

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The political rules of the last almost half-century are changing before our eyes," said Jewish Currents editor Peter Beinart.
As voters sour on Israel after over two years of genocide in Gaza, an internal poll suggests that backing from the pro-Israel lobby may be a liability for Democrats seeking to win their primaries.
The Democratic polling firm Upswing Strategies canvassed 850 Democratic voters in congressional districts across Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania. The survey asked voters for some of the most competitive Democratic primaries in the 2026 election cycle a number of questions about their sympathies in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
It also zeroed in on their feelings about pro-Israel lobbying groups, including the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which supported 152 Democrats who received more than $28 million in total during the 2024 election and had a role in toppling several House progressives, including then-Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) and Jamaal Bowman (D-NY).
The poll found that nearly half of voters in these competitive districts (48%) agreed with the statement that they "could never support" a candidate for Congress that was funded by AIPAC or the pro-Israel lobby more generally. Over a quarter of voters, 28%, said they strongly felt they could never support a candidate backed by AIPAC.
Just 40% said they "could see" themselves supporting a candidate backed by AIPAC, "especially if I agreed with them on most other issues," but just 10% expressed that belief strongly, while the other 30% said they only agreed with it somewhat.
The poll was posted to social media by Matthew Eadie, a reporter for the Illinois news outlet Evanston Now, on Saturday. He said that since it was conducted in early September, its results have been "circulating among Democrats in over a half-dozen competitive primaries in mostly Illinois."
With Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin's seat coming open in 2026, several current Illinois congresspeople have signaled their intent to run, leaving their own House seats up for grabs. Among them are some AIPAC favorites, including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who received over $63,000 from pro-Israel groups during the 2023-24 election cycle and nearly $269,000 since his first campaign in 2016; and Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), who received over $17,000 last cycle and nearly $109,000 since her first campaign in 2012.
Pro-Israel groups will also likely seek to hold off yet another primary challenge to Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) from the progressive community organizer Kina Collins, who has run against him during the last three cycles. During the 2024 election, an AIPAC affiliate, the United Democracy Project, spent approximately half a million dollars running ads attacking Collins, who had described Israel's actions against Palestinians, including its blockade of food and water supplies, as "war crimes."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), a progressive who has referred to Israel's actions as a "genocide" and sponsored a bill to halt military aid to the nation, was targeted with more than $157,000 worth of digital ads and mailers in 2022 by the AIPAC ally Democratic Majority for Israel. However, in 2024, while blitzing other races, the groups held off on targeting Ramirez, whose support was deemed to be too strong.
Other districts in the survey included that of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who has weathered multiple challenges from AIPAC, which likewise held off in 2024 due to her popularity.
On the flip side, it also included the district of one of Israel's strongest soldiers, the self-described "centrist" Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Pa.), whom AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups armed with more than $5.4 million in 2024 to take down the progressive Jewish incumbent Rep. Andy Levin, whom AIPAC's former president called "the most corrosive member of Congress to the US-Israel relationship.”
While the poll's results were not broken down by congressional district, they do show that in a political era defined by the Gaza genocide, the Israel lobby's influence within the party may be on the wane. Last week, Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), a centrist challenger to the progressive Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), seemed to exemplify this when he pledged to return the money he'd received from AIPAC, saying, “I’m a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC’s mission is to back that government."
This wane is partially due to the collapse of support for Israel among Democrats over the past two years. Affirming what past polls have shown, the Upswing poll found that Democratic voters overwhelmingly have a wildly positive view of not only Palestine, but international organizations that have shown support to Palestinians like the United Nations and Doctors Without Borders, while having overwhelmingly negative views of Israel and especially its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
And while it was less salient to voters than holding President Donald Trump accountable and lowering the cost of living, 53% of voters in the poll said "putting pressure on the Israeli government to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza" was a 10 out of 10 issue on the scale of importance for Democrats to focus on, while 72% said it was at least an 8 out of 10.
Peter Beinart, the editor-at-large of the progressive magazine Jewish Currents, said, "It's astonishing how quickly the politics are moving."
Democratic politicians, he continued, now "don't fear AIPAC. They fear being associated with AIPAC. The political rules of the last almost half-century are changing before our eyes."
"AIPAC's brand is increasingly, perhaps irredeemably toxic," wrote one observer.
A centrist Democratic lawmaker on Thursday surprised many political observers when he announced he would be returning donations he'd received from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), who is running a primary challenge against Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), said that he was rejecting donations from AIPAC because it had aligned itself too closely with the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who last year was accused of committing crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court.
"I'm a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC's mission is to back that government," Moulton said in a social media post. "I don't support that direction."
As flagged by New York Times reporter Annie Karni, Moulton is now the fourth Democratic lawmaker who once received heavy support from AIPAC to reject their donations, following Reps. Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.), Deborah Ross (D-NC), and Valerie Foushee (D-NC).
Hamid Bendaas, communications director for the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project, observed in a post on X that Moulton appeared to be ignoring advice given by a prominent Democratic consultant over the summer to not focus on the Israel-Palestine conflict because polls showed it wasn't important to voters.
Dylan Williams, the vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, argued that Moulton's rejection of AIPAC cash showed how far the organization's reputation with the electorate has fallen over the past several years.
"AIPAC is now so toxic to Democratic voters that support from it is widely seen as a political liability," he wrote. "The NRA-ization of AIPAC is nearly complete."
