Search the Lounge

Categories

« Dean Search: University of Tennessee College of Law | Main | Hiring Announcement: University of Colorado Law School »

August 05, 2021

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

anon

Ahh.... This seems to be getting closer to fair criticism of all persons affecting our public discourse, not just republicans. Thank you, Steve. I don't agree with the concluding paragraph, but it bears mentioning that this is a move toward a much needed balance here in the FL.

PaulB

Couple of points. The "spending advantage" that Turner had covers only money raised by the candidates. Money spent by third parties like Democratic Majority for Israel and more mainstream Democratic groups like Third Way went overwhelmingly for Brown. They both had roughly the same amount of money spent on their behalf so Turner supporters have no grounds to claim they lost because they were outspent.

This is an African American majority district so I doubt it was Israel that the majority of Brown voters were motivated by. It was endorsements by Clyburn, Marcia Fudge (whose mother did radio commercials on behalf of Turner to get around the Hatch Act) and ads that emphasized Turner's criticism of Biden that turned the tide. Israel did make a difference in the votes cast by virtue of this being the most heavily Jewish district in the state with East Side suburbs like Shaker Heights included. That probably accounted for perhaps 5 or 6% of the total vote.

Voters who are animated on the issue of Israel have the right, like all of us, to contribute to candidates that reflect their views on matters important to them.

Patrick S. O'Donnell

Interesting chain of inferences, insinuations, and attribution of motives, and compelling conclusion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad