New York Jewish Week: Democratic Voters Seen ‘Nuanced’ On Israel

May 22, 2019

By Shira Hanau

As pollsters try to tease out the potential results of an overstuffed Democratic presidential primary field, a portrait is beginning to emerge of what Democratic primary voters — and Jewish voters who comprise an important chunk of that electorate — want in a potential challenger to President Trump when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and other issues.

Two new polls — one from J Street, the dovish lobby group, and one from the non-partisan Jewish Electorate Institute — make clear that Democratic primary voters want the United States to be an “honest broker” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that Jewish voters and Democratic primary voters believe one can be pro-Israel while criticizing the Israeli government.

“People are following the issue [the Israeli-Palestinian conflict], they are supportive of Israel, but they also hold very nuanced views,” said pollster Jim Gerstein of GBAO Strategies, the firm that conducted the J Street poll.

While still eight months away from the first Democratic caucus vote in Iowa, the polls may help define the terms of Democratic debate around Israel. While support for Israel has long been the standard in the party, recent years have seen parts of the party re-evaluating its longstanding positions regarding Israel. The 2018 midterm elections brought several new faces to Congress, some of whom have espoused support for the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israel or interest in reviewing America’s financial support for Israel.

While the activist wing of the party views its upsets against longtime Democratic members of Congress as a victory over the party’s centrist establishment, the presidential primary may become an even stronger referendum on the direction for the party. While support for Israel may come under scrutiny in that fight, recent polling suggests it is unlikely to determine the outcome.

Last week’s J Street poll suggests that Democratic primary voters largely do not prioritize the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in their voting decisions, and that Democratic party voters are more inclined towards a candidate who is viewed as a “neutral broker” between the Israelis and Palestinians than one perceived to lean towards one side.

The survey, which was conducted between May 1 and May 5 via landlines and cell phones and included responses from 800 likely Democratic presidential primary voters, showed that Democrats are loathe to choose one side over the other in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

When presented with a choice between a hypothetical candidate who “supports both Israel and the Palestinians,” “supports Israel” or “supports Palestinians,” 75 percent of those polled chose the candidate who supports both. When asked if one could be critical of Israeli government policy while still being pro-Israel, 81 percent of respondents said yes.

The Jewish Electorate Institute’s poll, which surveyed 1,000 Jewish voters and was conducted online between May 6 and May 12, suggested a similar dynamic. While 90 percent of respondents to the JEI poll identified themselves as pro-Israel, 53 percent of those polled were critical of at least some of Israel’s current government policies, suggesting that pro-Israel voters are not a monolith.

“This poll helps to define a new playbook for Democratic candidates on Israel and Palestine,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street’s president, of the J Street poll in a call with reporters last week. “The preferred position for Democratic primary voters is to find a candidate who recognizes that there needs to be a balance between both sides.”

When asked to rate their feelings towards Israel and the Palestinians, less than half of respondents to the J Street poll said they had a favorable view of either Israel or the Palestinians, with 41 percent viewing Israel favorably versus 16 percent viewing Israel unfavorably, and 32 percent viewing the Palestinians favorably and 19 percent viewing the Palestinians unfavorably. Of those who follow the Israeli-Palestinian conflict very closely, 53 percent viewed Israel favorably and 20 percent viewed it unfavorably.

But the priority given to Israel in respondents’ voting decisions seems to be low. While a large portion of respondents follow the Israeli-Palestinian conflict “closely,” just 19 percent of respondents said they follow the conflict “very closely.” Older respondents followed the conflict much more closely than younger respondents, with 71 percent of respondents over age 65 saying they follow the conflict closely compared to 49 percent of those ages 18-29 who said the same.

Jewish voters seem to be equally disinclined to prioritize Israel over domestic issues. Respondents to the JEI survey ranked Israel lowest in a list of 16 policy priorities for Jewish voters. Issues like protecting Medicare and Social Security, making affordable health care available to all Americans, and enacting gun safety laws were among the highest priorities for Jewish voters.

For Jewish voters surveyed by JEI, anti-Semitism may be a more pressing issue when it comes time to vote in 2020. Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of respondents said they believed the United States is currently less secure for Jews than it was two years ago. When asked whether President Trump was “at least partially responsible” for attacks on synagogues, Jewish voters were less united, with 59 percent saying he bore some responsibility and 41 percent saying he did not. A majority, 71 percent, disapproved of President Trump’s handling of anti-Semitism.

