In the closing weeks of former Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential run last year, her campaign solicited guidance on how to win over the moderate and persuadable Republican voters she would need to defeat Donald Trump. 

One of the chief ways she could do that, according to a memo from political strategist Maria Comella, would be to tout her support for Israel — and make clear she disagreed with people in the Democratic Party who compared Israel to Hamas.

“It is wrong to draw moral equivalency between a terrorist organization in Hamas and the State of Israel. No terrorist organization should be celebrated. Our support for Israel and her right to self defense should not be questioned,” Comella, a close advisor to former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, and a onetime chief of staff to former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, wrote in one of four memos she sent to the Harris campaign in the fall. 

The memos were published by Politico and reported in a new book about the 2024 race by the political journalists Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager and Isaac Arnsdorf. The authors wrote that Comella did not feel her ideas were taken seriously. (Comella did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.) 

The messaging on Israel was part of a broader pitch by Comella for Harris to gain legitimacy with moderate swing voters by demonstrating a willingness to “call out your own party when it matters.” 

She could also do this, Comella argued, by drawing a contrast with the far left about the importance of America’s role in the world.

“Trump wants us to act like just any other country with no special role in the world while too many on the far left don’t want to acknowledge the fundamental goodness of our country and its people,” wrote Comella, who also advised Harris to make clear that Democrats who use hateful language to describe Trump voters are not being helpful.

In another memo, Comella described a “persuasion campaign that needs to be waged” to win over anti-Trump Republicans, anti-incumbent independents and Republicans who are “soft or still skeptical” of Trump. She advised Harris to draw a greater distinction between herself and former President Joe Biden.

The latest Democratic primary battle between the left and center where Israel has emerged as a point of division is playing out in a special House election in Tucson, Ariz., later this month, as five candidates vie to replace former longtime Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), who died in March.

The July 15 primary in Arizona’s dependably blue 7th Congressional District has kept a relatively low profile, even as it features ideological tensions over Middle East policy that could hold implications for the party’s increasingly fractious approach to Israel in the lead-up to next year’s midterm elections.

Adelita Grijalva, 54, a former Pima County supervisor, is viewed as the heavy favorite to win the seat in what is expected to be a low-turnout race, owing in part to her significant name recognition in the area represented by her late father for over two decades. 

She has also consolidated endorsements from top establishment Democrats, including Sens. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), while securing the backing of progressive leaders such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), among other high-profile critics of Israel in Congress.

But her limited record of commentary on Israel has raised questions among pro-Israel activists rallying behind one of Grijalva’s chief primary rivals, Daniel Hernandez, a former state lawmaker who identifies as a pro-Israel progressive and claims support from Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) and the political arm of Democratic Majority for Israel.

The 35-year-old Hernandez, recently named the board chair of the Zionist LGTBQ organization A Wider Bridge, has pitched himself as a “consistent champion” of pro-Israel causes, in contrast with the late Grijalva, who during his long tenure embraced hostile positions toward Israel — most prominently when he joined a small handful of House Democrats to oppose additional funding for Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system in 2021.

Like her father, the younger Grijalva appears more skeptical of Israel amid its war in Gaza, even as she has yet to publicly clarify her own views on a range of key issues, such as continued U.S. security aid to Israel, which has faced vocal resistance from some of her supporters on the left.

Grijalva called for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas 10 days after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks. In her role as a county supervisor, she also reluctantly voted for a resolution that condemned Hamas, while voicing frustration that she “couldn’t talk about peace and humanitarian aid” for Gaza.

More recently, Grijalva has struggled to clearly articulate her approach to Israel and the broader Middle East, suggesting in a recent discussion with a progressive organization that speaking candidly about her views could draw outside spending from pro-Israel advocacy groups such as AIPAC, which has targeted Israel critics in Democratic primaries, into the race.

“The frustration for me, and it will always be, I think, is that there were some things that my dad could get away with that a lot of these organizations that come in and try to influence races and stuff, he predated them,” Grijalva explained during a Zoom call in May with Progressive Democrats of America, an anti-Israel group that is backing her campaign.

Her father, who died at 77, “was like this mountain in the middle, like no one’s moving him one way or the other,” she continued on the call, some portions of which were recently reviewed by Jewish Insider. “But I do think that in this environment, when we are not in normal times and you can’t negotiate with terrorists, there is a difference here, where walking in, I know it’s going to be a different experience for me than it was for my dad.”

A spokesperson for AIPAC said on Wednesday that the group is “not involved” in the race. DMFI PAC, which has also engaged in several House primaries in recent cycles, has so far refrained from investing in the race, despite backing Hernandez. The group did not respond to a request for comment about its plans for the final days of the election, now less than two weeks away.

Elsewhere in the Zoom discussion, Grijalva dodged a question about her position on sending U.S. arms to Israel amid its war against Hamas in Gaza, which she called an “atrocity,” while echoing a section on her campaign site calling for “an immediate release of the remaining hostages in Hamas captivity” and “rapid and complete restoration of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip” to set “the foundation for a two-state solution.”

