J Street Crows About Victory--But In Fact They Laid An Egg

Mere Rhetoric notes J Street's deceptive claim that many of the candidates they backed won

J Street endorsed 61 candidates for the 2010 election, 58 Democrats for the House and 3 Democrats for the Senate, and today they’ve been bragging about how 46 of those candidates won. The results are supposed boost the group’s post-Soros, post-Goldstone, post-Levy rehabilitation strategy, where they’re bypassing the journalists they’ve alienated and appealing to politicians in terms of raw power.

...The ultimate test is supposed to be last night’s scoreboard, where 46 of J Street’s 55 incumbents won their races.

There is no denying that 49 out of 55 is an enviable success rate: but as with so many J Street claims--such as with their claim that they were not receiving money from Soros--once again you have to go below the surface.

It is one thing to look at those 55 races--it is quite another to take a look to see how many of those races were actually competitive races where one could assume that the backing of J Street actually could have made a difference.

That is where J Streets bragging shows the extent of their desperation.


Jennifer Rubin quotes from an email from a partisan Democrat about how J Street support fared in competitive races:

Josh Block, a long-time Democratic, pro-Israel activist and former AIPAC spokesman, e-mails: “Of 25 competitive races in which Jstreet endorsed, their candidates lost in 14 races, including in all three Senate races.” And then he unloads:

Being associated with a group that helped [Richard] Goldstone slander Israel on the Hill, that refuses to condemn his report and accusation that the leadership of Israel PURPOSEFULLY targeted civilians in Gaza, that says there’s no difference between Israel defending itself and Hamas terrorism, that lies about their secret money from anti-Israel George Soros, and derives half their budget from Hong Kong — not from American Jews as they claim — and that lies again and again, even twisting the arm of a former Israeli MK to lie for them after she is on tape exposing their ties to Goldstone, is HAZARDOUS for one’s pro-Israel reputation. … The question candidates in competitive races will be asking themselves is this: Is it worth it to lie down with dogs if all you get is flees!? The answer, I predict, will increasingly be no, it’s not worth it. Unless of course, you’re not pro-Israel.

True, Block may be a partisan Democrat--but he is also a former AIPAC spokesman. So let's go back to Mere Rhetoric and look at the details:

In the House J Street candidates had 24 competitive races, if you take the Cook Political Report’s combined Lean D, Toss Up, or Lean R categories. 11 of those candidates have already lost their races, while another 3 – Grijalva, Connolly, and Maffei – are still too close to call. As of right now a grand total of 10 J Street House candidates who had actual races have managed to clinch them.

And of those 10 candidates – and this is the crucial part – fully 9 came from districts where Democrats already enjoyed huge structural advantages. The only exception was Bill Owens, who was graced by having Doug Hoffman and Matt Doheny splitting the conservative vote in the R+1 New York 23rd district...

-So it’s true – almost by definition – that Democratic candidates have the luxury of doing whatever they want in districts where Republicans basically can’t win. They don’t need J Street’s votes or J Street’s Soros money, but if they want to sign pro-Hamas letters or whatever it’s probably not going to cost them. But any Democrat who thinks they might someday actually face a credible opponent is probably going to take the advice of Josh Block and not lie down with J Street.

Read the whole thing for the breakdown of the individual races of candidates backed by J Street.

To all of the J Street deceptions that have been uncovered during the past couple of months, you can now add their current claim that J Street support is actually helpful--instead of an albatross.

Of course, there were other groups that were justifiably proud of their success in the election--and Jennifer Rubin mentions 2 of them:

The Emergency Committee for Israel’s [site] executive director (and CONTENTIONS contributor), Noah Pollak, has released a statement:

Last night was a good night for the US-Israel relationship, with supporters of a strong alliance prevailing over a number of incumbents who had received financial and rhetorical support from anti-Israel groups. In Pennsylvania in particular, there was a close Senate race that resulted in the defeat of a candidate who had accused Israel of war crimes and helped raise money for an organization the FBI later called a front group for Hamas. ECI ran ads informing voters of that record, and no doubt many of those voters share our concerns. We are delighted with the result.

Meanwhile, the Republican Jewish Coalition [site] points out that in 11 races in which RJC-supported candidates faced off against J Street–funded candidates, the RJC candidate came out on top in seven, including three Senate races.

In contrast, being associated with J Street is beginning to be perceived as a liability--a fact that politicians will be quick to pick up on.

Technorati Tag: J Street.