Ishaan Tharoor, a Washington Post global affairs columnist, also reflected on how much AIPAC's brand has been damaged over the last two years of war in Gaza, which has resulted in the deaths of at least 68,000 Palestinians.
"There was a time when people would refer to AIPAC as the gold standard in lobbying," he wrote. "So many in India and the Indian diaspora have talked about a future 'Indian AIPAC' one day influencing US politics in similar fashion. But AIPAC's brand is increasingly, perhaps irredeemably toxic."
Journalist Ryan Grim had a one-word reaction to Moulton's rejection of AIPAC cash: "Wow."
"The United States and particularly the Democratic Party, we have to be leaders on this issue," said podcast host Jennifer Welch.
Two podcast interviews with potential Democratic 2028 presidential candidates went viral Tuesday—but observers said they served only to illustrate how disconnected the party establishment is from its base on the subject of Israel and Palestinian rights and how much work Democrats have ahead of them to reach out to the growing number of voters who oppose Israel after two years of its US-backed assault on Gaza.
US Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) appeared on I've Had It, hosted by Jennifer Welch and Angie "Pumps" Sullivan—Oklahoma-based former Bravo reality TV stars who were called "the future of viral left podcasting" by Rolling Stone last month.
With Welch and Sullivan's "thick southern accents made complete by their Ann Taylor-coded outfits, sharp red lipstick, and blonde highlighted hair" as Rolling Stone noted, some progressive commentators have mused that Democratic politicians eager to engage with podcast audiences are likely to underestimate the pair, who are outspoken in their criticism both of the Trump administration and Democratic leaders.
That appeared to be the case with Booker, who claimed he had to leave the interview as Welch hammered him on Democrats' support for Israel and his vote for Charles Kushner, the disbarred attorney and father of President Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to be US ambassador to France.
When Welch asked Booker what he had to say about "the capitulation that [he] participated in" the senator replied with a criticism of "purity tests" that Democratic lawmakers and organizers force on each other.
"That’s such bullshit,” Welch replied, echoing her response to former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel when he criticized Democrats for standing up for transgender rights on the podcast earlier this year. "It's not a purity test, it's, 'Are we in this fight and are we being beholden to corporations and corporate interests or are we being really the party of the working class?'"
“That is such bullshit” @MizzWelch isn’t having it when @CoryBooker tries to blame Democratic failures to stand up to Trump (including his own vote for Kushner’s dad) on a “circular firing squad”
Full @ivehaditpodcast ep: https://t.co/Qg8kAl0LuH pic.twitter.com/MjMHFSa836
— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) October 14, 2025
The hosts were no less direct when the discussion turned to Israel. Welch and Sullivan have been outspoken in their condemnation of Israel's assault on Gaza over the past two years and the support that both the Biden and Trump administrations have given to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as civilian casualties have mounted, a famine has been declared, and top Israeli officials have publicly said they aim to ethnically cleanse Gaza.
"The United States and particularly the Democratic Party, we have to be leaders on this issue, with Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu. It's something that there is a big loud beat in the base that's permeating all across the country," said Welch. "I think for us to come together as a party in 2026, it's going to take leadership saying things like, 'Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal.'"
Booker attempted to turn the conversation to conflicts in Africa and claimed the International Criminal Court, which has a warrant out for Netanyahu's arrest for war crimes, "singles out Israel," before dodging what Welch called a "simple yes or no question."
"Do you think he's a war criminal, Benjamin Netanyahu?" asked Welch.
Booker, who voted several times to provide Israel with military aid since it began bombarding Gaza in 2023, answered that such questions "undermine" his efforts to solve the conflict in the Middle East.
It’s a simple yes or no question pic.twitter.com/D6jY01uflY
— I've Had It Podcast (@ivehaditpodcast) October 14, 2025
"The thing that Democrats get so frustrated with, where we are right now, where you see the Zohran Mamdanis and the Graham Platners rise up, because they can go on podcasts and you can say, 'Do you think Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal?' and they just say yes," said Welch. "And that's the end of it, it's not all of the rhetoric."
Some observers said the interview, in which Welch also pressed Booker about the more than $871,000 in donations he's received from the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), should be taken as a warning to Democratic lawmakers as they look toward the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election in a country where polls show the public is shifting away from decades of support for Israel.
"Democratic politicians are getting a preview of the gauntlet they'll have to run in 2028 if they can't break from Israel," said journalist Branko Marcetic.
Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo added that "not only is Jennifer Welch awesome, but what an indictment of our mainstream media and political press that it takes nontraditional journalist podcasters to ask these simple and direct questions of our electeds."
That preview was also visible in an interview Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom did on the podcast Higher Learning with Van Lathan, who told Newsom he would not vote for the candidate who had accepted money from AIPAC.
"It's interesting, I haven't thought about AIPAC—it's interesting, you're the first to have brought up AIPAC in years, which is interesting," said Newsom. "Not relevant to my day-to-day life."
When asked about AIPAC Gavin Newsom freezes and repeats “it’s interesting” 10 times.
He’s a Zionist btw. Never trust him.
pic.twitter.com/76rl6OfY9o
— ADAM (@AdameMedia) October 15, 2025
Any candidate hoping to run for president in 2028, said Matt Duss of the Center for International Policy, "is gonna have to come up with a waaaaay better answer on this than 'it’s interesting.'"
In addition to revealing that top Democrats are unprepared for tough questions on US relations with Israel, said a number of observers, the interviews showed "the utter failure and brokenness of corporate media."