Letters: VP pick sets up clear choice for voters

The selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as the GOP vice presidential candidate presents the voters with a clear contrast between the welfare state promoted by President Obama and a return to our core values of hard work bringing rewards, which outweigh any standard of living provided by government handouts ("Editorial: Romney-Ryan a bold ticket").

Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Campaign rally: Paul Ryan hands the microphone to Mitt Romney on Saturday in Ashland, Va.

Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Campaign rally: Paul Ryan hands the microphone to Mitt Romney on Saturday in Ashland, Va.

The Democratic Party has created a voting bloc that depends on the party's programs. Ryan will articulate how Americans can return to the economic greatness that was the foundation of our country before we became mired in the Great Society and Obama's "hope and change" policies.

Whether USA TODAY will report the facts and not try to spin Ryan's message will be interesting to watch. Please remember that, contrary to popular conceptions, it is not Ryan who is attempting to throw old ladies over a cliff. Ryan is trying to prevent Obama from throwing America into a chasm from which it cannot recover.

Dave Kennett; Dayton, Ohio

Ohio lawmaker a better choice

Rep. Paul Ryan, 42, touts the virtue of private enterprise but has worked most of his adult life in the public sector. He briefly was a marketing consultant for his family's construction business.

Letters to the editor

USA TODAY receives about 300 letters each day. Most arrive via e-mail, but we also receive submissions by postal mail and fax. We publish about 35 letters each week.

We often select comments that respond directly to USA TODAY articles or opinion pieces. Letters that are concise and make one or two good points have the best chance of being selected, as do letters that reflect the vibrant debate around the nation on a particular subject.

We aim to make the letters platform a place where readers, not just writers representing institutions or interest groups, have their say.

Mitt Romney should have chosen a more seasoned person to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, such as Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio.

Gary Wesley; Mountain View, Calif.

Next GOP president?

In announcing Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney introduced Ryan as "the next president of the United States," later correcting himself. Mistake aside, Romney's statement might very well turn out to be an accurate prediction.

If President Obama beats Romney this November, Ryan's star could continue to rise nonetheless, and he might run for and win the presidency in 2016.

Constantinos E. Scaros; Newmanstown, Pa.

'Empty promises,' indeed

Paul Ryan's speech Saturday would have been terrific, if only it had made more sense ("Romney taps Ryan as his running mate").

He started by declaring that President Obama "passed nearly every item on his agenda," and then complained that "politicians from both parties have made empty promises." But how could the president's promises be "empty" if he passed "nearly every item on his agenda"? Then Ryan patted himself on the back: "I believe my record of getting things done in Congress will be a very helpful complement to Gov. Romney's executive and private-sector success." Never mind that his major claim to fame — the Ryan budget plan — is dead in the water in Congress, an "empty promise" if you will.

Finally, he stated: "We won't blame others. We will take responsibility!" But his entire speech contained not one single specific proposal and blamed Obama for nearly everything. It's really hard to see what Ryan brings to this ticket.

Joan Jacobson; Lakewood, Colo.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Republicans see opening with Hispanic voters over jobs data

WASHINGTON – With last week's job report showing Hispanic unemployment on the rise, Republicans see a chance to draw voters from a group that voted overwhelmingly for President Obama in 2008.

By Charles Dharapak, AP

President Obama greets audience members after speaking at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast in Washington in 2011.

By Charles Dharapak, AP

President Obama greets audience members after speaking at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast in Washington in 2011.

It remains uncertain, however, whether presumptive nominee Mitt Romney, who staked out a position at the right of his Republican rivals on immigration, can exploit it, analysts say.

The Hispanic unemployment rate jumped from 10.3% in April to 11% in May as the economy added only 69,000 jobs, the Labor Department reported. The disappointing job numbers come as Hispanic voters — who voted by 67%-31% for Obama in 2008 — are showing signs of diminished enthusiasm about the November election.

On a scale of 1 to 10, 65% of Hispanics put their propensity to vote at 10, according to the Gallup daily tracking poll from May 7 to May 27. By comparison, 82% of white voters and 75% of African-American voters offered a similar level of enthusiasm about the election, according to the poll.

