In New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District, AIPAC just put a strident anti-Israel voice on the path to Congress. But hey, at least it alienated one of America’s two major political parties in the process.
This hurts me to say. I’m a fervent Zionist. I’ve been writing in support of Israel for over 20 years. I started my career interning at AIPAC. I’d thought the organization was hated precisely because it was so effective. Yet after its performance in New Jersey’s 11th district — coming after years of making it harder for Democrats like me to keep the party on board with Israel — I have to wonder if AIPAC is still the right standard-bearer for pro-Israel Americans. At a minimum, it must dramatically rethink its strategy.
For those who don’t know, AIPAC decided it wanted to take down former Congressman and Assistant Secretary of State Tom Malinowski (full disclosure: I’ve worked with Malinowski and consider him a friend). The rationale for doing so was that he’d said he would consider conditioning aid to Israel based on whether the Jewish state was following through on commitments to the United States So AIPAC spent $2 million through a subsidiary to release a torrent of grossly misleading ads implying Malinowski voted in favor of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s current abuses.
Malinowski, who appeared headed to a win, just conceded the primary race to Bernie Sanders-endorsed, hard-core progressive Analilia Mejia. The same Mejia who went to a CAIR event and said Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
That’s right: AIPAC decided that the best way to support the U.S.-Israel relationship is to put someone in Congress who will try to drive the allies apart.
Worse yet, AIPAC has now forced Democrats to take one of two positions on Israel when they run for office. They can either support Israel in exactly the manner that AIPAC tells them, not daring to speak obvious truths like “sometimes allies have to tell each other when they’re making a mistake” or provide any nuance; or they can cast AIPAC (and by extension, Israel) as the enemy. In AIPAC’s rubric, then, they can only campaign as either “under the sway of a powerful lobbying organization” or “thinking for themselves.”
There’s no question which is a more compelling message, not to mention less humiliating. The likely outcome of AIPAC’s approach, then, will be more and more rabidly anti-Israel candidates winning Democratic primaries. Given the pervasiveness of gerrymandering, that means we’re likely to see more anti-Zionists in Congress.
As a diehard Zionist, I’m not eager for a Congress with fewer Ritchie Torreses and more Rashida Tlaibs. Yet that’s the likely outcome of AIPAC’s approach to Democratic politics.
What has me most concerned, however, was that this was all foreseeable. Advocates, myself included, repeatedly tried to warn AIPAC that what ended up happening was the most likely outcome of their actions. Malinowski was the most moderate candidate in the race and had by far the most foreign policy experience. If he lost votes, who did AIPAC think was likely to benefit? Never mind that AIPAC spent $2 million — money that the pro-Israel movement will need to spend in, say, Michigan’s Senate race, where proud Israel advocate Rep. Haley Stevens is running against Abdul El-Sayed, an anti-Zionist who had the chutzpah to fundraise off of the Oct. 7 massacre — to “achieve” this outcome.
Given the magnitude — and, frankly, stupidity — of this blunder, I am concerned that AIPAC is no longer up to the task of generating support for Israel among the Democrats who are overwhelming favorites to win the House of Representatives in 2026. As JTA reports, AIPAC appears to be taking the Trumpian approach to this blunder and refusing to admit a mistake no matter how glaring — saying it will continue to “focus on stopping candidates . . . who want to put conditions on aid” — and that tone does not play well with Democrats. It appears to no longer understand the internal battles within the Democratic Party, how pro-Israel Democrats need to argue their case to appeal to primary voters, or the outright necessity for Democratic politicians to present themselves as not beholden to any pressure organization or donor.
AIPAC can only assuage fears that Democratic politics have passed them by through public introspection. The organization needs to start a “Democratic Future” project that studies how best to appeal to Democratic voters in a new era when “Jews in the Democratic Party will align the Party with Israel” is no longer a viable strategy. At a bare minimum, AIPAC needs to reassign — or outright fire — every political analyst and consultant on its team who advocated for and executed its strategy in NJ-11. It needs to let its supporters know that it’s doing so, too.
Crow isn’t kosher, but it’s time for AIPAC to eat some anyhow.
Reporting the stories that define our era. When history unfolds in real-time, the Jewish world turns to JTA. Your support ensures we can document the complexities of war and the resilience of Jewish communities with integrity.
