Featured Post
Free The Hostages! Bring Them Home!
(this is a featured post and will stay at the top for the foreseeable future.. scroll down for new posts) -------------------------------...
Mar 15, 2015
Habayit Hayehudi's problem
I am not a big fan of making predictions, about anything let alone elections. Unless the person making the predictions is an acclaimed prophet, it is just a guess and I see no point in wasting time on it. If the person is a prophet, I'd prefer the lottery numbers than knowing, as in this case, how many seats any given political party will win.
So, I rarely read these predictions. On Shabbos I read the predictions published by Shmuel Sackett of Manhigut Yehudit. The predictions are as much a waste of time as anybody else's predictions are, but he had one interesting point among his chatter that I think is relatively close to being on the mark, and it was something I had felt but hadn't put my finger on until I saw his comment and then realized it.
In his predictions, Shmuel Sackett says regarding Habayit Hayehudi:
It is true that Habayit Hayehdui has lost seats to Yachad and to Likud, along with small amounts to other parties. I think Sackett is correct in saying the main reason is because they have not offered anything new (besides not apologizing, which is nice but not much of a platform). In 2013 they were a renewed party. They brought something new to the table and attracted voters from other parties (largely Likud but also from others) because of it. Now they are just back to being an old party, and its voters are either going back to their old parties or getting excited about other new parties and ideas, if they did not completely identify with Habayit Hayehudi's.
What say you?
So, I rarely read these predictions. On Shabbos I read the predictions published by Shmuel Sackett of Manhigut Yehudit. The predictions are as much a waste of time as anybody else's predictions are, but he had one interesting point among his chatter that I think is relatively close to being on the mark, and it was something I had felt but hadn't put my finger on until I saw his comment and then realized it.
In his predictions, Shmuel Sackett says regarding Habayit Hayehudi:
Bayit Yehudi, led by Naftali Bennett is really surprising me. When the campaign started I thought they would do very well and finish with 18-20 seats but as the campaign progressed the polls kept showing them slipping further down the line. I am not sure why this has happened except for the possibility that he lost many seats to Eli Yishai’s “Yachad” party and also that he is not saying anything new. When he ran for the Knesset the first time, in 2013, he was new on the scene, brought life to the dead and boring “Mafdal/NRP” party and was a refreshing force on the political map but now – two years later – he is saying the same thing and simply no longer exciting. On one hand, Bennett’s campaign is very good with a strong message and well-targeted to his audience but he has not succeeded in breaking out of his comfort zone and due to the reasons stated above it looks as though he will not gain even one additional seat and will remain at 12. This is what the polls are showing, although I give him one more and my official prediction for Bayit Yehudi is 13.
It is true that Habayit Hayehdui has lost seats to Yachad and to Likud, along with small amounts to other parties. I think Sackett is correct in saying the main reason is because they have not offered anything new (besides not apologizing, which is nice but not much of a platform). In 2013 they were a renewed party. They brought something new to the table and attracted voters from other parties (largely Likud but also from others) because of it. Now they are just back to being an old party, and its voters are either going back to their old parties or getting excited about other new parties and ideas, if they did not completely identify with Habayit Hayehudi's.
What say you?
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
Labels:
Ha'Bayit Ha'Yehudi
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Related Posts
"Not saying anything new" is just a negative way of saying that they have a consistent message. Considering it's been less than 2 years, I'm not really sure why they should have any major new issues on their platform.
ReplyDeleteYoni, all campaigns must bring a sense of optimism, change, and progress. The BY has rested on its laurels and from what I understand is still not, after two FULL years, telling us where it is heading or what it is really going to do other than not apologize.
ReplyDeleteExcept, we saw too many errors: bringing on non-religious people like Shoval, Magal, and Ohana. Religious people are voting BY because that is their main national religious party and IMO, non-religious people are voting for it BECAUSE it is the main religious party. Bennet wanted to replace the Likud with a mixed party, but the non-religious supporters (above average IQ) did not want to vote for Likud B, they want to vote for the religious party. Soccer player Eli Ohana was just a large insult to their intelligence (besides Bennet actually meeting former model and TV star Eden Harel to beg her to join) and never recovered from then. Bennet should have chose the Ethiopian Rabbi, social activist and res. battalion commander but didn't.
As for Rafi, IMO, the BY did not bleed too much to Yachad before Ohana, but did bleed a bit more after. Marzel brings with him a non-religious demographic, Dr Ben Ari has said many times that most of his supporters are non-religious. I am very surprised that Bennet has indeed managed to keep the majority of NR voters with an outstanding branding campaign since 2013. He really is the darling of the young and has not distanced the older Mafdalis who do not see him as threatening to their lite roots.
I think the turning point for Bayit Yehudi was the Ohana failure. Then they sunk in the polls, then they shifted away from sheke-up statements like "Shaked will replace Aharonovitch" or pushing that guy ready to revamp the Supreme Court, and clung to their typical message to hold onto its base.
ReplyDeleteit definitely was a turning point. I think the failure there was surprising, as it was mostly a PR failure, rather than a decision failure. They failed to explain what they were doing, why they chose Ohana, while unti now PR has been something they were so good at.
DeleteI have heard both Shaked and Bennet explain it, after the fact, and it made a lot of sense what they were trying to do (even if you disagree with the decision, at least there was a reasonable explanation). When it happened they didnt seem to explain their decision well, and it came out looking like they went for his celeb status, which turned many off.
How was it a PR failure? What justification did they give in trying to bring in someone who has no strong managerial or any political experience, but rather Sepharadi celeb status?
DeleteI dont remember the exact explanation, but it had nothing to do with celeb status or just his being mizrachi (they have plenty of those already). it had to do with him being a social leader and his work with disenfranchised youth, beyond that I dont really remember the details. they didn't really explain it well, and it blew over so fast when the BY public opposed it. had they introduced him with a good PR blitz explaining the choice, it might not have hurt them so badly, if not help them
DeleteSo he's a great soccer coach and has a nice project with youth. Even with me trying to give a major range of zchut, I cannot accept that his celeb, sepharadi, quasi-right wing status had nothing to do with the decision to make him an automatic MK.
DeleteI have no interest in defending the appointment of Ohana. That also wasn't my point.
DeleteAll I am saying is that Bennet has done many things his constituents werent always so happy with. With his great PR, he has always been able to push things through and come out on top. on this one he took a really big hit, and I think it is because he never really explained what he was doing. he didnt use his usual brilliant PR