and black than it ever was. Thirty years ago, some women were satisfied taking direction from their husbands in terms of who they voted for. Now, women are on the cutting edge of advocating for more tolerance regarding these same social issues.
Gay marriage: Democrats are increasingly winning the “culture wars”
George Bush could win an election in 1984 by trotting out a Black rapist and blaming his opponent for freeing him. Now, Americans are far more concerned about policemen killing Black citizens. Then there were a handful of Blacks in Congress. In 2008, we elected our first Black president. Then gays were routinely beaten and harrassed by police and homophobes. Gay rights was part of the agenda of a narrow segment of the American public. In a few years at most, gay marriage will become the law of the land.
While abortion remains a contentious issue, the issues that drove the early feminists to become activists for women’s rights are far more mainstream. It is far easier for the average American to understand the important of equal pay for men and women; of maternity (now “parental”) leave; protection from sexual violence. It’s even possible a woman will become president in 2016.
Now, all the social issues that rang bells for the traditional GOP no longer do. The Party has been slow to recognize this. Its elected officials continue with the dog whistles evoking racial and sexual stereotypes that have long since lost their resonance. It’s one of the reasons I predict that Party will not win a presidential election for some time. Yes, the Republicans can win control of the House or Senate (though usually only in a non-presidential election cycle). But they have far less success in elections that are national in scope.
There is another important wedge issue the Republicans are attempting to exploit to threaten a traditional Democratic stronghold: the Jewish vote. For decades, American Jews have voted anywhere from 60-80% Democratic in elections. Besides, Jewish campaign donations have accounted for up to 40% of funding in presidential primaries. Not to mention that the cities (New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston) and states in which Jews live are often critical in winning elections.
To rack up such high levels of support, Democrats have adopted an exceedingly pro-Israel, Lobby-friendly political platform. There was a time when Aipac could truly say it was bipartisan because Democrats were strongly involved. As Aipac’s Steve Rosen used to say, if he took a blank napkin and told Congress members it was an Aipac-sponsored bill, he could have 70 signatures on it by the end of lunch. And most of them would be Democrats.
Sheldon Adelson is reportedly prepared to go “all in” for Sen. Marco Rubio for GOP presidential primary campaign
But then a funny thing happened: a combination of increasingly chauvinist, nationalist Likud governments mixed with a seemingly endless series of wars and misery inflicted on Palestinians. It has led to a gradual decline in Democratic lockstep support. Bibi Netanyahu’s fawning over his Republican pals in Congress and wealthy GOP donors (like Sheldon Adelson) has only speeded the process.
Of course, the majority of Democratic elected officials still toe the Lobby-line. They still know on which side their campaign bread is buttered. But we’ve now entered an increasingly fluid period in which some leaders are beginning to understand the need for a certain degree of independence and skepticism of the Lobby’s agenda.
Republicans smell blood in the water: as a result they’ve trumpeted the supposed mass defection of Jews from the Democrats. But the rumors of the Party’s death among Democrats are premature. As elected Democrats move ever so slightly left on the issue of Israel, many American Jews do as well, as polls show.
Republicans have succeeded in drawing a small circle of exceedingly wealthy Jewish billionaires into their camp. Ronald Lauder, Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer, Herb Sandler, Seth Klarman, Michael Steinhardt, Aubrey Chernick, and Daniel Loeb have poured hundreds of millions in the Party’s coffers. Their generosity isn’t nearly matched by the few wealthy Democrats like George Soros and a few others.
But just as America as a whole has changed over the past few decades, so has Amerian Jewry. At one time, the Grand Old Men ran the show. We had our Morgenthaus and Stephen Wises. They were our ambassadors to the WASP power elite. We listened and followed their advice because they had the money and the power. To a small extent this is still true in our community.
But as the recent Pew survey of American Jewish attitudes pointed out, the youngest among us don’t adhere to these traditional notions of consensus and restraint. Young American Jews are increasingly secular and increasingly disaffiliated with the mainstream communal institutions. They’re less likely to serve as volunteers or donors in Jewish federations. They join synagogues in lesser numbers.
Their views about Israel are also less certain and “loyal.” While the majority of American Jews continue to consider themselves Zionist and supporters of Israel, they don’t do so with the zeal of their fathers and mothers. Israel is no longer a top priority on the list of what motivates Jewish voters. Despite this, Republicans, thanks to the tantalizing impact of Adelson’s billions, have doubled down on their support for Israel. They never met a settlement they didn’t like. They wave the blue and white whenever Israel attacks Gaza. They threaten war against Israel’s enemies like Iran. They welcome Israel’s prime minister to thumb his nose at the American president.
But little of this draws any large number of American Jews into the Republican column on Election Day. Jews are not impressed. For one, their true priorities are domestic, like most Americans (jobs, education, civil rights). Israel is in ninth place, if that, for most Jews.