“The surest way to bring them home, defeat Hamas and begin the process of rebuilding Gaza for the Palestinian people,” Grijalva said on the call, “is through a long-term, just and peaceful resolution, which the United States has a responsibility to work towards.”

Still, she suggested that U.S. involvement in the ongoing conflict “has not been helpful at all,” and vaguely argued that “the United States has been a part of interfering with this process and trying to aid in different ways.”

Pro-Israel activists in Arizona, none of whom would agree to speak on the record over concerns of antagonizing a likely future member of Congress, have voiced apprehension about Grijalva’s comments on Middle East policy, pointing to a lack of general clarity on major issues.

During a Zoom conversation this week with the Arizona Democratic Party Jewish Caucus, for example, Grijalva was asked about her “understanding of the term ‘intifada,’” a recent subject of heated debate as Zohran Mamdani, the far-left Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, has faced backlash for doubling down on defending calls to “globalize” the Palestinian uprisings against Israel — which critics have interpreted as stoking violence against Jews.

Grijalva, who has condemned recent antisemitic attacks, indicated that she was unfamiliar with the term, according to a brief recording of the Zoom discussion shared with JI on Wednesday. “I don’t really know in this case what that means,” she said in response.

Grijalva’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Limited public polling on the primary has shown Grijalva leading the field, which includes Deja Foxx, a 25-year-old political influencer who says she has raised $500,000 as her campaign has continued to gain some traction. On Wednesday, Foxx notched an endorsement from David Hogg’s political action group, which said “she has translated her story to represent a new vision of generational change that speaks truth to” President Donald Trump’s “cruel policies.”

An internal poll commissioned by Foxx’s campaign and publicized earlier this week reportedly showed her in second place behind Grijalva with 35%, marking a major improvement over her standing in a previous survey, released in April, where she claimed 5% of the vote. 

Foxx has rarely addressed developments in the Middle East, but she has indicated that she would be among the more outspoken critics of Israel if elected. In a video she shared on social media late last month, Foxx is seen addressing voters about the war in Gaza, arguing that “this is the issue that has politicized my entire generation.”

“We have watched devastation unfold on our screens as we have come of age,” she said in her remarks, while adding, “I want to be really clear that in one of the richest countries in the world, it is unconscionable that we send money abroad for weapons that disproportionately hurt women and children and families when families right here do not have food or insurance or housing.”

Jose Malvido Jr., a longshot candidate who has appeared in debates, has for his part repeatedly called Israel’s military actions in Gaza a “genocide,” an accusation his opponents have at least publicly avoided.

In perhaps a rare moment of unity on Middle East policy, both Grijalva and Hernandez have suggested that they would support an impeachment inquiry on Trump’s unilateral decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities last month. Foxx forcefully condemned the attacks, saying that the U.S. “should not be dragged into another endless war by a reality TV president.”

Mike Noble, a pollster and political analyst in Arizona, said Grijalva is “in the driver’s seat” as the primary enters its final stretch, noting it is “her race to lose.” Foxx, he speculated, could potentially peel support from Grijalva’s progressive base, but said it is unlikely that even a split vote would amount to a meaningful change in the outcome. “I’m less bullish on Hernandez,” he told JI, even as he acknowledged that the former state lawmaker could “pull off some votes.”

Grijalva’s ambiguous comments addressing Israel, meanwhile, do not appear to have tangibly stunted her path to the nomination — particularly as recent political developments have shown that embracing firm pro-Israel positions may no longer be as strong a prerequisite for a winning Democratic campaign amid declining voter sympathy for the Jewish state.

Pro-Israel activists are also preparing for a Grijalva victory, while continuing to voice reservations over the direction she will take on key Middle East policy issues if she is elected to succeed her father in the House. 

No such questions surround Hernandez, said Alma Hernandez, his sister and a top campaign surrogate, who is an outspoken defender of Israel in the state Legislature. 

“His record speaks for itself,” she told JI, saying that he “will always fight for what’s right and bring principled leadership to Congress.”

Esther Kim Varet, an art gallery owner mounting an outsider bid as a Democrat to unseat Rep. Young Kim (R-CA), said she wants to help repair and strengthen a Democratic Party she said has been severely undermined by rampant anti-Israel activism.

Anti-Israel extremism and its proponents have “really decimated the Democratic Party,” Kim Varet, whose husband and children are Jewish, told Jewish Insider in a recent interview. She said that anti-Israel activists in the party are trying to divide Democrats at a time when unity is more important than ever.

She said their efforts have pushed Jews toward the Republican Party, which she argued is no true friend to the Jews, describing it as replete with “antisemitic Zionists.”

“We need to rebuild from the center out right now,” Kim Varet said. “We need to remember that being a Zionist is not a partisan issue. It never has been and it should not be.”

