So, how many unaffiliated Jews voted for the Democrats?

The short remark I wrote yesterday on the Republican Jewish Coalition was not well received within the organization, and I can't say it was a surprise.

"The Republican Jewish Coalition survey of the midterm voters was a hoax, no less," I wrote. The Forward revealed that the telephone survey had bypassed Jews who never attend synagogue or do not associate with a major Jewish movement. This was a major flaw, I thought, as did the Forward.

No, it was not a flaw, replied Shari Hillman, Communications Director for the RJC, referring me to something by Richard Baehr, Chief Political Correspondent for the American Thinker.

Well, I read it - and didn't change my mind. In his initial reporting on the poll, Baehr made some valid points: relying on exit polls when one attempts to assess the Jewish vote is an unreliable method. He didn't, though, address the fundamental question: why didn't the RJC poll include the unaffiliated. He did address this issue in his second posting on the matter, but in a way that was less than convincing:

"Neither she [Jennifer Siegel of the Forward] , nor Professor Stephen Cohen, whom she quotes as an authority on the subject, have any idea of the voting patterns of members of congregations or of the unaffiliated Jews in this last election with which to counter the RJC survey results. How does either Miss Siegel or Professor Cohen know that the unaffiliated Jews would have voted any differently than say, reform Jews, who provided 22% support for Republicans in the RJC survey? Add another big swath of Jewish voters at the 22% level (46% of the total Jewish population is unaffiliated according to Professor Cohen), and the new average would still be 24% to 25% for Republicans, not much different than the 26 to 27% level in the RJC survey."

Well, this is an interesting argument: Cohen doesn't know - so we should assume - that the RJC poll is accurate? Of course Cohen doesn't know - and that's the whole point. Neither he nor the RJC poll can provide an answer. And the second argument in this one paragraph from Baehr is even stranger: "How does either Miss Siegel or Professor Cohen know that the unaffiliated Jews would have voted any differently than say, reform Jews." To this one can reply: and how does Mr. Baehr know that the unaffiliated Jews wouldn't have?

But seriously, there's plenty of available data with which to feed the assumption that the unaffiliated Jews would vote differently than the affiliated Jews. One example was provided to me a while ago by someone who was kind enough to give me the breakdown of the latest AJC annual survey. On the AJC web page you can only see the general numbers - but here are some examples of the ways in which the unaffiliated are different from the affiliated:

Do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out? Reform: 73% right, 23% out. Just Jewish: 27% right, 66% out. Would you support or oppose the United States taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons? Reform: approve 32%, disapprove 61%. Just Jewish: approve 41%, disapprove 52%.

But here's the most revealing question - the one that is relevant to this specific debate: In politics, as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent? Reform: 14% Republican, 59% Democrat, 26% independent. Just Jewish: 13% Republican, 48% Democrat, 34% independent.

Can you detect a pattern in these numbers? Interestingly enough, on many issues it is the ideal scenario for the RJC. The unaffiliated are more conservative, more hawkish than the Reform. So the assumption Baehr was making was flawed - but not necessarily in the way he thought. The RJC poll is still unreliable, but it might also carry another possibility: that there are actually more Jewish voters that lean to the right than it had revealed.

Oh, and one more thing. Claiming that the Forward did the story on this poll because "The liberal Jewish press, of which The Forward is certainly a member, seems to be very agitated with the results of the RJC poll" was a cheap shot. No proof was provided.