There were times during the last few months that it seemed as if Connecticut was the center of the political world. The Democratic Party’s bickering around the country turned into a major battle in Connecticut as Joe Lieberman was defeated in that party’s primary here. William F. Buckley commented that the primary was a move by that party’s “hard-bitten Democratic leftists” who were ”bidding for control of the party.” National tensions were being played out in our state.
Besides the Lieberman-Lamont race, three moderate Republicans in Congress were forced to run on the Bush record instead of their own. With control of Congress in the balance and a block of three seats at stake in one state, both parties flooded the airwaves with ads and spent millions trying to take all three. The Democrats succeeded in making President Bush the issueómost other issues were mainly ignored.
In the end, there were both winners and losers here, and the Jewish community shared in both.
The 40 percent of Jewish voters who chose Ned Lamont in the Democratic primary laid bare the myth of “the Jewish vote.” Long considered monolithic, this vote has been changing for years and has now reached the point that both parties have to compete for it. This election brought this splintering into focus. In an editorial right after the primary, we called this the end of the Jewish vote and posited that a “New Jewish Vote” was emerging both here and throughout the country which could be better defined as a pro-Israel vote and ironically attracts non-Jews and Jews. A candidate’s position on Israel would be more important to this “New Jewish Vote” than what party he or she is in.
It’s our guess that 70 percent of the Jews who voted Nov. 7 cast their vote for Joe Lieberman. Jews who voted for Ned Lamont in the primary also probably voted for him again in the general election. Jewish Independents and Republicans who voted for Joe increased his total vote in the Jewish community. Whatever the totals, the myth of the Jewish vote has been shattered in Connecticut, and Jewish votes here and elsewhere can no longer be considered the sole property of one party.

Congressional races

We knew going into this election that Connecticut’s congressional delegation was very supportive of Israel. The three vulnerable Republicans fit that description, and Reps. Chris Shays and Rob Simmons often took leadership roles in Middle East issues. We don’t know for sure how Chris Murphy, who just won Nancy Johnson’s 5th Congressional District seat, will be on these issues, but judging from our interview with him (see Ledger, Sept. 20), he will be supportive. As we went to press, the outcome of the 2nd District Simmons-Courtney race is not yet clear, but in the end, Connecticut will still have five strong friends of Israel in the House of Representatives.
If Rob Simmons survives, he will continue to be in the most Democratic district represented by a Republican in the country. Chris Murphy’s seat, like Rep. John Larson’s and Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s, will more than likely not be challengeable, and he will be a long-term incumbent.

Fringe elements beaten back

One more note on the Lieberman victory. His overcoming the Lamont challenge makes him one of the most important Democrats in the Senate. He has saved that party from an increasing polarization and he’s strengthened its important middle. As Congress’ most visible Jewish senator, Joe Lieberman’s survival is a tonic to Jews all over the country. Those elements who attacked because of his Jewish visibility (limited though they might be), didn’t succeed. Blogs such as Moveon.org, the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post and other elements of this fringe have been beaten back, and that benefits all of us. His victory also pushes our two major parties to compete with each other for the political center instead of being controlled by the noisy factions shouting at each other from their wings.

Schlesinger was a winner, too

Connecticut’s other Senate candidate, Republican Alan Schlesinger, was a winner, too. Though he only got 10 percent of the vote, that tally reflected the natural pragmatism of voters when confronted with more than two candidates in an election. Nonetheless, Schlesinger proved to be a bright, sensible candidate who articulated his positions well.  Parties in decline tend to produce candidacies built around personalities, and Schlesinger could offer his party an opportunity to coalesce around a cohesive set of positions. The task of rebuilding the Republican Party at the legislative level is daunting, but Alan Schlesinger showed that he’d perfect for that job and some have already mentioned his name as the person who could do it. 

National leadership

A note about national leadership. The Republican Party and the country have been paying the price of an Executive Branch unable to articulate its policy and programs. Whether George Bush is or is not right in much of what he does (and we think that he is more right than wrong), he lacks the ability to communicate, and that taints everything he does. His initiatives and issues have to draw their support first from his party and then the nation as a whole, for no matter how right they are, if unsupported, they are bound to be ineffective. Bush’s too often repeated “Stay the course” logically led to the Democrats’ “Change of Direction,” and this level of discourse is not worthy of the American people.
Similarly, Karl Rove didn’t do much to burnish his reputation in this election. His party was outmaneuvered at every turn with Democrats setting the agenda from beginning to end. Hopefully, blame for Republican losses doesn’t fall on the shoulders of people like party head Ken Mehlman, for if Rove’s record is more fully scrutinized, it might become clear that both Bush victories for which he is credited, were unnecessarily close-run, and this election was more of the same that broke the wrong way. When a party has difficulty mobilizing their base it more than likely has much to do with the lack of clarity of its message.

Exercise in democracy

And finally, we all are winners in this election because no matter how hard fought and exhausting, it gives us an outcome we’ll agree to live with until it is time to choose again.
This election was another of those brilliant exercises in democracy that makes our country so special. As long as our voices are heard, we will remain a free country and free people in this blessed land.

–nrg

Comments are closed.