These are all reasons why the Republican foray has largely failed. Despite millions raised and spent by the Republican Jewish Coalition to dent Democratic appeal, Jews still turn out in almost precisely the same numbers as they always have for Democratic candidates. Sheldon Adelson may be willing to spend $100 to 150-million to get a Republican elected in 2012 (and I predict at least $200-million in the 2016 cycle), but it has almost no impact on American Jews.
The Brookings Institution published a poll last week which largely reinforces the phenomena I’ve discussed here. It shows that Republicans are displaying an increasingly shrill, slavish support for Israel. Democrats, while still highly supportive, are increasingly willing to doubt the wisdom of a Middle East policy that privileges Israeli interests over American ones.
Here are a few examples: while 63% of American said Israeli settlements were counter-productive; 66% of “high-intensity” Republicans said they were a good thing. Overall, 39% of Americans favored a two-state solution and 34% favored a one-state solution. But 23% of the most committed GOP supporters favored annexation of the Territories and 27% supported “indefinite Occupation.” The most incendiary result was for the question of whether we should support Israel even if American interests diverge from Israel’s. While 41% of Americans agreed with that statement, 66% of the most highly motivated Republicans supported it. 26% of Americans said their main concern in the Israel-Palestine conflict was Israeli interests, while 48% of high-intensity Republicans said this.
Here is how Slate’s writer summarized the poll results:
When Republicans are asked to pick from a range of guiding principles…most…in the absence of a two-state solution, prefer Israeli control of Palestinians, through occupation or annexation, to a single integrated country with equal rights. Thirty-seven percent of Republicans consider Israel one of their top five issues, and most of these people would abandon democracy in order to make sure Israel remains a Jewish-controlled religious state. By a wide margin, this segment of the GOP cares more about Israeli interests than about American interests, human rights, or any other principle.
That’s not McCarthyism or anti-Semitism. It’s reality. And it raises hard questions about what the Republican Party stands for.
Which brings me back to the beginning of this post. The Republican Party is increasingly a minority, rather than a populist movement. It favors wealth and privilege. It favors whiteness. It favors evangelical Christianity. It is also largely a regional party with power based in the South and Midwest. But most of all it is a party favoring Israel, regardless of what Israel does or stands for. This resonates neither with American Jews or Americans in general. Until Republicans can shed this parochialism, they will remain a minority national party.
The next election may well be the test, because it is very possible that the election will go this way: the GOP will get the lion’s share of the Israel Lobby money, and the Democrats will (still) get the lion’s share of the Jewish vote.
And in the wash-up the equation will be this: who gained more?
The GOP with all that money?
Or the Democrats with all those votes?
Because, when it is all said and done, this still remains true: you end up with your bum on the seat because you gathered the most VOTES, not because you’ve garnered the most MONEY.
Right now, the Republicans hold a majority in the House, a majority in the Senate, and a strong majority of governorships and state legislatures. The Republican party is in fine shape at all levels except presidential, and they may very well win the Presidency back next year. Throughout most of the country, its the Dems that are irrelevant. I am not saying this because I am a supporter of the Republicans–I despise them–but facts are facts.
American Jewish affiliation aside, Repubicans do have considerable power. RS seems to suggesting that they are just not very popular, which is probably also true.
It is disturbing that American Jews could put Israeli interests ahead of American interests forthrightly, the mere public suggestion of which was taboo just recently. Something in this murky polity has changed very decidedly.
“Young American Jews … views about Israel are also less certain and “loyal.”” – Well, being vegetarian and singing Kumbaya is a passing phase. Soon enough people grow out of it and though it is easy to relate to the sufferings of the Palestinians, they understand it doesn’t mean the Palestinians are the victims or that they are just.
Their parents had the 6 days war to give them pride and strong connection to the state and right now all there is is some terrorists driving cars into train/bus stations. There also a great blackwashing machine throwing mud even at the great things Israel do. At the end, people are smart enough to sort out the true facts.
@ Tankist: You’re dreaming. Polls for over a decade have shown this as a trend among both young American Jews and young Americans in general. As I said in my post, young people have gradually changed the country’s views on a host of social issues about which their parents were much more conservative including gay marriage, abortion, race, etc. Views of Israel will not improve among this generation as it ages unless Israel radically transforms itself & its approach to its Arab neighbors. You can whistle past the graveyard, but that doesn’t keep death at bay.
Richard – you proved my point.
There are polls for a long time but the trend stays only with the young crowd and does NOT permeate (google translate) to the slightly older generation. It shows that once those youngsters grow just a little, they understand the presumably Palestinian sheep isn’t a prey of Israeli society but the victim of many historical incidents with no will to settle with a reasonable solution.
They understand much of the suffering was caused by neighbouring Arab countries who didn’t allow them to settle 60-70 years ago, the same way 10s of millions of Germans, Bulgarians, Hindus, Muslims and others were settled at the time.
