Despite the concerted efforts of Justice Democrats, the Sunrise Movement, the Working Families Party, The Jewish Vote, and other allies who helped Jamaal Bowman unseat Eliot Engel—a staunch pro-Israel congressman backed by $3 million from AIPAC affiliates—in 2020, the campaign infrastructure from that victory couldn't protect Congressman Bowman from AIPAC's $25 million campaign for George Latimer in 2024.
From Protest To Politics: The power of the streets was not successfully translated into winning seats. The battle was extremely uphill from the start, highlighting the need to build both grassroots and political power to counter AIPAC’s influence in the Democratic Party. It is possible that the movement is simultaneously stronger than ever and yet weaker than it may appear.
Jamaal Bowman's rise to office in 2020 was driven in part by the organic momentum of the Black Lives Matter movement, which has since faced substantial backlash. As the district became whiter and wealthier, the movement and its philanthropic donors were unable to shield him from AIPAC, partly due to its minimal presence in congressional primaries, despite his continued strong support among Black working and middle-class voters. Many of the organizations representing the racial justice movement did not spend anything comparable to what AIPAC, or even Justice Democrats, spent on this race. That leaves a lot of power and resources on the table.
AIPAC knows they’re losing the argument. Spending $25 million to unseat a middle school principal from the Bronx is not a demonstration of strength but of desperation. AIPAC is losing the argument on unconditional US diplomatic and weapons aid for the Israeli government. Just as real estate, the gun lobby, fossil fuels, Wall Street, and other special interests have become increasingly toxic within the Democratic Party. Bowman’s campaign took a gamble on educating voters about AIPAC’s alliance with Republican anti-choice, pro-Trump donors. But AIPAC’s low name recognition, niche focus, and advertisements that rarely mention Israel causes it to be an unknown brand among most Democratic voters.
Bowman’s defeat, fueled by substantial spending from the AIPAC network, underscores the necessity for a robust and multifaceted strategy to invest in deepening and growing our organizing infrastructure. I contend that the path to US policy change on Palestine is for the pro-Palestine movement to focus on out-organizing AIPAC within the Democratic Party, a contest in which power is ultimately measured by your ability to win elections and the amount of seats you influence. Here are eight lessons the movement can glean from this experience to bolster their future efforts.
AIPAC Is A Threat To Democracy. This House primary was the most expensive in American history, aimed solely at forcing the progressive wing of the Democratic Party into submission on Israel policy. But the true danger of AIPAC’s approach lies in their failure to convince anyone of their core argument: that voters support US weapons aid to Israel and its war in Gaza. AIPAC hasn't proven that Democrats back Israel’s war; they’ve shown that AIPAC’s millions in Republican donor money can still tilt elections. President Obama described AIPAC’s influence in Congress in this way in his recent memoir:
"Members of both parties worried about crossing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful bipartisan lobbying organization dedicated to ensuring unwavering U.S. support for Israel. AIPAC's clout could be brought to bear on virtually every congressional district in the country, and just about every politician in Washington—including me—counted AIPAC members among their key supporters and donors.
In the past, the organization had accommodated a spectrum of views on Middle East peace, insisting mainly that those seeking its endorsement support a continuation of U.S. aid to Israel and oppose efforts to isolate or condemn Israel via the U.N. and other international bodies.
But as Israeli politics had moved to the right, so had AIPAC's policy positions. Its staff and leaders increasingly argued that there should be "no daylight" between the U.S. and Israeli governments, even when Israel took actions that were contrary to U.S. policy. Those who criticized Israeli policy too loudly risked being tagged as "anti-Israel" (and possibly anti-Semitic) and confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election.”
AIPAC is not just coming for Jamaal and Cori. This is just the beginning of their electoral campaign to discipline and punish all Democratic officials who stand with Palestine. This is a long-term political battle and we must aim to control the center of the field, not just the margins.
Despite the majority in the district favoring a ceasefire and less US weapons funding to Netanyahu’s government, their voices are effectively being stifled by big money. According to recent polling in the district, 50% of voters believe the U.S. spends too much on aid to Israel while only 17% believe the U.S. spends to little on aid to Israel. AIPAC’s $20 million ad blitz, with a staggering $17,000 spent per hour, acted like the loudest guy at the bar who won’t shut up. Eventually that has an effect. Voters were incessantly bombarded with Republican-funded messages falsely painting Bowman as an anti-Biden Republican, rather than a Democrat. Most ads avoided mentioning Israel or Gaza. Even when voters saw through the big money influence, the relentless repetition drowned out the truth and stifled substantive debate about critical issues. This style of campaigning breeds cynicism and disillusionment.
