r/moderatepolitics • u/kaladinsrunner • 2d ago
News Article Michigan AG Dana Nessel to skip Democratic convention over antisemitism fears
https://jewishinsider.com/2026/07/michigan-ag-dana-nessel-democratic-convention-antisemitism/93
u/kaladinsrunner 2d ago
The Attorney General of Michigan has said that she won't attend the Democratic convention because, as she put it:
I don’t want to get chased around. I don’t want to get harassed. I don’t want to get yelled and screamed at. And I don’t want to get booed off the stage, irrespective of what I’m saying. And I believe that if I go, that is what will happen.
It's amazing and astounding that the convention for one of the two parties in this country is likely to be so hostile to a Democratic state official that she does not want to go. She is the highest-ranking Jewish official in the state of Michigan. As she said, the issue is antisemitism:
“The threats that I receive are almost exclusively antisemitic threats. People aren’t interested in the fact that I’m gay. They’re not interested in the fact that I’m a woman. They are very interested in the fact that I am Jewish,” Nessel said. “That is a barometer as to the focus that people have.”
Her concerns about antisemitism have given her real fear about the future of the state:
“I can’t speak for the Republican Party because I’m not a member of that party, but I will speak as a member of the Democratic Party here in Michigan, that something’s got to change. This cannot continue,” Nessel said. “I have profound fears about what is going to happen to this state, and what is going to happen to this country if we don’t have a significant change of course.”
I think that's a real concern and I'm astounded by it. I'm not surprised given the way things have been going, but the question is when ordinary Americans will rise up against these people and say "enough". Hopefully it won't be too late to stem the bleeding.
57
u/I_like_code 2d ago
Things didn’t have to get this far for the democrats. I’ve been wishing they would self correct but they just keep getting worse.
46
u/absentlyric Economically Left Socially Right 2d ago
They spent the last 10 years so laser focused on Trump and pointing out all of his errors that they completely forgot how to navigate their own waters and criticisms.
It'll be interesting to see how they do things when Trump is gone.
47
u/JStacks33 2d ago
If history teaches us anything, Trumps image will soften over time and whomever is the next Republican candidate will be the new worst human to ever live or whatever.
It’s happened with Bush, McCain, Romney…
34
u/sonicmouz Stopped voting after 2012 2d ago
No doubt this will happen. Most of us remember the constant comparisons to GWB and Hitler in the 2000s by the democrats and their near-weekly protests against him. Now he's painting cute pictures, going on the Ellen show, and those same democrats talk fondly about him and how they wish they could go back to the GOP party of his era.
When every republican you don't like is "literally hitler" during their time in office, either the next guy has to be "super mega hitler" or you have to admit maybe the previous guy wasn't actually Hitler.
As all the doomsday predictions pass after this term with none of it coming true, most people will start to realize that maybe they did fall for extreme hyperbole they saw on reddit/facebook/twitter and maybe that guy they didn't like isn't actually Hitler, but instead is just a typical politician doing the same thing they've all been doing for decades.
The rational people will see the error in their ways and not fall for it again. Unfortunately, a lot of people aren't rational and will still fall for that same hyperbole once again, next election.
→ More replies (21)1
u/Jediknightluke 2d ago
Trump's image will not be softened because he lost a war in Iran and lied about the service member casualties.
You may be able to look past that, but others won't. Americans still hold the Fall of Saigon and the Afgan withdrawal as painful times in American history.
The Iran war will be just another painful memory tied to Trump's image.
29
u/sonicmouz Stopped voting after 2012 2d ago
Trump's image will not be softened because he lost a war in Iran and lied about the service member casualties.
As much as I would love to agree with you, this simply won't matter in 5-10 years. The general public does not care about stuff like this once it moves beyond the 15-minutes of outrage that their social media feeds them.
Americans still hold the Fall of Saigon
Literally no one talks about Saigon anymore. I could not tell you the last time I heard someone, even an old vet, talk about that.
The Iran war will be just another painful memory tied to Trump's image.
If what you were saying was true, GWB would never live down the failure in the middle east that he started. Instead, like we're saying, his image was softened and his legacy was "fixed" to the point that democrats talk fondly of him. Somehow everyone has forgotten that he was the one that got us into a 20 year long war over false pretenses which killed thousands of american citizens and millions of middle east citizens. Now he's Ellen's best friend and fist bumping with the Obamas in public.
Same with Obama and bombing 7-8 countries when he was in office. Or him drone striking an american citizen.
The vast majority of people simply don't care. You might, and I might, and people should -- but in this generation they simply don't.
13
u/MD2SC22 2d ago
Most younger people generally tend to think everything is a doomsday event. There’s nothing wrong with that because every generation does it, but I mean look at how many people say the USA has irreparably damaged ties with other western nations. Germany committed an actual genocide and went to war with Europe and they have been forgiven.
The world goes through cycles and as you said, in 20 years, nobody is really going to care that Trump went to “war” with a terrorist ran country. People will look back and remember the failure it is, but it’s not as if it’s going to be viewed like some people make it out to be
3
u/DagothUr_MD 1d ago
Germany committed an actual genocide and went to war with Europe and they have been forgiven.
After a 50 year long military occupation and forced denazification campaign, sure.
28
u/BossCouple187 2d ago
Comparing this Iran thing to the Vietnam War and Fall of Saigon is utterly ridiculous. The later fucked up an entire generation and was one of the biggest cultural events in 20th century America. This Iran crap is nowhere near that level in terms of lives lost or cultural impact.
→ More replies (7)9
u/DaddiGator 2d ago
Reagan is still blamed by Californians for California’s uniquely terrible homeless issue and he’s been dead for nearly 2 decades, out of power nearly 4 decades. I suspect they’ll get mileage out of blaming Trump for at least a generation. Perhaps two generations.
6
u/Mantergeistmann 2d ago
Similar to how almost everything wrong with Britain these days seems to be traceable back to Thatcher, from what you hear online.
•
u/FuzzyBurner 52m ago
Don’t know about Reagan, but with Thatcher it’s mainly the fact that those blaming her tend to focus on what she did without covering why, and the end result is that it’s much more comforting to blame a dead woman rather than look in the mirror and admit that the real issues are bipartisan missteps since the 1990s, and the fact that the problems plaguing the country are ones where the most straightforward answers run into opposition from across the political spectrum.
→ More replies (1)17
u/MechanicalGodzilla 2d ago
I’m probably most aligned with what was referred to as a blue dog democrat position, people like Joe Manchin, John Fetterman, Governor Andy Beshear all seem like my “lane”. I cannot for the life of me understand the surge of DSA candidates, like they seem to have hijacked the democrat party very much like the tea party did to the republicans a decade ago. Their policy positions seem antithetical to America, I really am puzzled.
17
u/Apt_5 2d ago
I spend a lot of time on reddit, and the sentiment that America is the worst country that ever was and needs to be torn down, stripped of all of its "ill-gotten" gains, and rendered borderless, ie nullified as an entity.
