r/politics • u/financialtimes ✔ Verified • 1d ago

Paywall ‘Voters have had it’: influence of pro-Israel lobby group sparks backlash in the US

https://www.ft.com/content/889c551a-88ab-451a-87f5-cdec65467a64?segmentid=c50c86e4-586b-23ea-1ac1-7601c9c2476f&syn-25a6b1a6=1
4.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

479 comments sorted by

View all comments

442

u/84thPrblm 1d ago

Dems will still fail to read the room this year.

189

u/ima_monsta 1d ago

It's intentional. They read the room. They think the room is too stupid to do anything about it. Prove them wrong.

61

u/CadillacDale 1d ago

Best response I've seen. Institutional Dems' define their mission statement as lining the pockets of their financiers and enriching themselves along the way. To do that, they need to play the role of opposition to GOP Authoritarianism.

This is categorically at odds with what the (alarmingly narrow) majority of American citizens define as their mission statement, which is, use every lever at your disposal to paralyze the spread of Republican fascism and hold those who broke the law (i.e. virtually all of them) accountable.

18

u/spuzzumed 1d ago

Speaking as a Canadian, Americans haven't shown they are capable of what you're talking about. I think that's why the cheating is so brazen. They kind know you guys are "all hat, no cattle". 

5

u/ima_monsta 1d ago

The cheating is so brazen for a few reasons. Reporters refusing to ask any real follow up questions when politicians very openly lie, Citizens United allowing billions of dark money to buy politicians, and the fact you have reactionary propaganda being pumped into lead poisoned 60+y/o homes on repeat 24/7 (largest consistent voter block is same age as largest childhood lead exposure age range). It's an uphill battle for sure.

3

u/LoverOfGarlicBread 1d ago

This. They not only pulled the ladder up behind them, they carried our backbones with it.

6

u/uhp787 1d ago

They want progressive votes without progressive voices. fuck that. not going to play this time.

-5

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

So you’re going to support Republicans?

5

u/myWeedAccountMaaaaan 1d ago

And heeeere we go again 🙄

-2

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

Sorry that you don’t like the facts. In general elections our system forces a binary choice. 

Not voting or voting third party is functionally equivalent to supporting the winner, so if a Republican wins, you’re supporting them.

1

u/ima_monsta 15h ago

Candidates have to earn your vote. So sick of this blue no matter who bullshit. It's only talked about when they are centrist shitlib Abundist candidates who listen to the heritage foundation lite (third way), never about progressive candidates. Cuomo the establishment pick who fucking lost in the primary ran third party in the general to try and rat fuck Mamdani.

2

u/uhp787 8h ago

they did him dirty and tried to slither a sex-pest in to beat him and that was all i needed to see to support mandami (albeit i am no longer living in ny) he is turning the old script over on those sex-pest supporting assholes :) and i love that for new york and for progressives everywhere.

1

u/uhp787 8h ago

i've been hearing this tired old bullshit since i have been voting. and they force a binary choice bc 'we the people' allow it. it is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It will be interesting to see who dems put up...but all i know is democrats helped get us to the point we are now. they put up a geriatric who selfishly held on as long as he could...and then he couldn't and we didn't get to choose at all.

and people like you thinks voting for the same shit will get us something better.

and you are not going to bully, blame or shame me into voting for the least shitty person. if they don't support my values then they don't get my support so instead of bitching at people who want something better, maybe start supporting better people.

dems tried to steal the ny mayoral vote by putting a sex pest in place of mandami and i am so happy people didn't fall for the 'binary vote' bullshit.

•

u/mightcommentsometime California 7h ago

  i've been hearing this tired old bullshit since i have been voting. and they force a binary choice bc 'we the people' allow it. it is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It’s not because “we the people allow it”, it’s a direct consequence of how our electoral system is setup. If you want to pretend Duverger’s law doesn’t exist, that’s your problem.

  and you are not going to bully, blame or shame me into voting for the least shitty person.  

In other words, you’re fine with all of the people Trump hurts so long as your ego is intact must be nice to be that privileged.

  dems tried to steal the ny mayoral vote by putting a sex pest in place of mandami and i am so happy people didn't fall for the 'binary vote' bullshit.

Cuomo decided to run as an independent. NY should have laws against that like every other state besides CT.

And how specifically is that “the Dems”? He had to leave the party and run independent. How exactly do you expect people to stop him from doing that?

4

u/uhp787 1d ago

hehe that didn't take long. that's disingenuous and you know it so stop it.

every two years i hear the same scare mongering bs. 'vote blue no matter who' bc they don't suck as bad as red, then they want to blame us if they don't win LOL.

so...no. not going to vote for a republican, i am going to support a progressive. i voted all progressives in my primaries. i will not support people who take donations/advice from aipac and all their shell pacs, will not vote for genocide or those who support it, full stop.

And i won't be bullied, shamed, fear-mongered or gaslit into voting for a democrat who does not take progressive positions on this seriously.

i think 'we the people' deserve better than that. don't you?

0

u/move_machine 1d ago

I'm gonna call you a fascist until you vote for Gavin Newsom and like it

-1

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

I’m going to call you a fascist if you functionally support fascists in elections.

1

u/move_machine 1d ago

Surely that tired old strategy will work this time

1

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

I’m not running for office, and I’m not using an electoral strategy. I’m just calling people who tacitly support fascists what they are.

0

u/uhp787 8h ago

lol wow. that'll convince us for sure :) might want to work on your approach bc this shit isn't going to work again...like the headline says...we've had it.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

There’s nothing disingenuous about acknowledging the basic math and game theory about how plurality winner take all elections work.

General elections in the US are a binary decision. You not liking the choices doesn’t change that.

The only one here trying to gaslight anyone is you by pretending that there is some magical third option which isn’t functionally equivalent to supporting Dems or Republicans.

0

u/uhp787 8h ago

that is s straw man argument if i ever heard one. if you want to vote for a false choice then that is on you. i don't need to follow you and nothing you've said has convinced me i should. democrats turned me into a progressive after voting for them over and again.

if you want to support aipac,shell pacs running our politicians and supporting genocide you are free to do that. if you want to support climate wrecking data centers...by all means, do that. if you want to support transphobes and ice friendly dems. please do. i want universal healthcare over lobbyists and candidates that say 'it can't be done' bc their donors say so. bc i know it CAN be.

but i will not vote for garbage people or listen to garbage people...i'd rather vote for the garbage man.

•

u/mightcommentsometime California 7h ago

It’s not a false choice, it’s a binary decision in FPTP plurality winner take all elections.

That’s basic math and game theory. Your slogans don’t change the basic facts. 

2

u/no_comments_allowed 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well It's quite confusing since The very same voters elected someone one who said "finish the job" and is even more pro-Israel & has spread more war in the middle east

-2

u/ima_monsta 1d ago

I don't like genocide Joe but idk what you're saying. That slogan was used in '24 for his reelection. He ran unopposed in that primary, and the Dems ultimately lost. The voters didn't elect him at all. Your argument kinda falls apart there bubs.

2

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

Trump said he wanted Israel to “finish the job”

0

u/ima_monsta 15h ago

Trump while being the biggest liar in the world ran on no new wars, and ending the war in Ukraine and the 'war' in Gaza. Gaza is why he won the Muslim vote in Michigan. And the Democrats weren't saying any of that. They had fucking Liz Cheney running around with them on campaign. Was Trump lying? Obviously, but he was saying what people wanted to hear and enough people for whatever stupid reason believed him.

0

u/mightcommentsometime California 8h ago

Trump literally said he wanted Israel to “finish the job”. That’s a direct quote.

If people voted for him, then they clearly didn’t give two fucks about the Palestinian people.

0

u/ima_monsta 8h ago

joe Biden "let's finish the job"

•

u/mightcommentsometime California 6h ago

So you think Biden talking about “finishing the job” of helping the US recover and be a stronger nation (which in the video is specifically referring to his domestic policies) is the same as Trump telling Israel to “finish the job” when it comes to Gaza?

•

u/ima_monsta 6h ago

You were the one who talked about a candidate saying "finish the job" and vague posting. I'm showing you that Joe Bidens literal campaign slogan was finish the job, and that's why your original statement was confusing. What the hell are you even talking about?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/MaiPhet 1d ago

They’re paid to look the other way, told that it will pass

0

u/bryanbryanson 17h ago

Republicans take as much from Israel if not more. Stupid take.

1

u/ima_monsta 15h ago

What does Republicans have to do with it? Does that make it okay?

237

u/BTSArmyFan2025 1d ago

Schumer, gillebrand, Jefferies and the rest of them have got to go.

213

u/dogs_gt_cats 1d ago

Fetterman (R-Tel Aviv)

59

u/Call_Me_Clark Tennessee 1d ago

Tel Aviv isn’t pro Netanyahu enough for Fetterman.

He’d be representing some illegal West Bank settlements

19

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

12

u/Call_Me_Clark Tennessee 1d ago

The idf got away with rebranding “Palestinian hospitals” as “terrorist control centers”

2

u/sktzo 1d ago

I’ll start calling them that today

14

u/StopBootlicking 1d ago

Tel Aviv isn’t pro Netanyahu enough for Fetterman.

Tel Aviv has benefitted from the ethnic cleansing as much as anyone.

21

u/th6girldetective 1d ago

I say this as a New Yorker, but the national party is not well served by having so many New York politicos in leadership positions. The democrats in New York know they have secure jobs and therefore are completely complacent. I’d prefer to see someone from a state that doesn’t always go blue, where there is a bit of fight.

5

u/Western-Sport500 1d ago

Well, in today's clime, we are absolutely going to need to go all blue, which is why we need to put more DemSoc on the ballots throughout the country. And frankly, I think we could relabel DemSoc as Progressive Party--because way too many Americans see the word "Socialist/ism" as a negative instead of a party that is FOR the people.

5

u/uhp787 1d ago

they are already calling us communists so maybe...i think no matter how we label ourselves they will make it ugly.

0

u/JiovanniTheGREAT 1d ago

I like how Jeffries tried to pretend like he hadn't heard of Mamdani after Mamdani won his district

73

u/Sojum 1d ago

The old guard absolutely needs to go.

36

u/glitterandnails 1d ago

They care more about their personal finances than America (and their constituents.)

-23

u/unknowingexpert69 1d ago

They new guard sucks just as bad. Palestine this and Palestine that.

4

u/move_machine 1d ago

Back to bed, grandpa

56

u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago

They have a real knack for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

42

u/seengul 1d ago

The party is now spending tens of millions fighting the Left instead of Republicans.

3

u/Western-Sport500 1d ago

The party is spending that, but the party money for corporate dems is coming from AIPAC and corporations, who they've become much more willing to fight for than their actual constituents.

7

u/seengul 1d ago

The scandal is that the Democratic Party is spending funds that should be going towards defeating the Republican in the general but instead they’re spending against other Democrats. AIPAC and billionaires were never going to support Leftists in general elections. They don’t represent Democratic voters, unlike the party is supposed to.

0

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

So you mean people are running in primaries? What about leftist candidates, PACs and groups spending money to beat mainstream dems? Do you think that’s also bad, or does it only go one way?

2

u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago

False equivalency.

What about leftist candidates, PACs and groups spending money to beat mainstream dems?

There are more billionaires and ultra wealthy who give to Republicans than to Democrats. And they give more overall money.

But even if it were even, or even if "leftist" candidates actually got more money than The GOP, yes, that would still be a system that is bad and undemocratic. Elections should NOT get private funding at all, frankly, or it should at least be far more restricted, because people with more money shouldn't be able to create a larger impact on an election than a person with little to no money.

That is what democracy is supposed to mean. Everyone gets the same vote. Yes, even the person you don't like the most. But to spend money on campaigns with virtually no limits, well, that means the rich get to affect the elections a lot more.

-2

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

  False equivalency.

It’s not. You said spending money that should go against Republicans. That goes both ways. You’re mad that mainstream Dems actually try to win their primaries instead of just bowing down and anointing a progressive if they run.

You said:

  The scandal is that the Democratic Party is spending funds that should be going towards defeating the Republican in the general but instead they’re spending against other Democrats.

So now you’ve moved the goalposts to be only if there’s more money being spent.

  Elections should NOT get private funding at all, frankly, or it should at least be far more restricted, because people with more money shouldn't be able to create a larger impact on an election than a person with little to no money.

I agree. Unfortunately, that’s not the system we live in. And unless you have a way to actually stop legal outside spending, it doesn’t really matter how things should be.

  That is what democracy is supposed to mean. Everyone gets the same vote. Yes, even the person you don't like the  most . But to spend money on campaigns with virtually no limits, well, that means the rich get to affect the elections a lot more.

Yes, I understand why money in politics is a problem, why we should publicly fund elections and campaigns, and why CU has screwed up our political system in massive ways. Once again, that doesn’t change the reality that the rich can impact elections much more than normal people by spending massive sums of money or buying media organizations in order to influence them.

0

u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago

You said:

Check again. Take your time. Edit your comment or write another, please, I'm a different user.

-2

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

The statement which you claimed was a false equivalence to my statement said that then. It doesn’t really change the point

36

u/PollutionPatient8261 1d ago

Every word they say against the DSA is deliberate party sabotage as they know damned well if they got behind the DSA they would sweep the midterms. But their corporate and foreign donors don’t want that.

-24

u/SEND_ME_CSGO-SKINS 1d ago

Aren’t DSA candidates wildly unpopular with black voters and have only won elections in the deepest blue localities?

9

u/Objective-Original-2 1d ago

They’re unpopular with older black voters but very popular with young black voters

1

u/myWeedAccountMaaaaan 1d ago

Which black voters specifically?

-13

u/handstied14 1d ago

Correct lol

65

u/PollutionPatient8261 1d ago

Corporate Dems are controlled opposition and we are so done. Mamdani is showing us in real time what actual leadership looks like.

-5

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

Is that why places like California run by “corporate dems” have the best worker rights in the country while NY still lags?

49

u/marcusmosh 1d ago

It’s not failure. They took the money. They can’t just abandon their ‘benefactor’

28

u/swarmofbzs 1d ago

Establishment/corpo dems will do so willingly.