In a true democracy, the 67% of Democrats supporting a permanent ceasefire and 71% backing conditional weapons aid would be reflected in Congress. However, AIPAC’s influence means many members, even those who oppose the war, fear voting against it. Only 60 members—about 14%—voted to condition aid to Israel. Despite AIPAC endorsing 109 insurrectionist members in 2022, Democratic Party leadership and Biden administration continues to collaborate with them. President Biden has not endorsed these incumbents nor addressed the meddling of pro-Trump billionaires in Democratic primaries.
Ads Are Effective. The intense, round-the-clock media scrutiny of young student activists on college campuses starkly contrasts with the coverage of AIPAC’s $100 million campaign to unseat dovish Democrats. This imbalance not only distorts the true dynamics of power and influence in America but also undermines the democratic values that critics claim to defend. Why is a well-funded lobby with extensive resources to shape foreign policy largely unexamined, while students, armed with little more than their voices, are labeled as threats to democracy? This disparity reveals a troubling reality: the greatest threat to democracy is the unchecked power of billionaire and Republican donor money in politics, not the voices of passionate student activists.
In every election, candidates make mistakes that voters find unappealing. The opposing side's job is to highlight these errors and make them a focal point of the campaign. Effective campaigns leverage both paid advertisements and hope for amplification by "neutral" mainstream media coverage. However, there was scant scrutiny from local and national media on George Latimer’s positions and statements, failing to counterbalance AIPAC's historic spending on advertisements.
While Bowman had his missteps, such as pulling a fire alarm, Latimer's significant errors and controversial views—his stance on housing desegregation, reluctance to criticize Netanyahu, and Israel’s bombing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and several racist remarks—did not dominate headlines. The media heavily scrutinized Bowman's fire alarm incident, while largely ignoring Latimer’s acceptance of Republican money to support a devastating war in Gaza, his opposition to a two-state solution, and his support for actions that have led to severe humanitarian crises.
Latimer's sole reason for being a competitive candidate—the endorsement he received from AIPAC due to his unconditional backing of Netanyahu's horrific assault on Gaza—was not heavily scrutinized by the media. The assault on Gaza was barely debated other than within the “tactical framing” of Bowman’s relationship with pro-Israel Jewish voters in the district. Latimer rarely mentioned his unconditional support for the war himself, knowing it is unpopular. The mainstream media's failure to equally scrutinize Latimer reveals a significant disparity in coverage, undermining the democratic process.
Bowman and Latimer epitomize two distinct theories of political change. Bowman came to Congress to deliver change. His perspective is rooted in the disruptors of American history. We celebrate the abolitionists, suffragettes, union organizers, civil rights activists, environmental warriors, and LGBTQ leaders who led progress. These true Founding Fathers and Mothers believed that patriotism lies in confronting uncomfortable truths and reshaping our nation to reflect its highest ideals: freedom and justice for all. In their times, these trailblazers were scorned and called radicals and agitators but were determined to be correct by the course of history. On the other hand, Latimer’s theory of change aligns with the establishment, responding to changes by sticking a finger in the wind to gauge the prevailing sentiment, not to change it himself. His campaign, supported by significant financial backing from groups like AIPAC, aims to maintain the status quo.
So what can be done?
Through my own work for progressive causes, I’ve realized how pivotal the issue of Palestine is in shaping the broader political landscape. Palestine serves as a wedge issue that the right exploits to fracture the center-left coalition, and it is also a tool that conservative, corporate-backed Democrats use to marginalize the growing progressive wing. Progressives who have avoided taking a strong stance on shaping the Palestinian rights movement must recognize the deep threat AIPAC poses to all our movements and collective interests. The stance a politician takes on Palestine often indicates their willingness to challenge entrenched power and stand up for genuine justice and equality. It is imperative that progressives understand the centrality of this issue and rally together to counteract AIPAC's influence, for the sake of not just Palestinian rights but the integrity and future of all progressive causes.