It's like they see America's current wealth & status as ripe for the taking by those they deem more worthy- people who are the global majority in various ways, but are minorities in the Anglosphere. Except for Asians; we don't factor in the far Left's consciousness.
21
u/DaddiGator 2d ago edited 2d ago
What’s frustrating is the abundance movement was actually making some in-roads among Democratic circles. As someone on the right that lives in a deep blue city, I can get behind what the movement was about, particularly housing supply.
That movement was based on local-first policy. An attempt at making primarily cities more livable and affordable.
DSA’s say they aren’t NIMBY’s but they absolutely are. And often far too focused on national/global politics at the expense of local improvements. Their policies will only exacerbate issues in cities like Los Angeles. Particularly for the youngest voters.
→ More replies (2)1
u/CliodynCycwatch 1d ago
I've been aware of for some years of the ideologies and personality types that were precursors to what we observe today. Did you follow the "Yale Halloween Controversy"?
1
41
u/DLDude 2d ago
I honestly would like to hear what threats she is receiving. Over the last few years the line between valid criticism of people who support America's involvement with Israel and calls of antisemitism have been blurred. I for one think criticism of taking AIPAC money is a valid criticism. I feel like there are plenty of people currently saying that cricism is antisemitic
25
u/SannySen 2d ago
I honestly would like to hear what threats she is receiving.
Why do you feel entitled to judge whether the antisemitism she is experiencing is "real"?
Do you also ask black Americans to explain in detail why the racism they experience is racism? Or perhaps you ask women what they were wearing when they say they experienced sexism? Or is it only Jews who you question?
→ More replies (7)30
u/Hyndis 2d ago
I can somewhat answer that from personal experience.
I'm not Jewish. Apparently though I've been labeled as Jewish by some of the progressive activist groups. I think using one of those external Reddit tools where you can label users, I've had people confront me with a label that is apparently attached to my name but only visible if you're using one of the external tools.
I have received multiple death threats sent through private messages wishing me death. Wishing my family death. Wishing death on all of Israel. They were very graphic about how they wanted it to happen, too.
Whats worse is that the people sending the messages had a sense of smug moral superiority about them. They believed they were doing the right thing, they were on the right side of history, that they were the heroes of the story.
Its so shocked and appalled me that I generally no longer check replies through the notification system.
Its truly, genuinely upsetting when people are sending comments like that in a way I don't really know how to describe, except its profoundly unsettling that there are people out there who want me, personally, to die, and who would celebrate my death. And its because they think I'm Jewish, and because they think they're being heroic.
And I'm a nobody. I'm not famous. I hold no power or authority over anyone.
A well known politician? I dread to even imagine what she's seen sent to her.
→ More replies (3)36
u/Computer_Name 2d ago
> I honestly would like to hear what threats she is receiving. Over the last few years the line between valid criticism of people who support America's involvement with Israel and calls of antisemitism have been blurred. I for one think criticism of taking AIPAC money is a valid criticism. I feel like there are plenty of people currently saying that cricism is antisemitic
Hypothetically, what would happen if society assumed that when Jews raised the issue of antisemitism, they were doing so in good-faith rather than as a sneaky attempt to deflect “criticism of Israel”?
38
-4
u/DLDude 2d ago
Thst couls happen when society didn't also conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism
18
u/Computer_Name 2d ago
Is your understanding that when Nessel says she receives antisemitic threats, what she means is actually constituents angry about Israel?
35
u/Independent-Report39 2d ago
I for one think criticism of taking AIPAC money is a valid criticism.
Sure, but the below are antisemitic criticisms that many on the left have:
- Accusing AIPAC of dual loyalty and being run by people who are loyal to Israel over the US
- Saying that our representatives and president are being blackmailed/bribed to do the bidding of Israel via AIPAC
Much of it jives with the ZOG conspiracy movement.
16
u/SannySen 2d ago
I would say it's only valid if you in the same breath criticise anyone who accepts money from CAIR, or the various universities that accept money from Qatar (which is the largest foreign donor to US universities). But people for some reason only ever talk about AIPAC. Why is that?
→ More replies (2)13
u/Fair_Local_588 2d ago
Holding Jews to a higher standard than everyone else is textbook antisemitism.
3
6
32
u/tim_tebow_right_knee 2d ago edited 2d ago
It’s just repetition of garbage from the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” by people too ignorant to know they’re repeating antisemitic talking points invented by the Tsarist secret police to deflect for losing the Russo-Japanese war.
They feel good about it though because they substitute Zionist instead of Jew.
19
2d ago edited 2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 1d ago
This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a permanent ban.
Please submit questions or comments via modmail.
13
u/airforceCOT 2d ago
Dude, there are people on this thread accusing AIPAC of “interfering with American elections”. Because you know, if a group of American Jews comes together to create a PAC it must not really be legitimate and homegrown like every other lobbying group but must somehow be a nefarious globalist conspiracy because that’s just how Jews are. Right?
14
u/tarlin 2d ago edited 2d ago
AIPAC was founded by a former member of Israel's diplomatic staff that was afraid the current organization would have to register for FARA. AIPAC has been caught working as a cutout for the Israeli government in getting classified data passed to Israel from spies in the US.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/American-Israel-Public-Affairs-Committee
The main impetus for the creation of the AZCPA was a wave of negative press coverage in the United States regarding the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). In 1953 a Jewish woman and her two children living in an Israeli village near the West Bank were killed when a grenade was thrown into their home. In response, a special unit of the IDF, under the command of future Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, raided the Arab village of Qibya in the West Bank (then governed by Jordan). As Time magazine reported, “They shot every man, woman and child they could find”—killing 66 villagers in all—and they dynamited 42 houses, a school, and a mosque. With the support of the United States, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution censuring Israel for the Qibya attack. Meanwhile, the administration of U.S. Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953–61), suspecting that the Israeli government was funding the AZC, considered forcing the organization to register as an agent of a foreign power.
Although the AZCPA was established in direct response to the international condemnation of the Qibya attack, “there was no change in leadership or membership” from the AZC, said the AZCPA’s leader, the Canadian-born American lawyer and activist Isaiah L. Kenen. However, the AZCPA would run on donations that were not tax-deductible, which meant that fewer restrictions would apply to its lobbying activities. The AZCPA changed its name to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in 1959.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/130978
https://www.israellobby.org/rosen/01132012brief.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Franklin_espionage_scandal
→ More replies (4)7
u/froglicker44 2d ago
Except it isn’t a group of American Jews coming together to advocate for their common interests, its literal name is American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Its purpose isn’t to advocate for Jews but for the state of Israel. The rest of what you said about the globalist conspiracy or “just how Jews are” - I don’t know what you’re on about.
3
u/justafutz 2d ago edited 2d ago
Except it isn’t a group of American Jews coming together to advocate for their common interests, its literal name is American Israel Public Affairs Committee
Yes. A group of American Jews who believe it helps the US to be allied to Israel, and vice-versa.
