WASHINGTON — Support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as AIPAC, is becoming a sharper dividing line in Democratic primaries as public opinion toward Israel continues to shift, especially among Democrats and younger voters.
The issue is surfacing in competitive races from Michigan to Minnesota and New Jersey, where candidates are being pressed over whether they have accepted support from AIPAC or other pro-Israel political groups. The debate reflects a broader divide inside the Democratic Party over Israel, Gaza, foreign policy, campaign money, and the political influence of advocacy groups.
A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 60 percent of U.S. adults now have a very or somewhat unfavorable view of Israel, up 7 percentage points from last year and nearly 20 points since 2022. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 80 percent said they have an unfavorable view of Israel.
That shift has made AIPAC support a campaign issue in several Democratic primaries. AIPAC has long backed candidates from both parties who support a strong U.S.-Israel relationship. But critics on the left argue the group’s spending and endorsements are out of step with a Democratic base increasingly critical of Israel’s military actions in Gaza.
In Michigan, the issue has become especially prominent in the Democratic Senate primary. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive candidate and former Wayne County health director, has sharply criticized AIPAC and accused opponents of being too closely aligned with pro-Israel groups. At a University of Michigan campaign event, El-Sayed said Democrats should not allow AIPAC to define U.S. foreign policy around alignment with a foreign government.
The Michigan race is politically sensitive because the state has one of the nation’s largest Arab American populations, along with a significant Jewish community. In 2024, the Uncommitted National Movement drew more than 100,000 votes in Michigan’s Democratic presidential primary as a protest against then-President Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.
Rep. Haley Stevens, another Democratic Senate candidate in Michigan, has previously been backed by AIPAC and has recorded a video supporting the group. Democratic Majority for Israel, another pro-Israel organization, has endorsed her Senate campaign. State Sen. Mallory McMorrow, also running in the primary, has said she will not take AIPAC money and has called Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide.
The debate is not limited to Michigan. In Minnesota, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan has pledged not to take AIPAC funds, while Rep. Angie Craig has previously received support from AIPAC in congressional races and has been endorsed by Democratic Majority for Israel. Craig has not received AIPAC funding in the current Senate race, according to ABC News.
In New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District, AIPAC spent $2 million on ads opposing former Rep. Tom Malinowski, a moderate Democrat who had supported some conditions on aid to Israel. Progressive Analilia Mejia won that primary and has called Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide.
AIPAC has defended its role in Democratic politics. National spokesperson Deryn Sousa told ABC News that efforts to stigmatize pro-Israel Democrats are “un-American and undemocratic.” After the Democratic National Committee rejected a resolution criticizing the influence of money in primaries and singling out AIPAC, the group said the DNC had affirmed that pro-Israel Democrats have the right to participate fully in the political process.
Critics of AIPAC have increasingly organized online through groups such as Track AIPAC, which documents contributions to candidates and says it wants to expose the influence of the pro-Israel lobby. ABC News reported that the group has more than 400,000 followers on X, though its method of counting donations has drawn criticism from those who say it unfairly conflates individual donors with organized pro-Israel political spending.
The issue also carries a delicate warning for candidates and voters. Criticism of AIPAC or Israeli government policy is not the same as antisemitism. At the same time, Jewish candidates and organizations have raised concerns that some criticism can slide into unfair suspicion of Jewish political participation. Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan pushed back on that point during a town hall, telling a questioner that if they were equating the “Israel lobby” with Jews, she had a problem with that.
The fight over AIPAC support shows how much the political ground has shifted since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. For years, strong support for Israel was broadly bipartisan in Washington. Now, many Democratic voters—especially younger and progressive voters—are demanding stronger scrutiny of U.S. military aid, civilian casualties in Gaza, and the role of money in shaping foreign policy.
For Democratic candidates, the question is no longer only where they stand on Israel. It is also who supports them, whose money they accept, and whether voters believe those relationships shape their judgment. For Christian readers, this story also reminds us that foreign policy debates are never merely theoretical. They involve questions of war, civilian life, justice, antisemitism, Palestinian suffering, religious identity, and the moral responsibilities of public power.
As the midterm cycle intensifies, AIPAC support is likely to remain a flashpoint in Democratic races. The deeper issue is whether the party can hold together voters who still see Israel as a vital ally and voters who increasingly view U.S. support for Israel as morally and politically unacceptable.