"President Obama cashed in on the favorability capital that the Democratic Party has been developing over the longest time and the damaged brand that has hurt the Republican Party," said Daniel Garza, executive director of the Libre Initiative, a conservative Hispanic business organization. "I think we're getting to a point where you have to show results, not just rhetoric. Hispanics are just waking up to that."

Obama still holds a commanding 65%-25% lead with Hispanics over Romney, but political analysts say Obama has reason to worry that a lackluster job situation could dampen Hispanic turnout in November.

Hispanic unemployment is projected to remain above 10% through 2012 in 14 states — including the battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Pennsylvania, according to the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington.

"We're not going to have a scenario where (Hispanic) Obama supporters switch sides, but we could have a scenario where they get dispirited," said Gary Segura, a partner with the polling company Latino Decisions and a political scientist at Stanford University.

It is unclear how much emphasis Obama will place on trying to contrast his views with Romney's on immigration.

Last year, Romney said if Congress passed the DREAM Act— a proposal that sets a path for young illegal immigrants to win citizenship if they attend college or serve in the military — he would veto it.

"Hispanics know that the president is committed to comprehensive immigration reform and to the DREAM Act and that only by exercising their right to vote in November will these sensible proposals become laws," said Gabriela Domenzain, an Obama campaign spokeswoman.

The president's ability to attack Romney on his immigration policy is somewhat complicated by his own record, Segura said.

Obama has overseen a record number of deportations of illegal immigrants during his presidency.

A Pew Hispanic Center poll released in December found that Latinos disapprove of the Obama administration's deportation policy 59%-27%.

"He's lost the ability to bring up the topic without action," Segura said. "But a bolder move, such as stopping deportations of DREAM-eligible kids — which he could do with executive action — that would shift the conversation and energize Hispanics. And every day that Mitt Romney spends not talking about the economy is a good day for Obama."

"It is abundantly clear that President Obama hasn't lived up to the promises he made in 2008 and that his failed economic policies are disproportionately hurting Hispanics," Republican National Committee spokeswoman Alexandra Franceschi said. "With Gov. Romney in the White House, we will see a leader that has the business experience to put Hispanics back to work."

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Alienated voters may divert Serbia from West-friendly rule

BELGRADE, Serbia – Serbs who have lived through years of high unemployment and cronyism were threatening Sunday to throw out a pro-Western government for former allies of strongman Slobodan Milosevic.

By Visar Kryeziu, AP

A man casts his ballot at a polling station during the Serb elections in Gracanica, Kosovo.

By Visar Kryeziu, AP

A man casts his ballot at a polling station during the Serb elections in Gracanica, Kosovo.

The deceased Milosevic unleashed horrific violence against ethnic groups in the 1990s, and it took a U.S.-led bombing campaign to end it. Polls indicate that many Serbs will vote for anyone who can offer a more stable and prosperous living than what they have experienced under the ruling Serbian Democratic Party. Others do not like their choices.

"My disgust at what we are choosing between: the insatiable greed and corruption of the Democratic Party which has systematically dismantled the rule of law in Serbia vs. rebranded nationalists from Milosevic's era," said Belgrade filmmaker Mila Turajlic, who says she is one of many who plan to spoil their ballots in protest of a lack of choice.

The election could determine whether Serbia continues to maintain peaceful relations with the other former provinces of the disintegrated Yugoslavia that declared independence following the end of the Cold War.

During the conflicts that followed independence, Milosevic deployed paramilitaries against Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in assaults that killed more than 120,000 people. Milosevic's campaign against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, deemed ethnic cleansing by the United States, prompted a NATO air campaign in 1999 that ended the killings and led to Kosovo's independence.

Tomislav Nikolic, the Serbian Progressive Party candidate, was once closely allied to Milosevic, who was charged by the United Nations with war crimes and crimes against humanity but died in detention in 2006.

Nikolic is a former vice president of the far-right Serbian Radical Party but has toned down his rhetoric about Serbia's neighbors and is running against what he says is a corrupt and ineffective government.

"I don't think about the past, I think about the future," Nikolic, 60, said in a recent interview. "I know somebody must change this bad situation in Serbia.