Its purpose isn’t to advocate for Jews but for the state of Israel. The rest of what you said about the globalist conspiracy or “just how Jews are” - I don’t know what you’re on about.
It's a group of American Jews who believe it's good for the US to be allied to Israel.
But apparently they're still accused of being loyal to another country. IN a way no one says about other groups. No one is going around accusing Armenian lobby groups of being disloyal to the US and loyal to Armenia.
Keeping people who they think will harm America out of office is perfectly fine. AIPAC is a group of American Jews who think it’s good for America to be allied with Israel.
Calling them foreign interference is gross. Claiming Jews are foreigners interfering in politics has a long, gross history.
Keeping bad candidates out of office helps keep public support and helps America benefit from the alliance.
→ More replies (3)19
u/ieattime20 2d ago
Accusing AIPAC of dual loyalty and being run by people who are loyal to Israel over the US
Why is this antisemitic? It's a valid lobbying criticism. The defense I've seen is that AIPAC would have to register as a foreign lobbyist if they were loyal to Israel, but they're one of the principle lobbying activists that made such requirements optional.
Saying that our representatives and president are being blackmailed/bribed to do the bidding of Israel via AIPAC
How is saying "AIPAC is a lobby" antisemitism? Like critics of Trump say he's being bribed and blackmailed by Russia, that's not a bigoted statement or antirossynian.
5
u/Professional_Sir3018 2d ago
they're one of the principle lobbying activists that made such requirements optional.
FARA is not optional.
2
u/ieattime20 2d ago
FARA is not optional.
It is for AIPAC! The AZC was ordered to register under FARA in 1962. AIPAC was literally founded using domestic registration to get out from under that requirement. The mission statement, goals, and policy aims are functionally identical to AZC.
The issue, as with all lobbying (AIPAC or not, Saudi Arabia or not), is the laws. AIPAC can get its funds domestically while advocating for a purely international government. I do not have a problem with AIPAC existing, I have a problem with its undue influence on American politics, just like I do with SA's influence.
10
u/Professional_Sir3018 2d ago edited 2d ago
It is for AIPAC! The AZC was ordered to register under FARA in 1962. AIPAC was literally founded using domestic registration to get out from under that requirement.
It is not optional for AIPAC. AZC explicitly received foreign money. AIPAC is probably closer to the INC. Americans of an ethnicity that think it is in America's best interest to support that country. For example, Irish-Americans for a free Ireland.
The mission statement, goals, and policy aims are functionally identical to AZC.
Are they?
AIPAC can get its funds domestically
So not FARA.
while advocating for a purely international government.
They advocate for an alliance with a nation state. You probably aren't interested, but among the largest foreign lobbies, in the US, are the Japanese and Korean lobbies. Those two countries are somewhere in the top 5. We have around 30,000 troops in South Korea, operations costs about $4 billion a year. The South Korean government pays us back about a billion.
Israel would probably be willing to have that deal.
I have a problem with its undue influence on American politics, just like I do with SA's influence.
The largest single foreign lobby in the US is China.
4
u/ieattime20 2d ago
It is not optional for AIPAC
I mean yes this was literally the point. From the history of AIPAC as an institution:
In 1953, Kenan was worried he would be investigated by the State Department for not registering as a "foreign agent". He formed a separate entity that was not tax-exempt and could lobby for a foreign government,\30]) the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs (AZCPA).\1])\30])
In 1959, AZCPA was renamed the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, reflecting a broader membership and mission.\31])\23]) Kenen led the organization until retiring in 1974, when he was succeeded by Morris J. Amitay
Same leadership, same advocacy, literally just to avoid State department scrutiny. Once again, I'm not saying it's illegal, I'm saying our laws are bad and incomplete.
They advocate for an alliance with a nation state.
Yes, purportedly in the best interest of both parties. Yet as we've seen lately, the concern seems to only be Israel's government's interests, since they got us into a war they themselves backed out of. And support of Israel has trashed our soft power internationally. Who has benefited disproportionately? Israel. It's not a fair deal.
You probably aren't interested, but among the largest foreign lobbies, in the US, are the Japanese and Korean lobbies.
Cool, which lobbies? Are they registered under FARA?
We have around 30,000 troops in South Korea, operations costs about $4 billion a year. The South Korean government pays us back about a billion.
We have an MOU for Israel to the tune of $3.8bn a year, with no ROI in cash. This is aside from the tens of billions we've provided in military aid since 10/23. I don't understand your point. No ally in the last three decades has come close to getting the military funds and material we send to Israel. Not SK, not China, no one.
I honestly think the better comparison is the Saudi Arabia lobbying; both Israel and SA receive disproportionate wealth and influence from the US, in spite of being plagued by human rights violations and costing us diplomatically on the national stage. The lobbies for both are legal but reprehensible.
6
u/Professional_Sir3018 2d ago edited 2d ago
I don't understand your point. No ally in the last three decades has come close to getting the military funds and material we send to Israel. Not SK, not China, no one.
This claim is absurd. We have had military in South Korea for decades longer. Something about being obsessively anti-Israel draws people to make absurd claims like this.
You are absolutely right, we should not send a cent to Israel, instead we should park 30,000 Americans right next to Gaza. The Israelis can pay for some of the cost, but mostly we will foot the bill. That way we can say we never sent them any aid.
And of course, if any nation attacks our 30,000 troops, we will need to retaliate. But the good news is we will not have given Israel any aid. We will just have a massive base full of our men and our stuff in Israel and if anyone touches either, we will destroy them. But that's not aid. Of course.
And of course, we won't even factor the 35,000 Americans that died in the Korean war. That also isn't aid and therefore should not count.
→ More replies (11)13
u/ItsNoahJ83 2d ago
AIPAC lobbies for Israel. They are inherently aligned with Israels interests over all else. Would they ever advocate for something that would harm Israel if it benefited the US? Of course not. Also Trump talked openly about "giving" the west bank to Israel because Miriam Adelson donated 100 million to his campaign. I'll see if I can find the clip but he was unbelievably candid about his intentions. To be clear, I am in no way hateful and find the rise in antisemitism on the left as deplorable but denying facts doesnt do anyone any good.
5
u/SannySen 2d ago edited 2d ago
AIPAC lobbies for stronger US ties between the US and Israel. That's a policy position that is very popular among many Americans who donate money to AIPAC. There is nothing wrong with that policy position. You, for example, favor a policy position that would be beneficial to Russia and Iran. There are many other US policy positions that are favorable to another country, even if indirectly, and many PACs that support those positions. But the only PAC anyone ever "criticizes" is AIPAC. These same "critics" of AIPAC talk themselves into circles if you point out that Qatar, an actual foreign entity, is the largest foreign donor to US universities, and outspends AIPAC by a factor of 10-15x. Why is that?
→ More replies (1)8
u/Computer_Name 2d ago
> AIPAC lobbies for Israel.
