In my old neighborhood in Brooklyn, the first thing we ever learned about voting was to never vote for a Republican for anything… end of story. If you didn’t want to do a deep, pre-internet, dive into who the candidates were, that was enough: no Republicans. The only time the rule of thumb didn’t work was in 1965 when liberal Republican Congressman John Lindsay ran against a corrupt and conservative Democratic hack, Abe Beame for mayor. (Lindsay was endorsed by the Liberal Party) and William F. Buckley ran on the Conservative Party line.) Lindsay, while losing Brooklyn, came out ahead by 4 points. 4 years later, the Democrats ran another old conservative hack, Mario Procaccino. Lindsay lost the Republican primary to a far right goon but won the race on the Liberal Party line.
Anyway, rules of thumbs in politics can be dangerous. But let me throw in another couple: never vote for anyone endorsed by the Blue Dogs or anyone being backed by AIPAC/DMFI. The Blue Dogs are very careful about who they endorse and their candidates are basically all Kyrsten Sinemas. (She used to be the chair of it and her DNA defines it.) As for AIPAC/DMFI… they’re basically the Likud Party of America and only support candidates who back the genocide going on in Gaza.
So… for example, I haven’t spoken with any of the candidates running for the MD-03 open seat. There are 16 Democrats and 3 Republicans running. The district is solidly Democratic with a D+14 partisan lean. Biden won it with a 25.5 point margin. Only 5 candidates, all Dems, have raised a quarter million dollars or more:
Harry Dunn- $3,718,815
Sarah Elfreth- $903,487
Clarence Lam- $639,869
Juan Dominguez- $365,135 (although $158,610 is self-financed)
Michael Rogers- $294,390 (with $64,030 self-financed)
AIPAC’s United Democracy Project skewered the race significantly by putting $1,398,751 behind Elfreth. I didn’t know anything about her, aside from the fact that she’s a state Senator who was effectively attacked by Lam for being shady, and now I know she’s being supported by the genocide lobby. She opposes conditioning U.S. aid on anything and she has called local governments in the district “unbalanced” for passing ceasefire resolutions. I don’t know why AIPAC is backing her since the frontrunner, Harry Dunn, has basically the same positions on Israel/Gaza. Dunn doesn’t understand either. The candidate with the progressive position on Israel is union activist and lawyer John Morse, who hasn’t raised enough money to be competitive.
Let’s go to another open district, one that has interested me that MD-03— the downtown Phoenix district (AZ-03) that Ruben Gallego is leaving for his Senate run. It’s a solidly blue district with a partisan lean of D+44. Biden won the district 74.5% to 23.9%. There are 3 candidates competing in the primary but just 2 are raising enough money to be competitive:
Yassamin Ansari- $1,398,206
Raquel Terán- $856,513
Duane Wooten- $36,055
All 3 appear to be very progressive, although Terán has the endorsement of the Congressional Progressive Caucus— and most of the Democratic establishment including Sen. Mark Kelly, a moderate. The labor unions have all gotten behind Ansari. So far AIPAC hasn’t jumped in… so far. From the Jewish Insider: “As an open-seat House race in Phoenix has coalesced around two upstart progressives, the ongoing war in Gaza is fueling curiosity about their views on the conflict— which pro-Israel groups are closely scrutinizing for points of contrast that could invite outside engagement. The August primary election is pitting Yassamin Ansari, the vice mayor of Phoenix, against Raquel Terán, a former state legislator and party chair, who have each approached the Israel-Hamas war with varying degrees of caution in recent months, raising some questions about their positions on a key issue. While both candidates have forcefully condemned Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks, Ansari has shown a greater interest in sharing her Middle East policy views with pro-Israel activists, even as her statements have not always remained consistent. By contrast, Terán, who likewise has met with pro-Israel groups including AIPAC, according to people familiar with her engagement, has drawn scrutiny for avoiding questions on the war— which she has yet to clarify in depth. Terán’s continued silence has provoked frustration among some Jewish leaders in Arizona, who are waiting for her to release a policy paper on Israel— as is widely customary for federal candidates. Her campaign, meanwhile, declined to answer specific questions on the issue posed by the state’s leading newspaper last month.”
