“The vast majority of American Jews identify as Democrats, while Republican Jews are often very passionate about believing their stance is the best for Israel.”

Interview with Dara Horn 

by Esther Offenberg and Elie Petit

How did American Jews and their organizations position themselves during the presidential campaign, and what role did the Israel-Palestine conflict play in it? In this interview, conducted on the eve of Presidential Election Day, journalist and essayist Dara Horn sheds light on the political cleavages within the American Jewish world, and how they are at times instrumentalized.

 

 

Would you say that issues related to the “Jewish question” and the associated conflict played a particularly significant or even disproportionate role in this campaign?

Dara Horn : Being immersed in this world, I hear a lot about it. However, I don’t believe the Jewish question and related conflicts significantly influenced the election. The reality is that in American elections, each state must be won individually, and the Jewish population is concentrated in certain states, many of which are not competitive. This is also true for most people involved in the protests; they tend to live in areas where the voting isn’t very contentious.

Take New York, for example. It has a large Jewish population and has seen tens of thousands of people participating in rallies with extreme slogans like “Long Live the Intifada.” However, New York is a solidly Democratic state, so everyone there is effectively voting Democrat, which means this isn’t an issue in that context. There are only a few competitive states, and most of them do not have a large Jewish population or a significant number of residents who are deeply invested in this overseas conflict.

I don’t think this will have a major impact on the election. The only state people might mention is Michigan, which is competitive and has a sizable Arab-American community. However, even that community may not be large enough to sway the outcome. Michigan is quite divided, with cities like Detroit having both a significant Arab-American and Jewish population, both of which lean liberal. In contrast, other parts of the state are very conservative, predominantly white and Christian.

So, I really don’t believe it will make a substantial difference. Yet, there’s a perception that it might. For instance, Trump has even suggested that if he loses, it’s the Jews’ fault. I don’t think that’s justified, especially since, in Michigan, the Jewish population isn’t particularly large. Most Jews live in states that are already leaning one way or the other. There are only a few specific states where the situation is competitive, and those who are passionate about these issues—whether they’re Jewish, Arab-American, or progressive individuals—tend not to live in those key battleground areas.

So the voting patterns of Jewish communities do not bring about a clear difference.

DH : Let’s look at Congressional races. Each member of Congress represents a local district, typically encompassing about half a million people, which is relatively small for us. In many areas, these districts tend to vote along party lines, with some consistently favoring Republicans and others always supporting Democrats. However, when it comes to choosing candidates, there are primary elections held several months before the general election to decide which candidates will run for that seat.

This past summer, there were at least two Congressional races where Jewish voters played a significant role by mobilizing and organizing to unseat certain candidates. For example, in St. Louis, Missouri, which has a lot of Jewish voters, there was a Congresswoman named Cori Bush.

Cori Bush, along with another Congressman in New York, were both seen as very antisemitic and extremely anti-Israel, frequently posting online about issues like “Palestinian genocide.” They had been in office for several years, but the Jewish community began organizing against them. Even though both candidates were Democrats in districts expected to lean Democratic, the Jewish community mobilized support for challengers in the primary elections to run against them.

For instance, Cori Bush, who is a Black woman and very anti-Israel, faced off against Wesley Bell, a Black man who is pro-Israel and supportive of the Jewish community. I met Wesley Bell at a university event where I was giving a lecture about the Jewish community in St. Louis. He attended to connect with local Jewish leaders and community members, and basically campaign.

There are also many conservative voters who care about Israel, often influenced by their Christian beliefs and perhaps sometimes by anti-Muslim sentiments.

The mobilization effort by the Jewish community in St. Louis involved knocking on doors and raising funds for Wesley Bell’s campaign, which ultimately succeeded. A similar situation occurred in New York with Jamaal Bowman, who also represented a district with a significant Jewish population. Jewish voters there also organized and worked to replace him with a candidate more supportive of Israel and sympathetic to the Jewish community in general.

Your answer reflects how some voters are more focused on the situation in the Middle East conflict. But what about the general population? Do you think this topic was disproportionately uninteresting in the debate between the two candidates, or do you believe it is something that the general voters care about?

I believe the general voters are interested, but they’re not voting decisions based on that. In debates, the topic does come up, but for many who aren’t Jewish or Arab and don’t have a personal connection, their interest often stems from the U.S. military alliance aspect. They view it in terms of America’s role abroad, asking questions like, “What are we doing with NATO?” or reflecting on past engagements like the disaster in Afghanistan. People are concerned about whether we should involve ourselves in the Middle East again and if the U.S. should act as the world’s policeman. For them, this is about military decisions that impact the budget and national strategy, also particularly relevant to those in the military.