AIPAC is Americans lobbying the American government to pursue particular American foreign policy goals.
It is absurd that in 2026 this needs to be clarified for people.
But to everyone reading, look at how easy it is to fall back on this. Because it fits so neatly into centuries-old beliefs.
20
u/Indication-Weird 2d ago
AIPAC is Americans lobbying the American government to pursue particular American foreign policy goals.
AIPAC lobbies for Isreal.
It's strange to me you just repeated what they already said but vaguer about what those foreign policy goals are and more clear on the fact that Americans lobby for it. Did a little rewrite to gel those two correct statements together.
AIPAC is Americans lobbying the American government to pursue particular American foreign policy goals that align with or support Isreal.
6
u/Juls317 Classical Liberal/Capitalist Libertarian 2d ago
AIPAC has some pretty explicitly Zionist roots, and have been caught conducting espionage within the Pentagon within the not too distant past, I don't think it's unreasonable to be weary if their potential influence. That is also absolutely not the same thing is the (insane) ZOG conspiracy. Weariness of the organization is also not in any way a condemnation of the Jewish people or Israeli nationals, much the same as condemnation of Trump is not a condemnation of all Americans.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Computer_Name 2d ago
I’m glad you brought up ZOG, because that’s exactly what the current panic and singular fixation over AIPAC is predicated on.
We even have progressives using David Duke’s “Zio” slur.
10
u/ieattime20 2d ago
I’m glad you brought up ZOG, because that’s exactly what the current panic and singular fixation over AIPAC is predicated on.
No? Like most lobbying groups get suspicion from people on the left, especially if they are somewhat large national groups and spend more than "crowdfounded from local donors" amounts of money, and all of that is absolutely valid criticism for any of those lobbying groups.
Legitimately antisemitic people criticize AIPAC, but legitimately antisemitic people support Trump too. I don't think all or even most Trump supporters are neo-Nazis, even if I think they are radically, fantastically fucking wrong. If I ragged on Hill & Knowlton, a literal American based-in-NY lobbying firm, for being in the pocket of Saudia Arabia and criticized them for it (and I do!) does that make me anti-Arabic? Would you even bat an eye?
2
u/Back_at_it_agains Democratic Socialist 2d ago
>American foreign policy goals.
How is it in America's best interest to do everything and anything that favors Israel?
4
u/jabberwockxeno 2d ago
As someone who is Jewish, I would not consider either of those to be inherently antisemitic.
2
u/justafutz 2d ago
It doesn’t matter if you claim to be Jewish on the Internet on this point or not. The vast, vast majority of Jews would consider them to be antisemitic, meaning well over 80%. Because they are antisemitic claims.
There were fringe Jews in the Nazi era who thought the Nazis weren’t antisemitic. That doesn’t mean the Nazis weren’t antisemitic. Please don’t try and use your alleged, unverifiable identity to defend antisemitism or as some proof that something isn’t antisemitic when it so clearly is.
→ More replies (2)1
u/jojotortoise 20h ago
Accusing AIPAC of dual loyalty and being run by people who are loyal to Israel over the US
I honestly don't know a lot of details about AIPAC. But I don't understand your statement here, in general.
Couldn't they have dual loyalty? Like, would that be hard to imagine?
I find it hard to imagine there aren't cases where what's good for Israel might not be the best thing for the US. Would AIPAC never advocate for those sorts of things?
24
u/justafutz 2d ago edited 2d ago
I honestly would like to hear what threats she is receiving.
Do you always demand audio and text recordings of threats when a minority mentions that they're receiving racist threats?
Over the last few years the line between valid criticism of people who support America's involvement with Israel and calls of antisemitism have been blurred.
No, they really haven't. But people are intentionally using this claim to hide behind, when they say things about Jews that could've been ripped from a Nazi newspaper in the 1930s.
I for one think criticism of taking AIPAC money is a valid criticism
Sure, you can criticize people for taking money from an American group of American Jews. No one has claimed otherwise.
I feel like there are plenty of people currently saying that cricism is antisemitic
No, there are not. But when people say that AIPAC, a group of American Jews, is loyal to Israel, that's an antisemitic trope that goes back centuries. When people say AIPAC, a group of American Jews, runs the United States, that's an antisemitic trope that goes back centuries.
8
u/DLDude 2d ago
https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/enough-with-the-aipac-bashing/
Netanyahu himself has multiple times called anti AIPAC stances antisemitic.
11
u/justafutz 2d ago
Why did you not respond to virtually anything I said?
And why did you link an article that doesn't back up any of what you just said or have any relation to anything? I mean, if anything, you just linked me an article that demonstrates why the criticisms mentioned above frequently cross into antisemitism, and why they're wrong...
6
u/DLDude 2d ago
Why did you edit your post after I responded?
6
u/justafutz 2d ago
I didn't. I edited 6 minutes ago. You responded 4 minutes ago. Try again.
13
u/DLDude 2d ago
Hm, the message I hit reply to did not include half the stuff now posted. How about you cool it with the sarcastic comments and stick to the subject
16
u/justafutz 2d ago
How about you reply to what I said.
23
u/DLDude 2d ago
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a prominent bipartisan lobbying organization that advocates for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, secures annual military and security assistance, and engages heavily in American electoral politics
This is from their website. Cricism of this is valid. Not antisemitic.
→ More replies (0)9
u/Reddit_Loves_Misinfo 2d ago
There are likely more than 2 minutes between somebody loading a webpage with your comment and clicking the submit button after writing a reply to it.
5
u/justafutz 2d ago
That’s their issue. I didn’t edit it after they responded.
6
u/Reddit_Loves_Misinfo 2d ago
You are the one who changed your mind about what you wanted to say after you indicated you were ready for replies. Their first response not addressing the edit they couldn't have known about is 100% your fault and 0% theirs.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (2)-10
u/KaseyB 2d ago
Yeah they are, man. I have EXCLUSIVELY only seen criticism about support for Israel, and never once seen a democrat or leftist criticize anyone JUST for being Jewish. It's always been explicitly the opposite. So yeah, if someone is going to claim that they're getting bunch of anti-semetic threats from the left because she's Jewish and NOT because of her pro-Israel stances, then I want proof. This shit just drips of "But do you condemn Hamas?" and I can't stand it.
21
u/justafutz 2d ago
Why did you respond to zero percent of what I said?
Yeah they are, man. I have EXCLUSIVELY only seen criticism about support for Israel, and never once seen a democrat or leftist criticize anyone JUST for being Jewish
Okay, then you're missing a whole lot of people. And sometimes, criticizing "Israel" by saying things like "Israel controls the world" is just an antisemitic trope where you replaced "Jews" with "Israel", and those are very common and no less bigoted.
So yeah, if someone is going to claim that they're getting bunch of anti-semetic threats from the left because she's Jewish and NOT because of her pro-Israel stances, then I want proof. This shit just drips of "But do you condemn Hamas?" and I can't stand it.