She argued that Jewish values, like tikkun olam, are at the heart of the Democratic Party, because Jews have for so long been a core Democratic constituency. She said that she wants to advocate for the  party to refocus on those values.

Kim Varet’s connection to Israel dates back to her early 20s, when she and a friend backpacked through the Middle East for four months. She said that she saw stark differences between the authoritarian regimes in Syria, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt and the democratic government in Israel, and said, “my priority as an American is to do whatever it takes to preserve democracy.”

“These extremist groups want to exterminate my Jewish children simply because we believe that Jews also deserve a homeland. That’s the definition of Zionist,” Kim Varet said. “Would you rejoice if a pro-Palestinian terrorist gunned down, on American soil, my two Jewish children or my Jewish husband on the streets?”

Kim Varet, who spoke to JI in the immediate aftermath of the Capital Jewish Museum shooting, said it had hit particularly close to home because she had spoken recently at another American Jewish Committee event, about antisemitism in the art world, and because of the danger that antisemitism poses for her own family and children.

She said she was deeply disturbed by the response she saw to the shooting online, with the “‘Free Palestine’ left justifying the slaughter.”

“These extremist groups want to exterminate my Jewish children simply because we believe that Jews also deserve a homeland. That’s the definition of Zionist,” Kim Varet said. “Would you rejoice if a pro-Palestinian terrorist gunned down, on American soil, my two Jewish children or my Jewish husband on the streets?”

She also emphasized that, in the wake of World War II, Israel was a critical safe haven for the Jewish community when it had nowhere else to go, “which is something that every human should have a right to.”

Kim Varet, who grew up in an evangelical Christian Korean household in Texas going to a Christian school, said that she did not fully understand the richness of Jewish culture or the challenges of antisemitism when she and her now-husband first began dating, and has come to discover them over their time together.

“That became critical, for me, to be able to effectively talk to others about what certain kinds of language might feel [like] to a Jewish person, how that lands, how that gets internalized, how that gets processed,” she said.

“People don’t want to admit it, but I think for a lot of marginalized communities, they perceive Jews just to be wealthy, and they choose to just read them as wealthy instead of human, and they refuse to [acknowledge] their pain,” Kim Varet added.

She argued that her background can give her a unique perspective and strong voice to the fight against antisemitism. She argued that the Jewish community needs non-Jewish advocates who will step up and fight for it because of their own convictions, without receiving any political donations from AIPAC — which she criticized for supporting “antisemitic Zionists” in the GOP.

Kim Varet’s husband, Joseph Varet, is a descendant of the Rosenwald family, a founding member of the Sears Roebuck department store chain. He’s a relative of the renowned philanthropist Julius Rosenwald, and their son shares that name. Her family continues to operate a philanthropic foundation, which has turned its focus to Israel-related causes since Oct. 7.

Post-Oct. 7, Kim Varet and her husband have worked with the Israel Children’s Fund, supporting hundreds of children who lost parents or siblings in the attack. They have personally hosted dozens of those children in their California home, flying them out to the area for rest and relaxation, taking them to sites like Disneyland. 

She and her family also recently traveled to Israel to visit some of the families who had stayed with them, Kim Varet’s third visit to Israel.

“I could see where the fractures started happening in my own world, and then I could see that it was mirrored on a larger scale in the Democratic Party,” Kim Varet said.

“For me, it’s always been like this. Walk the walk, don’t just have opinions about things,” Kim Varet said. “Also very similar to why I’m running because … I need to. I feel so much despair around Trump. I’m not going to despair. I’m going to do, and I’m going to work.”

In her professional life, she’s also seen how antisemitism has rocked the art world since Oct. 7 — many artists came out strongly against Israel, using slogans like “From the river to the sea,” while many of the collectors that Kim Varet works with are Jewish. She said she saw the hurt that such rhetoric exacted on the Jewish community.

She said she saw some of the artists reject out of hand accusations of antisemitism and refuse to examine their own rhetoric. “I could see where the fractures started happening in my own world, and then I could see that it was mirrored on a larger scale in the Democratic Party,” Kim Varet said.

Kim Varet said she never anticipated entering politics, but said that she saw the values she cares about under threat under the Trump administration, and believes that the incumbent in the seat, Kim, is a Christian nationalist extremist who could be vulnerable in the upcoming election.

She said she had early conversations with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and other groups about the possibility of flipping the Orange County swing seat, a top Democratic target. She’s been endorsed by the political arm of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.

“I think we all felt really crappy after the election, if you’re a Democrat. I was like, ‘I’m gonna just go do something. I’m going to go flip the seat,’” Kim Varet said, adding that she’s channeling her “rage” at the unified Republican federal government toward her congressional bid.

“I’m fighting because you’re scared,” she said she’s telling prospective constituents.

