I hope Romney does the smart thing and chooses Eric Cantor to be his running mate.
Back in 2008, there were a lot of pro-Cantor voices, such as Bruce Walker at American Thinker and a Washington Times editorial.
Both editorials were wrong about Cantor being able to strip the Jewish vote from Obama in 2008. But things are different now. Jews have more reasons now to vote against Obama: the economy sucks and Obama has shown himself to be a false friend to Israel and his policies have messed up the Middle East. The special election in Brooklyn and Queens in which the Republican won Anthony Weiner's seat proves this. If there was ever an historic opportunity to strip Jewish voters from the Democratic party, that time has finally come if Romney is smart enough to grab it.
People will no doubt say that Jews are unimportant because they make up only 2% of the electorate. But Jews have a lot more influence than that. First of all, more like 5% of white Americans are Jewish enough to qualify to make Aliyah to Israel, even though they don't necessarily say they are Jewish when pollsters ask them their religion. Secondly, Jews donate a disproportionate amount of money to politicians. Finally, Jews have a disproportionate influence over the MSM, so if Republicans can win over the majority of Jews to their side, the result will be more favorable media coverage for Republicans.
Also, Cantor is conservative on the immigration issue. As the Washington Times editorial board wrote, “on illegal immigration, Mr. Cantor has consistently opposed legislation pushed by Mr. McCain that would provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
It's an anti-semitic myth to say Jews have a disproportionate influence over MSM.
[HS: Jews have a disproportionate influence in nearly all high-IQ occupations because Jews, on average, have genetically higher IQs than gentiles. But Jew-haters wrongly believe that Jews somehow CONTROL the media as part of a vast conspiracy to serve secret Jewish purposes involving global domination and the Federal Reserve Bank.]
Posted by: trey | September 26, 2011 at 10:12 AM
Sounds like a good idea to me.
Posted by: Fiddlesticks | September 26, 2011 at 11:01 AM
If that were to happen, what is your prediction on the Jewish vote compared to the normal 80:20 split?
Posted by: Whitey Whiteman III | September 26, 2011 at 11:48 AM
good argument--he's a class act
Posted by: Pussy Galore | September 26, 2011 at 12:40 PM
Cantor would get torn up. The media hates a traitor. No black, Hispanic, woman, or Jew can be a Republican without getting a lot of heat. They can't do much to Cantor now because he is relatively low profile and represents a conservative district, but if he ran for VP they would unload on him.
[HS: Cantor is a traitor to whom? He never belonged to the liberal establishment, and as far as I know he has always been a patriotic American and an observant Jew who has supported Israel.
As far as I know, the MSM likes Cantor because they invite him to appear on a lot of talk shows.]
Posted by: Thrasymachus | September 26, 2011 at 01:12 PM
A Mormon and a Jew, huh? :)
Posted by: Mark | September 26, 2011 at 01:33 PM
This would give Romney---by far the best Republican candidate---a pretty good shot at winning.
Posted by: Insider | September 26, 2011 at 02:09 PM
HS,
Why do you vote or care about politics. You've previously stated that you don't much care about society and only how an individual can get ahead. In what way does it further your aims? Is it just a hobby? Does the increased traffic lead to appreciable blog income?
[HS: There is zero advertising income from this blog since Google banned my URL from ads. There is a donate button, but rarely does anyone donate. The last donation was $10 on August 10th, and that doesn't even cover what I pay to TypePad for hosting. This blog is a liability and not a source of extra income.
And no, this is NOT a request for donations. I have mixed feelings about having a Donate button.]
Posted by: davver | September 26, 2011 at 02:11 PM
Now we know to whom Obama was referring:
"Here is what the president actually said, catching himself almost in time but not quite:'If asking a billionaire to pay the same tax rate as a Jew, uh, as a janitor makes me a warrior for the working class, I wear that with a badge of honor. I have no problem with that.'"
Obama, the anti-Semite, again muffs reading a teleprompter, which reveals his true, inner self. Explain to me again how smart Commandante Zero is.
RomneyCare vs. ObamaCare. Wake me when we get at least one non-Socialist parties.
Posted by: ErisGuy | September 26, 2011 at 02:59 PM
Cantor has the look of a campus liberal, kind of a less comical version of Dukakis, or what I imagine the guy who runs DailyKos looks like. As such, he will subliminally convert masses of erstwhile Dem. voters to the Republican side. They will imagine him as a manchurian worm eating away at the right-wing gut. As soon as he's in the race, the Dems will have to dump Obama, and come up with a similarly cerebral-looking candiate. Al Franken is our next president.
Posted by: sounds reasonable | September 26, 2011 at 03:00 PM
"Jews have a disproportionate influence in nearly all high-IQ occupations"
And they are especially disproportionate in high VERBAL IQ occupations in particular, especially media because Jews are smart enough to know that's where the real power is.
