Eva Chrysanthe "How dare the Jews Participate in Collective Action"

There is consistent condemnation that manifests whenever the Jewish people attempt to engage in the political process.  Grass roots organizing is blown off as the work of the "Israel Lobby". Even the most innocuous gesture- donating space for in person voting is loudly assumed to have nefarious motivation. The goal is to limit Jewish participation in the public area,  through intimidation, and by creating a deep societal distrust of the Jewish people.

Last year, a vile antisemitic screed appeared in the glorified blog Marin County Confidential. Written by the clearly unhinged Eva Chrysanthe, the missive could be subtitled "How dare the Jews participate in the political process". 

A month before the February 2025 California Democratic Delegate elections, the only Bay Area in person voting venues were in San Francisco and Martinez.  This was not perceived of as a problem because the vast majority of participants choose to vote online.   However, a centrally located Berkeley synagogue graciously opened its social hall to those seeking in person voting. A low turnout was expected.  However, no good deed goes unpunished.

More people showed up to vote at the Berkeley synagogue than any other venue in California. The venue ran out of ballots. People made mistakes on their ballots and new ones were issued. More people showed up to vote than were expected.  Volunteers were sent to local copy stories to print up more ballots, and took steps to ensure that all votes were recorded and honored.  

Yet Eva Chrysanthe treated this event as a  "Jewish conspiracy".    Her description of the venue as "non-secularized pro-Israel" betrays her prejudice. The elections were for Democratic party delegates,  and were not about Israel. A 2024 Gallup Poll showed the top issues among Democratic voters included democracy and the presidency, the Supreme Court, abortion, healthcare and education.   Not Israel.  

Her anger is about Jews engaging in the political process.  Her assumption that a venue that regularly provides a spiritual home for Jews is intimidating to non-Jews is wrong. The synagogue has served as a polling place in the past and as been used for such decidedly secular activities as blood drives.  In spite of Chrysanthe's assertion that people would be "intimidated" by showing up at a Jewish house of worship to vote, attendance exceeded that of all other venues in the state. Her bias becomes even more obvious in her criticism of the large empty social hall as "intimidation".   She choses her words carefully, when she describes the venue as the "only non-secular polling site in Northern California".   At least one church was used as a polling place elsewhere in California.   Can't help but wonder if they received the same level of vitriol as the synagogue.   (My money's on "no") .    A search for her name and the Full Gospel Baptist Church in Los Angeles reveals no hits.    Did Eva know this and deliberately exclude this information, or is it indictive of her basic lack of research skills?  The Hi Desert Center for Spiritual Living "G-d is Love" was also used as a polling place, and was met with only silence by Eva.  It was never about "non-secular" polling places for Eva Chrysanthe- it  is about Jewish participation in public life.

With other districts registering as few as 6 in person voters, Eva Chrysanthe still found fault with the distribution of 250 blank ballots to the Berkeley location.

Chrysanthe's missive claims that in the past, 1,800 people showed up for in-person voting,  but neglects to mention this was prior to the institution of the on-line system.   Ultimately, in District 14, 1135 votes were cast online, vs, 215 in person.   

In other districts, there was low turnout in person.

Assembly district 1: 139 ballots
85 in person

Assembly District 2: 659 ballots
95 in person

Assembly District 3: 54 ballots
6 in person

Assembly District 4: 268 ballots
145 in person

For all of her outcry on voting rights, Eva Chrysanthe freely admits her role in intimidating those attempting to vote, claiming she recorded an hour plus of video.  California for years has attempted to keep the voting process free from outside intimidation.   Chrysanthe's actions were in violation of the California Elections Code Section 18541 which states

"A person shall not photograph, video record or otherwise record a voter entering or exiting a polling place. A violation is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than 12 months or in state prison.  Any person who conspires to violate this section is guilty of a felony"

Eva Chrysanthe illegally intimidating voters

Eva Chrysanthe taking a break from illegally intimidating voters

The convener and the volunteers erred in not reporting Chysanthe's behavior to the police and having her arrested.  Her attempts at voter intimidation and her rationalization of her own role show a shocking lack of moral clarity.  Eva's irrational behavior extended to the counting of participant by her perception of their ethnicity, claiming "I only saw one Muslim or Arab", and "I witnessed only a few Asian Americans".  What does a Muslim look like, Eva?

Eva Chrysanthe claims to be a "Citizen  Journalist"  In her case, that appears to mean lacking the professionalism, the research skills and the objectivity of professionally trained ones.