A number of other candidates have also entered the race including the 2024 Democratic general election candidate, Joe Kerr; former local school board member Christina Gagnier; nonprofit leader and entrepreneur Nina Linh; and small business owner Paula Swift.

Kim Varet said her personal network from the art and philanthropic world can help her match the incumbent’s fundraising prowess. She raised more than $1 million in the first months of her campaign — placing her in rarified air among Democratic challengers nationwide.

“If I can figure out how to raise the money to compete against all her dirty money, then I have a fair shot here. And this district just hasn’t been able to produce anybody that has the network to do that,” Kim Varet said.

She said she wants to help support the American dream that her parents and grandparents — who fled North Korea — were able to pursue, having seen the hardships that her young employees, most of them first and second generation immigrants, have faced in making ends meet.

She said some consultants had urged her to aim for local office first, but she responded, “it’s 2025. It’s a freaking emergency situation. You think I want to be doing this? This is a call to action … I don’t need this job. This is not a great job … I have a really comfortable life, but at this point of my life, I am too educated, too privileged and too comfortable to not do anything for everybody else.”

The political developments over the last week couldn’t send a more dispiriting message about the viability of the political center — in both parties. 

Last Tuesday, a self-proclaimed democratic socialist, Zohran Mamdani, who campaigned on a far-left agenda on issues ranging from the economy, crime and antisemitism, emerged as the Democratic standard-bearer for mayor of New York City. 

Over the weekend, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), one of the most pragmatic Republicans in the upper chamber, announced he wouldn’t be running for reelection after signaling he’d be one of two GOP votes against President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” budget reconciliation bill. His decision to retire came after Trump, in a Truth Social post, threatened to support a primary challenger. 

Tillis, notably, was the deciding Republican vote scuttling the nomination of interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin for, among other issues, his associations with a Nazi sympathizer.

And on Monday, Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE), one of only three House Republicans who represents a district that former Vice President Kamala Harris won in 2024, formally announced his retirement, making it all the more likely a more-partisan Democratic lawmaker will succeed him in the seat. 

These are just the latest developments that underscore that moderation, pragmatism and bipartisanship are becoming endangered principles in a polarized political environment that rewards extremism and hot takes over thoughtful policymaking. 

The list of threats to the mainstream middle are all over: Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) is facing a serious threat from far-right Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in next year’s primary despite his long record of pragmatism and thoughtful policymaking as Texas’ senior senator. 

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who reluctantly cast the tiebreaking vote to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as HHS secretary despite his record opposing vaccines, is nonetheless facing the likelihood of a tough renomination fight against state Treasurer John Fleming, a former GOP congressman.

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, Mamdani’s surprise victory threatens to activate the left-wing grassroots in numerous congressional primaries. For a while, it looked like the moderates in the party held the upper hand after an embarrassing 2024 election where activists’ preferred policies badly hurt the Democratic ticket. But amid a DSA victory in New York, anti-ICE activism percolating again throughout the party and significant crowds showing up for anti-Trump “No Kings” protests last month, there are signs of an empowered progressive flank of the Democratic Party. 

The emergence of liberal lawmakers like Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), who are accommodating out-of-the-mainstream views in the party, is an ominous sign of where the party could be headed. 

Murphy told NBC’s “Meet the Press” about Mamdani’s primary win: “He was authentic, right? I mean, yes, he’s got some views that are a little bit out of the conventional mainstream. But you know what? The traditional political pundits have no idea what’s actually mainstream in this country …  And so Democrats should learn from his victory.”

We could be close to a time where both parties’ populist, activist wings become the dominant forces in primaries, a trend that has been apparent in recent years and may be past the point of no return. That would be a blow to good governance and a win for performative politics and nonstop narcissism being the driving force in American elections.

Former Obama administration OMB Director Peter Orszag, the CEO of Lazard, sounded an alarm Thursday morning over the leftward direction of the Democratic Party, especially when it comes to its handling of antisemitism.  

He spoke out on CNBC after far-left state Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic nomination for New York City mayor. 

“I’m saddened to say the Democratic Party is becoming increasingly antisemitic and anti-capitalism… Turning away from your principles and towards antisemitism never works,” Orszag said on CNBC’s “Money Movers” this afternoon.

He went on: “The Democratic candidate for mayor has embraced the global intifada idea. The DCCC has distributed fundraising emails from a senior Democratic operative [James Carville] saying Jewish donors [are] only interested in tax cuts. The senior leadership in the party seems to have cognitive dissonance on Israel. It’s problematic.”

Orszag has been a major figure in the Democratic Party for years, most prominently serving in the Obama administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget. 

As antisemitism increases, he said that he had expressed these concerns to Democratic leadership, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who has faced his own challenges navigating the ideologically divisive New York City mayoral race.

“I think the New York mayoral race is only part of the broader question. I think the Democratic Party needs to decide what it stands for,” Orszag said. “It needs to decide what its moral principles are and that includes [regarding] antisemitism.”