"I know the suffering of my people, without jobs and a future, without anything," he said.

President Boris Tadic of the Serbian Democratic Party has been in power eight years and presided over a redistribution of former state-controlled industries that his opponents say has favored his political supporters. The European Commission has reported that a large percentage of Serbs say they have to pay bribes for government licenses and permits as well as medical care.

Serbian industries, especially its textile sector, have fallen apart. Unemployment is at 22%, which may explain why polling stations saw their highest voter turnout in presidential and parliamentary elections since 2000, when pro-democracy forces ousted Milosevic from power.

Tadic has played up his rival's past to convince the electorate that a Nikolic victory would have Serbia dragged back to the conflicts of the 1990s, leaving the country isolated from the West. Tadic succeeded in making Serbia a candidate for membership in the European Union in 2011.

"I expect that Serbia will continue on its reform path," said Tadic, 54, a former psychology professor. "Better life, better living standards for ordinary people is our strategic goal."

Ljubimir Gavrilovic, a 72-year-old retired auto mechanic, said Tadic has represented a break with Serbia's violent past and he appreciates his move toward the West.

"Tadic is the best man," he said.

Sasha Mimic, 50, said he was also worried about supporting the nationalists despite the poor economy under the Serbian Democratic Party.

"I like democracy, and this will bring a better life for my children," he said. "I'm afraid of what would happen to this country (if the nationalists regain power). I don't want my kids to go through that."

In Belgrade, trendy shopping lanes, modern cafes and tourist boutiques are popping up among decrepit communist-era buildings. But there are few job opportunities for the young.

The European Stability Initiative, a think tank, said in a report in April that the Serbian textile and clothing industry has shrunk by 75% in 20 years' time. Critics such as Tadic say privatization of industries needs to be more open to public scrutiny.

"All our lives (we) have been living in an environment contaminated by strong nationalism and a bad economical situation," said Dejan Alempijevic, a recent college graduate in Belgrade.

While many complain about their electoral choices, Filip Ejdus, of the independent think tank the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy, says that the election marks a turning point in Serbian politics.

"We don't have nasty nationalists on one side and pro-Europeans who are looking for a brighter future on the other," he said. "These are the first elections where most of the parties agree."

Serbia officially considers the breakaway region of Kosovo a part of Serbia still, an issue that nationalists have always had at the top of their platform. But it has not been a significant campaign issue.

"I think the Kosovo issue can basically show you how Nikolic changed," said Dusan Spasojevic, a political scientist at the University of Belgrade. "Nikolic chose not to radicalize this issue. He deliberately chose to portray himself as a moderate."

But Spasojevic doubts the nationalist agenda has receded.

"I think that maybe the party elite can change a little bit, but their constituency is more or less very similar to the Radical Party, or at least half of the former Radicals who are now supporting them," he says.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Democrats, Republicans each aim to woo support of women voters in November - Post-Crescent

WASHINGTON ? Is the 2012 election shaping up to be all about women?

President Barack Obama is working hard to woo this pivotal constituency in his re-election race. His Democratic allies are even accusing the GOP of launching a "war against women" after the Republicans reignited a new national debate over cultural issues, including birth control.

But now the Republicans ? including Ann Romney and Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski ? are striking back with a promise: Their party will win women by focusing on the real No. 1 issue, the economy.

Not that Obama is ready to give up that issue.

"I believe that the Democrats have a better story to tell to women about how we're going to solidify the middle class and grow this economy, make sure everybody has a fair shot, everybody's doing their fair share, and we got a fair set of rules of the road that everybody has to follow," Obama said Tuesday as Republican presidential contenders competed in Super Tuesday primaries.

Hours later, Ann Romney ? the wife of GOP front-runner Mitt Romney ? answered him.

"Do you know what women care about? Women care about jobs," she declared on national television, as her husband waited nearby to speak. "They're angry, and they're furious about the entitlement debt that we're leaving for our children."

"I'm right along with Ann Romney," Murkowski said on Wednesday.

The Alaska Republican has been critical of her party's focus on birth control policy when people remain worried about economic stability. In a telephone interview, Murkowski added: "There is clearly a direction that we can take as Republicans that gives confidence and assurance that we are focused on the issues that matter to women."

