Islam Trends Democratic
Vol: 61 Issue: 26 Thursday, October 26, 2006
It appears that Arab-Americans are trending toward Democratic candidates, according to a new poll conducted by Zogby International.
According to James Zogby, “This first started in early 2002,” referring to the Arab-American shift to the Left.
“It enlarged in 2004, and now, in 2006, has grown to very large majorities.”
According to the Arab-American Institute, the Arab-American community is projected to turnout about 510,000 voters. And that could mean 5 percent of all voters in Michigan, 2 percent in Ohio and Florida and 1.5 percent in Pennsylvania.
In all four states, the Democrats are leading among Arab Americans by large margins, with Florida’s gubernatorial race being the lone exception.
The numbers are a far cry from as recently as 2000, when Zogby says President Bush won the support of 46 percent of Arab Americans, compared with 38 percent who went for Al Gore. Independent candidate Ralph Nader, who is Lebanese, received 13 percent of the Arab vote.
Pollster John Zogby, James Zogby’s brother, said that his initial data on Arab-American voting trends, conducted between 1981 and 1984, showed “a fairly even balance” in voter identification between Democrats, Republicans and independents. For the most part, that trend continued through the late 1990s.
“In 1996, that parity was present,” Mr. Zogby said. There has been a 12-point shift away from the Republicans over the past decade, he said.
“Clearly, there is a trend in the Democrats’ direction,” Mr. Zogby said. “Clearly, there is a vote for change.”
What can we learn from this new polling information?
There are probably all kinds of ways of looking at the data, but no matter how one spins it, the bottom line remains unchanged.
The Arab-American community would rather have a Democrat deciding how America should fight the war on terror than it would a Republican.
Maybe they don’t like Republicans, maybe they don’t like George Bush, but the trend toward the Democrats began in 1996 — about the same time that Osama bin-Laden declared war against the infidel West.
It trended even more sharply Democrat following the attacks on September 11. Indeed, as the US intensified the conflict, Arab American support for the Democrats went up commensurately.
It is worth noting some other polling information, this time, from CAIR, to help round out the picture.
CAIR found that 55 percent believe that the Bush Administration’s current war on terror has become a war on Islam.
Sixty-nine percent believe a just resolution to the Palestinian cause would improve America’s standing in the Muslim world. Sixty-six percent support working toward normalization of relations with Iran .
Only 12 percent believe the war in Iraq was a worthwhile effort, and just 10 percent support the use of the military to spread democracy in other countries.
Call me a cynic, but there doesn’t seem to be a dime’s worth of difference between the majority American Muslim opinion on these issues and those of ‘radical’ Islam. The only distinction is about how best to advance that agenda.
Think about this. Radical Islam advocates advancing that agenda by the sword. ‘Moderate’ Islam advocates the ballot box.
But the agenda remains the same, and it is the agenda, not the method, that we are at war with.
Terror is not a cause. Terror is a method of advancing a cause. Fighting terror instead of the cause it advances is manifestly futile.
The Republicans are arguing that the terrorists are trying to influence the election in favor of the Democrats. The Democrats dismiss the charge as ‘electioneering rhetoric’.
But facts are stubborn things. It is beyond logic to argue that the Democratic agenda of opposing the war effort helps the war effort. It is equally illogical to argue that anything that helps the enemy helps America — unless one shares the enemy’s agenda.
It is obvious on its face that CAIR’s Arab American poll reflects the same agenda as the radical Islamist enemy. Removing both partisan preferences and political correctness from the equation and just connecting the dots as they appear, what picture emerges?
Which side benefits from an anti-war agenda? America’s? Or America’s enemies?
Remember, we are not discussing politics so much as we are looking at America’s survival in its current form.
We remain at war with an enemy as determined as any fanatical Nazi storm trooper or Japanese samurai. Partisanship has overtaken good sense. It is clear who the enemy would like to see win in November.
What is NOT clear is why any American would want to give them the victory.
It’s just not logical.