Comments
LA POLITICS - Every election has a political blind spot.
For Nithya Raman, it may be the growing divide between her campaign and many Jewish voters.
And if she loses the race for mayor, that divide may be remembered as one of the most consequential political miscalculations of the campaign.
Los Angeles is home to one of the largest Jewish communities in the United States. Jewish voters have long played an outsized role in the city's civic and political life. They vote. They organize. They donate. They volunteer. They build coalitions. And for generations, they have been among the Democratic Party's most loyal and dependable supporters.
But loyalty is never guaranteed.
It must be earned.
Since the October 7 attacks, many Jewish voters have become increasingly focused on how elected officials respond to antisemitism, public safety concerns, and issues affecting the Jewish community. For many, the response from parts of the progressive movement has been deeply troubling.
Repeated accusations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza have become a defining fault line. Many Jewish voters view those accusations as false, inflammatory, and offensive. They see them not as legitimate criticism of Israeli government policy, but as rhetoric that unfairly targets the world's only Jewish state while minimizing the realities of terrorism, war, and self-defense.
Reasonable people can disagree on Middle East policy.
But politics is not simply about policy.
Politics is about trust.
And for many Jewish voters, that trust has been damaged.
The challenge for Raman is not merely disagreement over Israel.
It is the growing perception that Jewish concerns are no longer being treated with the seriousness they deserve.
Many Jewish Democrats who spent decades supporting Democratic candidates now question whether their voices still matter within parts of the modern progressive coalition. They see limited outreach, strained relationships, and what they view as a reluctance to directly engage concerns about antisemitism.
The problem for Raman is not criticism from conservatives.
The problem is criticism from Democrats.
The problem is criticism from voters who should naturally be part of her coalition.
When a candidate begins losing confidence among voters who have historically been loyal allies, every political strategist recognizes the danger.
Perhaps most politically damaging is the perception among some Jewish Democrats that support from mainstream Jewish Democratic organizations is no longer viewed as essential. Critics argue that Raman has shown little interest in strengthening relationships with influential Jewish Democratic groups in California at the very moment she should be expanding her coalition and building broader support.
Whether that perception is entirely fair is almost irrelevant politically.
Perception drives elections.
And the perception among many Jewish voters is that they are being asked for their vote while their concerns are being pushed aside.
That is a dangerous position for any candidate seeking citywide office.
Citywide elections are won through coalition building.
Not coalition shrinking.
They are won by bringing people together.
Not by allowing key constituencies to drift away.
Yet at a time when Raman should be building bridges to moderates, independents, homeowners, business leaders, and Jewish voters, many of those relationships appear increasingly strained.
That is not a strategy.
It is a warning sign.
The danger for Raman is not that she loses every Jewish voter.
The danger is that she loses enough.
Enough voters.
Enough donors.
Enough volunteers.
Enough community leaders.
Enough trust.
A few thousand votes.
A handful of neighborhoods.
A modest decline in turnout.
That is often all it takes to decide a Los Angeles election.
Across the city, voters are frustrated with homelessness, public safety concerns, and a government that too often appears disconnected from everyday realities. In that environment, candidates cannot afford unnecessary political liabilities.
And that is precisely why Raman's relationship with many Jewish voters matters.
No candidate running for mayor of Los Angeles can afford to weaken ties with one of the city's most politically active, influential, and engaged Democratic constituencies.
If enough Jewish voters conclude that their concerns are being dismissed, enthusiasm from Raman's progressive base may not be enough to offset losses elsewhere.
That does not guarantee defeat.
But it creates a path to defeat.
And if November ends with Raman falling short, political observers may look back and identify one of the defining mistakes of the campaign:
Allowing a growing divide with Jewish voters to become a political liability instead of a political priority.
In a close election, that may be all it takes.
The Jewish vote alone will not decide the next mayor of Los Angeles.
But losing the trust of enough Jewish voters could.
And that is a risk Nithya Raman cannot afford to ignore.
(Yonatan Mendel is an accomplished writer, researcher and leading expert on Jewish-Arab relations and Middle East affairs. He serves as Director of the Center for Jewish-Arab Relations at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute and as a Research Fellow at the Forum for Regional Thought. His work focuses on politics, identity, media and regional dynamics in Israel and the broader Middle East. Widely respected for his scholarly analysis and public commentary, Mendel is a prominent voice on democracy, coexistence, public policy and cross-cultural dialogue.)