There are also many conservative voters who care about Israel, often influenced by their Christian beliefs and perhaps sometimes by anti-Muslim sentiments. While they might not have personal ties to the region, they’re interested in Middle Eastern affairs for various reasons—either due to their views on U.S. military involvement or they might be religious Christians who care about the Holy Land. Millions of Americans fall into this category, generally favoring Israel and opposing Arab countries.

However, I don’t think these factors will significantly sway their votes. In a polarized election like this one, it’s hard to imagine many undecided voters. People have strong feelings about Donald Trump—either love or hate—and that tends to drive their voting behavior. Most voters had limited knowledge of Kamala Harris until recently, so the decision largely comes down to their opinions on Trump rather than a nuanced understanding of other issues.

This reflects Donald Trump’s stance toward the Jewish community, as he has rallied antisemitic tropes while simultaneously making declarations of support and affection for the community. What does this indicate about the place of the Jewish population in the U.S.? Additionally, what does it say about the symbolism of love or hate for Jews that must be addressed in this election?

DH : Absolutely, that’s very insightful. It seems that everyone is leveraging the Jewish community for their own agendas. It’s interesting to note that the vast majority of American Jews identify as Democrats, while Republican Jews are often very passionate about believing their stance is the best for Israel. Conversely, Democrats feel strongly that the Republican Party poses the greatest threat to Jewish interests in the U.S. Even within the Jewish community, there is a strong connection to these political identities. You’re right that politicians are exploiting this dynamic to energize their voter bases.

I had a personal experience with this when I testified in Congress about antisemitism at Harvard this year. This was part of a broader investigation into antisemitism on college campuses. I remember being quite nervous and speaking with my lawyer, who frequently prepares individuals for congressional hearings. He asked me why I was testifying, and I replied that, while I didn’t have much choice, I hoped to effect positive change for Jewish students. He looked at me and said, “That’s not going to happen. This is Congress during an election year; no one cares about Jewish students on college campuses. They only care if addressing this issue can sway their voters.” He told me that my goal should be to leave as quickly as possible without becoming part of someone else’s campaign ad.

Trump’s behavior is particularly peculiar. He often straddles both sides, claiming to be the best friend the Jewish community has ever had while making critical remarks about the political preferences of American Jews. Yes, there are Jewish voters who support Trump, but much of what he says seems aimed at appealing to his Christian conservative base, which is far larger than the Jewish population.

Trump claims to be the best friend the Jewish community has ever had while making critical remarks about the political preferences of American Jews.

The reality is that Jews aren’t situated in key battlegrounds for elections. Trump’s remark about losing and blaming the Jews was a strategic move. While there are about 5.8 million Jewish adults in America—making it the largest Jewish community outside Israel—this is relatively small in a country of 330 million. Most American Jews live in areas like New York, which are not competitive in elections. The only red state with a significant Jewish population is Florida, but that state is largely expected to lean Republican.

It seems that politicians are using Jews as a symbol, which resonates with many Americans. For some, this evokes positive feelings, particularly among Christian conservatives. I’ve been interviewed on Christian TV programs where hosts express admiration for me as a member of the “chosen people,” which can feel both awkward and somewhat flattering. This demographic is quite active in the U.S., unlike in Europe. However, there is a darker side to this dynamic.

Under Trump’s administration, we witnessed a significant rise in violent antisemitism, including attacks on synagogues—a disturbing trend that hadn’t been seen in many years. The resurgence of right-wing antisemitism, which had largely been dormant, re-emerged during his term, and some argue that he played a role in that activation.

Nonetheless, there is also a perception that he has made positive contributions regarding Israel. His administration brokered peace deals between Israel and the Gulf States and moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. While these actions may be seen as favorable for Israel, they are likely driven more by his appeal to Christian voters rather than genuine concern for the Jewish community. Overall, it’s a complex landscape where motives and outcomes intertwine in ways that can both support and threaten Jewish interests.

Moving toward Harris now. With Kamala Harris’ rise, there seems to be less criticism of Israeli policy coming from the Biden-Harris administration and within the Democratic Party as a whole. Do you think that these criticisms are being softened or absorbed by Harris’s stance? Or has this period created some discomfort for Jewish Democratic voters? Has the conversation shifted in that direction?

DH : There has certainly been a lot of discomfort among Jewish Democratic voters. This past year has been shocking for many in the Jewish community, particularly for those further to the left, who felt betrayed—not so much by the Democratic Party, but by the progressive movement in the United States. Before this year, many Jews were actively involved in various progressive causes, such as racial justice, economic justice, and environmental issues. It was jarring for them to see these movements turn against Israel to the extent of calling for violence against Zionists. This has dampened the enthusiasm of many Jewish voters.

While they may still vote for Democrats, they are less inclined to actively support the party. There seems to be a decrease in interest in activities like phone banking, canvassing, campaigning, posting on social media, and donating money, all essential components of a political campaign. The sense of betrayal isn’t directed at the Biden administration, as many perceive Biden himself to be pro-Israel. However, there is a general concern about the progressive movements and the left wing of the Democratic Party.