Eight months before Election Day, women have become arguably the most sought-after voting group in an election year where the presidency and control of Congress are at stake. Females comprise a majority of voters in a typical presidential election year.

Women are a crucial voting group for Obama, particularly in the suburbs of big cities like Denver and Detroit. He would not be president today had he not beaten Republican John McCain by 13 points among women four years ago.

The importance of winning the women's vote may be magnified this year given that the fragile economy may weigh down the support of other groups that supported Obama strongly in 2008, such as Latinos and college-age voters.

Recent polling suggests Obama is gaining among women. An Associated Press-GfK poll conducted last month showed his approval rating had risen 10 percentage points among women since December. The poll also showed that women approve more strongly of the way the president is handling the economy.

For Republicans, conservative women represent a loyal sector of the party's base, and female independents offer an opportunity to eat into Obama's support. Independent women broke for Obama by a 10-point margin four years ago, according to exit polling, while among independent men he managed just a 5-point edge.

Both parties have viewed the furor over Obama's policy on access to contraception as an opportunity to curry favor with women. Republicans protested Obama's mandate that birth control be covered by insurance, even for employers whose faiths forbid contraception. The policy, Republicans insisted, was a violation of the Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom, and they forced a vote on it in the Senate. The GOP measure to overturn Obama's policy lost, 51-48, with one Republican, Sen. Olympia Snowe, helping Democrats kill it.

Recent exit polls in the GOP nomination contest suggest some groups of women within the GOP are turned off by the focus on social issues. In Ohio, for example, married women broke for Santorum, while unmarried women favored Romney, a marriage gap that did not exist among men. Women who said abortion should be legal in most or all cases broke for Romney, while those who thought it should be illegal in most or all cases leaned toward Santorum.

Democrats called the Senate vote the latest attempt to roll back long-established women's rights. House Republicans, they also pointed out, had barred a young law student from testifying in favor of Obama's policy but allowed five men to testify against it. And then radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh called the woman a "slut" and a "prostitute" for arguing that her school, Georgetown University, should cover her contraception.

Obama made sure reporters knew he had telephoned the young woman, Sandra Fluke, to offer support. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, called Limbaugh's remarks "inappropriate." And Limbaugh, losing advertisers, apologized.

The Democrats' pitch ? that Republicans were launching a "war on women" was born. Coast to coast, Democrats hawked the theme. Women senators used it to raise money, wives of candidates included it in pleas for support, and surrogates ? from Sen. Claire McCaskill's mother to former tennis star Billie Jean King ? ran with it.

"Stop the GOP's War on Women!" read an email sent to Democrats by the party's House campaign committee.

The drumbeat has frustrated Republicans, pushed onto the defensive as polls showed a majority of Americans favored the president's contraception policy.

But the notion that Republicans are out to strip women of their rights "is just a lie," said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus. "It's not a war on women. It's an effort to protect religious liberty."

But Ann Romney's rebuttal moves the response further, said veteran GOP pollster Ed Goeas.

Polling, he said, shows that different subgroups of women assess economic questions differently ? and that white women in particular respond well to the Republicans' economic message.

"Everybody's responding to this as if women vote as a monolith," Goeas said. "They don't."

Or, suggested Murkowski, they shouldn't.

In the interview, she said she regrets her vote for the GOP amendment to overturn Obama's contraception policy. If she had it to do over again, she would join Snowe in voting against it.

"Women in Alaska are worried about what they're paying for energy costs. They're worried about whether or not they're going to be able to put their kids through college, whether their savings are secure," Murkowski said.

Even Obama acknowledged that female voters are going to want questions answered on the economy.

"I'm not somebody who believes that women are going to be single-issue voters. They never have been," he said.

View the original article here

Obama adviser: Voters have trouble trusting Romney (AP)

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's chief campaign adviser says conservative and moderate Republicans are having problems trusting GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney.

Strategist David Axelrod says it's clear Romney is running into resistance from a majority of Republican voters, given that his support is under 25 percent in most national surveys and some early voting states.

