AIPAC $20 MILLION Bet FLOPS In Major Elections
Quick Read
Summary
Takeaways
- ❖AIPAC spent at least $22 million in four Illinois congressional races, often through 'fake' Super PACs like 'Affordable Chicago Now' and 'Elect Chicago Women'.
- ❖In District 9, AIPAC's preferred candidate, Laura Fine, received only 20% of the vote despite millions spent, with Daniel Bis Evston winning against their efforts.
- ❖AIPAC also spent money on Bushra Amiwala in District 9, a spoiler candidate who finished sixth with 5% of the vote, failing to peel enough votes from other progressive candidates.
- ❖In District 7, AIPAC spent $4-5 million openly for Melissa Conyers-Irvin, who was under corruption investigation, and she lost decisively with 20.5% of the vote.
- ❖In District 2 and District 8, AIPAC-backed candidates Donna Miller (40% of vote) and Melissa Bean (32% of vote) won due to a lack of consolidation among progressive challengers.
- ❖The hosts advocate for a 'deep stigma' against candidates who cannot win but refuse to drop out, leading to vote splitting.
- ❖Progressive activists have an opportunity to pressure candidates like Donna Miller to publicly reject AIPAC money and align with progressive positions, citing Max Frost as a precedent.
- ❖Crypto PAC 'Fairshake' spent millions in the Illinois Senate race against Juliana Stratton, but she still won by a convincing seven-point margin against Raja Krishnamoorthi.
- ❖The hosts criticize the cynical nature of PAC spending that doesn't campaign on issues but rather manipulates elections through smear campaigns and vote splitting.
Insights
1AIPAC's Multi-Million Dollar Losses in Key Illinois Races
AIPAC spent at least $22 million across four Illinois congressional primaries, often using 'fake' Super PACs to obscure their involvement. Despite this massive investment, their preferred candidates suffered significant defeats in two high-profile races. In District 9, Laura Fine, the AIPAC-backed candidate, only secured 20% of the vote, losing to Daniel Bis Evston. Similarly, in District 7, AIPAC openly spent $4-5 million on Melissa Conyers-Irvin, who was under corruption investigation, yet she also garnered only 20.5% of the vote and lost.
Laura Fine got 20% with millions spent on her behalf (). Melissa Conyers-Irvin finished with 20.5% despite $4-5 million spent ().
2Progressive Vote Splitting Enables PAC Victories
In races where AIPAC-backed candidates did win, their victories were often attributed to a lack of consolidation among progressive challengers. For example, Donna Miller won District 2 with only 40% of the vote because Jesse Jackson Jr. and Robert Peters split the remaining progressive vote. Similarly, Melissa Bean won District 8 with 32% of the vote due to multiple candidates splitting the opposition, despite the left-wing candidate Jun Akmed coming very close.
Donna Miller won with 40% of the vote, with 60% voting against her (). Melissa Bean finished with almost 32% of the vote, narrowly beating Jun Akmed ().
3Crypto PACs Fail to Buy Illinois Senate Race
The political group Fairshake, a crypto-backed PAC, spent approximately $9 million on ads to support Robin Kelly against Juliana Stratton in the Illinois Senate race, attempting to split the black vote and boost Raja Krishnamoorthi. Despite this substantial spending, Juliana Stratton secured a convincing victory by a seven-point margin, demonstrating that even immense financial influence from new political actors like crypto PACs can be overcome by strong candidates and voter support.
Fairshake spent about $9 million on ads for Christian Murphy's opponents (). Juliana Stratton beat him by seven points ().
4The Strategic Threat of 'Liberal Zionists' to AIPAC
AIPAC views 'liberal Zionists' like Daniel Bis Evston and Andy Levin as a greater threat than more radical critics of Israel. This is because figures like Bis, who has Israeli family connections and J Street support, or Levin, a synagogue president, hold credibility within the Jewish community. Their criticism of Israeli policy or support for figures like Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar is harder for AIPAC to marginalize, making them targets for significant spending to remove them from office.
Malinowski's mild criticism was more of a threat than Mahia's strong criticism (). Andy Levin, a synagogue president and liberal Zionist, was targeted because his criticism landed harder ().
