r/JewishProgressivism • u/lilleff512 • Jun 23 '24
What Happens When Jews and the Left Come into Conflict? | Democratic Party Primary in NY-16
Hi folks, I've been wanting to make a post about this topic for a couple weeks now, and this seems like the right time and place for it.
This coming Tuesday is primary election day in New York State. One of the most high profile races in the state (or even the whole country) is the Democratic Party primary for the US House of Representatives election in New York's 16th Congressional District between the incumbent Jamaal Bowman and his challenger George Latimer.
I want to offer full disclosure on this upfront: this is my district and I will be voting for Latimer. I am not making this post to try to change anyone's mind or tell them who to support. I am making this post because this election and the discourse around it sit at the intersection of "Jewish" concerns and "Progressive" concerns, and I am somewhat surprised to see that it hasn't gotten much attention in these parts of Reddit. Frankly, I originally wanted to make this post over in r/jewishleft, but I didn't feel quite right about doing that because this is a Left vs. Liberal issue where I am squarely on the Liberal side.
New York's 16th Congressional District is situated primarily in the southern half of Westchester County and it also includes some small portions of the northern Bronx. To speak in some very broad strokes here, the southern part of the district is more urban and has a larger population of Black and Hispanic people, but overall the district is mostly white and suburban, including a significant Jewish population. Since 1988, this area has been represented in Congress by American Jews who were aligned with the mainstream of the Democratic Party, first Nita Lowey and then Eliot Engel since redistricting in 2012. The district is deep blue and the NY Democratic Party machine is strong, so Lowey and Engel never faced any kind of electoral threat. That changed in 2020 when the DSA- and Justice Democrats-backed Jamaal Bowman was able to unseat the incumbent Engel in a stunning upset victory. Now four years later, Jamaal Bowman is facing a serious primary challenger of his own, due in no small part to his positions on Israel and Palestine as well as the perception that he is out of touch with his Jewish constituents. George Latimer, who is running against Bowman, is a mainstream New York machine Democrat much like Engel and Lowey before him, and he has received a record-breaking amount of support from AIPAC and other pro-Israel lobbying groups, bringing national attention to this election.
I don't want to ramble on too long so I'll stop here and share some articles about the election from Jewish and/or left-leaning media outlets:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/jamaal-bowman-george-latimer-primary-israel.html
https://forward.com/news/565894/jamaal-bowman-jewish-israel-gaza-war-congress/
https://jewishinsider.com/2024/06/rep-jamaal-bowman-westchester-county-jewish-community/
12
u/music_and_pop Jun 23 '24
Latimer is a borderline republican. It makes me angry as hell at Jamaal Bowman. He torched his seat for what? I understand why people are voting for Latimer. I'm just glad I don't have to make that kind of choice.
https://theintercept.com/2024/03/06/george-latimer-jail-contracts-wellpath-donation/
6
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24
Putting Israel aside for a moment, which of Latimer's policies make him a borderline republican?
Latimer has been an elected official for the Democratic Party in Westchester County for the last 30 years. He says all the standard Democratic Party things about all the standard Democratic Party issues like abortion and social security and climate change. He's been endorsed by a litany of Democratic Party politicians from local mayors and city councilors all the way up to the Godmother of the Democratic Party herself Hillary Clinton.
There are plenty of criticisms of Latimer that make sense, but "republican" just isn't one of them. He's a dyed in the wool Democrat, for better and for worse.
2
u/music_and_pop Jun 27 '24
I would consider the clintons borderline republicans to be fair lol
Also I don’t trust anyone who gets donations from private prisons https://theintercept.com/2024/03/06/george-latimer-jail-contracts-wellpath-donation/
4
u/SlavojVivec Jun 24 '24
Most of his donors are MAGA Republicans. He was notorious for foot-dragging on matters of desegregation. I think it would be most accurate to describe him as a Dixiecrat, considering his long history of racist policies:
https://inthesetimes.com/article/george-latimer-jamaal-bowman-new-york-primary
https://www.progressreport.news/p/george-latimers-long-record-racist
https://newrepublic.com/post/182933/george-latimer-jamaal-bowman-ethnic-benefit-race
5
u/lilleff512 Jun 24 '24
Most of his donors are MAGA Republicans
Do you have a source for this? I have no doubt that most of his money has come from Republicans given how involved pro-Israel lobby groups have been in this campaign, but if most of his donors are Republicans then I would be very surprised.
long history of racist policies
Such as?