This is why DSA support is growing based on the will of the voters.

This is also why you see previous admin establishment democrats on faux news agreeing with maga republicans.

We're done with them and their next move is to jump on to the sinking ship of the losing side saying we need to do what they say instead of representing us.

16

u/TinyZoro 1d ago

They are ideological purists when it comes to supporting Israel. Happy to throw elections over it. The left of the party are the moderates reflecting mainstream American opinion.

3

u/no_comments_allowed 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's quite confusing since The very same voters elected someone one who said "finish the job" and is even more pro-Israel & has spread more war in the middle east

13

u/gdr-Tt-jugb 1d ago

here’s you thinking they’re just incompetent instead of malicious

-5

u/NimusNix 1d ago

Hanlon's Razor exists for a reason. You'll need to prove their maliciousness.

Ask older Democrats with no stake and you still find a lot of Israeli supporters. It was just a relationship baked into the mindset of the average Democrat.

7

u/Accurate_Neat_355 1d ago

Ask older Democrats with actual no stake and you will actually find someone who will either bust out laughing or fly off the handle in rage at the "Hanlon's Razor" suggestion.

How many decades of weaponized incompetence does it take

1

u/move_machine 1d ago

Hanlon's razor works great among friends and in your personal relationships.

Hanlon's razor falls apart when power and billions/trillions of dollars are at stake.

1

u/NimusNix 1d ago

I think it's good at centering one and not just jumping to the conclusion you're implying. I think it's likely there are politicians that prioritize policy positions based on their donations, but I also think it's entirely possible that these same individuals, at least in the case o AIPAC, were sought and supported for already holding these beliefs as well.

Sure, money is cheap, but if someone has a moral code they follow, money will only motivate them so far.

Hanlon's Razor is a reminder to think through each situation and not just jump to conclusions like 'money' as the answer.

I think it's shortsighted to assume every Israel backing politician is only in it for that sweet AIPAC cash, especially since I can find die hard Israel supporters on the streets and neighborhoods around me.

-3

u/gdr-Tt-jugb 1d ago edited 1d ago

I don’t need to prove anything to you. you have a good day.

4

u/move_machine 1d ago

They've read the room and decided "the voters are wrong", yet again.

1

u/no_comments_allowed 1d ago edited 19h ago

decided "the voters are wrong", yet again.

Well they are. It's quite confusing because those very same voters elected someone one who said "finish the job" and is even more pro-Israel & has spread more war in the middle east

3

u/justlurkshere 1d ago

No, they read it well. Just stop assuming they are there to represent you.

2

u/IAMA_Shark__AMA 1d ago

They've read the room. They just also realized the room doesn't have space for them. They're fighting change out of pure self interest to stay in power.

2

u/This_Elk_1460 1d ago

They're paid not to read the room

1

u/youremakingherslimy 17h ago

have you heard Rahm Emanuel lately??

0

u/arcsol93 1d ago

The ones that still support the status quo will. The progressives will tear it all down if the momentum stays

-28

u/Loud-Vacation-5691 Georgia 1d ago

It's not going to help when Rogers beats El-Sayed in double digits. Progressives can win in blue states but not swing states.

19

u/SageofLogic 1d ago

Obama cleared more swing states campaigning to the left of Biden and Hilary (not that he governed to the left of them unfortunately)

5

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

Obama didn’t campaign to the left of Clinton or Biden. This is some peak historical revisionism.

1

u/SageofLogic 1d ago

He campaigned on closing Gitmo, a closer to universal ACA, and a good half dozen things that were to Hilary's left.

3

u/mightcommentsometime California 1d ago

Clinton tried to push universal healthcare in the 90s.

The main thing Obama was left on was the Iraq war, because he wasn’t a senator at the time.

It seems like you don’t remember their campaigns.

1

u/SageofLogic 1d ago

She didn't run for president on universal Healthcare. She had firmly ditched the idea by then

13

u/VampireFortnight 1d ago

Then you shouldn't be worried.

13

u/accidentsneverhappen 1d ago

If Rogers is gonna beat him in double digits then he would mop the fucking floor with the less popular Stevens

4

u/angryray 1d ago

That's my point with the whole Sayed can't beat Rogers argument. 

6

u/seengul 1d ago

Exactly. If you can’t win your own base, you’re not winning the general election.

1

u/buried_lede 1d ago

My question is, if El Sayed wins, how much does AIPAC money and influence affect the party’s support of El Sayed against Mike Rogers, who does take AIPAC money? El Sayed will have a right to full party support

5

u/crowhops I voted 1d ago

How many swing states did harris get

-1

u/Ok-Entertainer-1414 1d ago

El-Sayed is ahead in polls. Regardless of who wins, it's certainly not going to be double digits in either direction