"But Jew-haters wrongly believe that Jews somehow CONTROL the media as part of a vast conspiracy to serve secret Jewish purposes involving global domination and the Federal Reserve Bank."
There's no conspiracy but all racial and ethnic groups are genetically motivated to help their own people as a way of replicating their own genes (see Rushton's genetic similarity theory). Jews have the highest IQ's so they can figure out away to do this far more efficiently by acquiring disproportionate wealth and power and skillfully using that to advance Jewish interests. There's no grand conspiracy; each Jew is independently motivated and able to figure out what to do without conspiring with other Jews, but the collective effect of so many rich, powerful intelligent Jews all serving Jewish interests is a force to be reckoned with.
Every ethnicity actively works to serve its own interests, but Jews are so much better at it than everyone else that they inspire occasional resentment, especially when Jewish interests conflict with American interests as they do in U.S. foreign policy and some would argue immigration policy.
Jews have so much power in the media that even non-Jews in media serve Jewish interests because so much of the media is Jewish owned or Jewish run that non-Jews will often placate Jews to increase the odds of keeping their job, improving their television time slot, or being hired by a better network/newspaper.
Posted by: Linda | September 26, 2011 at 04:50 PM
Jews make up less than 3% of the population therefore there is little electoral benefit in choosing a Jewish running mate. It would make a lot more sense for Romney - a Mormon - to choose a mainstream Protestant or Catholic running mate such as Paul Ryan.
Posted by: Joe Walker | September 26, 2011 at 07:15 PM
Cantor lacks gravitas, enabling the administration to gaslight him as being "immature" during the debt ceiling debates. He also has a Southern accent, which probably wouldn't help in pealing off big city liberal Jews.
In any case, Jewishness is probably more of a liability than an asset. It would be a turnoff to paleos who think the country is too biased toward Israel already, and it wouldn't even attract many Jewish voters (who voted against the Jewish candidate in NY-9 earlier this month).
Posted by: DaveinHackensack | September 26, 2011 at 07:47 PM
When most people talk about problems in the economy they are talking about jobs. I'd guess that Jewish unemployment is really, really low, so unemployment is probably not that important to Jews. I doubt Obama's ruinous interventions really matter all that much to Jewish voting.
And remember, Obama is trying to grow the scope of government dominated sectors like education, healthcare, and law which all seem like sectors that employ a disproportionate Jewish percentage.
Posted by: Secret of NAM | September 26, 2011 at 09:39 PM
"In any case, Jewishness is probably more of a liability than an asset. It would be a turnoff to paleos who think the country is too biased toward Israel already, "
Yes, that's quite a huge and powerful voting bloc.
Posted by: RA | September 26, 2011 at 09:51 PM
"In any case, Jewishness is probably more of a liability than an asset. It would be a turnoff to paleos who think the country is too biased toward Israel already, and it wouldn't even attract many Jewish voters (who voted against the Jewish candidate in NY-9 earlier this month)."
I don't think Jews even want a Jew on a presidential ticket. Jews have brilliantly achieved so much power they have no problem getting non-Jewish leaders to act in Israel's interest and it's better for Jews to have non-Jews carrying their water because then Jews don't get blamed.
Posted by: Linda | September 26, 2011 at 10:08 PM
Hopefully, he is a Jew With a Clue...
Posted by: Sbarro Revenge | September 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM
Regarding Jewish donations, there is an anti-semtic lie that Jews are 40-50% of Democrat donations (and this statistic has been stupidly repeated by math illiterate journalits who didn;t bother to check where this number came from) but the source for this funding information has never been located.
This number was debunked by the dormant blog Guy White where it was shown it is mathematically impossible that Jews could be such a high percentage of Democrat donors.
10% is more plausible, but 40% or more appears to be another anti-semitic lie.
"Finally, Jews have a disproportionate influence over the MSM, so if Republicans can win over the majority of Jews to their side, the result will be more favorable media coverage for Republicans."
The media is only 20-25% Jewish if one counts journalists who are partially Jewish as fully Jewish, which is a common tactic used by anti-semites to exaggerate Jewish influence, which is still disproportionate for being 5% of American whites.
Regardless of the Jewish percentage, there wouldn't be any improved media coverage for Republicans were the GOP to win a majority of the Jewish vote because white gentiles currently vote majority GOP and yet white gentile journalists are overwhelmingly Democrat hacks.
The Jews won't join conservatism until elite gentiles become conservative because the Jews are simply imitating the elite gentiles rather than working against them.
The overrepresntation of Jews in the MSM (or political movements in general) makes little difference in American society because the non-ethnocentric assimilated Jews are promoting liberalism because they are copying the gentile white elite.
Replacing Jewish liberals in the MSM will just lead to their jobs being taken over by gentile SWPL liberals who will promote the exact same ideas Jews are.
In other words, the Daily Show isn't going to become conservative if Jon Stewart is replaced by gentile Tina Fey.