They understand that Israel (even with less attachment than their parents generation) won’t exist if those demand (unjustified in the minds of many) will be met.
You completely misunderstand how polls work. Attitudes we have when young are generally retained over time. Once you lose a young person, you don’t get them back. Young Americans & Jews don’t suddenly transform at the age of 40 or 50 from apathetic about Israel to Gung ho Zionists. Trend lines from youth remain on the same trajectory. And you guys are in big trouble. Thinking that all of a sudden they’ll adopt a pro Israel narrative because they’ll suddenly become older or wiser or more cynical is a pipe dream. Now move on from this thread. No more posts here.
“Once you lose a young person, you don’t get them back” – it that true? With both know it isn’t.
Nobody asked them to become “Gung ho Zionists” just show support and understand the issue a bit better. Understand that Palestinians’ suffering doesn’t mean Israelis’ evilness as some people try to tell young minds.
@Tankist: Traditional Zionists have largely lost the younger generation of American Jews. While there will always be a certain level of support, it will gradually decline & continue doing so unless/until Israel changes radically.
“Gung Ho Zionists” by definition “show support.” And it’s not that they “understand the issue better.” But if you mean they see things the way you do, then yes, Gung Ho Zionists do that too. But there are less & less of them around.
Palestinian suffering does pretty much mean Israeli “evilness,” though one might argue that “evilness” (I don’t think that’s a word by the way) is a bit extreme. But other than that, you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head: Palestinian suffering is a sin & crime perpetrated by Israel.
Since you disregarded my last request not to comment further in this thread, I warn you that the next time you defy such a request you will be moderated.
Tanks said: ” … people are smart enough to sort out the true facts.”
Exactly.
67 years and counting…
I note that RS does not focus much on the role of Jewish organizations as such in calling the shots for everyday American Jews. These organizations all eventually went Zionist not to keep up with their constituents but in order to stay alive, because of funding from the wealthy donors. In a vicious feedback loop now these organizations feed the Zionist enterprise and impact Jewish sentiment through their endless mailings and solitications. I think that these organizations now dominate the American Jewish Ziosphere, but do not represent the majority of American Jews any more than Netanyahu does.
But, what are we to do with Americans who put the interests of foreign countries first? How long will mainstream America tolerate such an affront?
Power, influence and democratic popular representation are not necessarily linked. Very few of us own shares of major banks, but still the big banks have incredible amounts of influence and power in democratic countries. The influence of the US Jewish lobbies is not minuscule even not all Jews in USA do not support them.
The control of US political system is becoming more and more obvious. Now “they” are even linking the giant trade negotiations with EU ( Transatlantic and Trade and Investment Partnership talks) and potential future trade boycotts/sanctions/limitations with Israel. So that EU could not for example demand marking the goods produced in West Bank’s illegal settlements if it wants the TTIP to be reality.
The question begins to be how independent, able to decide and able to hold the decisions the US governmental system is nowadays. In future countries in many cases have to consider is it worth to negotiate with USA if it is the Israeli government, Jewish lobby and some Jewish billionaires who make the decisions and set the policies in the end. Why not ask the Zionists first for authorization and then go to US gentiles saying that your overlords demand you to accept this agreement negotiated with them? For example the trade agreement with EU could be agreed fast when it is illegal, punished with death penalty, to mention Israel in a negative way in EU countries and EU allows 15 Adelson casinos to be build in the capitals and one in Monte Carlo.
I understand that the billionaire Haim Saban has decided to go all out to support Hillary Clinton for the White House. His sophisticated advice about Iran was to “bomb the living daylights out of those sons of bitches”. What is Clinton going to do with this?
I take some small consolation from another bit of his political repertoire:
“In their hour-long discussion, Saban and Adelson had few disagreements, but one concerned how Israel engages with Palestinians. Saban said Israel has no choice but to negotiate with the Palestinians, whose numbers in the region roughly equal those of Israeli Jews.
“What is Israel to do with these 6 million people?” Saban asked. “It is not about granting the Palestinian state. It’s about securing the future of a democratic Israel.” “
(Washington Post, Nov.9 2014)
About Saban vs Adelson: liberals pride themselves to be much more sophisticated than semi-educated yahoos who fund Republican Zionists (and Likud). For example, I cannot imagine Saban urging to detonate a nuke in an Iranian desert and “kill some rattlesnakes” as a prelude to negotiation (next step — nuking Tehran). Everybody with a scintilla of education knows that there are no rattlesnakes in Asia! Similarly, Adelson and obedient sockpuppets know that Palestinians simply do not exists: it is an Arab fiction! But liberals know that the reality is not as convenient as that and there are “6 million people” who may be left unnamed but …
What a lunkhead: I should have the good sense to rid my comment threads of YOU!