The Times Insists on Talking About Jewish ‘Voters,’ Not Donors…

US Politics
on 16 Comments

One of the most emailed stories in yesterday’s Times is a story I’ve covered repeatedly here, Obama’s difficulties courting Jews. The Times emphasized the importance of the at-first private meeting Obama had with 100 Cleveland Jews last week, the meeting I’ve compared to Kennedy meeting the Protestant ministers in 1960, and then it offered this analysis:

Jews make up about 1.7 percent of the adult population, but they are a
stronghold of the Democratic base and important to the party’s
fund-raising. Over all, Jews made up 5 percent of the voters when more than 20 states voted on Feb. 5…

And that’s all. These statements beg the obvious question, whether Jews are not far more important as donors than they are as voters. Yet the Times repeatedly refers to Obama’s efforts with "Jewish voters." Is that really the problem? I have many times cited a Washington Post assertion that Jews make up half the givers to Democratic candidates; and added my own reporting, from Clintonite  Steve Rabinowitz, that if anyone did a study of how much Dem money comes from Jews, it would fuel conspiracy theories…

Shouldn’t the Times get past the hypocrisy here? Shouldn’t it describe the actual power of Jews in the political process, and the reasons that Obama has been so craven? I’d like to know about this in real detail. And the story would get a lot of attention…

    Leave a Reply