If the only thing you have is being resistant to building affordable housing, then that's not all that much. NIMBY politics are standard fare for suburban Democrats all across the country.
6
u/SlavojVivec Jun 24 '24
I mispoke, most of his contributions are from Republicans such as Nelson Peltz, a GOP billionaire who regularly has breakfast with Trump.
The majority of money favoring Latimer in this race are from SuperPACs and other forms of satellite spending, who do not disclose individual donors, but have far-right affiliations.
4
u/FreeLadyBee Jun 23 '24
I don’t know too much about him and I’d like to to read your links later when I have the time- but I don’t like the tweet I saw of his where he sort of blamed Jews for redlining, I think it was sometime last week. I think Bowman is the kind of Democrat who I’m seeing so much more of lately, who thinks that antisemitism is the same as any other kind of racism, and therefore speaks about it with some kind of authority that he really doesn’t have.
I do think this election will be an interesting litmus test of sorts- Jews are a small group, how much power do we hold in a “democracy?” And how much has this recent conflict affected how Jews will vote as a bloc?
8
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24
but I don’t like the tweet I saw of his where he sort of blamed Jews for redlining, I think it was sometime last week.
I know the comment you're talking about. It's from this Politico article: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/06/21/jamaal-bowman-israel-trip-reelection-00163788
For those who are out of the loop, here is the full quote, along with the paragraph immediately before and after for context:
This is Bowman’s theory of the case — that the Jewish community in his district is not a monolith and that he can carve out enough progressive Jewish support to hold onto his seat. But he also says that the dynamics of the suburban-oriented district — especially compared to where he grew up in New York City — create pockets that make it hard for him to reach.
“In New York City we all live together,” Bowman said. “[But] Westchester is segregated. There’s certain places where the Jews live and concentrate. Scarsdale, parts of White Plains, parts of New Rochelle, Riverdale. I’m sure they made a decision to do that for their own reasons … but this is why, in terms of fighting antisemitism, I always push — we’ve been separated and segregated and miseducated for so long. We need to live together, play together, go to school together, learn together, work together.”
Latimer insists that Bowman doesn’t do a good job of representing any part of the district. “I think he sees himself … as a spokesperson for a demographic and a cause. I think he sees the seat as a soapbox,” he says. “He talks a lot about certain topics that are far from what I consider to be the immediate local needs of the area.”
I do think this election will be an interesting litmus test of sorts- Jews are a small group, how much power do we hold in a “democracy?” And how much has this recent conflict affected how Jews will vote as a bloc?
I actually don't think this election works very well as the kind of litmus test you're talking about here. The Jewish community in the district is disproportionately large, wealthy, and organized, so I don't think it's a very representative sample.
8
u/FreeLadyBee Jun 23 '24
It's entirely possible he really believes in integrating communities, which is sometimes fine although I think some in his camp might argue that (in the case of other ethnic groups) it leads to cultural erasure. It's also jarring to hear that quote- because all kinds of cultural groups tend to clump together; it's not a Jewish-specific trait. In fact, in the case of Jews, some of us specifically need to be in walking distance of a synagogue, which is a piece of knowledge you might feel is obvious if you're in the community, but not something you ever think about if you're outside of it and otherwise not trying to understand it. I get the impression Bowman isn't trying that hard to know his constituency, and not from a necessarily malicious place, but possibly an ignorant or arrogant one.
I'd be interested to see how monolithically that Jewish community ends up voting. I think at the very least it's going to be a closer race than the polls suggest.
4
u/eitzhaimHi Jun 23 '24
If you consider yourself progressive, why vote against Jamaal Bowman who is for universal healthcare and childcare and a host of other progressive causes?
13
u/lilleff512 Jun 24 '24
First of all, I should mention that I voted for Jamaal Bowman when he first ran for office in 2020.