Axelrod also took aim at Romney's work at the Bain Capital private equity company. Romney has never substantiated his claim that he was a creator of more than 100,000 jobs while leading Bain. Critics cite jobs lost at Bain-acquired or Bain-supported firms that closed, cut back or shifted employment overseas.

Axelrod tells ABC's "This Week" that Romney is "a corporate raider" and that "bringing a Bain mentality" to running the economy undercuts Romney's candidacy.

View the original article here

Florida Democrats Struggle To Connect With Latino Voters, Elect Hispanic Leaders - Huffingtonpost.com

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Florida Democrats have seen their registration numbers swell in recent years, due in large part to a surge in Hispanic voters.

But despite their success on paper, state Democratic officials are struggling to connect with Hispanics, who have little representation among the party's Florida leadership. That could spell trouble not just for the future of the party in a state that's now nearly a quarter Latino, but also for President Barack Obama and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, who will be counting on Latino support during tough races next year.

"There's no bench here. Democrats don't cultivate Hispanic leaders," said Freddy Balsera, who heads a Hispanic-focused public relations firm in Miami and serves on the Democratic National Committee's finance team.

That's a problem for the party statewide but especially true in South Florida, where Cuban exiles have long been loyal to the Republican Party and have built their influence over decades. The list of high-level Republican GOP Hispanics includes U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, South Florida's three members of Congress and state House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera. The run-off for Miami-Dade County mayor pitted two Republican Cuban-Americans against each other.

Meanwhile, only three Latino Democrats serve in the state House, none in the Senate. And as the state begins the process of redrawing political boundaries to conform with population changes since 2000 – which will likely lead to at least one new heavily Hispanic congressional seat – Democratic party officials have been slow to respond.

Joe Garcia, a past head of Miami-Dade Democrats and former Obama appointee who ran unsuccessfully for Congress last year, said Republicans have been more aggressive in going after Latino voters.

"The Republican Party views Hispanics in terms of market share: Who are they? How do we reach them? Democrats still view us in terms of quotas," Garcia said.

Florida Hispanics, like Latinos nationwide, provided overwhelming support in 2008 for Obama thanks to a national get-out-the-vote effort. Since December of that year, 73,000 have registered in the state as Democrats and another 76,000 have registered while declaring no party. There have been 31,000 new Hispanic Republicans.

The growth in Democratic voters has come in part from younger, more progressive Cuban Americans and a wave of Puerto Ricans and other Latinos.

But that didn't help Florida Democrats in last year's election, as turnout of their Hispanic members dropped sharply – even more than among other Democratic voters – according to party leaders. It was one reason why the Democrats lost races for governor and U.S. Senate as well as other statewide contests.

For Democratic Hispanic Caucus leader Jose Fernandez in Orlando, that drop came as no surprise. The Army veteran recalled how Democratic gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink bought few Spanish-language ads and toured a local Puerto Rican community center only weeks before the election, when narrowly lost.

"People still thought she was a man with a name like Alex," he said. "We don't work like that. We have to see people, hear them."

The Democrats' challenge in Florida comes as the party expects to do well again nationally with Latinos in 2012, in part because of GOP attacks on the immigration issue.

But Hispanics in Florida are somewhat of an anomaly. Cubans, who make up the majority, are generally allowed to stay in the country as soon as they touch U.S. soil, and Puerto Ricans are already citizens. Among the state's growing South and Central American communities, many have yet to be naturalized.

Patrick Manteiga, publisher of a trilingual Tampa newspaper (Spanish, English and Italian), said the party needs to reach out to new leaders like those at the region's thriving Hispanic churches, many of them evangelical.

"The pastors may be conservative Republicans, but there are many Democrats among their congregants," he said.

Scott Arceneaux, executive director of the state Democratic party, said the party is trying to improve outreach, but he conceded his party could take a page from the Republicans when it comes to Hispanics.

"They have absolutely done a better job than we have," he said. "It's finding young school commissioners, your business and community leaders. You've got to identify those people and help bring them along."

Earlier this year, Florida Democrats hired a Puerto Rican community activist from Orlando to head Hispanic outreach efforts. But the party declined to make her available to The Associated Press for an interview.