Some see Harris as not being anti-Israel enough and that she is TOO supportive of the Jewish community.

When Kamala Harris stepped in as a candidate, there was anxiety among some Jewish voters about her stance on these issues. Interestingly, she seems to align more closely with Biden’s positions, which has alienated some left-wing voters, particularly those who aren’t Jewish, who feel she should be more critical of Israel.

There’s a movement among some anti-Israel activists, known as the Uncommitted Movement, that refuses to support Kamala Harris due to her perceived alignment with Zionism. It seems rather pointless, though, as they’re not going to vote for Trump. It’s interesting to observe that some see Harris as not being anti-Israel enough and that she is TOO supportive of the Jewish community. I wonder how those who choose to sit out the election, particularly the far-left voters who cannot bring themselves to support Harris, will impact the election.

Do you think that’s actually a sizable number that’s following this movement, or was it maybe more of a social media echo chamber?

DH : I find it hard to believe that people won’t vote. Many people don’t participate because they’re apathetic or disengaged, but that doesn’t apply to activists. It would be incredibly foolish for them to sit out the election. Yet, it seems there’s really no limit to how misguided people can be.

Consider this perspective: if someone fervently wishes for Israel’s destruction and holds antisemitic beliefs, thinking that Jews control the government and manipulate the Biden administration, they might decide not to vote because they oppose Biden and Kamala Harris for not being aggressive enough against what they perceive as “evil Zionists.” However, by not voting in a swing state, they are essentially casting a vote for Trump, which is the last thing they want. I just don’t understand the logic here. It’s incredibly short-sighted. We have a two-party system in the U.S., unlike in Europe where there are many smaller parties to choose from.

This movement on the left also includes participation from American Jews, particularly younger individuals. Overall, it appears that there has been a shift in the younger Jewish community’s relationship with Zionism. What do you think are the origins and political implications of these trends? Would you say this is a widespread shift, or is it more of a marginal phenomenon?

DH : This is not a trend. Before October 7, polling indicated that younger Jews were indeed less supportive of Israel. For instance, a Pew survey conducted in 2020  showed that about 80% of American Jews considered Israel an important part of their identity.^[1] When broken down by age, a significant majority of those under 40 still felt similarly—71%. However, more recent surveys from 2024, conducted after October 7, show that 85% of American Jews aged 18 to 40 still identify as Zionists and believe in Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.^[2] This suggests that the narrative of a growing anti-Zionist trend among younger Jews is not well-supported by evidence. 

Many individuals in the anti-Zionist camp might wish this were true, but it simply isn’t. In fact, there has been a significant awakening among younger Jews in the past year regarding the issue of left-wing antisemitism. While this sentiment has been prevalent in Europe for a long time, it has only recently become more visible in the U.S. The majority of American Jews live in progressive urban areas, and these recent developments have had a profound impact on them. 

As a result, many younger American Jews are not becoming anti-Zionist; rather, they are becoming more aware of their Jewish identity and showing greater curiosity about it. A New York Times columnist, Bret Stephens, coined the term “October 8 Jew” to describe those who suddenly realized their Jewish identity after the events of October 7 and began participating in Jewish community events.

The narrative of a growing anti-Zionist trend among younger Jews is not well-supported by evidence.

I’ve noticed this trend when speaking to Jewish audiences. For instance, I recently spoke in Seattle, a very left-leaning city, and drew a crowd of 700, mostly younger people, including many teenagers and even some Bar Mitzvah-aged kids. The same was true when I spoke in Portland, Oregon, where I also attracted hundreds of attendees. Many expressed that they had never participated in Jewish community events before. 

While this shift in awareness doesn’t necessarily mean they support current events in the Middle East, it does indicate that these individuals are recognizing that the activism against Israel often feels disconnected from the realities of the situation in the region.

Do you believe that the Jewish electorate is divided, or have its institutions taken a clear stance? We have heard significant discussions, including criticism directed at the Washington Post for not supporting Kamala Harris, even though it’s not a Jewish institution. Or there have been protests regarding the ADL’s lack of criticism on certain issues. How have the communities and their institutions responded during this period? Are they denouncing specific statements or urging people to vote for particular candidates?

DH : Jewish organizations typically refrain from endorsing a candidate unless they operate as a political group. They understand that the electorate is divided, and making an endorsement could alienate segments of their constituency. While the vast majority of American Jews vote Democratic, there has been a noticeable increase in the number of Jews voting Republican compared to the past 50 years. The ADL, for instance, has struggled with this issue. Jonathan Greenblatt had worked in the Obama administration before becoming the CEO of the ADL. Under Greenblatt’s leadership, which began just before the Trump administration, the organization focused primarily on right-wing antisemitism and largely overlooked antisemitism from the left. In recent years, they’ve had to adjust their approach, recognizing that they made a mistake by only addressing one side of the political spectrum.

