I think you are overgeneralising . The Muslim population is not a homogeneous entity having one single concern. I also think that you know that the size of the Jewish population is not necessarily commiserate with their influence. Their wealth and also that of the Indian Americans who might be another
Nor is the jewish population a homogenous entity. There are a large number of jewish democrats who continue to support Obama despite the tiffs with Israel. And there is a substantial number of jewish americans who are completely fed up of Israel earning them and their faith a bad name. One example:
And as for jewish money and influence, please remember that a huge amount of arab money - impossible to estimate but definitely in the trillions - is parked in the US. Up until recently, one of the most expensive homes in the US was owned by Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Many former US presidents and high officials directly benefit from millions of dollars in donations from middle eastern organizations. The zionist lobby in America certainly has influence, but it is no longer unopposed. The muslim population in America is growing rapidly, the jewish population is not. There is much great upward mobility potential in the muslim population of the US than the jewish population. Therefore it stands to reason that the political influence of muslim groups in the US will continue to increase rapidly.
group of interest to you is much higher than any other group. In any case, a U.S. President can only go as far as the general mood of the country which actually is very evident in Obama's abject failure with the West Asia peace negotiations. His inability to pressurise Israel to do the basic minimum to get the talks underway
I don't agree. First, if the Bush government has proved anything, it is that the mood of the people can be shaped quite quickly. He went down the path of a ridiculous war in Iraq with popular support... not because the people would have supported the move if they knew the facts, but because the Bush team was able to craft public sentiment to their benefit. Of course, this eventually backfired, but by then the damage was done.
Second, I think it is way to early to call Obama's moves in the ME a 'failure'. He's been at it for a year, where previous attempts have spanned the course of decades. His moves to reach out to Saudi Arabia in a respectful fashion, his speech from Egypt which was received well in the muslim world, the toughening of his stance on Israel and the obvious discomfort this has caused the Gov of Israel (including their recent decision to not attend the nuke summit in the US) etc. have all gone down well and are moves beyond what the previous US government(s) were willing to take. A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step...
That's being more than a little unfair. Obama's election proved that most of America indeed did get over that but no President can get a free ride especially during such tough economic times.
Who is asking the people of the US to give Obama a "free ride"? So far, it appears that he has tackled some difficult and unpopular issues and has done the right thing (in his and his team's opinion - which is all you can ask of a government) despite the obvious opposition. If you read much of the popular press, even though the healthcare initiative has faced heavy opposition, the majority of Americans have appreciated the move and, from an electoral perspective, this is likely to help the Democrats.
I am quite familiar with politics in the US and my personal read is that Obama is trying to tackle much of the unpopular stuff early on in his term so that he can spend the last two years focusing on issues that will help him get re-elected. There is still much time to craft a re-election strategy, and voters are fickle, with short memories.
