The Normalization of Opposition: How the Lobby Co-opts Dissent
THE CLAIM: The mainstream interpretation of this election is that a progressive candidate, Sue Altman, won, albeit with an unexpected coalition of support. The Intercept article highlights the direct financial linkage: AIPAC-affiliated entities, specifically the United Democracy Project (UDP), invested heavily to ensure her victory. THE EVIDENCE: Public campaign finance disclosures corroborate the
investment. UDP, a super PAC associated with AIPAC, spent over $4.2 million backing Altman. This expenditure directly contributed to her primary victory over a long-standing incumbent (The Intercept, 2024). This figure is notable, eclipsing the combined spending of several other PACs in the race. Furthermore, Altman, a former state director for Bernie Sanders's 2020 presidential campaign, accepted
this funding despite AIPAC's historical opposition to progressive candidates and its significant role in opposing candidates critical of Israeli government policies, such as Jamaal Bowman and Rashida Tlaib. THE CONTRADICTIONS: The fundamental contradiction lies in the perceived ideological chasm between AIPAC's stated foreign policy objectives and the typical platform of a Berniecrat.
Historically, AIPAC has targeted and spent millions against progressive candidates who advocate for Palestinian human rights or criticize the Israeli government's occupation policies. For example, in 2022, UDP spent more than $26 million in Democratic primaries, primarily to defeat progressive candidates (OpenSecrets, 2022). This abrupt shift to supporting a former Sanders aide, despite her