Shhhh! Dude! You’re not supposed to talk about the international government … yet. You’ll give away the whole enchilada!
Question: Has the UK had a jewish PM since Disraeli? I suspect that there is no issue for a jew to be POTUS, but I don’t see it for two more terms.
More interestingly: would an open athiest ever be elected POTUS?
The answer to the OP is: Yes we will, when there is a viable jewish candidate actually running. Just like it seems we’ll have a black president now that it looks like a viable black candidate is running.
It’s really as simple as that. We COULD have had a female president this term, if the viable black candidate hadn’t been more popular with Democrats. If a candidate, be they black, brown, white, yellow or green, be they christian, jew, muslim or agnostic/atheist appeals to the US center they are going to win. If they don’t, if their only appeal is to the left or right faithful then they are going to lose…even if they are white snow.
It will be amusing to see all the people slapping each other on the back when Obama wins ‘despite rampant racism in the US!’ because somehow our time has come or some other such non-sense. Because they won’t see that the reason Obama wins isn’t that he is or is not black…but because his message appealed to the US center, while McCain’s didn’t. Of course, if McCain wins we’ll have to hear about how the election was ‘stolen’ from Obama by the racists and knee jerk prejudice conservatives, blah blah blah. I think that has been the point of some of these threads in fact…to make sure the ground is well prepared in case Obama DOES lose (btw, I’m not talking about this thread in particular here…just the endless Obama racism threads).
Anyway, I think we’ll have a jewish president one day…one day when a viable, popular jewish CANDIDATE who appeals to the center runs. It’s kind of funny that we COULD have had a jewish president by now…except his politics didn’t appeal to his own party faithful. I actually think Lieberman would have appealed very well to the US center and would have had a good to win…if he could have actually gotten the nomination.
-XT
Disraeli was a Jew by ancestry, but was a member of the Church of England, so the UK has never had a religious Jew as PM.
The love of Lieberman is strange considering he lost his own party’s primary as the incumbent Senator in his home state. The love people have for him far and wide sort of reminds me of what people thought of Giuliani before the primary season actually started. Everyone in New York, who knew him rolled their eyes, while others said they thought he was a shoo-in. I think Lieberman would be similar. He’s a Michael Dukakis. He ain’t got the juice. The Jewish presidential contender, will certainly not be Joe Lieberman.
As I said above, I think Rahm Emanuel has the best shot. Though his deep connections to Hollywood might hurt him amongst conservatives.
Lieberman is Orthodox, and more observant than most. If that hurt the ticket, I sure didn’t notice. As mentioned, evangelicals tend to be pro-Israel. I don’t remember the poll numbers, but I think the percentage of people willing to vote for a Jew for President is in the 90s somewhere.
As for Zionism, no one runs Judaism, so there will be no religious leaders telling a candidate to vote this way or else - unlike what some Cardinals do.
That’s ignoring the vetting process. I think if we saw what happened with Obama as being ugly, wait until the charges of anti-semitism or being in the pockets of AIPAC come out against a Jewish candidate.
Correct me if I’m wrong here…but he lost the DEMOCRAT primary. And then ran as an independent and won the general election. No? Assuming I’m remembering correctly this says more about the Democrat party than it does about a willingness/unwillingness to elect jews…or a love or not love of Lieberman himself.
You are misunderstanding what I am saying. I didn’t say he WILL be a contender in the future…I think as far as the presidency goes he’s done at this point. I said he COULD have been a viable candidate for the Dems…but it was the same Dems who attempted to get rid of him in his own state that prevented him from taking the nomination for the presidency. It’s funny because I think that, like he ended up winning that race to the collective head scratching of the left wingers, he would have actually had the best chance of winning in a presidential race in 2004. Instead those clever Democrats picked Lurch (a.k.a. Kerry)…and look how well that turned out!
-XT
It says nothing about Jews in general, we in the Northeast love us some Jews. The point is that a lot of people don’t have so much love for Joe Lieberman.
People just flat out don’t like Joe Lieberman. What can I say? He ain’t that popular. If people from his own party in his own state do not like him, I think it’s worth examing. I think John Edwards or Wesley Clark probably would have had the best chances in the General against Bush of the candidates running in 04. Of the contenders, I think that Joe Lieberman is pretty low on the list from 04. I don’t know if he would’ve been better than Lurch, but it’s hard to know. Lurch was a terrible choice.
What would a Jewish candidate say or be asked to say that is any different then every other candidate has been asked to say? I really don’t see why you think this would happen. We went through this with JFK and the Pope already. I don’t think it’s a non-issue, but it’s a pretty small one.