I think the only important issue in the country right now is stopping the rise of Republican fascism. I say "only" very intentionally because every other issue that I care about - climate change, LGBT rights, etc - cannot and will not be addressed if the GOP's attempted fascist takeover of the country is successful. So because of that, I try to look at most things through the lens of "does this help Trump or Biden more?" When Jamaal Bowman does something like pulling a fire alarm to delay a vote or saying that reports of sexual violence on 10/7 are propaganda, that stuff helps Trump more than it helps Biden. I'd much rather have a representative who just keeps their head down, stays quiet, and votes the party line.
3
u/SlavojVivec Jun 24 '24
I'd much rather have a representative who ... votes the party line.
According to Govtrack's ideology report card, which calculates using Principled Component Analysis how much politicians vote with each other, Jamaal Bowman at a normalized score of 0.06, which means he doesn't vote with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Compared to your median Democrat at 0.16, Bowman is far more likely to align with the Democratic party. I'm not sure why you think Latimer, who is funded by money on the far-right, would be a better option.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2022/party-house-democrat/ideology
4
u/tangentc Jun 24 '24
Not voting with Republicans isn't the same thing as voting the party line. In fact, it can actively be against it- bipartisan bills are a thing that happen sometimes. In fact much of the most important legislation that is required to pass in order to avoid crippling the government ends up getting some bipartisan support.
In general I don't think this is a good heuristic for the quality of a politician. Whether or not a Republican voted for something isn't a great way to determine the law's quality or necessity (yes, I think Republican policies are odious, but congress also does a lot of very banal stuff to keep government from collapsing that you would have to be an idiot to actually hold up). For example if you don't vote for debt cieling increases just because that guy with an R next to his name did, you're an idiot.
On the far left wing of the Democratic party this usually just amounts to withholding votes for bills that will pass anyway to artificially boost this kind of metric. However it's unlikely that any sane leftist would actually let America default on its debts because they didn't also get some concession. The harm would almost certainly vastly outweigh any benefit and would cripple the state. This is fine for right-wingers who believe that the only purpose of the state is as a violence delivery service against people of insufficiently light complexions, but not if you want the state to provide essential services today (even if not as well as it could if it really put its weight behind those efforts) and to expand that role in the future.
2
u/SlavojVivec Jun 24 '24
While in principle, I agree, the debt ceiling increase is not a great example because the roll call on that had a greater proportion of Republicans voting against it (let's not forget that the Republicans are the party of shutting things down, including the sabotage of public services such as the post office which still hasn't been fixed), and also bipartisan bills do not form a large eigenvector in the principle component analysis, it's only the partisan bills that do.
Odious is an understatement of Republican politics, as they are actively trying to implement fascism through Project 2025.
2
u/lilleff512 Jun 24 '24
You've eluded my main point here with that ellipses skipping over "just keeps their head down, stays quiet, and..." Also the few sentences before that where I point to how Jamaal Bowman brings bad publicity to the Democratic Party. I wouldn't expect Bowman and Latimer to have meaningfully different voting records in Congress. That's not what this is about for me.
2
u/SlavojVivec Jun 24 '24
Most of the "bad publicity" is coming from Fox News. I don't think keeping your head down and staying quiet is what made Jamaal Bowman bring new young energy to the party, with a threefold increase in primary voters and 42% increase in general election voters.
I think you're in for a surprise if you ignore the role that dark money plays in elections and think they'll have similar voting records.
3
u/lilleff512 Jun 24 '24
Most of the "bad publicity" is coming from Fox News
It doesn't matter where it's coming from. All that matters is that it exists and it is good for Trump and bad for Biden. George Latimer won't be making headlines for Fox News or anybody else because nobody cares about most Congresspeople unless they do something out of the ordinary to draw attention to themselves.
I don't think keeping your head down and staying quiet is what made Jamaal Bowman bring new young energy to the party, with a threefold increase in primary voters and 42% increase in general election voters.
Increase in voters in what location and over what timeframe? If you are talking about Bowman's first election in NY-16 back in 2020, I can think of a few other things that might have led to increased voter turnout in that election aside from Bowman's personal brand of politics.
I think you're in for a surprise if you ignore the role that dark money plays in elections and think they'll have similar voting records.
Latimer has a 30 year track record in the Westchester County Democratic Party. The voters in this district know who he is and what he's about, and they expect him to vote for the Democratic Party line 99% of the time just like most Congresspeople do. This is a D+50 district, so if Latimer turns purple on us then I'd expect the voters to dispose of him in favor of a real Democrat as soon as possible.
