On Israel Hayom, there is an article by Judith Bergman about BDS and its efforts to penetrate western society. Bergman is correct in describing BDS as just another form of terrorism and not a movement about "peace and justice." However, she makes a claim that BDS is losing, and that claim fails to recognize the actual strategy and can lull us into a false sense of security. In reality, all the votes against BDS have as much to do with our victory against BDS as Westmoreland's body counts had to do with attaining victory in Vietnam. To understand how Bergman's declaration of victory misses the mark, it is necessary to have a definition of what constitutes victory.
Einat Wilf provides such a definition. Victory will be the advocates of BDS enjoying the social acceptability of neo-Nazis. As of now, the proponents of BDS are gaining in social acceptability and their arguments are gaining traction. They might not be getting over the hump to garner a majority of votes favoring divestment. However, their presentation of Israel as evil-incarnate is being welcomed as a legitimate viewpoint and the margin of defeat does not dismiss the argument, rather considers BDS's actions on behalf of the argument is a bridge too far. Victory will be BDS's arguments being greeted the way neo-Nazism is and winning is making progress towards that end.