When asked about how Lazard would respond to a Mamdani mayorship, he said the bar for the company leaving was “very high” and would depend on what policies are implemented.

Reps. Laura Gillen (D-NY), Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and George Latimer (D-NY) declined to support State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, the presumptive Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, citing ongoing concerns about his ideological record, as many other prominent politicians in the state fell in line.

“Socialist Zohran Mamdani is too extreme to lead New York City,” Gillen said, highlighting his calls for higher taxes and what she described as unrealistic campaign promises. “Beyond that, Mr. Mamdani has called to defund the police and has demonstrated a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is skyrocketing. He is the absolute wrong choice for New York.”

“I had serious concerns about Assemblyman Mamdani before yesterday, and that is one of the reasons I endorsed his opponent. Those concerns remain,” Suozzi said. Suozzi, once a close ally of New York Mayor Eric Adams, endorsed former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the final weeks of the race, explaining “I don’t want the socialists to win.”

Latimer, who also endorsed Cuomo, said he was surprised by Mamdani’s performance, credited him with a “very energetic campaign” and called him “clearly a very charismatic figure.” But he was also clear that he was not endorsing Mamdani and left open the possibility of endorsing a third-party challenger.

“I haven’t thought about it at all yet, check back with me once things shake out. I don’t want to be presumptive if I don’t know what’s going to happen,” Latimer told reporters, referring to potential uncertainties around whether Adams, Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa stay in the race. “I’m not endorsing anybody at this point.”

He said that he was concerned that “running New York City is an extremely complicated situation … it takes a certain mindset not to just advocate for policies — as popular as they are — but to actually accomplish them.” Latimer said Mamdani would likely have to appeal to the state Legislature and would face difficult cash crunches as he seeks to implement his signature, and costly, campaign promises.

“I know how popular it would be for me to say things and promise things. I try to be careful about what I promise because whether I can deliver it or not becomes the first test of whether I’m effective in that office,” he continued.

Asked by Jewish Insider about Mamdani’s record on antisemitism, Latimer highlighted his own opposition to and work on combating hate.

“You shouldn’t have to feel afraid to walk in the streets with yarmulke on. … You should be treated for who you are as a person,” Latimer said. “So to the extent that you know there’s, there’s a sense that there’s an antisemitic moment, then we can’t add code words and make it worse, we have to fight to try to have people be treated equally all across the board, including those who are Jewish.”

Both Gillen and Suozzi represent Long Island-based swing districts in the outskirts of New York City. Suozzi’s district includes a slice of Queens. Latimer’s district is primarily in Westchester County, but includes a small piece of the Bronx.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), meanwhile, endorsed Mamdani on Wednesday, after backing one of his primary challengers, saying Mamdani was committed to fighting antisemitism.

Nadler, a co-chair of the House Jewish Caucus, said he had “spoken to [Mamdani] today about his commitment to fighting antisemitism, and we’ll work with all New Yorkers to fight against all bigotry and hate.”

“Voters in New York City demanded change and, with Zohran’s triumph, we have a direct repudiation of Donald Trump’s politics of tax cuts and authoritarianism,” Nadler added, describing Mamdani as a future “partner to me in Washington to take on Donald Trump.”

Other prominent New York Democrats including Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have offered praise for Mamdani in the hours since his victory, declining to address his antisemitic history. They held back explicit endorsements.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) supported Mamdani in the primary. No other New York Democratic lawmakers responded to requests for comment.

In the region’s northern suburbs, Mamdani’s candidacy is likely to emerge quickly as a hot-button issue in the swing district race in New York’s 17th Congressional District, which is home to a substantial Jewish population.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), the 17th District incumbent, has repeatedly attacked Democratic leaders across the state over Mamdani’s victory, particularly highlighting his record on antisemitism.

“Democrats need to make very clear to voters where they stand on this,” Lawler told reporters. “You’ve already had Laura Gillen speak out against it, and yet, Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer and Kathy Hochul put together the most gobbly-gook bull***t statements I’ve ever seen in my life, saying nothing about anything except that they’re going to continue to speak with him, whatever the hell that means.”

Three of the seven Democratic 17th District candidates who responded to questions from Jewish Insider about Mamdani took divergent approaches.

Cait Conley, a former national security official, told JI that she does “not agree with the direction Zohran wants to take NYC. We need to address affordability but not by raising already exorbitant taxes on New Yorkers that will just drive more people out of the state. We need to stand up for the NY Jewish community and stand against anti-semitism in all forms.”

Conley argued that the election results show that voters are looking for alternatives, like herself, to career politicians, adding, “I will never stop standing up to hate. Anti-semitism is on the rise across this country which is both unacceptable and un-American.”

Jessica Reinmann, a nonprofit executive, told JI, “The results of last night’s NYC mayoral race underscore the need for the kind of boots-on-the-ground, community-focused effort that Team Reinmann is building — one focused on kitchen-table issues, meeting people where they are, and addressing their concerns.”