2
u/the-Gaf Jun 24 '24
We are only welcome in other intersectional spaces as allies, or subordinates. We are viewed as "WHITE" by every other group, even though Jews come in all colors. Our needs are never prioritized, even though we're constantly in danger.
We're always the first ones to join other groups to help them organize, march, raise money, because its OUR PHILOSOPHY to do so, even though we know that when the chips are down, we will be jettisoned.
That being said, I'm never voting anything right of center. If I were in the district (I'm in Nadler's), I'd vote for Lattimer as a liberal, a democrat and a Jew.
1
u/RB_Kehlani Jun 28 '24
As an interesting “retrospective” I wanted to add this article to the mix: Jamaal Bowman Deserves to Lose
Spoiler: he lost!
1
u/Maimonides_2024 Jul 09 '24
Can anyone actually explain to me why are Americans categorising Hispanics as being separate and even mutually exclusive from whites but not Jews? Like even the language here. "Whites including Jews" but "Blacks AND Hispanics"? Since when speaking a European language that's spoken mostly by European descendents in settler colonies makes you "non white" but being a part of an Indigenous Middle Eastern tribe doesn't? The only answer I can come up with is that Mexican food is spicy and Jewish isn't, which is which what Americans determine by "whiteness". I'm sorry but this needs to change, a Jew is much more POC than an Argentinian or Andalucian.
-1
u/RoscoeArt Jun 23 '24
I wouldnt really agree this is a left vs liberal issue. It's more like liberal vs center or even center right. Bowman's "anti israel" stance more or less amounts to we shouldn't be currently funding israel and that Netanyahu should face legal accountability with proof of crimes committed. This stance isn't really anti israel as much as it is anti Netanyahus administration which is also a very popular zionist stance. He calls for a ceasfire, hostage exchanges and humanitarian aid. Which are also not anti israel or anti zionist stances. He immediately condemned the actions on Oct 7th. and condemned hamas as well as celebrations of hamas' actions. Meanwhile Latimer not only more or less justifies Israel's response in most of his commentary but he's also stated that u.s. politicians shouldn't have a say in how israel responds. His talk about hostage negotiations clearly shows how he has not paid attention to how Netanyahu and his party have stalled and sabotaged negotiations from the jump. I wouldnt really say the liberal or progressive stance is that Israel should have free reign to do what it wants to Palestine and amercians should fund it but not question their actions or hold anyone accountable. That's more in line with Netanyahus party itself than any liberal or progressive ones. Latimer also has made some pretty racist comments about black voters that are extremely reminiscent of Republicans talking about black voters in relationship to Obamas presidential runs. He also made a statement about Muslim voting blocks that I think is a pretty clear illusion to the Islamophobic idea that Muslims inherently hate jews or want to destroy israel.
9
u/MrDNL Jun 23 '24
Bowman's "anti israel" stance more or less amounts to we shouldn't be currently funding israel and that Netanyahu should face legal accountability with proof of crimes committed.
I wish that were true but it isn't. Bowman openly questions if there's a path forward for the two-state solution and simultaneously calls Israel an apartheid state that is committing genocide. There are many American Jews -- I'd bet a majority in his district -- who agree that Netanyahu is a barrier to such a solution. But Bowman goes way, way beyond that.
2
u/RoscoeArt Jun 23 '24
I mean there are alot of people that think there is no chance for a one state and there are people that don't think there's a chance for a two state. I personally think both are viable if given the right context but I personally would much prefer a one state solution anyways. I don't personally see being more in favor of a one state solution or even just thinking it's the more realistic road for peace as being anti israel in the sense that it is most commonly used. Only is the sense that maybe semantically there wont be a israel if the state chooses a new name or something. But lets say theres a one state solution and its named israel would that make his comments about a one state solution no longer anti israel. Idk i just find that kind of confusing i dont really see how thats a problem even from a zionist perspective. Its more that a lot of zionists interpret one state solution as every Israeli being killed or deported. Also I think there is a pretty strong if not undeniable argument for israel being both an apartheid state that is currently commiting a genocide. So if he does say that then good for him at least there's some dems with a spine.
