Were you as deeply moved as I was listening to Rachel and Jon Goldberg-Polin speak at the Democratic National Convention last Wednesday night?
It was the most emotional moment of the convention, and arguably the most powerful speech delivered at the event. It came from two Jewish parents who aren’t politicians and who weren’t there to promote a political message, but a humanitarian one — a call to bring their son, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, home after 10-plus months of being held hostage by Hamas.
Their deeply poignant and impassioned plea they made on behalf of their son — and all the hostages being held by Hamas — touched the hearts of millions of Americans and did more to advocate their cause than any other effort since Oct. 7.
Speaking to Democratic delegates, the couple was also smart enough not to take sides in the Gaza War. “There is a surplus of agony on all sides of the tragic conflict in the Middle East. In a competition of pain, there are no winners,” said Jon Polin.
It was heartwarming to witness the emotional responses on the faces of the tens of thousands at the convention. You could feel the intensity of the crowd as they listened with rapt attention. Some in the audience wiped away tears, while others stood silently, their attention fixed on the stage.
This powerful moment was followed by a clear reaffirmation of the party’s commitment to Israel’s security, including the pledge to continue the $3.8 billion in annual defense assistance to Israel, which President Joe Biden has described as “ironclad.” In addition, the platform explicitly blamed Hamas for the ongoing war in Gaza and reiterated its opposition to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
But all is not rosy.
The dangerous influence of the pro-Palestinian movement within the party was evident, and its exclusion from the main stage sparked significant controversy. In addition, anti-Israel hooligans disrupted a DNC event sponsored by Agudas Israel on rising antisemitism against Orthodox Jews, which was a reminder of the increased hatred American Jews have been feeling since Oct. 7. The protestors chanted, “Brick by brick, wall by wall, Zionism will fall,” a slogan which is not just anti-Israel but antisemitic, targeting visibly Jewish individuals and organizations simply because they are Jews.
Unfortunately, these incidents are not just isolated events — they are symptomatic of a broader shift within the Democratic Party that has been slowly gaining momentum over the past few years. The rise of progressive voices that are increasingly critical of Israel has created a rift within the party, one that could potentially have significant implications for the future of U.S.-Israel relations.
While the current leadership remains committed to supporting Israel, the rising influence of anti-Israel voices from the progressives cannot be ignored. Fortunately, they are still a minority, but they are growing louder and more influential and their impact on the party’s future approach to Israel is uncertain.
The DNC was a mixed bag for those concerned with Israel and the American Jewish community. On the one hand, it was reassuring to witness the strong reaffirmation of support for Israel’s security. On the other hand, the visible tensions and increased criticism of Israel within the party are reasonable cause for concern.
Another highlight of the convention that had the Jewish community talking was a comment that Doug Emhoff, Kamala Harris’ Jewish husband, made in his speech. He said that his wife Kamala “makes a mean brisket for Passover.”
Now I’m sure Emhoff is a good husband and he seems like a very nice guy. To his credit, he has made visits to Auschwitz and the Holocaust Museum in Berlin and has spoken out forcefully against antisemitism. And maybe Kamala really does make a mean brisket. But if he expects to win points with me and other members of the Jewish community by raving about his wife’s Jewish culinary skills, he is sadly mistaken. The quality of Kamala’s brisket has absolutely nothing to do with what kind of commitment his wife’s administration will make toward Israel and what kind of friend she will be to the Jewish community. Unfortunately, it’s also a sad commentary on the American Jewish community that this silly statement and photos of his bar mitzvah that his son displayed are all it takes to remove doubts about what kind of president Kamala would be vis a vis Israel and the Jewish community.
Finally, President Biden was at the convention, of course. And he received a four minute ovation before uttering a word. Now if this applause was for devoting 50-plus years of dedicated service to his country as senator, vice president and president, I’d say that every second of that ovation was richly deserved. However, those in the audience were applauding Biden for his decision to step down and allow Kamala Harris to run as the party’s nominee. And that’s where I have a problem.
Let’s be honest. President Biden didn’t voluntarily decide to drop out of the race. He was forced to drop out after a miserable debate performance and most of the Democratic bigwigs turning against him. In my opinion, his decision to drop out of the race was not done for the good of the party; it was done because he was forced to realize — much too late — that he did not have the support of his colleagues and he wasn’t going to win the election.
What he should have done is announce that he was not going to run 12-18 months before he ultimately made the decision and allow the Democrats to choose a nominee through the usual process of primaries, instead of being forced to select a candidate by default.
In my opinion, Kamala Harris is a very weak presidential candidate. I can name a half dozen other people who would have made a better nominee.
Harris has historically been unpopular, pretty much throughout her tenure as vice president. She is also a terrible campaigner … in 2010, she beat her competitor for California attorney general by less than 1%, while Democrats beat their opponents in other statewide elections by 10 percentage points or more. Her very short 2020 campaign for president never got off the ground.
According to those who worked for Harris and left their jobs in disappointment, she is a terrible manager. She also has a penchant for making the most banal comments. (I’m sure you’ve seen the videos that have circulated, such as the one where she said, “It is time for us to do what we have been doing. And that time is every day.”) She was placed in charge of the administration’s immigration policies, which were an unmitigated disaster, confirmed even by the staunchest Biden supporters.
Finally, she is clearly left-of-center on most issues — and historically the only Democrats who have successfully won a presidential election in the last 50 years have been those who positioned themselves as centrists (Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden … Obama turned more leftward after he was elected but certainly campaigned originally as a moderate).
Personally, I would have loved to have seen President Biden announce his intentions not to run in January 2023 and allow for a fair race for the Democratic nominee. Alas, that was not meant to be.
If Harris ends up winning the election, President Biden will still look like a hero for his decision not to run. But if she loses (and she might), Democrats should rightly be angry at his hubris for not dropping out sooner — and allowing for a potentially better candidate to oppose Trump.
We’ll know the answer to that in about two months.
Michael Feldstein, who lives in Stamford, is the author of “Meet Me in the Middle” (meet-me-in-the-middle-book.com), a collection of essays on contemporary Jewish life. He can be reached at [email protected].