Luis Garcia, one of the party's three state representatives, said he's urged the Democrats to hire someone to do similar work in South Florida.

"Where we have been failing, is that we have not been attracting the younger voters," said Garcia, a retired fire chief who is being courted to run for Congress against embattled South Florida Republican David Rivera.

Arceneaux blames the lack of elected Hispanic Democrats on districts created a decade ago by the Republican-controlled Legislature following the 2000 Census. But as the state gears up again for redistricting, local Democrats have missed key opportunities.

In Orange County, many Puerto Ricans were angered when officials failed to appoint any to a redistricting committee even though they make up a third of the county. Local Democrats were slow to react to the flap, even though Puerto Ricans tend to support them.

Similarly, in neighboring Hillsborough County, it took a New York-based Latino civil rights group from New York to help propose a county commission redistricting map that accurately reflected Hispanic growth. The mostly Republican commission nixed that map during a recent hearing. Local Democratic leaders were largely absent, attending their monthly meeting.

At the national level, the Obama campaign has set up Spanish-language phone banks in Florida and is planning a grass-roots organizing meeting later this month.

But Fernandez and others say engagement with Latinos should be about more than electing a Democratic president every four years.

Amy Mercado, chair of the Orange County Democrats, said she wants to see people in office like herself "who may be Hispanic, who are married and have to juggle and still do it all."

But she added: "They're not going to field a candidate just because it has a Hispanic name. I'm a Hispanic, Latina, but I'm a Democratic Latina. I'd rather have someone who's really going to push Democratic ideals than just have someone whose Hispanic or Latina."

She said the party is beginning to recognize people like herself, but that Hispanic Democrats also need to demonstrate they can act independently.

She should know. Last year, Mercado, a manager for the National Mango Board, ran a $64,000 maiden campaign against the powerful Florida House speaker, a Republican. With less than $2,000 in cash and $5,000 worth of in-kind contributions from the party, she won 40 percent of the vote.

GET ALERTS Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!

View the original article here

Democrats fighting not to lose Jewish voters (Daily Caller)

The White House is pushing back against predictions that President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy will prompt many voters in the Jewish community to switch their vote to the GOP nominee in 2012.

“The president will do very well with Jewish Americans,” said Robert Wexler, a former Democratic representative from Florida.

“I don’t know if it will be 72 percent or 75 percent … [but] it will be a vast majority,” said Wexler, who now is the president of the Washington-based S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace.

The Democrats’ push-back features Wexler, Democratic National Committee chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Alan Solow, a Chicago lawyer and Obama’s earliest and most prominent supporter in the Jewish community. The White House has joined the effort by posting a new page at the White House’s site titled, “President Obama: Advancing Israel’s Security and Supporting Peace.”

The push-back “is multifaceted through discussions on TV, speaking to Jewish organizations, though op-eds,” Wexler told TheDC. “All of these people are close friends and close associates and work with each other in a regular way,” he said.

The push-back follows the controversy over the president’s May 19 proposal to solve the 63-year long struggle by Israel to win recognition and peace from the surrounding Arab states. In his speech, he said the United States wanted the parties to accept a border based in the 1967 truce lines, with some mutually-agreed swaps of territory.

The speech generated much opposition from Israel’s supporters, because it largely accepted a Palestinian negotiating position, and because it ignored the underlying disputes, such as the control of important sites in and around Israel’s capital of Jerusalem.

“1967 lines with agreed swaps means you’re saying to Israel that ‘You think you have the Western Wall [of the ancient Jewish temple in Jerusalem] as part of Israel, but we don’t … [and] you need to come up with some swaps that that Palestinians believe acceptable to keep the Western Wall in Israel,’” said Elliott Abrams, at the Council on Foreign Relations.

The deeper disputes include many Arabs’ reluctance to recognize a Jewish state on territory once ruled by Muslims, and many Arabs’ demand that Israel accept the return of the Arab community that fled during the Arab invasion of Israel in 1948. Fewer than one million Arabs fled in 1948, but they and their descendants now number between 4.5 million and 7.2 million.