Bowman’s loss in the primary election to AIPAC-recruit George Latimer serves as a stark reminder of the infrastructure and organizing challenges faced by progressive candidates, especially those advocating for Palestinian rights. We can criticize AIPAC all we want, but we must also focus on building our own powerful strategic infrastructure.
Bowman’s defeat, fueled by substantial spending from the AIPAC network, underscores the necessity for a robust and multifaceted strategy to invest in deepening and growing our organizing infrastructure.
I contend that the path to US policy change on Palestine is for the pro-Palestine movement to focus on out-organizing AIPAC within the Democratic Party, a contest in which power is ultimately measured by your ability to win elections and the amount of seats you influence. Here are some lessons the movement can glean from this experience to bolster their future efforts.
1. Build Stronger Donor Networks
Bowman’s campaign was significantly outspent by his opponent, largely due to the influx of money from AIPAC and its affiliates. This highlights the critical need for coordinated and well-organized donor networks within the Palestinian rights and broader progressive movement. It’s not enough to rely on grassroots organizing alone; substantial financial resources are necessary to compete effectively in today’s political landscape. Research demonstrates that funding is especially consequential in House races, smaller races, and primaries, where financial resources can significantly impact the outcome.
There are numerous left-leaning foundations with substantial funds, yet they've failed to invest adequately in PACs like Justice Democrats and 501c4s that conduct robust Palestinian rights advocacy or Arab/Muslim civic engagement. Despite being on the agenda for eight months, these large foundations have not adequately organized a disciplined opposition to Biden. The lack of investment in these areas is particularly concerning as Arab and Muslim communities are among the first targets of far-right Trump authoritarianism. Liberal philanthropy needs to recognize that neutrality on Palestine threatens the very foundation of progressive liberalism. Arab and Muslim communities are key players in the anti-authoritarian coalition. The lack of investment is pushing these communities to the disillusioned sidelines of general elections or even towards voting for Trump, similar to the shifts toward the GOP seen among Latino voters. Liberal philanthropy must recognize that neutrality on Palestine threatens progressive liberalism and act accordingly to support these critical communities.
Develop sophisticated fundraising campaigns targeting a broad donor base, both small and large, while learning from other successful movements. Build connections with liberal and progressive philanthropy networks, highlighting the critical nature of the Palestine issue for Democratic success. Convert charity donors to political donors by emphasizing political engagement's importance, and foster long-term donor relationships. Formalize regional and national donor networks for streamlined communication and strategic financial planning to ensure sufficient campaign resources.
2. Develop Stronger Membership Organizations
The movement needs to invest in building authentic membership organizations that go beyond social media followings. Bowman’s campaign highlighted the limitations of email lists and/or staff-driven or donor-driven models that lack a real, engaged membership base.
Build year-round engagement by continuously organizing, registering voters, and developing leadership. Grassroots organizations must take responsibility for building voter blocs in districts to protect politicians standing for Palestinian rights. Between elections, focus on mobilizing and persuading voters to support these rights. Implement ongoing legislative advocacy in key districts to educate and raise awareness about Palestinian rights and AIPAC, moving public opinion and ensuring the issue's priority. Utilize traditional community organizing methods to cultivate deep leadership and genuine relationships. Expand the membership base, especially within Palestinian, Muslim, and Arab-American networks and progressive Jewish communities, to create a broad, committed support network actively involved year-round.
3. Develop Stronger Staff, Operatives, Organizers, and Leaders
A robust movement requires an investment in leadership development, political education, and skills training. Bowman’s campaign demonstrated that without strong leaders and operatives from the movement and a skilled base, street mobilization efforts can fall short on their own. Implement comprehensive, year-round leadership development for early and mid-career staff to build capacity continuously. Train leaders to be effective spokespeople in mainstream media and strategic bridge-builders within the movement and Democratic Party. Provide ongoing skills training in organizing, advocacy, communications, finance, and campaign management. . Establish local hubs and national convenings to ensure members have access to training, knowledge, and community support.
4. Forge Coalitions Across Difference
The necessity for stronger coalitional alliances with various communities cannot be overstated. Bowman’s campaign needed broader support from Black, Hispanic, and Jewish communities, reflecting a gap in coalition-building. Conduct year-round and election-specific outreach to key constituencies, especially Black, Latino, and progressive communities. Partner with organizations like Working Families Party and Justice Democrats for collaborative campaigning. Build multiracial coalitions by developing dedicated teams for alliances and coalition-building. Craft inclusive messages for mobilizing core volunteers and persuading undecided voters. Launch 501c4 ad campaigns to expose AIPAC's impact, aiming to make it a toxic brand among Democrats. Foster mutual support among communities, demonstrating solidarity and collective strength.
