WE SHOULD REMEMBER THE RADICAL IDEAS OUR FOUNDERS EMBRACED — AND RETURN TO THEM

One of the clearest examples played out this week in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary. During the candidates’ televised debate, Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) delivered some of her sharpest criticism yet of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu while reaffirming her support for Israel.

“It is very clear that Mr. Netanyahu has not made us safer,” Stevens said, drawing a distinction between her support for Israel and her criticism of its current leadership.

Her progressive rival, Abdul el Sayed, a physician and former Wayne County health director backed by progressives, dismissed Stevens’s comments as politically motivated, arguing Stevens was attempting to distance herself from a longstanding record of supporting Israeli government policies rather than signaling a genuine shift in position.

The exchange underscored the political balancing act facing many establishment Democrats, who are trying to reaffirm their support for Israel while responding to an increasingly skeptical Democratic electorate demanding stronger criticism of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and greater support for Palestinians.

For Democratic strategist Brad Bannon, that balancing act has become one of the defining characteristics of Democratic primaries.

“I don’t think it’s overstated,” Bannon told the Washington Examiner when asked whether Israel has become the Democratic equivalent of abortion in Republican politics.

“I think there are going to be two big issues that distinguish Democratic presidential candidates in 2028. Israel and Gaza is one of them.”

Bannon argued Democratic candidates increasingly sound similar on domestic issues such as healthcare and affordability, leaving Israel as one of the clearest ways to distinguish themselves before primary voters.

“The big difference has to do with their positions on Israel and Palestine,” he said. “That’s the reason why there’s so much focus on the Middle East in these primaries.”.

The same tensions are already shaping Maine Democrats’ search for a nominee after Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner said he would withdraw from the race.

Former Maine Senate President Troy Jackson recently weighed in publicly on Israel for what appears to be the first time since entering the race, accusing Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza, an allegation Israel strongly denies, and pledging he would “never vote in favor of U.S. taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel” if elected.

THE TRAGEDY OF JOE BIDEN: HISTORIANS PAINT A DAMNING PICTURE OF WHAT WENT WRONG

His comments came days after former gubernatorial candidate Nirav Shah told Semafor he supports an arms embargo against Israel, accused Israel of committing genocide, and said he would not accept funding or an endorsement from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC.

Democratic Majority for Israel has also become increasingly involved in the race. Following Platner’s withdrawal, the group’s board chair, former Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC), argued Democrats had been given a “do-over” and should choose a nominee “who reflects our Democratic values, can unite the party and can actually win this race” against Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME).

How much the issue matters still depends heavily on the race and the electorate. Matt Bennett, co-founder of the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way, said Israel has become a defining issue in some Democratic primaries but cautioned against treating it as a universal litmus test.

“I don’t think it’s overstated in some primaries,” Bennett told the Washington Examiner. “Ask Dan Goldman. It’s what decided that election.”

Still, Bennett argued geography matters.

“If you’re in Lower Manhattan, yes. If you’re in Scranton, Pennsylvania, no,” he said, arguing many Democratic voters remain far more concerned about inflation, tariffs, and the economy than events in the Middle East.

The party’s internal debate has also reached some of its highest-profile establishment figures. 

Speaking Wednesday in Tel Aviv, former Chicago Mayor and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who is widely viewed as a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender, sharply criticized Netanyahu while maintaining his support for Israel.

Emanuel said Israel’s current leadership had led the country into “a dead end” and argued that unconditional support had enabled the denial of food and medical relief to civilians in Gaza.

The shifting politics were also evident last week in Colorado, where Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), a 15-term incumbent and longtime supporter of Israel, lost her Democratic primary to progressive challenger Melat Kiros, another sign of the Democratic electorate’s changing priorities.

In fact, according to a new AP-NORC poll, 58% percent of Democrats now believe the United States is “too supportive” of Israel, up from 45% in January 2024. At the same time, 62% said the United States is “not supportive enough” of Palestinians. The survey also found older Democrats increasingly adopting views that were once concentrated among younger voters, suggesting the party’s changing attitudes are becoming intergenerational.

Those changes have transformed Israel from a traditional foreign policy issue into a broader question of political identity, according to Lincoln Mitchell, a political analyst and lecturer at Columbia University.

“This is not about foreign policy ideas or plans,” Mitchell told the Washington Examiner. “This is about identity.”

Mitchell argued Democratic candidates increasingly feel compelled to stake out positions on Israel because the issue has become a marker of progressive credentials. Not all Democrats view that evolution as a positive development.

One Democratic strategist, speaking on the condition of anonymity to candidly discuss divisions within the party, said the growing prominence of Israel in Democratic primaries has become troubling.

“I think it’s dangerous and frankly almost antisemitic the kind of focus Israel has taken on in these primaries,” the strategist said. “While many of us are unhappy with how Netanyahu has handled the war, Israel is our ally in the Middle East and these extreme stances from progressive and DSA candidates are beyond concerning.”

Democratic strategist Michael Ceraso argued Israel has become a useful issue for candidates seeking to distinguish themselves in competitive primaries, but questioned whether it carries the same weight with the broader electorate.

“Candidates are always looking for places to create contrast in a primary,” Ceraso told the Washington Examiner. “Israel has become one of those issues.”

But he argued the dynamic changes once campaigns pivot to the general election, where the issue becomes “less consequential.”

Republican strategist Dennis Lennox argued Democrats’ divisions over Israel could create new openings for Republicans in competitive races.

“The Democratic divide over Israel is increasingly more fundamental,” Lennox told the Washington Examiner. “It’s no longer just a debate over Netanyahu’s policies. The ascendant left is just against Israel.”

GRAHAM PLATNER’S COLLAPSE CASTS SHADOW OVER ABDUL EL SAYED IN MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC SENATE PRIMARY 

Lennox argued Republicans could benefit if Democrats fail to distinguish between criticism of Israel’s government and support for Israel’s right to exist and defend itself as a Jewish state.

For candidates across the country, the question is increasingly not whether they’ll be asked about Israel, but how they’ll answer.