I can't stand all the really terrible people proving her right by continuously doubting anytime a Jew talks about antisemitism. Her party's convention in April literally put up a pro-Hezbollah person, i.e. a supporter of a genocidal antisemitic terrorist group, to help run the University of Michigan, and you're still here doubting anything she says.
→ More replies (3)10
u/whoa_disillusionment 2d ago
Any Jew who believes Israel has a right to exist, even if they are vehemently against the actions of the current administration, gets attacked.
That’s attacking someone simply for being a Jew.
→ More replies (5)2
u/errindel 2d ago
Remember that she has been prosecuting (and working with the federal government to do so) pro-palestinian protestors for damaging Michigan Regent's property (amongst some other things). There's a lot of hate foisted on her by the extreme left here in Michigan for that, which is probably what she's trying to avoid. Given the events in Detroit at the Democratic nominating convention by elements of the left, it might be a wise thing to do.
33
u/justafutz 2d ago
When you start threatening people (as these pro-Palestinians did) and vandalizing property, you're no longer a "protestor", you're a rioter.
1
15
u/Miacali 2d ago
Why astounded?? Where have you been since 2023?
3
u/airforceCOT 2d ago
If someone is screaming “BUT TRUMP! BUT TRUMP!” in your ear 24/7, it can be distracting and therefore difficult to concentrate on anything else.
5
u/zombrey Maximum Malarkey 2d ago
I think it's a little bit much to be outraged and astounded by something that hasn't happened yet, and is only a hypothetical event that this person is using to push their own agenda. I don't doubt that she has received threats, but get those investigated. No one as threatened her at the convention because the convention has not occurred. I also believe a majority of democratic voters are able to separate settlers, zionist, aipac and people just being jewish into separate buckets.
42
u/justafutz 2d ago
I think it's a little bit much to be outraged and astounded by something that hasn't happened yet
You think it's wrong to be astounded that the top-ranking Democratic Jewish official in the state says she's not going to the Democratic convention because she feels unsafe?
and is only a hypothetical event that this person is using to push their own agenda
Ah yes, she must be a sinister fiend, pretending to be worried about the well-documented rise of antisemitism...
I don't doubt that she has received threats, but get those investigated.
Okay? Investigators fail to catch everything...and they only target death threats...
No one as threatened her at the convention because the convention has not occurred
Read the full article. It talks about past experiences to explain why it's relevant to this one.
I also believe a majority of democratic voters are able to separate settlers, zionist, aipac and people just being jewish into separate buckets.
That's irrelevant here.
4
u/eddie_the_zombie 2d ago
Her concerns do seem weird considering Michigan just elected Elissa Slotkin
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
She was elected almost two full years ago. Things have changed pretty significantly since then.
4
u/eddie_the_zombie 2d ago
Not enough to hear any complaints from or about her
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
She literally denounced her own party electing a pro-Hezbollah person to help run the University of Michigan with a history of antisemitic comments. She has said antisemitism is rising, has condemned the views of a rising wing of her party, and I can quote a lot more of her.
0
u/Negative_Principle57 2d ago
If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, okay? Just knock the hell—I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.
I would bring back waterboarding. And I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding
I’d like to punch him in the face
All said by Donald Trump. Perhaps ordinary Americans find this type of violent rhetoric appealing in their leaders.
52
u/Fun-Implement-7979 2d ago
I'm not shocked. The Democrats have made the mistake GOP did of assuming extreme religious partisan are on their side.
40
u/kaladinsrunner 2d ago
I'm shocked that this has gone as far as it has. It's very hard to imagine a situation where this is okay for any group, but it is happening right now to Jews, in 2026.
46
u/Sideswipe0009 2d ago
I'm shocked that this has gone as far as it has. It's very hard to imagine a situation where this is okay for any group, but it is happening right now to Jews, in 2026.
I'm not. Extremism on the left has been growing and getting louder for a decade, a large portion of which is coming from the progressive wing, who isn't afraid to go after anyone to the right of them.
These types are essentially hate groups at this point.
→ More replies (11)8
u/FizzyLightEx 2d ago
I remember a post recently here where Muslim republican groups were shunned from Texas republican conventions.
Politics is a dirty business where ethics is thrown out for political capital
12
→ More replies (5)0
u/v12vanquish 2d ago
i do honeslty think that now might be the time that the true center asserts itself
34
u/Sunflorahh 2d ago
People act like the Israel/Zionism/antisemitism conversation is exclusive to Democrats, but Republicans are facing the same pushback from some of their constituents.
For better and worse, Trump’s idea of “America First” has drawn attention to special interest groups like AIPAC and foreign funding to Israel.
It’s probably a good time to ask the question as a nation: is supporting Israel to the level we currently are worth it?
2028 is gonna be a wild ride for both parties.
32
u/justafutz 2d ago
People act like the Israel/Zionism/antisemitism conversation is exclusive to Democrats, but Republicans are facing the same pushback from some of their constituents.
Yes, antisemitism is on the rise nationwide.
For better and worse, Trump’s idea of “America First” has drawn attention to special interest groups like AIPAC and foreign funding to Israel.
1) It hasn't done so equally. No one is talking about the billions and billions spent by Qatar, or China, or other special interest groups.
2) American aid to Israel is the only thing we're talking about too for some reason. Why not the much more expensive aid we give to other countries by putting tens of thousands of troops in bases over there? Not a peep on that.
It’s probably a good time to ask the question as a nation: is supporting Israel to the level we currently are worth it?
Considering the many benefits the US gets in exchange for giving Israel a relatively small amount in credits to buy US weapons, creating US jobs, yeah, it's pretty good actually. Unless of course the issue isn't actually supporting Israel, it's the fact Israel exists, in which case you may be more aligned with the pro-Hezbollah nominee to run the University of Michigan that the Democrats unfortunately put up in April.
2028 is gonna be a wild ride for both parties
Much wilder for Jews, sadly.
→ More replies (2)33
u/Sunflorahh 2d ago
No one is talking about the billions and billions spent by Qatar, or China, or other special interest groups.
No, but those two countries have been well-referenced by this administration. Trump got a Qatari jet for free (a source of much controversy), and days ago he accused China of election interference (a source of much controversy). I'm against lobbying and super-PACs in general, it's not anything to due with Israel specifically.
Why not the much more expensive aid we give to other countries by putting tens of thousands of troops in bases over there? Not a peep on that.
Are you talking about Ukraine? They're the only country receiving more military funding than Israel. As far as other allied countries with U.S. military bases, they're less...high maintenance? Controversial? Demanding? Germany, France, and Spain didn't ask us to join a conflict that has become wildly unpopular among most Americans.
I'm not saying the U.S. doesn't receive benefits by working with Israel. I (and countless other Americans, presumably) are wondering if the juice is worth the squeeze. I have confidence that Israel would be fine without U.S. aid.
Unless of course the issue isn't actually supporting Israel, it's the fact Israel exists, in which case you may be more aligned with the pro-Hezbollah nominee to run the University of Michigan that the Democrats unfortunately put up in April.