One pro-Israel activist in Arizona who has met with both candidates expressed disappointment with Terán’s reticence on “a major international conflict,” alleging that she “seems uninterested” in substantive engagement. “She’s going to be a voting member,” the activist, who was granted anonymity to speak freely, told Jewish Insider last week. “The residents deserve to know what she thinks.”
…Terán still would not directly confirm her positions on some hot-button issues— including growing calls for a cease-fire and conditioning military aid to Israel— even as she insisted that the U.S. “must support Israel’s efforts to defeat Hamas and ensure every hostage is released.”
…“Aid to Israel, like all countries we share aid with, should follow existing U.S. law,” Terán added. “I continue to be concerned over the humanitarian situation in Gaza and encourage fair oversight of aid and stronger assurances of human rights protections.”
Her carefully worded remarks underscore the tightrope that Terán, a leading progressive activist in Arizona, is now walking as she seeks to build support across a wide ideological spectrum. The former state senator has won backing from both Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), a pro-Israel stalwart, and the Working Families Party, a left-wing group that has vocally backed a cease-fire and supports conditioning aid to Israel.
…Ansari, who became the first Iranian-American elected to hold public office in Arizona three years ago, has established relationships with pro-Israel advocates and Jewish leaders in the state who say they have been encouraged by her commitment to upholding continued U.S. assistance to Israel, with no added conditions, and countering Iran, among other positions outlined in a lengthy policy paper circulated in recent months.
In a recent interview with JI, however, Ansari would not explicitly confirm her opposition to conditioning aid to Israel, despite the pledge in her policy paper, which was shared by her campaign.
“When it comes to military aid or assistance to any country, I don’t think we should necessarily be singling out Israel,” Ansari said. But in situations “where the U.S. is providing assistance in any way, there needs to be strong accountability,” she added. “We need to be making sure, whether it’s a weapon that’s used or any assistance that’s provided, that the result is abiding by international law.”
A spokesperson for Ansari declined to clarify for the record if she continues to stand by her paper, which her campaign has said is “subject to revisions.”
With regard to a cease-fire, which her paper does not address, Ansari was reluctant to endorse the call, emphasizing that a resolution to the conflict “requires Hamas surrendering” as well as the safe return of hostages now being held in Gaza. “Then I think that could be a conversation,” she said of a cease-fire.
“But I also do want to echo in the same breath that I do truly, truly think and hope that we are doing everything possible to preserve civilian life,” Ansari explained. “I’m very devastated by the numbers of Palestinians who have been killed in addition to the number of Israelis who have been killed. I think we need to be working toward a long-lasting, durable peace for the sake of humanity.”
The 31-year-old Democrat stressed that there is “no future that Hamas can be a part of,” noting that a two-state solution, which she backs, “will only be possible with the recognition that Israel has a right to peace and security. That is not the ideology of Hamas.”
Ansari, who wrote her undergraduate thesis at Stanford on the Iranian nuclear program and worked as a climate activist at the United Nations before seeking public office, said she had “nothing but complete contempt” for Iran and its funding of “proxy terrorist organizations, including Hamas,” which are “wreaking havoc” across the region. “I can’t even think of the strongest possible word for that ideology.”
Despite her equivocation on conditioning aid, a number of pro-Israel leaders in Arizona say they are backing Ansari, joining a diverse range of supporters that also includes Ben Rhodes, a top national security adviser in the Obama admiration who has clashed with the pro-Israel community.
“Yassamin is unequivocal in her support for Israel, and clear-eyed about the threat of Iran and its proxies,” Adam Goodman, a Jewish community activist in Phoenix, said in a recent email to JI, adding that, if elected, “she will be a loud voice in the Democratic caucus urging her party to reject the cynical attempt to bifurcate the country and rejoin with Republicans in solidarity for Israel.”
…Marshall Wittmann, a spokesperson for AIPAC, which has met with both candidates, told JI that the group has “not yet made decisions” about the race.
…DMFI’s political arm, which also hasn’t made an endorsement in the race, has spoken with Ansari, according to a person familiar with the discussion, who said that “she seems to be a strong pro-Israel candidate.” The group, which frequently engages in open-seat races where contrasting views on Israel have fueled tension, declined to confirm if it had also met with Terán, whose spokesperson did not return a request for comment on her engagement.