Example: The climate movement worked for over a decade, across multiple movement cycles, to build multiracial and multi-sectoral alliances spanning climate activists, environmental justice communities, and labor unions. This created a broad base of support for the sea change in climate policy that occurred with the Green New Deal and subsequent climate legislation.
5. Prioritize Political Education, Strategic Dialogue, and Alignment Building
A key takeaway from Bowman’s loss is the importance of some degree of political education and alignment within the movement, particularly regarding the significance of Democratic primary elections in driving policy change. If Palestinian-led youth organizations undermine candidates like Bowman out of frustration with the Biden endorsements or the political process, it disrupts the strategy of building a left-progressive pro-Palestine bloc in Congress anchored in the youth vote, progressive, and social movement allies. This contradiction causes the media and politicians to question our collective support for the youth movement or why they should sympathize with the movement in the streets. We must ensure that our actions and messaging are somewhat aligned to maintain credibility and effectiveness.
Launch educational campaigns to inform the movement about the impact of Democratic primary elections on policy and representation, particularly regarding Palestinian rights. Organize regular online and offline convenings, discussions, and debates between different movement wings to foster mutual understanding, strategic alignment, and strengthen overall cohesion and effectiveness.
6. Support Palestinian-Led Multiracial Mass Membership Organization That Blends Disruptive Protest with Electoral Organizing in Democratic Primaries
There is an urgent need to support Palestinian-led and multiracial organizations to channel the energy of mass street protests into productive political action. Similar to the Sunrise Movement, United We Dream, and March for Our Lives, this organizing would integrate street mobilization with legislative advocacy and electoral engagement, transforming grassroots activism into substantial political influence. Funding and support for these efforts are crucial for the movement's success.
7. Institutionalize the Movement Moment
AIPAC will be emboldened, aiming to unseat Ilhan Omar, Summer Lee, Rashida Tlaib, and others by 2026 and prevent any pro-Palestine Democrat from being elected to Congress ever again in open seat races. The recent surge in anti-war and Palestinian human rights organizing has galvanized millions of young Americans, but they need a long-term political home and campaign to sustain their momentum.
Jamaal Bowman’s defeat highlights AIPAC’s power to undermine progressive Democrats of color. To counter this, we must unite stakeholders from the key forces in the progressive Democratic coalition racial justice, labor unions, reproductive rights, environmental, immigrant and LGBTQ rights, and other progressive movements within the Democratic Party. A strategic plan to put together a coalition of groups spanning the major players in the center-left coalition to the Palestinian human rights movement inspired by movements like Sunrise’s campaign for a Green New Deal and United We Dream’s campaign for DACA and DAPA is essential. Establishing hubs in key districts and states, fostering a cohesive campaign, and building a united front against AIPAC’s influence will ensure pro-Palestinian rights remain a priority.
Envision a strategy where political organizations evaluate numerous candidates for local offices across states using a questionnaire centered on Palestinian human rights and foreign policy. This process aims to identify around 200 local champions who align with our values. These elected officials will use their platforms to influence key congressional targets and could become significant challengers in future elections, forming a strong farm team for 2026 and beyond. This is essentially what AIPAC does as well with many local and state officials (see: Ritchie Torres). This approach harnesses the potential of local progressives already in office, paving the way for coordinated electoral efforts in 2025-26.
8. Strategic Communications
Youth-led social movements are driving change but struggle to effectively engage with mainstream media and navigate Washington politics. It’s not about any one policy, but rather about a structural infrastructure gap that persists and blocks the shared ambitions of young people, social movements, and progressive advocates - on Palestine – but also more broadly on three key areas driving generational change in American politics: foreign policy, economic justice, and multiracial democracy.
