Trending Topics:

New poll shows sharp partisan divide on UN settlements resolution, and between Jews and African-Americans

US Politics
on 40 Comments

poll of registered voters from the end of the year shows that on the issue of the UN Security Council resolution against settlements of December 23, there are sharp splits between Democrats and Republicans and between Jews and African-Americans/Hispanics.

There’s a huge partisan divide in the data released by Politico/Morning Consult. Democrats support the UN resolution, by 47 to 16 percent. Among Republicans, it’s the opposite: 43-24 percent against.

And the Democratic Party is divided between traditional blocs: Jews were against the resolution by 47-42 percent. But Hispanics are 44-17 percent for the resolution. And African Americans are 39-18 percent for the resolution. Religious nones/atheists are also strongly for the resolution.

Here’s the raw data, of 2000 registered voters. The UN Resolution question is at page 180. Let’s  drill down a little bit into the numbers.

Registered voters support the resolution, overall, 35-28 percent. Good news for those who oppose settlements: the voters have the politicians’ backs. Break out whites, they support the resolution: 34-31 percent. Though bear in mind, in each of those categories, there are large numbers who are indifferent.

Jews and Protestants stand out as being against the resolution.

Jews: 47 oppose, 42 support. Only 12 percent don’t know. That’s the indifference quota, very low.

Evangelicals: 36-27 percent oppose it. But 37 percent don’t know.

Protestants oppose the resolution, 41-28. But Catholics support, it 39-30.

Here’s the big kahuna in the poll: Atheists/Agnostics/Nones: 43-16 percent support the UN Resolution. That’s whopping. Notice that the Nones/Agnostics/Atheists now make up 478 of the sample of 2000 — nearly a quarter. Jews are only 63. Talk about punching above your weight! Those Nones are what gave Bernie Sanders his oomph on this issue.

More of the partisanship. Clinton voters: 49-14 percent support the resolution. But Trump voters: 46-23 percent oppose it.

The more education, the more support for the Resolution. It’s 46-34 percent support for the resolution among those with post-graduate education. No college, just 32 percent support. And those with a college degree: 37 percent support the resolution.

Change the script. On page 174 of the data, the pollsters ask a different question: Do you see the settlements as a legitimate security measure in a hostile region, or illegal? And there are some interesting results.

The partisan split is the same. Republicans regard settlements as a security measure, 40-18. Democrats go the other way, and see them as illegal, by 38-19.

But on political ideology, the differences are huge. Liberals 42-17 say illegal over a security measure. Conservatives flip the other way, 46-17.

Young people don’t buy the security argument. From ages 18-44, the numbers are about 30-20 percent saying that the settlements are illegal. Between 45 and 55, it’s even. The numbers only start going the other way, for the settlements as a security measure, above age 55.

The religious difference is even more pronounced when you ask whether settlements are a security measure or illegal. Jews go 52-32 percent for them being a security measure, with 16 percent having no opinion.

And while evangelicals line up more or less with Jews, by 35-19 saying it’s a security measure, 47 percent don’t know/have no opinion.

So much for the fervor of the evangelicals. Again: Jews know about settlements. Only 16 percent of Jews don’t know or have no opinion. But among other religions the no opinion numbers are all 39 or higher. Nones/Agnostics/Atheists say they’re illegal, 35-18. But 47 percent have no opinion.

This is important because it shows that while Jews are just 3 percent of the sample, they care more than any other group. They know the story. And they’re conservative on the question.

Bottom lines.

The Democratic Party is fractured. The party blocs of Nones, Higher Educated, African-Americans, Hispanics are against the settlements. Only Jews are for them. That divide is not going away. It’s getting rawer. Norman Finkelstein is surely right that the conflict is politically quiescent/sewn up in Israel/Palestine. But it’s not sewn up here. No: things are busting out all over. Wait till Republicans work to expose the differences. Wait till Keith Ellison and Tom Perez square off over this issue inside the Democratic Party.