“That said, there should be no tolerance in the Democratic Party for candidates who espouse antisemitic and hateful views,” Reinmann continued. “Team Reinmann is building a coalition that is built on respect for all people, no matter who they pray to, where they come from, who they love, or the color of their skin.”

Peter Chatzky, a tech company founder and deputy mayor of Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., praised Mamdani for “an effective campaign that consistently focused on affordability, fairness, and opportunity in New York City.”

“The Democratic Party needs candidates who are hearing constituent concerns and will take on the Trump administration and fight for the people of their districts,” Chatzky said. “I am excited to bring that message to the voters of the Hudson Valley.”

Pressed on Mamdani’s record on antisemitism, Chatzky added, “To be clear, antisemitism is serious and a real threat to Jewish New Yorkers and needs to be taken with utmost seriousness. It is something I will be on the forefront of for the people of the 17th District every day.”

Neither Gillen nor Suozzi indicated whether they plan to support an alternative candidate like Adams, the incumbent who is running as an independent in the general election.

Suozzi said, when he endorsed Cuomo, that he still likes Adams, but argued he’s too mired in scandal to continue to lead. Adams’ team praised Suozzi’s record even after his endorsement of Cuomo.

Gillen, meanwhile, publicly clashed with Adams at a House Oversight Committee hearing earlier this year, saying she had “no confidence” in his leadership and calling on him to resign. She said previously that he had “failed and betrayed New York City repeatedly” and engaged in “blatant, textbook corruption. She has said that New York Gov. Kathy Hochul should remove him from office.

Given that Mamdani appears headed for a fairly sizable margin of victory in the primary and the city’s largely Democratic electorate, any third-party challenge will be a tough lift.

Cuomo hasn’t confirmed yet whether he will seek to run in the general election as an independent, a prospect that could further complicate efforts for Mamdani opponents to coalesce.

When Joe Biden announced his presidential campaign in 2019, he stated explicitly, in a slickly edited campaign video, that one of the issues motivating him to reenter politics was fighting antisemitism and hate. He specifically mentioned the violent Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 and the white nationalist protesters who were “chanting the same antisemitic bile heard across Europe in the ‘30s.”

One of Biden’s former high-level aides pointed out to Jewish Insider how different that rhetoric was from the position staked out by Zohran Mamdani, the upstart New York assemblyman who won a surprise victory in the New York City mayoral Democratic primary on Tuesday.

In the closing days of the campaign, Mamdani, who began his activism journey as a Students for Justice in Palestine leader at Bowdoin College, defended the term “globalize the intifada” as an expression of Palestinian rights. Mamdani’s defense of the phrase was strongly criticized by Jewish groups across the ideological spectrum, who view the phrase as a call to violence. While Mamdani has pledged to keep Jewish New Yorkers safe, he has not acknowledged their concerns about his invocation of a phrase tied to a violent, yearslong Palestinian uprising. 

“Biden was elected running a campaign in 2020 premised on combating antisemitism. That was the animating feature that got him into the race. So the politics of this have really moved,” said the former White House official. “This is all about language and people using their microphones, and the fact that someone could feel empowered to double down on these ideas and win a mayoral race in New York City, that doesn’t happen by accident. It takes years of moving the goalposts on this language, on what it means to be antisemitic in America in 2025.”

This Biden administration staffer, who requested anonymity for fear of professional backlash, is one of many Jewish Democrats questioning where their party is heading after a dynamic young socialist with radical anti-Israel politics is on track to become mayor of the largest city in America, which has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. Coupled with Democrats’ reluctance to offer support for President Donald Trump’s targeted strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, which drew support from major Jewish groups, Mamdani’s ascension has some pro-Israel Democrats concerned about the future of their party.

Put more bluntly by another senior Biden administration official: “I feel like a person without a party,” they told JI. 

Those two voices, who served at high levels of the Biden White House, are part of a small cadre of disillusioned former Biden staffers who want to see a more vocally pro-Israel tack from the Democratic Party’s current leaders, although they aren’t yet willing to say so publicly with their names attached. But their frustration represents a simmering undercurrent of concern among Jewish Democrats that has started to spill into the open after Mamdani’s victory.

Lawrence Summers, an economist who served as treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton and director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama, said in a post on X that he is “profoundly alarmed” about the future of the Democratic Party and the country “by yesterday’s NYC anointment of a candidate who failed to disavow a ‘globalize the intifada’ slogan and advocated Trotskyite economic policies.” 

Some prominent Jewish Democrats acknowledged Mamdani’s shortcomings but tempered that concern by noting that voters were likely drawn in by his economic messaging, not his anti-Israel stance, and by the presence of a scandal-plagued rival in Andrew Cuomo, who ran a lackluster campaign.