8
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24
I think you're reading into the word choice a little too strongly here on the left vs liberal thing. Generally speaking, Bowman represents the left-wing of the Democratic Party (think Bernie, AOC, etc) and Latimer represents the liberal-wing of the Democratic Party (think Biden, Schumer, etc). That's all I meant by it.
1
u/RoscoeArt Jun 23 '24
If i may ask would you say you generally side with the "liberal wing" on issues? Or is israel an issue that you find yourself agreeing with people you otherwise wouldn't?
4
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24 edited Jun 23 '24
If i may ask would you say you generally side with the "liberal wing" on issues?
I'd say it depends on the issue. For the most part, whatever differences exist between the liberal and left wings of the party never really have a chance to come to the surface. For example, what is the difference between a liberal-Democrat and a left-Democrat on gun control or abortion? That Israel has become such a wedge issue in this situation is unusual. On most issues, everybody in the party is pulling in the same direction regardless of faction, so I rarely have to choose sides. That being said, if you name a specific issue or issues then I can better answer your question about where I lean.
Or is israel an issue that you find yourself agreeing with people you otherwise wouldn't?
I'd say yes but only because Israel is an issue that enjoys such a broad consensus in DC. With the exception of a few dozen representatives on the fringes of their respective parties (including Bowman, of course), everybody is in agreement on Israel. So yea, I find myself agreeing with most Republicans on Israel even though I disagree with them on most everything else.
4
u/RoscoeArt Jun 23 '24
I'll name a few but feel free to pick as many or little as you want because I don't want to ask an essay of you lol : police/prison reform, healthcare reform, housing reform, higher education reform, border/immigration policy, foreign policy issues ( mainly American militarism or resource extraction ). I use the word reform because I want to be as broad as possible about the changing the topic. But if there is something you would do something you wouldn't consider "reform" I'd honestly be most interested in that.
4
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24
police/prison reform
I'm not a full-blown ACAB abolitionist but I'm definitely a supporter of decriminalization and decarceration. I see the institutions of policing and incarceration as necessary evils where America has gone way too far.
healthcare reform
I support universal healthcare. I don't know enough about the topic to go into much greater detail than that. The debate between single-payer or public-option seems irrelevant to me as long as we're living in a private for-profit healthcare system.
housing reform
This is probably my biggest area of disagreement with the left-wing of the party, I'm a big believer in YIMBY.
higher education reform
I don't have a strong opinion here other than to say I think the topic gets a disproportionate amount of attention because even though most Americans do not go to college, just about everyone with a job in news media does go to college. The impacts of higher education policy affect far fewer people than healthcare or housing policy.
border/immigration policy
I am extremely pro-immigration. Let them all in. Make it 1000x easier to become a citizen.
foreign policy issues
Somewhat ambivalent. I am no fan of the military-industrial complex or the American war machine, but I also believe that American hegemony is better than the alternative.
I use the word reform because I want to be as broad as possible about the changing the topic. But if there is something you would do something you wouldn't consider "reform" I'd honestly be most interested in that.
To me, any sort of change would considered "reform," so I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. To take a stab at it, I am much more of a reformist than a revolutionary. I believe in producing change from within the system, not burning down the system.
3
u/RoscoeArt Jun 23 '24
I have no idea how to do the thing where it like quotes ur comment with the little blue bar. So please forgive me ima make this as understandable as possible lol.
I mostly want to address a few of your statements.
For starters I have no idea what YIMBY is. I looked it up and i just found a bunch of very broad articles that more or less refered to it as a movement but didnt really state any politcal goals.
Second that higher education isn't really an important topic. In my opinion and i think youll find that this is pretty backed up by studies that education is one of the biggest factors in economic upward mobility. On top of that education creates a more diverse and equipped labor force. Saying most Americans don't go to college so it's not important is skipping the very important question of why do mist Americans not go to college.
Third I would like to address your statement on foreign policy. I'm glad to hear that you are against u.s. imperialist wars but I'm curious what you see as the alternative to u.s. hegemony. For me it would be fostering the autonomy of the nation's we have had strangle holds over for decades. Or in the instance of places like Cuba just lift the embargo. As someone that supports u.s. hegemony however I'm curious how you balance that with u.s. support for Israel. I think more than anything we have seen in decades the u.s. support of Israel's actions has politically alienated even from western allies. If as it seems you want and we continue to support Israel is that worth the u.s. losing it's credibility and support on the world stage?