Something else. The liberal Zionists constantly tell us that American Jews oppose the settlement project, so Obama was pushing on an open door in the Jewish community. No. Maybe attitudinally they do, but when it comes to our government taking action, the numbers don’t support the liberal Zionist claims. The numbers support the Jewish establishment, which has castigated the Obama administration for the vote. The young Jews are against settlements vociferously; but why do you think the Democratic Party establishment is so against Obama, as we reported the other day? It’s not just the sclerotic leadership, it’s the community. Jews are against Obama on this; and you can bet older Jews overwhelmingly so. Older Jews are donors.

This is why Barney Frank once told Jeff Halper after witnessing the horrors of the settlements: I’m with you, but I won’t commit political suicide till you produce the names of 5000 Jews in my district who support you. He knew the Jewish street, in Newton and Brookline! The Jews were the ones who cared, and they were not really against the settlements. Now can we go forward?



About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

40 Responses

    [email protected]
    January 5, 2017, 2:45 pm

    Thanks for publishing raw data that don’t make liberal zionists happy as they like to portray themselves as the silent Jewish moral majority. However, some of your reported data gives me pause. For example, the 47-42 Jewish opposition to the resolution. This Judaism does not include Jews who classify themselves as nones or non-practicing. And as you point out, the nones overwhelming supported this resolution and Jewish people in particular were the least likely to have a “Don’t know” response to the question. So in essence, if the complete Jewish community were asked, different results would have been obtained suggesting a significant majority support for the resolution.

  2. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    January 5, 2017, 4:20 pm

    There are 2 separate issues: a Palestinian state on the west bank and settlements on the west bank. . I think the two issues overlap in many Jewish minds. I think retaining military occupation of the west bank, from a purely military point of view is safer than having a Palestinian state there. The settlers present themselves as being the obstacle to a dangerous military situation: the Palestinians control the mountain Ridge overlooking the narrow coast.

    Of course there is no such thing as purely militarily, the Palestinians are political beings, humans, with needs and demands that are festering wounds. The occupation is as corrupting as yeshayahu leibowitz asserted. His conclusion: the occupation is more dangerous or indeed toxic, than a Palestinian state.

    The lame duck out of the door, flipping of the bird on the way out, might not bother your average person of color democrat, but it certainly made an impression on Jews. Norm finkelstein’s impression is widespread and not a cause for much Jewish cheer in the mainstream.

    • Mooser
      January 5, 2017, 5:13 pm

      “The lame duck out of the door, flipping of the bird on the way out, might not bother your average person of color democrat, but it certainly made an impression on Jews.”

      So, approval for the settlements is the price of Jewish support for Democrats in the US?

      “The settlers present themselves as being the obstacle to a dangerous military situation”

      Really? Civilian apartments with women and children? As human shields? That’s how the settlers make the military situation less dangerous?

      • genesto
        January 6, 2017, 12:35 pm

        Not only that, but considering the way the settlements are disbursed dis-contiguously throughout the West Bank, they are, by themselves, really a security nightmare for Israel to protect. Remember that the real reason for the Gaza withdrawal of 8000 settlers was because of the headache and expense of providing security for them. It was purely a strategic decision on Israel’s part.

        The whole notion of the settlements actually providing protection for the Jewish state is patently absurd!

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2017, 1:21 pm

        “The whole notion of the settlements actually providing protection for the Jewish state is patently absurd!”

        Gee, “Yonah”, can you tell us how the settlement building and infra-structure is financed, “Yonah”?

    • eljay
      January 5, 2017, 7:39 pm

      || yonah fredman: The lame duck out of the door, flipping of the bird on the way out, might not bother your average person of color democrat, but it certainly made an impression on Jews. … ||

      You appear to be saying that Jews (not Zionists) are not content only with American presidential support for Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in most of Palestine – they expect American presidential support of existing and on-going “Jewish State” colonialism and intransigence (and (war) crimes?) as well.

      Are Jews really as unjust and immoral as you appear to be making them out to be?

      Or did you mean Zionists and you were simply anti-Semitically conflating all Jews with Zionism?

