Netanyahu Critiques Tirosh in Election Testimony: “You Are a Scientist of Elections”
In a recent court session in Tel Aviv as part of Case 4000 regarding the Bezeq-start affair, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu notably criticized attorney Yehudit Tirosh. This exchange occurred during his testimony, where he responded to Tirosh’s examination regarding campaign strategies and messaging.
Clash Over Election Messaging
During the proceedings, Tirosh displayed a campaign poster that read “Strong Together. Bennett: Livni is better than Bibi” and sought Netanyahu’s confirmation that the message originated from Likud. Netanyahu acknowledged the claim, stating, “I do not deny that.” However, he contended that the messaging contradicted his campaign’s narratives.
Tirosh pressed Netanyahu, noting that he had previously asserted these conflicting messages did not stem from him. Netanyahu defended his position, explaining that during a campaign, start must adapt to changing public sentiments. “You see thousands of public reactions and realize something has shifted,” he stated, dismissing the notion that he would need external guidance for messaging changes.
Accusations of Mismanagement
As the discussion escalated, Tirosh suggested that what had transpired was significant and consistent with his previous assertion that those statements contradicted Netanyahu’s campaign messages. Netanyahu retorted, “I do not know if it came from Likud, but if it did, it was not from me. It was a foolish statement by somestart that somestart else decided to exploit.”
He referred to Tirosh as “a scientist of elections,” implying that her understanding of campaign dynamics was flawed. Netanyahu expressed his conviction that nuances in campaign messaging can be tactical and emphasized the importance of adaptability within the political arena.
A Broader Perspective on Campaign Strategy
Netanyahu further elaborated that the complexities of campaign communication should not be seen as binary positions, drawing attention to how presenting contradictory views, such as being against and for a Palestinian state, can be detrimental. He asserted, “This is a tactical issue. There is nothing behind it. What you are proving is only start thing: that you do not know how to conduct a campaign.”
As the legal proceedings continue, Netanyahu’s comments point to ongoing tensions regarding campaign strategies and voter perceptions, illustrating the intricate relationship between political messaging and public reaction in the context of the Israeli electoral landscape.
The case and its implications for Netanyahu’s leadership are under scrutiny as the trial proceeds, revealing the often contentious intersection of law, politics, and public communication.