A Shift in Attitude Towards Israel Among Democrats

It has long been believed that support for Israel was near universal among elected officials in the United States, especially in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Every once in a while, a brave — or depending on your perspective, stupid — soul would step out of line, and Israel's supporters would quickly make an example of the individual by soundly defeating him. Back in 1984, Senator Charles Percy, the powerful chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was defeated when the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) turned against him due to his support for selling AWACs aircraft to Saudi Arabia. Last year, AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups were able to defeat Representatives Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush in their respective primary elections. Former Vice President Kamala Harris was so reluctant to allow even the slightest light between her position and that of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that she arguably crippled her presidential election opportunity. It is therefore remarkable that yesterday a majority of Democratic Senators voted in favor of blocking arms sales to Israel. The tide is clearly turning with regard to Israel's support among Democrats.

To be clear, pro-Israel interests remain extremely powerful among Democrats, and many leading Democrats were unwilling yesterday to vote in favor of blocking arms sales. But the change in support that has occurred cannot be denied. This is clearly motivated by Israel's actions in Gaza and especially the mass starvation that Israel is causing among the Palestinians. Where at one time, the debate about support for Israel was framed as pitting a democratic ally against terrorists, it is now more likely to be viewed as involving an aggressive and belligerent Israel using unreasonable violence to cause mass death and destruction and possible ethnic cleansing. Israel, once seen as the victim, is now frequently viewed as the aggressor. Pictures of starving children provided the last straw. There has been a wave of Democrats, many of them traditionally very pro-Israel, who have suddenly become harsh critics of the country.

Soon after the October 8, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, protests against Israel's retaliatory attacks on Gaza erupted across the nation. Protests were especially prevalent on college campuses, and the reaction by college administrators to such protests was divisive, in several cases resulting in the removal of university presidents. There have been severe clampdowns on free expression on many campuses, and cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump has used the protests as a pretext to enact draconian measures restricting the independence of colleges and universities. Massive efforts were made to present the wave of support for the people of Gaza as limited to young, naive, and uninformed students, or Hamas supporters and antisemites. Many of the protesters were brushed off as representing only the far left and being unimportant to mainstream Democratic politics. It is now undeniable, however, that opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza has spread to the Democratic mainstream.

One of the most clear indications of the change in attitude towards Israel among many Democrats was the recent primary victory by Zohran Mamdani in the New York City mayoral primary. Mamdani was running against former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a very strong supporter of Israel. Moreover, during the campaign, Mamdani had said that he would arrest Netanyahu if Netanyahu came to New York (Netanyahu has been indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court). Mamdani was asked about the expression, "Globalize the Intifada". While Mamdani himself has not used the phrase, he explained that he does not view it as a call for violence and refrained from condemning its use. The media coverage of Mamdani's campaign would suggest that these positions made Mamdani unelectable and would be particularly alienating to Jews. However, recent polling shows that Mamdani's positions regarding Israel and the Palestinians are very popular among New Yorkers. Mamdani even leads among Jewish voters with a 56-point lead among Jews under the age of 45 and a 17-point margin among all Jewish voters. Mamdani was strongly supported by New York City comptroller Brad Lander, the city's highest-ranking Jewish elected official, and Mamdani was immediately endorsed after his primary victory by Representative Jerry Nadler, traditionally a very strong supporter of Israel. It is clear that many Jewish Americans, especially those who are young, are comfortable with criticism of Israel and the issue is no longer the red line that it generally has been.

Whether due to Mamdani's victory, the ongoing Israeli-initiated starvation in Gaza, a combination, or other factors altogether, the changes among Democrats have been palpable. Representative Richie Torres, for example, has been one of the most vocal pro-Israel Democrats. In one of the more questionable actions by the Harris presidential campaign, Torres was sent to Michigan to campaign on Harris' behalf. The Muslims and Arabs of Michigan were already upset with Harris due to her strong support for Israel and her frequent snubs of Muslim and Arab activists. Many had joined the Uncommitted movement in hopes of pressuring Harris to change her position. Torres alienated this group further by claiming that it was "committed to a distorted narrative" and ridiculously suggesting that the group actually supported war. Now, Torres is sounding a much different tune. In a recent interview, he said that Netanyahu had caused damage to his relationship with the Democratic Party that "may be irreparable." He went on to say that support among Americans for Israel was "eroding, and anyone who denies it is ignoring the numbers." As I described in my blog post yesterday, Torres engaged in a heated exchange on X with Representative Randy Fine due to Fine's suggestion that Palestinians in Gaza "starve away."