  3. RoHa
    January 5, 2017, 8:46 pm

    I’m going to use this space to point out a technical problem, no doubt caused by Russian hackers.

    Over the past few days I have repeatedly received “Server stopped responding … Time out” messages when trying to view MW.

    This may be a local problem in whatever chain of thingies lies between my modem in Brisbane and the pulsating core of MW in the land beyond the stars, but, if it is at MW’s end, could you please give the server another bottle of gin or whatever is necessary to keep it going?

    • just
      January 6, 2017, 2:21 am

      Very droll, RoHa!

      (I really did laugh out loud, and am still smiling. Thanks!)

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 8:18 am

        Happy to amuse, but is the server problem solved?

    • Mooser
      January 6, 2017, 12:18 pm

      “This may be a local problem in whatever chain of thingies lies between my modem in Brisbane and the pulsating core of MW”

      That’s because it’s uphill most of the way.

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 7:34 pm

        Data flows uphill from MW to Brisbane?

      • Mooser
        January 7, 2017, 2:02 pm

        “Data flows uphill from MW to Brisbane?”

        “Flows”? It doesn’t “flow” my good “RoHa”, it is tortuously driven, every step of the way! Gazillions of electrons trudging and singing “We Are Climbing Jacob’s Ladder”.

  4. Kay24
    January 5, 2017, 9:52 pm

    Maybe your Congressperson is shamelessly giving Israel the green light to continue breaking international laws and stealing lands for illegal squatters. Rep. Engel who should be in the knesset and not in the US congress, and others, have gone against their own President, once again, to kiss up to Israel, and defy the official stance of their own nation. For shame.

    U.S. House Votes to Condemn UN Over Israel, but Two-state Solution Clause Irks Hardliners
    Resolution, which enjoyed bipartisan support, calls on Obama to prevent any additional international moves against Israel while he is still in office.

    “The Royce-Engel resolution expresses opposition to UN Security Council Resolution 2334 and calls for it to be repealed or altered significantly. It also calls on the Obama administration to prevent any future decisions of this kind before his term ends in two weeks’ time. The resolution stressed that international forums like the UN were not the appropriate venue for solving the conflict, and that the United States should focus its efforts on promoting direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. 
    The resolution said that “a durable and sustainable peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will come only through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties resulting in a Jewish, democratic state living side-by-side next to a de-militarized Palestinian state in peace and security.”

    read more:


    • RoHa
      January 6, 2017, 9:03 am

      From this side of the Pacific it looks as though there are plenty of people who are preparing to disrespect and go against their own president, and are, in fact, starting before he has been inaugurated.

      • Kay24
        January 6, 2017, 11:45 am

        No surprise, Putin might even have an office in the West Wing. Unlike Obama it seems Trump seem to attract leaders who lost their respect long time ago. Netanyahu cannot wait to “work”on Trump.

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2017, 1:35 pm

        “Netanyahu cannot wait to “work”on Trump.”

        Wait until it becomes apparent that Trump parrots the last person he talked to, if he likes what they say. And caves in personal confrontation.
        His Administration will be a game of musical seats.

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 5:38 pm

        “Putin might even have an office in the West Wing.”

        You should be so lucky.

        Putin is, if not the most, certainly one of the most respected national leaders in the world.

        But I see your objection to people disrespecting and acting against presidents only applies to specific cases.

      • gamal
        January 6, 2017, 6:59 pm

        “You should be so lucky.

        Putin is, if not the most, certainly one of the most respected national leaders in the world”

        god sake man it’s “I should be so lucky”,

        i would welcome Putin we have a zombei (sic) Kenny, first name Enda but he won’t, in Ireland the greatest person was countess Markievicz, why not Put’n as the Americans have it, i respect you too much to link to Kylie, let Oz retain its dignity.

      • straightline
        January 6, 2017, 9:00 pm

        Unhappily, Roha, Australia seems to be the only one of the 5-eyes that has said that it would “likely have voted” against the resolution, had it been on the SC at the time.

        Incidentally, this should ensure that it is a long time before Australia again gets a seat on the Security Council – great tactics, Julie!

        From this side of the Pacific, it appears that we are bought lock, stock, and barrel by the Zionist cause. Fortunately, there are plenty of people in Australia who are preparing to disrespect and go against their own Prime Minister on this issue. Advance Australia Fair?

      • straightline
        January 6, 2017, 9:16 pm

        Putin lost his respect?

        Leave aside the WaPo rhetoric – just look at the facts. Putin works in Russia’s interests. If only the US had a president from either side of politics who did that, rather than pandering to a foreign power with which it has a significant divergence of interests.

      • Kay24
        January 6, 2017, 9:37 pm

        Putin, according to Pew Research, is not popular in the world. Neither is Obama. I don’t think it will be any kind of luck to have this tyrant in the WH. He has invaded his neighbors, and has interfered in other nations.

        “Outside its own borders, neither Russia nor its president, Vladimir Putin, receives much respect or support, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. A median of only 30% see Russia favorably in the nations outside of Russia. Its image trails that of the United States in nearly every region of the world. At the same time, a median of only 24% in the countries surveyed have confidence in Putin to do the right thing in world affairs, and there is far less faith in the Russian leader than there is in U.S. President Barack Obama”.

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 10:57 pm

        On the other hand…

        He invaded Georgia after Georgia attacked South Ossetia, but who else has he invaded?
        As for interference, his seems to have been invited.

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 11:02 pm

        Straightline, as far as I am concerned, Popeye Julie is a traitor.

        And I think that disrespecting and going against presidents and PMs is often the right thing to do. But Kay at first gave the impression that she thought it was always wrong.

  5. richard vajs
    richard vajs
    January 6, 2017, 9:09 am

    I consider the “settlements” to be such an assault upon basic human rights (as they are land-grabs by armed people against disarmed victims) that I fail to understand how anyone with sentient feelings can possibly see such actions as “security measures”. To me, it is the human rights struggle of our age and to aid the “settlers” is to voluntarily don a “brown shirt”. Indeed it was the prime reason for this Progressive to develop an intense hatred of Hillary Clinton as she was willing to go along with the “settlements” for the sake of political contributions.
    This article points out the general unconcern of most American voters on this issue, but it should also be understood that many of us are very passionate about it. The Zionists are taking serious risks thinking that this issue can continue to be waffled about.

      [email protected]
      January 6, 2017, 2:39 pm

      At the same time most democrats are very happy to point the fingers now at foreign (Russian) involvement in US elections. The democrats are quite correct to see foreign influence on a US election as corrupting. BUT. Mr. Saban is an Israeli citizen as well as US, as is a top contributor to the Clinton campaign. His and other contributors to both parties, are to influence the US in favor for a foreign government. They’re open about their politics. And like the Russian influence it has the smell of influencing US foreign policy in such a way as to condone actions by those who undermine fundamental human rights. Also take note that in both cases, the scale of the foreign meddling is massive not a few bucks here or there. Yes, in my case I voted for Clinton, even as this whole hoopla over foreign influence and incredulous behavior over Putin, betrays the fact that both parties are a party to some foreign influence peddling in direct contradiction to our constitution. Trumps victory did not come in a vacuum of clean and sterile environment in the US. The fact that people are willing to vote as they did sorts supports the reality that basic aspects of our system here in the US are quite broken. And now we have politicians who can’t figure out who to love more. Putin or Bibi. It’s just a matter of time before a horse becomes a US senator.

      • RoHa
        January 6, 2017, 5:54 pm

        You surely don’t believe this tosh about Russian hacking?

      • gamal
        January 6, 2017, 7:13 pm

        forgive me

        “You surely don’t believe this tosh about Russian hacking?”

        loh and behold (google better not let me down, so many slavs around)


        “A russian word describing a naive and extremely trusting person, subject to various frauds and fails”

        – Look, mate! A guy in the street sold me this Rollex for 100$!
        – what a loh you are! that’s a Chinese fake!

      • ritzl
        January 6, 2017, 7:25 pm

        Shorter version: Israel has been “hacking” our elections/political process for decades. With nary a peep.

      • oldgeezer
        January 6, 2017, 11:13 pm


        And under agreeement with GW they get a complete copy of all internet traffic raw. They can datamine 99% of what they want. Granted I am sure they will hack whenever they can

        We all know Israel can trusted with all our private data amd would never abuse it. Choke.

        The relationship as well as our governments are corrupt. Time to throw the rogue state to the fishes and let it sink or swim on it’s own. Such an immoral state with even more immoral goals doesn’t deserve the time of day let alone assistance or support.

        As an ally of the west we can at least be sure they will be nowhere to be seen in the time of need.

      • echinococcus
        January 7, 2017, 12:42 am


        Of course that tosh about Russian hacking is now the official state doctrine of the US of A, including all its elected, selected and unelected organs. Just came back from my compulsory Two-Minute Hate to find most of my favorite Web sites adorned by tasteful little posts about Emmanuel Goldberg, including this page.

      • Sibiriak
        January 7, 2017, 6:20 am

        RoHa: You surely don’t believe this tosh about Russian hacking?


        Well, the case seems airtight, doesn’t it?

        FACT: Putin had a clear preference for Trump.

        FACT: U.S. intelligence says they picked up senior Russian officials celebrating Donald Trump’s win. (Most Russians were celebrating or feeling relief.)

        CONCLUSION: Putin ordered an operation to get him elected.

      • RoHa
        January 7, 2017, 4:36 pm

        Absolutely airtight.

        (FACT: RoHa had a clear preference for Trump.
        FACT: RoHa expressed relief when Trump won.
        CONCLUSION: ….)

      • eljay
        January 7, 2017, 9:18 pm

        || RoHa: Absolutely airtight.

        (FACT: RoHa had a clear preference for Trump.
        FACT: RoHa expressed relief when Trump won.
        CONCLUSION: ….) ||

        Impressive. Is there anything* you can’t do?!  ;-)
        (*Other than ignore misplaced commas and bad grammar.)

  6. Nevada Ned
    Nevada Ned
    January 8, 2017, 1:59 am

    To met the most surprising result is the poll of US Jews, who opposed the UN resolution, but only by 49-42%. That’s pretty close to an even split.

    And if the 49% were older (on the average) than the 42% (which the survey doesn’t address, but it might be true) then we might expect the numbers to tilt in the future against Jewish hawks and in favor of Jewish doves.

  7. hophmi
    January 8, 2017, 10:26 am

    Do you have a point? The polls is meaningless unless the people being polled actually care. Israel is unlikely to be a dispositive issue for the vast majority of Americans. That’s why BDS doesn’t have any real support.

    • just
      January 8, 2017, 11:31 am

      Most Americans do and will certainly care when they find out that their billions of dollars go to fund this genocidal and Occupation statelet. It’s been obvious to many for a long time now. Others are finally becoming aware.

      BDS will continue to blossom and bloom and spread. Just wait and see.


    • Maghlawatan
      January 8, 2017, 1:16 pm

      It is so hopeless that there is an Israeli govt team at ministerial level to fight it. BDS scares the bejaysus out of senior Zionists

    • Nevada Ned
      Nevada Ned
      January 11, 2017, 1:07 am

      At the recent meeting of the MLA, promoters of BDS had quite a bit of support. Unfortunately less than 50% support, but enough to refute Hophmi’s predictable claim that “BDS doesn’t have any real support.

      For more coverage of the MLA meeting, see the recent (Jan 7) article on Counterpunch by Kenneth Surin.

  8. Bandolero
    January 8, 2017, 3:47 pm

    What I find most striking is the gender gap at the question whether people support or oppose the UN SC resolution. While the resulting support is +4 for men and +9 for women in total, meaning the difference is quite small, there seems to be a huge gender gap in the “Don’t know/No opinion” answer: Men: 26%, Women: 46%.

    I find this really stunning. Does anyone have an explanation for this?

Leave a Reply