Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nonstatist
Except for the fact that the majority of Jews in New York during Hillary's Senate race voted for her opponent and not her.

If you have a source for that, I'd love to see it. Knowing what I do about New York politics, I find that very hard to believe.

Heck, even those ultra-orthodox Satmars up in New Square voted for her by a margin of something like 1,100 to 4. Seriously.

13 posted on 05/07/2003 8:21:15 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child
those ultra-orthodox Satmars up in New Square

Ultra-Orthodox Jews in New Square are Skvira Hasidim (hence the name "New Square" which derives from "New Skvira"). Satmars live in Williamsburg and Kiryas Yoel.

With this embarrassing exception, most Orthodox Jews in NY voted for Lazio.

44 posted on 05/07/2003 10:06:25 AM PDT by Alouette (Why is it called "International Law" if only Israel and the United States are expected to keep it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child; Nonstatist
THE ISRAEL SWING FACTOR: HOW THE AMERICAN JEWISH VOTE INFLUENCES U.S. ELECTIONS

In 2000 the electoral shift, on the part of New York's Jewish swing vote, was even more dramatic. Not only did the traditional 30 percent swing vote side against Democrat Hillary Clinton, but even the uncontested 60 percent "base" of the Democrats was eroded, bringing Clinton's Jewish support down to between 53 and 56 percent. 37 As she lost even more than the Jewish votes that were seen to be in play, it could be said that Hillary Clinton completely failed in her appeal to the Jewish community.

But this would be a mistaken interpretation. It ignores a basic difference between the 2000 race and nearly every one that preceded it in recent memory: the normal expectations - of a 60 percent base, a 30 percent swing, etc. - rely on the typical condition that all the candidates are above suspicion with regard to Israel. Even in the case of Robert Abrams, who lost the entire Jewish swing vote, there was no doubt that he was supportive of Israel, not to mention other Jewish concerns. It was simply a matter of what the Jewish community felt it owed Senator D'Amato for his past record.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, entered the New York race on the defensive about her support for the Jewish state. Voters quickly became familiar with her famous call for the establishment of a Palestinian state two years earlier, at a time when even the Israeli-Palestinian terms for negotiation explicitly prohibited taking such steps. That and her public embrace of Suha Arafat, immediately after the Palestinian icon's libelous speech about alleged Israeli practices, became the bane of her campaign in New York's Jewish community. Republican Rick Lazio, by contrast, had been a particularly strident supporter of Israel, even for a Long Island Congressman, although this may not have been widely known. From the onset, Clinton seemed headed for a disastrous showing among Jews.

A poll taken by Zogby International in both May and July had Clinton taking a mere 48 percent of the Jewish vote, which is unprecedented for a Democrat. 38 By September, however, Clinton had gained an advantage, with a new Zogby International poll showing her winning 52 percent of the Jewish vote, a closer approximation to what she actually received. 39

57 posted on 05/07/2003 10:36:54 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
There was some deal for their vote in exchange for releasing or pardoning a member of that group. Anyone else remember?
58 posted on 05/07/2003 10:37:19 AM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion (Free! Read my historical romance novels online at http://Writing.Com/authors/vdavisson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson