Over at Mother Jones, Noah Lanard comments on the 13% "uncommitted" vote in yesterday's Michigan Democratic primary:
The results in Michigan are another sign the president’s team underestimated the level of outrage that its war response would provoke. The New York Times’ Peter Baker reported Tuesday that the president’s advisers had been hoping the war would end in early January—and that they thought Arab Americans and people on the left would calm down as they saw Gaza being rebuilt over the summer. This, like so many of their predictions about the war and their ability to shape its direction, is proving to be wishful thinking.
As near as I can tell, Biden's pro-Israel stance is based on conviction, not political calculation. However, if we're judging the politics anyway it's not enough to merely point out that some people don't like Biden's Gaza policy. You have to compare this with the likely impact of following the opposite policy.
It's stating the obvious to say that Biden would have detractors no matter which side of the Gaza conflict he took. It's stating only the slightly less obvious to say that a pro-Palestinian policy would lose him more votes than his current stand.
There's no question that Democratic sympathies have shifted. According to YouGov, Dems have gone from 27%-20% pro-Israel in October to 25%-20% pro-Palestinian now. Nevertheless, even among Democrats, a large majority still think it's important to protect Israel:
Protecting Israel is favored by nearly 3:1 over not caring much.
The simple truth is that Biden would lose some votes no matter what he did, and I find it unlikely that he underestimated much of anything. Disputes over Israel are about as well understood as anything in American politics. In fact, the only surprising thing has nothing to do with Biden: namely that Donald Trump has managed to stay so quiet on the subject and Republicans have managed to block military aid to Israel without much blowback. But this won't stay the case forever.
Notes:
1) In the 2012 Michigan caucus (the last time a Democrat ran for re-election), 10.7% of the caucus-goers voted "uncommitted".
2) This primary had half the number of voters participating than in 2020.
3) Biden received 81.1% of the votes.
4) The last poll (Emerson) before the primary had him at 77%.
5) Given all that, 13.3% seems relatively unremarkable.
Is the percentage of voters in Deerborn that voted uncommitted normal as well?
If Michigan was a solid blue state than what you say would be true. But the distribution of the votes suggest that the increase was very much a statement from a population that Biden needs.
There are not many places with the racial makeup of Dearborn, even in MI.
And since this is not likely to be a close election ignoring the Muslim vote that Dearborn represents is no big deal. Or maybe not.
Dearborn is only the 7th largest city in Michigan. It’s not Detroit of the 1960s. Hell, it’s got less people now than Dearborn had in the 1960s. In Michigan, the Muslim population that voted in 2020 was 140,000. Biden won among them by roughly 90,000 to Trump’s 50,000. Biden won Michigan by 155,000 in 2020.
10.7% voted uncommitted in a caucus in 2012! Can you imagine waiting around for 90 minutes to vote uncommitted? The media played this up for two weeks. MSNBC basically gave away their weekend programming for the organizers of this protest. The media narrative was “Michigan has a huge Muslim population.” You were not allowed to introduce the story without mentioning it. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some Russian funding behind the scenes for this organized effort. Yet, when it came down to it, they were only able to get 2.5% more than unfunded and media ignored uncommitted got in 2012. It’s pretty pathetic, actually.
In 2012, did Obama lose the national election? Surely, he must have lost Michigan, right? Is it ok, if I call you Shirley?
You think that the reason Dearborn voted overwhelmingly uncommitted is that the Russians paid them? Dearborn is a concentrated Muslim presence, so it signifies if this vote was really just a small variation or a significant statement by Muslims, or specifically Arab voters.
The numbers suggest it was not. But maybe it is all a Russian conspiracy.
As Dearborn goes, so goes Paterson, New Jersey?
Trump underperformed in Michigan. It is a flashing red light that even in deep, deep red Kent County/Grand Rapids Trump he got significantly less than expected. Even the former head of the Michigan Republican Party Jeff Timmer says Trump can’t win in November with these kinds of results.
“ Voters in Kent, Ottawa and Oakland counties – which “for decades had been the breadbasket of Republican votes” – also sent a loud message to former President Donald Trump, Czuba said.
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley won more than 30% of the GOP primary vote in each of those counties, showing Trump could again struggle with college-educated voters that cost him the 2020 election, Czuba said. ”
https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/despite-michigan-primary-wins-signs-trouble-trump-and-biden
I'm not sure that matters much (aggregate votes and larger demographic splits matter more), but, he did lose in precincts with the highest ratio of Arab-Americans, in Michigan.
Also, those voters need him just as much as he needs them. If Biden loses, Trump's going to give Bibi the biggest green light anyone's ever seen, to do anything he wants. Lest anyone forgot, Trump's solution in 2020 was a single state, Israel, controlling Palestine. So, people who win the battle but lose the war?
Finally, the Arab-American demographic has been shifting rightward in Michigan, aligning against LGBTQ+ rights, over the last decade. Given Michigan is an open primary, I expect a lot of them would just jump into the Democratic primary to vote against Biden.
100,000+ UC and people who have left Biden for other reasons and say bye to Michigan.
I don't think you need to appease Tlaib to blunt it. Like Arabs throughout history many (CAIR) are quite willing to destroy themselves by bringing in a 2nd Trump era out of revenge. They have not changed much in 1500 years.
But you do need to do something a bit more forceful than a Collins-esque look of concern. Things like having the US air drop humanitarian aid to Gaza for instance. Or supporting some sort of ceasefire resolution at the UN.
Neither of those things would hurt Israel for those who care
In 2008, Michigan scheduled its primary early in violation of DNC rules; Sec. Clinton was the only major candidate to not have her name removed from the ballot. ‘Uncommitted’ got 40% of the Democratic vote. That’s a protest.