Bottom Line
AIPAC's strategy of targeting 'liberal Zionists' who criticize Israel, viewing them as more dangerous than 'radical' critics due to their internal credibility, creates a unique vulnerability.
This reveals AIPAC's fear of internal dissent and nuanced criticism from within the Jewish community, suggesting that such voices are perceived as more effective in shifting mainstream opinion.
Progressive movements can strategically elevate and support 'liberal Zionist' critics, understanding that their nuanced positions can be a more effective wedge against AIPAC's influence than purely anti-Zionist stances, potentially leading to a broader shift in discourse.
The failure of a 'moneyball' approach by the anti-genocide PAC, American Priorities, to engage in a close race (District 8) due to past losses and outdated polling.
Over-reliance on quantitative data and emotional fallout from previous defeats can lead to missed opportunities in winnable, close elections, especially against well-funded opponents.
New progressive PACs need to balance data-driven decisions with a willingness to take calculated risks in tight races, understanding that late-stage funding can make a critical difference, and past losses should not paralyze future action.
Key Concepts
The Spoiler Effect
When multiple candidates with similar ideologies run in an election, they can split the vote, inadvertently allowing a candidate with less overall support to win. This was observed in Illinois Districts 2 and 8, where progressive votes were fragmented, enabling AIPAC-backed candidates to win with minority support.
Moneyball Politics (and its limits)
The approach of using data and quantitative analysis to make political decisions, often seen in PACs like American Priorities. The podcast suggests this 'moneyball' approach can be overly cautious and miss opportunities, as seen when American Priorities declined to support Jun Akmed in District 8 based on old polling, potentially missing a winnable race.
Lessons
- Progressive movements must prioritize candidate consolidation in multi-candidate primaries to prevent vote splitting, which allows well-funded PAC-backed candidates to win with minority support.
- Activists should actively pressure newly elected candidates who received covert PAC support to publicly denounce that support and align with progressive policy positions, leveraging their vulnerability to future primary challenges.
- Organizers should focus on building a 'deep stigma' around candidates who refuse to drop out of unwinnable races, as their continued presence can inadvertently aid opposing PAC-backed candidates.
The 'Flip the PAC-Backed Candidate' Strategy
Identify candidates who won with significant, often covert, PAC support but secured less than a majority of the vote (e.g., Donna Miller in District 2).
Immediately engage these candidates post-election, highlighting their low vote share and the controversial nature of their PAC backing.
Demand public rejection of future PAC money and commitment to progressive policy positions (e.g., signing activist letters, voting on specific issues), citing examples like Max Frost and Valerie Foushee who successfully navigated this path.
Threaten a consolidated primary challenge in the next election cycle if the candidate does not comply, demonstrating organized progressive unity.
Quotes
"AIPAC found out the hard way. The ninth district is not FOR SALE."
"It is completely ridiculous that the people of Illinois's ninth district, suburban Chicago, had their race hijacked into a mandate on Middle Eastern foreign policy."
"There should be a deep stigma on candidates who cannot win and refuse to drop out."
"Once you're in the liberal Zionist space and you're starting to talk about apartheid and occupation and genocide, the rationale and the logic just pushes you to anti-Zionism eventually."
Q&A
Recent Questions
Related Episodes
Georgia Fort Pleads Not Guilty. Paralyzed Man Case Charges Dropped. Roy Cooper Senate Bid
"This episode delivers a powerful, multi-faceted tribute to Reverend Jesse Jackson Sr., highlighting his unparalleled impact on civil rights, economic empowerment, political strategy, and global diplomacy, emphasizing his role as an irreplaceable force for justice."
Celebrating the Life and Legacy of Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.
"This episode unpacks the unparalleled impact of Reverend Jesse Jackson Sr., a towering figure who reshaped American politics, economics, and civil rights through audacious leadership and unwavering commitment to the marginalized."
Cory Booker GOES OFF on Trump and Democrats’ Tax Plan
"Senator Cory Booker delivers a passionate critique of Trump's administration and Congressional inaction, while advocating for bold Democratic policies, including a controversial tax plan that would eliminate federal income tax for most Americans."
A major shift is happening right now
"Donald Trump is losing his grip on the Republican party and movement, evidenced by internal dissent and a broader political landscape grappling with a collapse of accountability and truth."