Fuck Lieberman. I’m not voting for anyone who hates Marilyn Manson. Lieberman’s hairstyle is also hella lame.
Huh? Charges of anti-semitism against whom? I think the political impact of any position on the Mid-East is independent of the religion of the candidate. Being in favor of a Palestinian state is no longer controversial, no one is going to come out for Hamas, and few if any American voters are going to give a damn about the details of a West Bank settlement policy.
Lieberman lost the primary for being pro-war, nothing else. I agree that he’ll never be president, but being Jewish has nothing to do with it.
As for being short - I’m 6’2", the best man at my wedding was 6’4’, and I was by no means the tallest person in my primarily Jewish schools in Queens. Where the hell are you getting this stuff?
I disagree. Look at Obama’s candidacy. I think it would be a major issue. It’s NOT the same as a Catholic, because Israel is more likely to drag us into a war than the Vatican is. The comparisons to JFK are facile. I think that the election process would be ugly with the same sorts of knives that we see with Obama’s candidacy. In many ways I think it would be much uglier, with accusations of anti-semitism flying back and forth, and enough ZOG conspiracy theory to choke on.
Compare the amount of Catholics in America to the number of Jews in America.
Compare the nature of anti-Catholic sentiment to the nature of anti-Semitic sentiment - the former exists, sure, but the latter is in my opinion much more virulent and harsh. There are people who really believe in a “ZOG.” (If there’s a ZOG then why has America been trying to broker peace between the Jews and Arabs - why didn’t they just send a few hundred Abrams tanks their way and then tell Israel to wipe 'em off the map? If there’s a ZOG then why is the number two recipient of U.S. aid Egypt?)
They’re very clever, the Jews . . . you never know why they do what they do or what they’re plotting next . . .
Say rather that DEMOCRATS (of the left leaning variety) didn’t like Lieberman and you would be closer to the truth. You do realize that he was re-elected by the majority in that race for the Senate, right? His own party pretty much stabbed him in the back…and yet he still managed to win that race.
If he’s so unpopular and folks don’t like him, why did he win that race…as an independent against the candidate the Dems DID chose?
I think Lieberman is unpopular here on the 'dope…but I don’t think that translates into everyone out there. YMMV of course.
-XT
Charges against anyone who questions the Israel party-line. ‘The left’ in general. If you think being in favor of a Palestinian state is no longer controversial, you’re out of touch.
Eh, every attribute contributes to the outcome. Obviously it’s a major part of his identity and his identity lost him the race.
I know some tall Jews, but the point is that as a whole they don’t often exceed 6’. Show me a tall Jewish politico at the national level. You may be tall, there may be tall kids in the Queens Jewish schools, but who of them is currently serving in national politics with the juice to get the Presidential nom?
xtisme You’re appealing to emotion here. The fact is that his party voted for Lamont. Yes, he won as an independent, but he lost as a Democrat. The party wouldn’t be behind him. That’s relevant, regardless of any innuendo pointed at the CT Dems.
Heh, I don’t want to go too deeply into this. But Egypt being the second recipient of US aid is an argument in FAVOR of a ZOG. They are being paid protection money. 
Regardless of the rationality underlying ZOG, there has been a lot of irrationality coming out against Obama too. Who would have thought Geraldine Ferraro would trot out the affirmative action darkie action we got from her a few months ago?
Um…no I’m not. I’m appealing to the facts. The Democrats, for mysterious reasons of their own (concerning politics) chose Lamont…and then lost because the MAJORITY of voters in Connecticut wanted Lieberman. How is this appealing to emotion in any way, shape or form?? Obviously Lieberman was the more popular candidate…because he won the freaking general election AGAINST Lamont!
Sheesh man. The Dems screwed the pooch there, because they allowed the left in their party to decide on yet another sub-optimal candidate that wouldn’t appeal to the center…that candidate being Lamont instead of who they SHOULD have chosen (i.e. Lieberman) in this case. I think Lieberman would have had a hell of a lot better shot at actually winning the presidency against Bush than Kerry did…but Lieberman would never win the nomination for the Dems. Do you not see the irony there?
-XT
The government of Israel accepts a Palestinian state. Sure there are extremist wackos, but it is controversial in the same way that evolution is.
Since you’re asserting this, why don’t you find a source giving the height and religion of politicians, and we can do a statistical analysis. Find one for the population as a whole while you’re at it. I’ve got better things to do.