Summarizing the poll, Stan Greenberg of Greenberg Research, which conducted the survey, said, “The results demonstrate that domestic issues dominate the policy priorities of the Jewish community as they determine which candidate to support in the 2020 election, as opposed to issues related to Israel, which remains the lowest policy priority of Jewish voters. The results also demonstrate that the Jewish American electorate remains overwhelmingly opposed to President Trump, motivated largely by the Jewish community’s positions on domestic policy issues.”

J Street’s Ben-Ami emphasized the political risk for Democratic candidates who are aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu has cultivated a close relationship with President Trump, even going so far as to name a new settlement in the Golan Heights after the American president. (Many in the Jewish community have hailed President Trump for moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights; liberal groups have pointed out that the unilateral nature of the moves is problematic.)

Democratic voters seemed to reject the closeness of the Trump-Netanyahu relationship in their responses to J Street’s poll. When presented with the description of “a candidate who says he or she strongly supports Israel, and the United States must stand behind all of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies,” 61 percent said they would be less likely to vote for that candidate. Of “a candidate who says the United States should continue financial and military aid to Israel without any restrictions, regardless of whether Israel expands settlements or annexes Palestinian territory,” 69 percent said they would be less likely to support that candidate.

The J Street poll suggested that the BDS movement — which has been a target of those on the Jewish right and members of Congress from both sides of the aisle — was even less of a priority for Democratic primary voters. When asked about the movement against Israel, 63 percent of voters said they had not heard of it. Among those who said they follow the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just 6 percent said they had heard “a great deal” about it and 7 percent said they had heard “a good amount” about it. When asked if they supported legislation that would penalize BDS supporters, 61 percent of those who opposed BDS said they opposed legislation to penalize those who boycott Israel.

“Democratic voters do not know what that movement [BDS] is, and the movement has no real support or opposition among Democratic voters,” said Ben-Ami. “BDS is a non-issue and the legislation to combat it is unpopular.”

Antisemitism is a warning sign. Are we listening?

By Eileen Filler-Corn • July 3, 2025
In the nearly two years since Hamas’s brutal Oct. 7 attack on Israel, American Jews have watched a disturbing rise in antisemitism take place across America — and crucially, among some of our longtime allies. For decades, Jewish Americans stood at the forefront of progressive causes, marching for civil rights, fighting for reproductive freedom and advocating for immigrants and the marginalized. My Jewish faith is what first drove me to public service. The Jewish concept of tikkun olam — our responsibility to repair the world — is not just a religious tenet but a moral call to action. It’s why we’ve always shown up to defend others. Yet now, as antisemitism surges to record levels, many progressive organizations and leaders who once stood with us have gone quiet; or worse, turned their backs entirely. It’s no longer just about Israeli policy. The line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism has been crossed so many times it’s barely a line at all. “Zionist” has become a stand-in for “Jew,” and the message is clear: Unless you disavow the world’s only Jewish state, your place in many progressive spaces is no longer welcome. The picture is sobering. There have been calls to ban “Zionists” from Pride events. Many women’s groups have shrugged at Hamas’ rape of Israeli women. And the Democratic nominee for mayor of America’s most populous city has a pattern of antisemitic rhetoric and has refused to condemn the hurtful call to “globalize the intifada,” a rallying cry that has been used to incite violence against Jews. This didn’t happen overnight, but the silence from many who claim to fight for justice has been deafening and deeply painful. I know what it feels like to be targeted for who you are. In January 2020, shortly after I became the first woman and the first Jewish Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, the FBI uncovered a plot to assassinate me. Two members of a neo-Nazi domestic terrorist group had targeted me. It was the most serious of many threats I received during my time as Speaker. Thankfully, law enforcement intervened in time. But the threat was real, and it reminded me that hatred knows no single party or ideology. We’ve long seen this kind of extremist hate on the right, but today that same danger is rising on both extremes of the ideological spectrum. Antisemitism spreads under different names but with the same devastating consequences. Now, with the recent war between Israel and Iran, we’re likely to see a fresh wave of anti-Zionism and antisemitism. It is already giving rise to a new round of dangerous conspiracy theories laced with antisemitic tropes: accusing American Jews of dual loyalty; suggesting we control foreign policy; and portraying Jewish political engagement as part of a shadowy cabal influencing Washington. This is a moment of moral testing. Will our leaders speak clearly and forcefully against antisemitism, even when it’s politically inconvenient? Will those who champion diversity and inclusion apply those values to Jews as well? And will we be honest about how bad actors have exploited division, stoked extremism and enabled those who traffic in hate? Just as many Americans oppose President Donald Trump’s leadership while still loving this country and believing in its promise, the same is true for Israel. You can criticize or reject Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government and still support Israel’s right to exist, to defend itself and to thrive as a Jewish and democratic state. That distinction matters. Criticizing a government is not the same as condemning a people; but when it comes to Israel, that line is too often deliberately blurred. We must be able to hold leaders accountable without fueling hatred or questioning a nation’s fundamental legitimacy. Antisemitism is not merely a problem faced by Jews — it is a bellwether for the health of our democracy. When a society tolerates hatred against one group, it gives license to hate others. When threats against public servants go unchallenged, violence becomes normalized. I was reminded of that tragic reality when my friend and former counterpart, former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, was executed in her home along with her husband, Mark. Authorities say her killer was a politically motivated extremist who had compiled a list of Democratic lawmakers. Melissa was a principled leader and a friend. Her death was a heartbreaking loss and a flashing red warning sign for the tolerance of hate in our democracy. We cannot afford to treat this moment as normal. It is time for our allies to rejoin us. To speak up when we are threatened. To see antisemitism for what it is: a growing, dangerous force that must be confronted head-on. Because if we wait until it affects everyone, it will already be too late. Eileen Filler Corn is a JEI Board Member and Former Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, and the only ever Jewish speaker in VA
JEI logo - blue and red star