Interestingly, I spoke at their major convention in New York last March, which attracted thousands of attendees. During that event, they awarded Jared Kushner a prize, ostensibly for his role in the Abraham Accords. However, this move seemed to be an attempt to appease those who were frustrated with the ADL’s previous lack of attention to left-wing antisemitism. This decision, however, angered others who questioned why they were honoring someone associated with Trump. It’s a difficult position for Jewish organizations, as they aim to remain nonpartisan. They do not want to alienate Jews who may vote in different ways, nor do they wish to take a stance against whoever ultimately wins an election. 

Their goal is to maintain a voice regardless of the administration in power. While AIPAC is explicitly political and focused on promoting policies that support Israel, they also work with a bipartisan group of supporters, including many Christians who are pro-Israel. In this country, openly aligning with one party can be unwise, as it risks making an organization persona non grata with the winning administration. Given the closely divided nature of Congress, which plays a crucial role in legislation, it is essential for these organizations to engage with both parties. For these reasons, Jewish organizations generally choose not to endorse candidates. In contrast, the Washington Post’s decision not to support a candidate is quite unusual.

Recently, Kamala Harris’ campaign played what might be considered a surprising card by allowing her husband to specifically address the threats Donald Trump poses to the Jewish community. He characterized Trump as a fascist and highlighted some of the offensive remarks he has made about Jews. In response, Trump declared, “I’m not a Nazi; I’m the opposite of a Nazi.” What do you make of this exchange?

DH : It’s disheartening that Trump’s closing argument is essentially, “Vote for me; I’m not a Nazi.” Yet, this situation reveals, to me at least, the enormous role Jews play in people’s imaginations. Here, at the last minute, Kamala Harris believed that appealing to Jewish voters was crucial. While there are experts who are much better at analyzing polling data than I am, I’m not entirely convinced that Jewish voters are as pivotal as they think. There simply aren’t that many of us. 

However, it benefits the Jewish community to have both parties subscribe to this somewhat antisemitic notion of Jewish power. If they believe we hold significant influence, it may lead to more engagement with us, allowing people like me to testify in Congress and have our voices heard. It’s almost as if this notion operates beneath the surface; these individuals aren’t necessarily antisemitic, but they’ve absorbed a certain idea about Jewish power without fully articulating it. This perception shapes how many people think about us. If only the idea were true, we would certainly have fewer worries.

The reality is that the Jewish community here will engage with whoever is in power.

What do you think a Trump re-election would signify for American Jews and possibly for Israeli politics?

DH : Jewish Republicans believe Trump would be better for Israel. However, I have serious concerns about what the Trump administration ignited among certain groups in the United States. I’ve noticed this Horseshoe theory online, where extreme left-wing anti-Zionist sentiments intersect with those of far-right neo-Nazis, with both sides being on the fringes. During the last Trump administration, we witnessed the rise of this activism and the activation of these radical elements. It seemed to bring out the worst instincts in people, and I am genuinely apprehensive about the prospect of four more years of such extremism. In my view, this has not been beneficial for Jews, especially regarding what becomes normalized in discourse and behavior.

What would a Trump victory mean for Jews in terms of how they would need to respond? Last week we published an article in K. highlighting that Trump expects unconditional support from Jews in exchange for his conditional support of their interests. Do you think Jews will take a moderate opposition stance, or will they be forced into a temporary alliance of support or silent backing? How might this impact the position of Jews in the U.S.?

DH : That’s an interesting concept—demanding unconditional loyalty in exchange for conditional support. The issue with Trump is his unpredictability; he tends to act on impulse, yet he expects total loyalty in return. This is evident in his remarks suggesting that if he loses, it’s somehow the fault of the Jews. The reality is that the Jewish community here will engage with whoever is in power. 

The problem with the Trump administration was that it brought out the crazy in people—not just those in government, but also in the general population. What was so alarming during Trump’s presidency was the sudden emergence of neo-Nazis in America; it was as if a previously more dormant movement had become very active. This forced people to overlook various issues, which is often the case with political alliances—you have to tolerate aspects you dislike about your chosen candidate.

The Biden administration has certainly made decisions that the Jewish community could rightfully criticize. In a two-party system, it’s common to overlook certain discontent with the party you support. However, Trump’s erratic behavior and extreme rhetoric created an environment where saying anything, no matter how outrageous, became acceptable.

We’ve seen a year of left-wing extremism, which I don’t expect to dissipate if Trump were to be re-elected. In fact, it might intensify, giving both sides yet another cause to rally around. This could lead to a deeply troubling scenario where both extremes become more energized, each with their own antisemitic elements. Overall, I don’t see any positive outcome in that scenario.

---

Interview conducted by Esther Offenberg and Elie Petit