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | September 26, 2011 at 11:28 PM
"It would be a turnoff to paleos"
There are almost no paleoconservatives outside of a tiny, and completely irrelevant section of the blogosphere.
Their candidate, Ron Paul, is going nowhere in the Republican primary and is widely hated by Republican primary voters because he doesn't support Israel and loves to make excuses for Muslim terrorism.
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | September 26, 2011 at 11:31 PM
"But Jew-haters wrongly believe that Jews somehow CONTROL the media"
The Jews are COPYING elite gentiles and they won't be conservative until ELITE GENTILES become conservative.
When the Republicans were the elite party from 1865-1932, the elite Jews, the German American Jews, were Republicans. After FDR moved the country to the left, the Jews assimilated into American Democrat leftist establishment mores.
Yet, the antisemites expect Jewish elites to be conservative when GENTILE ELITES are also liberal and directing Jewish political behavior.
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | September 26, 2011 at 11:35 PM
"Cantor has the look of a campus liberal, kind of a less comical version of Dukakis, or what I imagine the guy who runs DailyKos looks like. As such, he will subliminally convert masses of erstwhile Dem. voters to the Republican side. They will imagine him as a manchurian worm eating away at the right-wing gut. As soon as he's in the race, the Dems will have to dump Obama, and come up with a similarly cerebral-looking candiate. Al Franken is our next president."
LOL. Cantor does actually look like a Scandinavian liberal. I've had professors who've looked just like him. He doesn't look like a Jew or a conservative. In fact, to be totally superficial, I don't like that look. It reminds me of some sort of anal-retentiveness without a sense of humor or imagination.
Posted by: EliteBaby | September 27, 2011 at 01:53 AM
"There are almost no paleoconservatives outside of a tiny, and completely irrelevant section of the blogosphere."
How do you know? Have you conducted a census of them? Paleos comprised a big wing of the GOP until the rise of the neocons. Do you think they and their children all disappeared?
Just because their views aren't represented in the mainstream media (except for maybe Pat Buchanan) doesn't mean they don't exist.
Posted by: DaveinHackensack | September 27, 2011 at 03:15 AM
Cantor is fine on another ticket but is too button up for Romney.
Together they would be a vortex of GQ.
Romney needs someone like Perry or Joe Manchin to balance out his whiff of Northern gentility.
Manchin would be perfect since he is Southern and working class. And he is obviously the type of Democrat that Nancy Pelosi is driving from the party.
They would play the Zell Miller card that was so successful against Kerry.
Posted by: Turambar | September 27, 2011 at 09:01 AM
Is that (5-3)% of semi-Jewish Americans going to give a damn that Eric Cantor is the VP nominee? I don't think Sarah Palin did much for McCain among women, and Cantor won't do it for Romney. Things will be much as they were in 2008, but with reduced minority turnout since there isn't the same big hopey-changey push.
[HS: Women prefer to vote for alpha males and dislike voting for women. When are people going to figure that out???]
Posted by: TGGP | September 27, 2011 at 09:43 AM
There might have been some positive MSM-Cantor relations at one time, but that disappeared after the Republicans won the House last year. Now Cantor has some power and is an enemy to the MSM. His treatment in the media the last few months has been pretty crappy.
Posted by: lil mike | September 27, 2011 at 09:01 PM
"There is zero advertising income from this blog since Google banned my URL from ads. There is a donate button, but rarely does anyone donate. The last donation was $10 on August 10th, and that doesn't even cover what I pay to TypePad for hosting. This blog is a liability and not a source of extra income.
And no, this is NOT a request for donations. I have mixed feelings about having a Donate button." - Half Sigma
The Spearhead and In Mala Fide have donation drives to maintain operations. The Spearhead's readership consists of divorced pot bellied comb over dads. In Mala Fide's readership consists of 20 something nihilists. If your readership is as high brow as they seem then they should have no problem financing your blog. Your high quality content is well worth it.
Posted by: Commander Shepard | September 28, 2011 at 06:37 PM
"In any case, Jewishness is probably more of a liability than an asset. It would be a turnoff to paleos who think the country is too biased toward Israel already, and it wouldn't even attract many Jewish voters (who voted against the Jewish candidate in NY-9 earlier this month)."
I wonder if Paleos know that one of their heroes is part Jewish. Namely a former presidential candidate with a glaringly Jewish name which, ironically, no one seems to notice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater#Personal_life
I'm a fan of Cantor and would find it gratifying to see him be VP. But, unfortunately, I tend to agree that it wouldn't cause the vast majority of the Jewish vote to budge from the Democrat column. There is too much of a connection to the Democratic party and liberalism among much of the Jewish community.
How about Kay Bailey Hutchison for VP? Like the Texan Perry without the arrogance, and like Palin with a brain.
[HS: When will people learn that conservative women do poorly in general elections? Eric Cantor would attract a lot more votes from the "undecided" people who actually decide elections.]
Posted by: J. L. | September 30, 2011 at 10:03 AM