US Jewish Groups, Congresswoman Concerned After Ohio Congressional Candidate Blames 'Evil Money'

[MineralMan]

https://www.algemeiner.com/2021/08/05/us-jewish-groups-congresswoman-express-concern-after-ohio-congressional-candidate-blames-evil-money-for-defeat/

Leading American Jewish groups and a Jewish US Representative expressed concern on Thursday after a defeated Ohio congressional candidate made a statement they said carried antisemitic overtones, a charge denied by her campaign.

Nina Turner, who lost Tuesday’s primary race for Ohio’s 11th Congressional district to Councilwoman Shontel Brown, said in her concession speech, “We didn’t lose this race. Evil money manipulated and maligned this election.”

“See, I don’t want you to relent, because it took evil money,” she said. “They took evil money to come in here and do this.”

Jewish voters in the district played a major role in Turner’s loss to Brown, while pro-Israel Democrats and Democratic groups had campaigned for and donated to her opponent.

My comment: Blaming Jews for losing elections is a right-wing crock of excrement. This is very disturbing.

[lark]

1. It's par for the course for this Jill Stein supporter and anti-Democrat. n/t

[Nikossitti]

4. Yes

And why I couldn’t be happier that she lost. I hope she will just go away.

[BlueLucy]

11. I was so happy when I heard she lost!! nt

[nycbos]

14. Unfortunately I don't think she will.

People like this keep going back they are like weeds.

[The Magistrate]

2. Turner's Campaign Was Teeing This Up Weeks Ago, Sir

It's par for the course in many radical circles.

[MineralMan]

6. Would-Be Populists Must Blame Someone, Sir.

There is historical precedent.

[The Magistrate]

8. 'Anti-Semitism Is the Socialism Of Fools'

I forget who said it, but it often seems apt....

[nycbos]

3. We knew this was coming.

[sarisataka]

5. I have always believed

The political spectrum is circular not linear. If you go far enough left you may find yourself on the right and vice-versa.

We have seen several examples of this in the last year.

[MineralMan]

7. Unfortunately, you are correct.

Politics are like seething nests of the Worm Ouroboros. Head and tail come together.

[madaboutharry]

9. That is true.

Bend far enough to the left and you’ll end up in the same place as the far right, on the slice of the spectrum that says “It’s the Jews.”

It has always been that way and sadly it always will be.

[nycbos]

13. Yup

It's called the horseshoe theory of politics. There are many causes that unite the far left and far right.

Antisemitism is one of them.

The anti-vax movement is another. The anti-vaccine groups include both hippies and nazis.

[joetheman]

10. Would it have been different is she had said "dark money" instead?

Does this mean that we shouldn't use the term "dark money?"

[MineralMan]

12. I don't take your point, actually.

Both Nina Turner, the loser, and Shontel Brown, the winner, are Black women. The election was not decided on the basis of race at all. For the loser in the race to complain about "evil money" is a complaint about Jewish voters in that district supporting Brown. There is no other possible interpretation, really.

Nina Turner lost. The winning candidate had funding from many sources. For the Turner campaign to point at Jewish voters and contributions from that sector for her loss is very, very weak sauce, but does point to an ugly sentiment, I think. I do not like it one bit.

[Budi]

15. She repeatedly said Dark Money in comments referring to Jews

She omitted ownership of her own Dark Money from RU Kirili Gorenchenko's Mercury Global Lobbying Group.

Not a peep about her own.
Just the Jews.


HERE'S A START

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

And much more..

[comradebillyboy]

16. Democratic Majority for Israel PAC was the organization

that Turner and her allies called out for financially supporting Brown. Turner and her friends weren't calling out dark money so much as they were calling out Jewish money. Thus the assertions of antisemitism.

[TheRealNorth]

19. I don't really care for Nina Turner...

But I don't have a problem with calling out the pro-Israel lobby. Thry are mostly Right-wing Israelites that play us whenever the Democrats are in power, and then go back to supporting the Republicans when we are not. Equating that with antisemitism is horseshit.

[obamanut2012]

17. Par for the course for her

I honestly have no idea why she became like this.

[MineralMan]

18. When you lose, you have to come up with a reason for your loss.

In primary elections especially, if you run on a very narrow, unbending set of issues near the edge of your party's political philosophy, there is a very real chance that another candidate from your declared party who has a broader view of things will defeat you. That's what happened in the district Nina Turner ran in. Her views did not match a majority of primary voters, so she lost.

But, since she was, and is, unwilling to take a broader perspective in her campaign, she cannot accept that her views were a poor match for the constituency of that district. So, she has to blame someone for her loss. Contributions from the local and national Jewish contingent allowed her strongest opponent, Shontel Brown, to mount a more effective campaign and win.

Since losing was completely unacceptable for Nina Turner, she called those contributions "evil." She is a sore loser. She has demonstrated that in the past, as well, seeking to blame others for her own faulty campaign strategies. That has hurt primary candidates on the edge of a party's positions in many elections. I've seen it many times, where a primary candidate who is otherwise a good candidate loses due to the narrowness of his or her campaign's focus.

It's not as big a problem in general elections, though, since voters tend strongly to vote for the candidate of their party, regardless of any extreme positions. But, in primaries, you really have to gain the trust of a broader spectrum of voters, since so few voters actually show up for the election. Nina Turner miscalculated and lost. She didn't meet the expectations of a majority of primary voters.

It happens all the time.