Letter to House Judiciary Committee on Anti-Semitism

July 1, 2025
July 1, 2025 U.S. House Committee On The Judiciary 2142 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Now in our ninth year, the nationally and internationally recognized Jewish Electorate Institute (JEI), an independent, non-partisan, non-profit organization, continues to serve as the barometer for the Jewish electorate. We are therefore honored to submit the following Comments for the Record to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee in support of its June 24, 2025, hearing on antisemitism - Rising Threat: America’s Battle Against Antisemitic Terror. This hearing, punctuated by the moving testimony of Matt Nosanchuk, reminded us that Jewish safety in America is not a political football - it is a national imperative. Nosanchuk, a former senior official in both the Obama and Biden Administrations and a lifelong advocate against antisemitism, laid bare the stark realities we face. The murder of Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, who were attending a Jewish community event just blocks from his home, brought the crisis home - literally and painfully. It also underscored a chilling truth: this could have been any one of us. Antisemitism today does not discriminate based on geography, profession, or even political identity. Nosanchuk rightly challenged both ends of the political spectrum. From the right, we've seen rising indulgence of white nationalist rhetoric, normalization of Nazi imagery, and an embrace of conspiracy theorists. When antisemitism is tolerated—or worse, weaponized—by public officials and influential institutions, it emboldens violence and undermines the rule of law. The example of the pardoning of the person wearing a “Camp Auschwitz” shirt at the riot on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, was not just shocking to the Jewish community – it was symptomatic of a deeper, corrosive tolerance for hate. From the left, antisemitism also too often masquerades as political critique. When Jews are asked to renounce their ties to Israel to participate in coalitions, or when pro-Palestinian activism turns violent against Jews, with intimidating targeted rhetoric and violence, that’s not solidarity – it’s exclusion and scapegoating. Our Jewish identity should never be a precondition for political participation. What we need is not partisan grandstanding, but comprehensive action. That includes implementing the Biden Administration’s well-thought-out National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, restoring funding for civil rights enforcement at the Justice Department, and condemning hate, regardless of its ideological source. Nosanchuk’s call for education, prevention, and cross-community solidarity is exactly right. In closing, it’s our view at JEI that using antisemitism as cover for draconian immigration or university policies erodes the democratic institutions that have allowed Jewish life to flourish. Fighting hate must not become an excuse to violate civil liberties - ours or anyone else’s. Our safety as Jews has always been linked to the safety of others. In this perilous moment, we must demand more than soundbites. We must demand seriousness, solidarity, and above all, solutions. We are grateful to the Committee for having held this vital hearing at a perilous moment for American Jews. Sincerely, Barbara Goldberg Goldman Chairperson The Jewish Electorate Institute

JEI Statement on escalation and Support on Israel Security

June 18, 2025
Washington, DC — As hostilities between Israel and Iran intensify, the Jewish Electorate Institute (JEI), a nonpartisan political nonprofit, is calling on Congress to take all necessary measures to support Israel’s security, halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and help bring the hostages home.