Another example involves Senator Elissa Slotkin, who represents Michigan. When Slotkin was elected to the Senate, the Jewish News Syndicate ran an article extolling her pro-Israel credentials. "She has also long been a big supporter of Israel, even in the face of its detractors, particularly in Michigan," one Democratic consultant was quoted as saying. The leader of a pro-Israel group noted that Slotkin "had a clear pro-Israel record in the House". Recently, however, Slotkin gave an interview to the Breaking Points podcast and YouTube channel in which she sounded like a much different person. She accused Israel of starving the people of Gaza and suggested that Israel might be committing forced migration, which would be illegal. She also said that she would consider halting the supply of offensive weapons to Israel. She further argued that in 2021, she decided not to seek the support of pro-Israel groups such as AIPAC and J-Street and said that she was elected without their endorsements. While it may be true that she was not formally endorsed, she did receive campaign funding from sources aligned with the groups. Still, her eagerness to disassociate herself from AIPAC is notable.

A recent article in Axios adequately summed things up, saying, "Lawmakers told Axios the deteriorating situation in Gaza and the U.S. public's growing apathy toward Israel have made it increasingly untenable to be unflinchingly pro-Israel." Many Democrats are trying to hedge their criticism by aiming it at Netanyahu rather than Israel. This allows them to have their cake and eat it too. But, increasingly, that line is being erased. Slotkin, for instance, recently criticized Israel's killing of Palestinians waiting in line for food assistance and the murder of an American who was beaten to death by Israeli settlers. She then went on to say, "It’s hard to understand this lack of accountability by the Netanyahu government as anything other than tacit approval by the state — something that should be treated as abhorrent by all decent people."

Then came last night's votes. Senator Bernie Sanders offered two resolutions to block arms sales to Israel. The first would stop the supply of bombs and guidance kits. The second blocked the sale of fully automatic assault rifles. That the resolutions would fail was never in doubt. All Republicans, who have a majority in the Senate, planned to vote against them. Twenty-four Democrats voted in favor of the first resolution and twenty-seven in favor of the second. This is an astounding number and an unprecedented action. Moreover, many of the votes in favor of stopping the arms supply were notable. For instance, Jon Ossoff, Ed Markey, Ben Ray Luján, Jeff Merkley, and Jack Reed are all up for reelection and voted in favor of the resolutions. These senators apparently are not concerned about opposition from pro-Israel groups. Many represent solidly blue states where their votes will likely be popular. For her part, Slotkin appears to have missed the votes in order to appear on Colbert's show. Two more Democratic Senators, Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego who are both from Arizona, missed the votes but said that they would have voted for the resolutions.

There has been a near-seismic shift in the attitudes of Democratic voters towards Israel. So much so that this will likely be a major wedge issue in the 2026 elections. Republicans will portray Democrats as pro-Hamas antisemites who want to destroy Israel. Democrats, on the other hand, will be divided between those who want to take a firmer stance towards the country and end the bloodshed and those who are more interested in maintaining the Democrats' traditional position of full support for Israel. Much of this division will likely play out in the primaries. Michigan's open Senate seat, for instance, has a strongly pro-Israel candidate who is a favorite of AIPAC and a progressive candidate who is strongly critical of Israel, Muslim, and endorsed by Bernie Sanders. Between these two is a candidate trying to find a middle ground. Voters will probably not choose based on the candidates' Middle East positions alone, but if they were, every flavor is available. Not so long ago, it would be unthinkable that any position other than completely pro-Israel would be tenable.