The conservative right adeptly employs a divide-and-conquer strategy against the center-left coalition, especially targeting the rifts between “leftists” and “moderates.” The emergence of young people and progressives on the main political stage presents an opportunity but also a vulnerability—if these groups can't effectively communicate their demands, like those concerning Palestine, “defunding the police,” or the Green New Deal, through mainstream media channels, they risk falling prey to the far-right's potent messaging machine. The "hack gap" illustrates this vulnerability, where right-wing frames and internal divisions are amplified on platforms like MSNBC and CNN, leading to a loss of public support for the center-left coalition among older Americans and across widely consumed digital platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Facebook.
This fracturing not only weakens the Democratic Party response to pressing issues but also risks sliding the political center towards a subtle authoritarianism under the guise of stability. Without a strong, popular majoritarian progressive ecosystem, President Biden finds himself in a precarious balancing act, often negotiating between corporate Democrats and moderate Republicans.
Palestinian human rights movement currently struggle sits at the heart of the energy driving young people and their social movements right now. The movement for a ceasefire and an end to weapons aid to the Israeli government is simply the latest example of an issue where there exists a huge gulf between popular majorities and the corridors of political and media power.
This gap between societal demands and policy outcomes is fundamentally an infrastructure problem, a “hack gap.” The "hack gap," defined as the conservative movement’s ability to fill the public sphere with right-wing hacks and the mainstream media’s tendency to overcompensate for perceived liberal bias, highlights the need for progressive advocates to develop a robust political infrastructure. Addressing the hack gap involves not just crafting compelling messages but ensuring they are heard, thereby intensifying political debate, embedding narratives in media discourse and federal politics, and mobilizing social forces through compelling content.
It’s not about any one policy, but rather about a structural gap that persists and blocks the shared ambitions of young people, social movements, and progressive advocates - on Palestine – but also more broadly on three key areas driving generational change in American politics: foreign policy, economic justice, and multiracial democracy.
A key issue for the Palestinian human rights movement is the lack of identifiable, developed youth spokespeople and earned mainstream media persuasion strategies (like the GND sit-in at Pelosi’s office or the DREAMers campaign), which hampers its ability to control its narrative and influence Democratic voters. It makes sense considering how heavily scrutinized and attacked Palestinian leaders are by their adversaries and by mainstream media. But without choosing its spokespeople, the media and algorithms will do it for them, often to the movement's detriment. Electing allies is just the beginning; the crucial step is molding a political climate where champions and movements can thrive.
…
Jamaal Bowman’s primary loss is a learning opportunity for the Palestinian rights and progressive movement. By building stronger donor networks, developing robust membership organizations, focusing on leadership development, forging coalitional alliances, and prioritizing strategic communications and political education, the movement can position itself for greater success in future elections.
These lessons underscore the importance of a comprehensive, strategic approach in navigating the complex political landscape and advocating for justice and human rights. Incorporating these strategic steps will enable the Palestinian rights and progressive movement to turn the setback of Bowman’s loss into a catalyst for growth and empowerment, ensuring that future campaigns are more resilient and effective.
Excellent ideas pertaining to building up political movements. Grassroots Movements 101.
With that said, AIPAC gets you 10-12 pts at most. Latimer won by 17+. No PAC can buy that many votes. Obviously, when you run in a district that is 30% Jewish and you choose to be rabidly Pro-Palestinian, deny that Jews were brutalized in the Hamas October attack, and vociferously demonize Israel, there will be political blowback. “From the river to the sea” simply doesn’t fly in Scarsdale. It never will. That’s a political reality that AIPAC doesn’t have to sell. Tip O’Neil 101- “all politics is local.” People always vote for in their own self-interest.
Combine this with the fire-alarm incident, the constant tirade of public F-bombs (On Camera!), and angry emotional rhetoric- all of which is fodder for made-for-TV political ads- and it wasn’t hard for NY16 to assume that Bowman was unhinged. All AIPAC had to do was put up a barrage of tv ads showing Bowman at his worst. (And man, did they!)
To borrow from Jesse Jackson, 2 years ago NY-16 voted in a Tree-Shaker, yesterday they voted in a Jam-Maker.
Good luck to you sir. I thoroughly enjoy your thoughtful and well-reasoned political writing.
Great stuff Waleed. Long, but I read this one to the end and I agree with a lot of it. I’m curious if you have what examples exist of membership drives for dues paying orgs when family wallets are tight, and examples of doing that among younger generations that have the values but define themselves as singular volunteers instead of members.
Also I want to plug Leadership for Democracy & Social Justice’s leadership development programs for the populations you name!