Abdul El-Sayed, a candidate for the Democratic Senate nomination in Michigan, sent a fundraising email with this opener: "I know it's late, but I can't stop thinking about these AIPAC ads." The email referenced $16 million in AIPAC-aligned advertising spending. It mentioned AIPAC six times in eight paragraphs.
AIPAC stands for American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It is a prominent organization that boasts bipartisan support to promote strong ties between Israel and the U.S. government.
The thesis is simple: open antisemitism has migrated from the fringes of the Democratic Party to its fundraising infrastructure. Candidates aren't just tolerating anti-Jewish sentiment — they're monetizing it.
The examples pile up fast. Justice Democrats, the progressive outfit that launched Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's career, ran a fundraiser attacking a Democratic incumbent for putting "special interests" and "his biggest donor (AIPAC) ahead of our community's basic needs." The target was Rep. Ro Khanna of California's 17th District. His crime, apparently, was accepting support from a pro-Israel lobby.
Then there's Darializa Avila Chevalier, a New York City Congressional candidate. Former Rep. Jamaal Bowman sent an email on her behalf declaring that "Darializa is tired of the people who are supposed to be representing us taking money from AIPAC, MAGA donors." Notice the quiet equivalence there — pro-Israel money and pro-Trump money lumped into the same bucket of things to be angry about.
But it's more than just fundraising emails campaigning against AIPAC , the sentiments have become anti-semitic among the Democrat donor base that bashing Jews and Jewish politics has become normalized. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Democratic Socialists of America, and the progressive grassroots wing have made opposition to Jewish political influence a standard plank. Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota's 5th District has been the most visible face of this shift for years, but she's no longer the outlier. She's the template.
The usual defense is that criticizing AIPAC isn't the same as criticizing Jewish people. Fair enough in theory. But when every fundraising appeal from the progressive left uses AIPAC as shorthand for shadowy money controlling your representatives, the distinction gets awfully thin. Just look to Democrats continued embracement of Graham Platner, the Senate candidate in Maine who is a known woman abuser. The party would rather stick by the side of a mysogynistic, serial cheating husband rather than promote a candidate that doesn't hate Israel.
Progressive candidates discovered that attacking AIPAC — specifically, repeatedly, by name — generates donations. El-Sayed's late-night email wasn't a moment of genuine concern. It was A/B-tested outrage. Six mentions of the same pro-Israel organization in a single email is a copywriting choice, not a policy position.
What's changed isn't that antisemitism exists on the left. That's been true for years. What's changed is the economics. Anti-Jewish messaging now has a measurable return on investment in Democratic primary fundraising. Candidates aren't running away from it. They're running on it.
When the fundraising data tells you that bashing Jewish political organizations is your most reliable small-dollar play, the rhetoric follows the money. It always does.