The media also fail to mention that Trump beat Haley by 10 points less than what polling had predicted (and with a percentage of the vote far less than Biden's).
The media has been all over the 13% protest vote, while being curiously silent about the fact that Joe Biden's winning Michigan margin significantly exceeded Trump's!
Or how many usually vote uncommitted?
Usually ~20,000. In 2008, 238,000.
https://www.wxyz.com/news/national-politics/america-votes/heres-how-many-people-voted-uncommitted-in-past-michigan-presidential-primaries
The "for" votes matter too.
Obama (2012): 174,000
Biden (2020): 623,500
Uncommitted in 2012 was 10.7%.
More telling is that the media are all over “Biden’s big problem” uniting Democrats when 13% voted uncommitted in a primary election where it was fine to cast a protest vote, but downplay Haley's taking 40% in SC.
D's make a big show of our disagreements but it's actually the R's that have the danger of shedding moderate voters in November. They should be taking Haley's success as a serious message. That's the real story of Tuesday.
Unlike many here, I do not think the media want trump to continue because it's good for their business - or at least that that is the main driver - but coverage like this makes me wonder.
I think what drives the slanted coverage in favor of the GOP is that MSM reporters (who, in the main, are not Republican-leaning in private), typically bend over backwards to provide “fair” coverage to Republicans, and they often overcorrect. They are trained to valorize objectivity and fairness, often to a fault.
MAGA Mike Johnson may not be as politically inept as the media has tended to paint him. He can rightly rebut criticism from the AIPAC lobby by pointing out the House passed a bill with billions in aid for Israel months ago, which is sitting in Chuck Schumer's in-tray.
Did they?
What else was in it?
Had to look it up...that was the one where they tried to cut the IRS funding
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-house-passes-republicans-israel-aid-bill-faces-dead-end-senate-2023-11-02/
Ah yes. Cutting funding to audit rich tax cheats is the number 1 GOP priority.
Equally important is what it didn’t have in it, which was aid for Ukraine, or humanitarian aid for Gazans, both of which are in the Senate’s bill. Of course, the House would be fine with cutting Ukraine off to help Putin, their cult leader’s man-crush.
"The simple truth is that Biden would lose some votes no matter what he did, ..."
This is likely true but inconsistent with the title of the post. Making the best of a bad situation is not the same thing as not being hurt.
Upvoted. He would almost certainly lose more support if he took a different stance, but the situation harms him no matter what he does.
yup. the best would be to figure out a way to force netanyahu to end the war without publicly taking an "anti-israeli" position. but is that possible when you're dealing with netanyahu and his coalition? i tend to doubt it. he seems intent on decimating gaza in the name of eradicating hamas, but i think in fact he considers the civilian death toll and destruction of cities a positive outcome. plus he hates biden, the US democratic party in general, and wants trump to win.
Not a whole lot you can do about someone when they're determined to be the turd in the punch bowl and that's Netanyahu to a tee. In fact, the odds of his avoiding jail time are inversely proportional to how much he can spead his stink around.
Glad you brought up Netanyahu's serious legal problems. I like to think that material factors drive major events, but a lot of this disaster has to do with him wanting to keep his ass out of jail on what are basically petty corruption charges. Certainly petty compared to what's happened.
In retrospect, it would have been better for everyone if he could've been given a "you're free if you go home and shut up" deal a few months ago.
Biden is doing better than if he took a straight Palestinian line. But it is rather simpleminded to think that he had to either green light Israel's atrocities or attack Israel. Calling for a ceasefire has long been the popular position. And one would have to not being following the conflict to not realize that Israel was going to turn this into something indefensible for Biden. Now he is trying to distance himself from the Israeli behavior, but he is clearly behind where he should be with this.
He was in a bad position because Israel splits the Democratic party while not splitting the Republican party, which couldn't care less about how many Palestinians die. But it is pretty simpleminded to think that there were only two positions he could have taken, and the blind support of Israel, that even he seems to see he has to abandon, was the best one to take.
Saw somewhere today that Uncommitted in a Michigan Democratic presidential primary scores at around this level every single time, so this result is really meaningless.
It's a check engine light without any problems on the road. It needs to checked and taken care of, but the car is gonna run. In other words, don't ignore it but don't freak out either.
So what's their "statement", stay home and let Trump win??
If he does, those Michigan voters won't have time to worry about Gaza. They'll be too busy fighting their own deportation!
I saw an interview on one of the network news shows in which a young person seemed to be OK with that; the words were something like ‘we may have to suffer some short-term pain for long-term gain’. Maybe I’m old and cynical, but I think volunteering for short-term pain almost always leads to being forced to endure long-term pain. Reagan-era union-busting is still depressing working people’s compensation.
IIIII don’t know, folks. Biden may have a small margin in Michigan. And all uncommitted votes are not the same. People who make the effort just to vote “uncommitted “ in a primary usually will show up in the general to back their party’s nominee once they have made their protest. Not so this year. The anger over Gaza will only grow as Israel gets more brutal about killing as many Palestinians as possible. I think the worst is yet to come over there.
I disagree completely. I think that this will mostly be done in a month or two and that people will return for the most part to their previous opinions. By election day, most Michigan Moslems and Leftists who are so incensed about Gaza will be months away from TV pictures or Gazan rubble and fevered journalism about the Middle East that outrage them and see a lot more pictures of Donald Trump saying things and fevered journalism about him that outrage them.
National polls don't tell you much of anything about how the electoral college results might look, do they?