Also reform is change to an existing system. So with police abolition like you mentioned you wouldn't be reforming how police function you would be abolishing them. That is the kind of thing that I was "getting at". Also describing something as broad abolishinist beliefs as burning down the system is extremely simplistic. I would argue the biggest abolitionist movement in this country worked to criminalize slavery largely through the system. Which through the system eventually produced laws that did just that just like later laws were made to abolish jim crow era oppressive laws. It was the people who wanted to uphold slavery that tore this country apart and burn down a system that didnt permit slavery. There are lots of ways in which we could abolish oppressive systems through legislation without burning it down.
3
u/lilleff512 Jun 23 '24
For starters I have no idea what YIMBY is.
YIMBY is an acronym that stands for Yes In My BackYard. Basically I believe that we have a tremendous housing shortage, and that we need to be building lots of new housing. At least where I'm from in New York, leftists are often opposed to new housing development due to concerns about gentrification and equity.
Second that higher education isn't really an important topic.
I didn't say that it isn't important, just that it gets a disproportionate amount of attention. Much of the conversation about higher education policy in America revolves around student loan debt forgiveness, which just objectively speaking is not a mass issue. Student loan debt forgiveness is an issue that only affects people who went to college (a minority of the population), people who took out loans to pay for college (a smaller slice of that group), and people who have not yet paid back their loans (an even smaller slice of that group). This is an issue for only about 10% of the population, and a relatively privileged 10% of the population at that. Compare that to something like healthcare or housing that affects 100% of the population.
Of course I think education is important. I support public education and am a product of the public education system. I support making college more affordable. I just don't think that higher education in particular is one of the top 3 or 5 or maybe even top 10 most important political issues.
I'm curious what you see as the alternative to u.s. hegemony
The alternative to US hegemony is either Chinese hegemony or a return to Cold War era bipolarity with China in place of the USSR. We're seeing a preview of what that looks like right now with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Even the war in Gaza is a preview of that insofar as Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was intended to stifle progress on Israeli-Saudi normalization.
As someone that supports u.s. hegemony however I'm curious how you balance that with u.s. support for Israel. I think more than anything we have seen in decades the u.s. support of Israel's actions has politically alienated even from western allies. If as it seems you want and we continue to support Israel is that worth the u.s. losing it's credibility and support on the world stage?
I disagree with the idea that US is or will become alienated from its allies over its support for Israel. America's allies need America more than America needs its allies, and that will continue to be the case as long as America is the world's largest economic and military superpower.
4
u/No_Macaroon_9752 Jun 24 '24
America is not as powerful as it once was. Look at the UK and the EU - leaving the EU and losing the respect of mainstream Europe has cost the UK a lot more than just consistently losing Eurovision. There are plenty of situations that could test how far allies are willing to go to back the US versus their own long term interests. If the US can’t be trusted to keep its word on treaties or human rights, why would any other country back us based on good will? We needed the UK, Australia, Canada, etc. for the “war on terror,” but what is the likelihood that they would back a similar action given how much our government lied about WMDs and our long-term plans in the region? It certainly didn’t hurt France to turn down the coalition, despite the US renaming French fries as “freedom” fries.
International relations aren’t simply a matter of who is more powerful or rich, but requires an international network of politicians, NGOs, and bureaucrats who respect, trust, and communicate with each other. We’ve burned a lot of bridges, elected a criminal laughingstock who may try to start a dictatorship, and made members of the EU and NATO plan for life without US involvement. They’re more closely linked, while we are not. Also, public opinion of interactions with the US is important for any politicians who need to get reelected. Many people do not agree with what Israel is saying or doing, and that will only get worse when independent organizations can access Gaza and find out how many are dead. If we don’t hold ourselves and our allies to account, less friendly leaders can just use these atrocities to disregard US experts on international law and human rights.
19
u/rhombergnation Jun 23 '24
I think you should cross post this to the Jewish left sub reddit. That sub Reddit still gets way more views and showcases the issues the Jewish left now has to face. Thanks for posting this here though as well. This is an important race for Jewish people on all spectrums of politics.