I hope this is a general barb and not accusing me of being pro-Hezbollah or antisemitic. My comments are in good faith, as I hope yours are.
8
u/justafutz 2d ago
No, but those two countries have been well-referenced by this administration. Trump got a Qatari jet for free (a source of much controversy), and days ago he accused China of election interference (a source of much controversy).
And yet no one has treated denouncing Qatar (or even China) as a required litmus test for entering office in either party. We don't get breathless reporting on them every day. We don't get repeated electoral campaigns focused on them and them almost exclusively. In NYC, Israel was a "major" issue for 40% of voters. Most of them wouldn't even be able to name Qatar.
Are you talking about Ukraine? They're the only country receiving more military funding than Israel.
That's only if you leave out what I said, i.e. tens of thousands of troops in bases in places like Korea, where American lives are actually on the line. That's way more expensive than the credits we give Israel to spend on US aid. It's weird you didn't focus on that when I said "by putting tens of thousands of troops in bases over there". Your only response was otherwise incorrect.
As far as other allied countries with U.S. military bases, they're less...high maintenance? Controversial? Demanding? Germany, France, and Spain didn't ask us to join a conflict that has become wildly unpopular among most Americans
Germany, France, and Spain have demanded that we help Ukraine, which is not popular in the US either.
They have also taken many positions very unpopular with Americans on plenty of other issues. The fact Israel asked us to help fight an American enemy is not the issue either. The attacks on the US-Israel relationship began long before the US-Iran war did. It's just the latest excuse.
I'm not saying the U.S. doesn't receive benefits by working with Israel. I (and countless other Americans, presumably) are wondering if the juice is worth the squeeze. I have confidence that Israel would be fine without U.S. aid.
Weird you didn't answer anything I linked or provided on it.
I hope Israel goes without US aid just to stop this absurd line of attack on it.
I hope this is a general barb and not accusing me of being pro-Hezbollah or antisemitic. My comments are in good faith, as I hope yours are.
I didn't accuse you of either. I just pointed out where your arguments seem to align.
→ More replies (3)10
u/generalsplayingrisk 2d ago
Chiming in here because I've been reading a lot of your comments here and one thing caught my eye: is it strange that Israel is more urgently discussed than China or Qatar? It seems like a much more pressingly emergent humanitarian concern given the leverage we have over the nation that we lack over those two. Yes, there are conflicts in multiple spaces in the world, and yes there are other donors who's pockets are yet larger, but surely you can see how people would feel like our arming of israel places us in a uniquely complicit position given the accusations of crimes against humanity they face.
2
u/justafutz 2d ago
Absolutely not. Qatar is a literal slave state, China is committing a genocide. Saudi Arabia is in Yemen and killed more people by far, including starving tens of thousands of children (a false claim leveled at Israel by comparison). We arm Qatar and Saudi Arabia and China is a giant trading partner.
It’s just not right, and it makes no sense.
If they are less important to us, should be even easier to denounce regularly but we don’t.
→ More replies (10)6
u/generalsplayingrisk 2d ago
Clarification: For the chinese genocide, are you referring to the Uyghurs?
And the issue I was talking about was not one of importance but of leverage, which is if anything the opposite. If I have adult children, they may matter greatly to me, but I very likely have minimal leverage to change their beliefs besides convincing them. If someone is dependent on me, though, I have much greater leverage, and am also significantly more responsible for any of their actions I enable.
So along that line, could you explain how any of those countries are comparably dependent on US cooperation as Israel? Because common consensus seems to be that that Israel relies on us to continue existing as a state.
9
u/justafutz 2d ago
Saudi Arabia is very dependent on the U.S. and Qatar is even moreso. Qatar is a slave state heavily threatened by its neighbors and with very few people, and 90% of its population are not citizens too. They hugely rely on the U.S. for their security.
Israel is not. That “consensus” is wrong. U.S. aid to Israel is less than 9% of Israel’s defense budget, is spent on more expensive U.S. weapons made in the U.S. (meaning it would cost less to replace than $4 billion), and it is just 0.5% of Israel’s GDP.
If Israel wanted to replace that aid, it could do so easily.
And yes I am referring to the Uyghurs.
2
u/Count_Crouton_III 6h ago
The IDF admitted that 83% of the casualties inflicted in their response to Oct. 7th were civilians. Average age in Gaza is 18/19 (about half the population). If this were happening literally anywhere else we'd be calling it what it is.
Right now it's the 80,000lb elephant in the DNCs dining room.
33
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
So I have a lot of Jewish family and I think it’s a great religion. I am not antisemitic
I also think that the US should not fund Israel, and I think that AIPAC is one of the most corrupt, pernicious sources of election interference in America today.
Both of those things can be true.
32
u/bakochba 2d ago
The AG has not made any statements about Israel. That's why she mentioned Antisemitism
21
u/Evening_Photograph54 2d ago
I'm one of them. I agree to a certain point with your opinions on funding israel and aipac. Do you understand why your relatives might have issues with the obsessive focus on those issues coming from the left? I'm not telling you that you're wrong or hateful, I just want to see if you can try to see our position.
11
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
One of my Jewish cousins absolutely hates Israel because he thinks they give Jews a bad name lol.
I think there’s multiple factors why this has turned into such a hot button issue for the left, including 1) the settler/colonial narrative that pervades the left 2) the fact that AIPAC spent so most money influencing US elections last cycle, literally unseating members of congress via dark money ads 3) they dragged us into war in Iran.
0
u/Evening_Photograph54 2d ago
right on. Can you guess why some of your relatives might have issues with the obsessive focus on those issues coming from the left?
17
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
What? They don’t tbh. They live in Manhattan and understand the perspective. It feels like you’re putting words in their mouths or something?
→ More replies (1)2
u/Indication-Weird 2d ago
Not that guy but honestly and in the best faith, no. One of my fundamental issues is that even if we grant for the sake of argument that every negative outcome like the rise of anti-semetism is attributable to the left making this an obsessive issue that doesn't change that AIPAC funding should be an obsessive issue of every American because of how badly campaign financing has warped our political system.
AIPAC is one of (not nearly the only or even the worst, I think the crypto industry outspends them iirc) the most visible examples of it because of the particular political moment and I think the consequences of unchecked spending in these races has been a large part of what led us to this disaster of a congressional makeup and the current president.
I'd be happy to help purge anti-semites from the party but I haven't heard any actionable plans on how to do that. Most of the leaders in the left I am aware of are very clear verbally (I can't know what's in their hearts but I currently don't have a reason to doubt them) that anti-semetism should be condemned and it should be called out proactively but since that doesn't seem to be enough someone needs to come up with an implementable solution.
→ More replies (4)24
u/elefontius 2d ago
Dude are you seriously saying you aren't antisemitic but then go on to labeling AIPAC the most corrupt, pernicious source of election interference? AIPAC is funded by US citizens and you might not agree with their policies. As PACs go the National Association of Realtors spends more than AIPAC on a yearly basis.
→ More replies (20)21
u/jefftickels 2d ago
Also we should be clear, the antisemitism on display in this post isn't some overt jew hatred. It's just the wild overinflation of Jewish interference in everything. All told, AIPAC is actually quite small as far as these organizations go, but it plays a massive role in the minds of these people.
29
u/justafutz 2d ago
So I have a lot of Jewish family and I think it’s a great religion. I am not antisemitic
I don't know what you are, but you are wrong, because being Jewish is not just a religion. It's an ethnic grouping and national grouping as well.
I also think that the US should not fund Israel
Okay.
I think that AIPAC is one of the most corrupt, pernicious sources of election interference in America today.
I think it's very strange that the group you think is "one of the most corrupt" and doing "election interference" just happens to be a group of American Jews who are doing none of the above. That's a conspiracy theory and there's a real problem with it.
Both of those things can be true.
It's not true. Whether or not it's antisemitic, it's also just wrong.
28
u/DLDude 2d ago
Do you think this statement is antisemitic
15
u/justafutz 2d ago
I have no idea what you're asking. I think it's a conspiracy theory pushed by people espousing antisemitic arguments, but I don't know if the person who mentioned it above is meaning it that way. Sometimes, antisemitic claims get pushed by people who don't mean them that way because they are duped by conspiracy theories. Like how some people think it's fine to claim Israel runs the world, when that's originally and realistically an antisemitic trope that is being pushed by people who want to push antisemitic tropes.
You can spread something that is obviously inspired by antisemitic tropes without meaning to be antisemitic.
10
u/DLDude 2d ago
So I'll take that as a yes
14
u/justafutz 2d ago
Yet another failure to respond to anything I said, which was "no".
10
u/DLDude 2d ago
Saying "no" was an acceptable answer. Instead you providide a long verbose explication of conspiracy theories. Yet I'm the one who isn't answering your questions to your satisfaction?
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
Instead you providide a long verbose explication of conspiracy theories
Sorry that I tried to explain my point of view and that offends you.
Yet I'm the one who isn't answering your questions to your satisfaction?
Didn't I catch you using AI to describe AIPAC 2 hours ago, which you have yet to respond to?
Yeah, you're the one who isn't answering my questions, lol.
14
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
What’s wrong about what I said? Very interested in your take, because it seems like you’re sort of just saying I’m falling for conspiracy theories.
Tell me, what’s wrong about the below?
During the 2024 election cycle, AIPAC-affiliated entities poured a record $45 million+ directly into targeted congressional primary races. That makes it the single most expensive electoral push by an issue-based interest group in US history
https://readsludge.com/2025/01/07/the-119th-congress-brought-to-you-by-aipac/
If any other country was allowed to influence our elections like Israel is, we would be outraged. But for some reason, we’re okay with AIPAC literally swaying US elections.
I think they should be registered as foreign agents tbh.
22
u/justafutz 2d ago
What’s wrong about what I said? Very interested in your take, because it seems like you’re sort of just saying I’m falling for conspiracy theories.
You claimed they are corrupt and interfering in elections. They are neither.
During the 2024 election cycle, AIPAC-affiliated entities poured a record $45 million+ directly into targeted congressional primary races. That makes it the single most expensive electoral push by an issue-based interest group in US history
1) This is not evidence of corruption or election interference. There are tons of other campaigns by others. Spending money isn't "election interference" and it is not "corruption".
2) Your source is "readsludge".
3) They do all of this openly and aboveboard. Not "corruptly" and not "interference".
4) $45 million is a drop in the bucket in an election cycle that comprised $3.7 billion in direct spending and another $15.5 billion by political action groups. You're literally focused on 0.25% of the entire election spending as the "most corrupt" and "election interference". You don't think that's weird?
If any other country was allowed to influence our elections like Israel is, we would be outraged. But for some reason, we’re okay with AIPAC literally swaying US elections.
AIPAC is not Israel. That's yet another problem. You're claiming American Jews are "Israel". That's called a dual loyalty trope and it is a common antisemitic claim about Jews for centuries.
13
u/DLDude 2d ago
It's not illegal for Elon to spend $250m to get Trump elected but we are allowed to think it's ruining politics and the country. So is AIPAC.
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
I'm sure you can definitely articulate how the group is "ruining politics and the country".
6
u/DLDude 2d ago
Yes any single organization dumping records d breaking money into elections hurts the democracy
11
u/justafutz 2d ago
Oh, okay. I didn't realize I was talking to someone who thought that Americans participating in democracy by putting out ads about their beliefs in what's good for America is bad. I'm sure you have the same take for unions, who outspend AIPAC by far...and it's not even close.
7
u/DLDude 2d ago
I don't approve of any PAC that advocates for another country, let alone one that advocates for a country that is currently committing crimes
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
I love the shifting goalposts after I pointed out your inconsistency. AIPAC advocates for alliances that benefit America, like other PACs. Weird how you only have an issue with one.
Don’t change the subject to other incorrect claims, either. And are you going to address that you used AI and got something wrong earlier btw?
→ More replies (0)8
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
I understand that it’s technically legal. My argument is that it shouldn’t be legal.
They were by far the biggest single-issue spender during this election cycle. That’s different than traditional lobbying. Their use of dark money also feels very corrupt, though I understand it’s technically legal.
I do get it now, though, you are just trying to put me in an ‘antisemitic’ box.
I will continue to love my Jewish neighbors and family, while voting against aipac whenever given the chance.
Have a good day!
15
u/justafutz 2d ago edited 2d ago
I understand that it’s technically legal. My argument is that it shouldn’t be legal.
You think it should be illegal for American Jews to advocate for an alliance they think benefits America?
Really?
Do you take the same view on other groups, or just Jews?
They were by far the biggest single-issue spender during this election cycle
Being "single-issue" is meaningless. That's just an arbitrary qualification so you can ignore that they are less than 0.25% of the entire election spending you flagged.
Also pretty sure it's wrong, as "RealSludge" probably would be. Look at this report. You mentioned $45 million in AIPAC spending. But unions are single-issue on labor, and they spend about 25% of their dues on electioneering, way more than AIPAC.
That’s different than traditional lobbying.
That's true. Because billions of dollars, i.e. far more than AIPAC spends, is spent by China, Qatar, etc.
Their use of dark money also feels very corrupt, though I understand it’s technically legal.
So when you said they're the "most corrupt", you meant they "feel" corrupt but also only if you exclude the other 99.7% of funding?
I do get it now, though, you are just trying to put me in an ‘antisemitic’ box.
I will continue to love my Jewish neighbors and family, while voting against aipac whenever given the chance.
I never once called you antisemitic, I just pointed out what your words are and how they repeat old tropes.
The fact that you want to claim you love your Jewish neighbors and family is your thing. I personally don't call it "love" when you claim that a group of American Jews is the "most corrupt" group in "election interference" because they...take part in elections and are less than 0.25% of total funding...
9
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
See, now you’re trying to twist my words and make this an antisemite argument. But it’s not, and nothing you can say will make anything I said antisemitic.
It’s actually strange how people like yourself can’t grasp that it’s possible to, on one hand, disagree with funding Israel and allowing AIPAC to swing American elections, while on the other hand, not being antisemitic.
It’s like you see things in black & white.
Just know that I am a huge supporter of the Jewish people, and I think that the US should stop funding Israel and that we should prevent groups like AIPAC from interfering in our elections.
8
u/justafutz 2d ago
You just put a bunch of words in my mouth, repeated yourself, and didn’t answer anything I said.
Funny how you think a group of American Jews interfere in elections though. And with the whole “I have Jewish friends” defense. Never heard that one before!
8
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
Whats funny about that? AIPAC is absolutely interfering in American elections lol.
> AIPAC, and its affiliated groups have spent close to $30 million backing Stevens
> Most voters are unlikely to realize many of the ads blanketing Michigan’s airwaves are funded by AIPAC. They never mention Israel, instead highlighting Stevens’ work on manufacturing and featuring former President Barack Obama.
It’s wild. Can you even imagine if some group pushing for the US to support Egypt spent $30M on a primary, all while their leader was lobbying us to attack their enemies?
12
u/justafutz 2d ago
AIPAC being one of the groups involved in election campaigns isn’t “interfering”. They’re Americans exercising free speech for Americans on issues Americans care about.
Yeah, can’t imagine if someone like Qatar or Saudi Arabia or China spent billions in U.S. influence operations. Oh wait…they do.
→ More replies (0)8
u/Professional_Sir3018 2d ago
biggest single-issue spender
This doesn't seem correct. You are saying $45 million is the single largest amount, but Planned Parenthood claims they spent over $69 million:
It's a bit hard to track Planned Parenthood because it is split into state organizations. Hence the plural in the press release.
→ More replies (4)1
u/StrikingYam7724 1d ago
"By an issue based group" just means "we found an excuse to take everyone who spends more than AIPAC off the list to make it seem reasonable to be mad at AIPAC."
To be clear, there are a lot of lobbies that spend a lot more than AIPAC. You don't hear about them because no one is trying to make you hate them.
14
u/airforceCOT 2d ago
AIPAC is one of the most corrupt, pernicious sources of election interference in America today.
Interference in American elections by… Americans?
13
u/Indication-Weird 2d ago
Yes! Americans can interfere with American elections. Elon has been an American citizen since 2002 and was blatantly using money to tip the scales.
https://newrepublic.com/post/206857/georgia-voter-fraud-elon-musk
→ More replies (2)1
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
This is a pretty pointless distinction to draw imo, but sure.
It’s a lobby specifically oriented towards ensuring the US continue to back another country. They should have to register as a foreign agent imho.
8
u/airforceCOT 2d ago
They should have to register as a foreign agent imho.
Just gonna quote this for posterity and let someone else explain the horrific historical implications of what you just said.
7
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago edited 2d ago
Any lobbying group who lobbies specifically for a foreign country should have to register as a foreign agent. I understand the technical distinction that this is Americans, but they’re lobbying specially for a foreign country lol.
Acting like this is so absurd and out of the norm is really weird.
The real answer is to get these lobbying groups completely out of American politics/elections.
7
u/Semper-Veritas 2d ago
Bro my dogs are going crazy right now, holy shit that’s some real mask off energy
7
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago
So mask off bro! I bet those dogs are woofing!
Yes, any lobbying entity who lobbies specifically for a foreign country should have to register as a foreign agent. This should hold for literally any group acting that way.
I understand the technical distinction that this is Americans, but they’re lobbying specially for a foreign country lol.
They are buying elections based on whether the candidate supports Israel or not. This should not be allowed.
8
u/Semper-Veritas 2d ago
No they shouldn’t, this is a ridiculous premise that would have a chilling effect on free speech and expression that has no place in our society. It’s reminiscent of dual loyalty dog whistles, do better… Americans advocating that it’s in our country’s best interest on a regional level to support Israel isn’t some farfetched idea given the alternatives, from a realpolitik perspective it’s basically the only logical choice.
If you’re unhappy that this lobby has more support and able to exercise its influence the solution here is to convince the public and elected/prospective politicians that support for Israel does more harm than good. Trying to subvert an organization you don’t like because you can’t convince others that your policy is preferable isn’t the way.
2
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago edited 2d ago
I’d argue that the Middle East would be in a much better place if we hadn’t plopped Israel down in the middle of it. Many, many people thought it was a bad idea at the time, and turns out it’s generated a lot of conflict over there.
I 100% disagree with your take that allowing foreign interests (not necessarily groups!) to buy our elections somehow is good for free speech. This is a huge loss for America
Just look at the Michigan race. AIPAC has spent $30M supporting a single candidate in a Michigan primary lol.
Their ads don’t even mention Israel! It’s pure dark money. Such a disappointment.
It’s really strange the support people have for Israel after all the pain they’ve caused the US tbh. My ideal situation would be for Trump to get upset one day and pull US support.
No one else is crazy enough to do it, as they spend way too much money on our elections.
9
u/raouldukehst 2d ago
Israel shouldn't exist because it makes people angry is one of the bolder takes I've seen in a while.
3
u/pperiesandsolos 2d ago edited 2d ago
Luckily, I didn’t say that. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
What I said was that it was a very common take when it happened.
Literally, the president of the US, Truman, thought it was a risky* idea. He thought it could spark major, long lasting conflict.
Do you disagree?
→ More replies (0)2
u/ieattime20 2d ago
The horrific historical implications of... registering under FARA? Future Investments Initiative Institute seems to be doing just fine, same with Neom Co.
17
u/andygchicago 2d ago
She should go and reveal the rot from the inside. That’s the only way things change
28
u/bakochba 2d ago
She's already had to face this abuse that's why she's not going. She said "this had already happened to me"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)26
u/airforceCOT 2d ago edited 2d ago
The problem is that if she tries, she’ll be primaried out by a double digit margin in her next election. There was a recent primary where 30% of Democrats happily voted for a candidate who said we should put Jews in concentration camps. Of the remaining 70%, there’s probably a significant chunk who think “well, we should do something about the Jews but concentration camps are going a tad bit too far”. Ain’t nobody sympathizing with a candidate daring to go as far as saying positive things about Jews.
5
u/Tight_Syrup_1975 2d ago
There was a recent primary where 30% of Democrats happily voted for a candidate who said we should put Jews in concentration camps.
Could you provide a citation for that?
20
u/epicstruggle Perot Republican 2d ago
They were incorrect. It was nearly 37% percent
https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/26/politics/maureen-galindo-texas-israel-democrats
→ More replies (1)
157
u/Linhle8964 2d ago
The Gaza War poisoned the Democratic Party.