The population of Israel comprises 5.8 million Jews and 1.6 million Arabs. The political dispute is especially sharp-edged because Palestinian-Arab groups celebrate the killing of many Israelis civilians, including a family of two adults and two children that were stabbed in the town of Itamar.

Obama’s speech showed his hostility to Israel, and prompted many American Jews to back away from Obama, or even to shift their support to the GOP, according to several board members at the Republican Jewish Coalition.

“I’ve been surprised by the negative reaction,” said Brad Wine, an RJC board member and a lawyer at Dickstein Shapiro in Washington D.C. “We see Jewish opinion leaders openly critical of the president.”

GOP activists don’t claim Obama’s policies will shift a majority of that Jewish vote, which went lopsidedly for Obama in 2008, by 78 percent to 21 percent. But a slice of that vote — mostly male or Orthodox — are more willing to walk away from their community’s traditional support for Democrats, said Jews who affiliate with the GOP.

Republicans have already won a majority of votes from the minority of Jews in the United States who belong to Orthodox congregations.

“It is no secret that whereas President Obama won a majority of the Jewish vote in 2008, the Orthodox community voted heavily for John McCain” by a margin of roughly three to one, said Nathan Diament, who heads the Institute for Public Affairs of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

These days, he said, “the mood in the orthodox community is certainly of great concern” about Obama’s Middle East policy.

But these Orthodox Jews comprise only 10 percent of the U.S. Jewish population.

“It is too soon” to predict the scale of any shift to the GOP, said Abrams. “I don’t know whether ‘unease’ translates into a vote against him [because] history suggests that most Jews will find some excuse to vote Democratic.”

Still, even a shift of several percent in the Jewish population could matter in a close Florida election. Also, any shift could also hit Democratic donations hard. In May, for example, Haim Saban, a major Californian donor, suggested he would not give more money to Obama.

Any pullback by Jewish donors could add to the troubles facing Obama’s fundraisers. In several news articles, Democratic fundraisers have said wealthy donors are less generous this year than in 2008.

Wexler scoffed at claims that Jews will shift their political loyalties. “The anecdotal stuff is political nonsense … [Republicans say] every two years, certainly every four tears, that this is the year Jewish voters will desert the Democratic party … it doesn’t happen.”

“There is no trend that suggests that any significant change in the Jewish vote,” Solow said.

Yet Solow and Wexler also took time to argue that Obama has been protective of Israel. Obama has supported Israel militarily, economically and diplomatically, Wexler said. Obama does not accept the Arab claim that Palestinians should be allowed to move into Israel, and his ’67 lines with swaps’ policy will allow 80 percent of Israelis now living on land claimed by Palestinians to remain in their homes, he said.

The White House’s website makes many of the same points. “President Obama emphasized that a peace agreement must meet the … goal of two states for two peoples with Israel as a Jewish state and homeland for the Jewish people,” says the one-page site.

Obama “is absolutely a strong friend of Israel, and it is a complete mischaracterization to represent otherwise,” said Solow. “The positions that he has taken, including in his most recent speeches, are consistent with the historical American position and reflect full and complete support for Israel.”

Middle East politics are very complex, said Solow, “and it is easy for people to mischaracterize people, in this case, President Obama, for political gain. I believe that attempt will not be successful in the long run.”

Last year, Solow did criticize the administration’s policy against Israeli home-building in and around Jerusalem.

“That [policy] was not helpful, and did not make any sense,” he told TheDC. “I don’t think they have officially changed their position, but I think they have [now] placed less emphasis on that position,” he said.

Still, the push-back by the White House, Wexler and their allies, said Diament, shows that “there’s clearly a level of concern among Democrats.”

Wexler and his allies may also be too late, said Matt Brooks, chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition. Because of Obama’s multiple speeches urging the 67 lines with swaps, and because of his repeated failure to address concerns voiced by Israel’s supporters, “much of this [anti-Israel] narrative may already be baked in the cake,” Brooks said.

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Gaddafi loses support of lobbyists

Police: War on Drugs worst policy since slavery

NRC inspector general: Chairman withheld information in Yucca shutdown

Hotel union tucks support behind California legislation mandating fitted bed-sheets

Republicans accused of killing Medicare while asking Obama to save program from financial disaster

View the original article here