“I think it is very disheartening that he was not able to say the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ feels very threatening to Jews. I find that very distressing, but I don’t think that that’s the issue that the majority of New Yorkers were voting on,” said former Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC), the board chair of Democratic Majority for Israel. “I don’t see it as a referendum on, people don’t care about antisemitism.”

Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, expressed concern that New York Democrats elected a candidate “whose views on Israel deeply concern many American Jews.” But, she argued, “Democratic leadership and the vast majority of our elected officials stand with Jewish Americans on the range of issues of importance to Jewish voters.” 

Mamdani’s election came days after a watershed foreign policy moment, in which Trump ordered American strikes on several Iranian nuclear sites. Democrats, even many moderates, responded by criticizing Trump for his unilateral action without consulting Congress, with many — including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) — failing to even acknowledge the threat Iran posed to Israel and the U.S.

“I think overwhelmingly, Democrats have not done a good job, and the proof is in the pudding, that even staunch Democrats who would never consider supporting Donald Trump or ever vote for a Republican are just really pained by what feels like a refusal to even acknowledge the seriousness of the threat of the Iranian nuclear program,” said Amanda Berman, CEO of Zioness, a progressive pro-Israel organization. Manning said she “would have loved to see not just my [former] colleagues but newscasters acknowledge that Iran is a bad actor.”

Wary Jewish Democrats are keeping a watchful eye on how party leaders handle Israel- and antisemitism-related issues. 

“While I believe the majority of Democrats are pro-Israel economic moderates, we will see if our party leadership capitulates to the party’s most radical anti-Israel wing in the city with the most Jews in the world,” Esther Panitch, a Democratic state representative in Georgia and the only Jewish politician in the Georgia Statehouse, told JI on Wednesday. “I’m not optimistic at this moment, given that they have welcomed non-Democrats DSA [Democratic Socialists of America] and WFP [Working Families Party] into the tent.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries, both of whom live in New York City, each congratulated Mamdani with social media posts on Wednesday, although they did not outright endorse him.  

Sara Forman, the executive director of New York Solidarity Network, which promotes pro-Israel candidates in local races in New York, called Mamdani’s election “a seismic change” for Democratic politics in New York.  Far-left activists, she said, are now firmly inside of the party apparatus in the city, and she pledged to stick around and work to make sure the party is not represented by those activists. 

“I am not advocating Jews leaving the Democratic Party,” Forman told JI. “One of the things that I’m going to work on, and I’ve been working on, is getting people to join me in the chorus and to not sit back and watch the car accident happening in front of their eyes, but instead, speak up. Speak out. Don’t surrender.”

According to Bradley Tusk, a venture capitalist and longtime political operative who served as former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s 2009 campaign director, the challenge for Democrats is how to overcome the most ideological voters who turn out to vote in primaries.

“It wasn’t that he was this candidate who had all these interesting, exciting affordability ideas, but also happened to be anti-Israel. The anti-Israel was a big part of what allowed him to succeed,” Tusk told JI. “I think structurally, we have put ourselves in a bind where, when the Democratic Party is only decided by small ideological actors who vote in primaries, and that group tends to lean much more into anti-Israel, antisemitism, the Democratic Party is pretty stuck.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) finds himself in an awkward bind: The self-dubbed “Shomer Yisrael” — “guardian of the people of Israel” — is now the “Shomer of the Democratic Party” — guardian of a caucus that has drifted increasingly leftward, especially when it comes to its support for Israel and aggressive action to deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

When he had the opportunity earlier this month to take a clean shot at President Donald Trump for not being tough enough against Iran — over reports the administration was working on a deal allowing Iran to maintain enrichment — he played to his history of hawkishness on Iran, taunting Trump for “folding” and “let[ting] Iran get away with everything,” facing backlash from some on the left in the process. 

But when Trump made the decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites last weekend, Schumer sided against a handful of pro-Israel stalwarts in his party and leading Jewish communal organizations, who praised the move as advancing peace in the region. Instead, he joined the majority of congressional Democrats, who blasted the administration for not seeking congressional authorization. 

“No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,” Schumer said Saturday. “Confronting Iran’s ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased.”

Schumer’s turnaround is raising eyebrows among Jewish and pro-Israel leaders, and his focus on congressional procedure is frustrating some in the pro-Israel community who wanted to see him support Trump’s efforts to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program.

“If your argument is leading with a technicality over war powers, you know you’re losing the broader debate,” a former Biden administration official told JI. “This wasn’t an open-ended military campaign — these were limited U.S. airstrikes. Every president in modern times has done it this way for limited airstrikes, and this isn’t any different.”

“I would like it to be that whoever does the right thing, no matter who they are or how much you otherwise dislike them, that at least certain truths can be recognized by everyone,” Democratic Georgia state Rep. Esther Panitch said. “One of those being that Iran’s nuclear program needed to stop. … We all need to take a step back and acknowledge that Trump did a good thing, even if we can’t stand him otherwise.”

Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Gilad Erdan wrote on X, “When President Trump strikes Iran’s nuclear sites to stop a regime openly calling for Israel’s destruction (and responsible for the [murder] of many many Americans), Schumer’s only reaction is… complaining about congressional procedure? Seriously, Chuck? Don’t you have anything positive to say about removing an existential threat from Israel and the free world?”

Democratic Georgia state Rep. Esther Panitch, who has been outspoken in criticizing members of her own party over lukewarm support for, or criticism of, Israel, said that Schumer’s position would appear to be one of “blind partisanship,” if he hadn’t expressed the same criticisms of Democratic presidents’ own unilateral military actions.

“I would like it to be that whoever does the right thing, no matter who they are or how much you otherwise dislike them, that at least certain truths can be recognized by everyone,” Panitch said. “One of those being that Iran’s nuclear program needed to stop. … We all need to take a step back and acknowledge that Trump did a good thing, even if we can’t stand him otherwise.”

Panitch was the only Democrat in the Georgia House to join a letter with Republicans backing the Iran strikes.

Schumer’s spokesperson, Angelo Roefaro, told JI, “Senator Schumer has long said Iran cannot obtain a nuclear weapon and he voted against his own party when he didn’t think President Obama’s Iran deal went far enough.” 

“He’s also long said that the executive branch cannot ignore the role of Congress when it comes to taking military action(s), yet that is exactly what is happening right now, and that is unacceptable when the stakes are so high and when key questions, including how the administration will prevent Iran in the long-term from obtaining a nuclear weapon, remain unanswered,” Roefaro continued.

“He has got tremendous pressures facing him,” Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic consultant told JI. “There are people in New York who would want him to be much more vociferous in support of the attack on Iran … but his party isn’t in that place.”

Publicly, Schumer has also been critical of the administration for failing to brief him and other lawmakers to show the necessity of the strikes, or that they accomplished the administration’s intended goal. He’s suggested that’s a sign that the strikes were not successful, as one leaked intelligence report has indicated.

“This last-minute postponement is outrageous, evasive, and derelict. Senators deserve full transparency, and the administration has a legal obligation to inform Congress precisely about what is happening. What is the administration so afraid of?” Schumer said in a new statement Tuesday. “Such obstruction undermines the very principles of accountability and oversight that safeguard our democracy.”

One analyst argued that Schumer’s position as Democratic leader places him in a politically difficult bind.

“He has got tremendous pressures facing him,” Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic consultant told JI. “There are people in New York who would want him to be much more vociferous in support of the attack on Iran … but his party isn’t in that place.”

He argued that Schumer, as the leader of a minority party, needs to focus on attracting younger voters back to the party, and in protecting the coalition he does have — both groups that largely oppose the strikes.

Sheinkopf also said Schumer’s stance is “absolutely a product of internal caucus politics. … The minority party’s job is to be on the other side of the president and the leadership, and that’s what they’re doing. So it should not be surprising, and Sen. Schumer’s positioning should not be surprising at all.”

Schumer’s comments over the weekend echo the stance he took in 2020 on potential military action against Iran, when he backed similar legislation following the strike that killed Quds Force head Gen. Qassem Soleimani. He also backed a bill that would withhold funding for war with Iran.

“Congress, unequivocally, must hold the president accountable and assert our authority over matters of war and peace,” Schumer said at the time, remarks to which Schumer’s office referred JI. He also criticized the administration for failing to provide “a clear picture … about our strategy in the region.”

Schumer has said he regretted his vote to authorize the Iraq War and has pushed, including during the Biden administration, for repeal of the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force undergirding the war on terrorism, arguing that Congress needed to reassert war powers and prevent another inadvertent war in the Middle East.

But he didn’t publicly offer the same direct and pointed opposition to strikes undertaken by previous Democratic administrations without congressional authorization in places such as Libya and Yemen.

Schumer’s office also referred JI to his past opposition to Iran’s nuclear program and opposition to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as well as his support for the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, which requires the administration to submit for congressional review any nuclear agreement with Iran.

It’s not an overstatement to suggest that the future direction of the Democratic Party could well be decided tonight in New York City, where a far-left, anti-Israel assemblyman from Queens, Zohran Mamdani, has a shot to win the Democratic nomination against presumed favorite, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

Most public and internal campaign polls show Cuomo ahead, but a new Emerson College poll released Monday showed Mamdani in the lead for the first time, sending shockwaves through the New York City Jewish community — and beyond.

The notion that a candidate who pointedly declined to condemn “globalize the intifada” rhetoric in the city with the largest Jewish population in the world could be running competitively would have been unthinkable not long ago.

For a party desperately seeking to moderate in the aftermath of brutal defeats in 2024, the prospect of having a socialist mayor for the next four years in the largest city in the country would be an undeniable setback, threatening to reverberate beyond Gotham’s borders.

Mamdani’s rise has particularly fueled anxiety among Jewish leaders — as his hostile views toward Israel have hardly dented his standing in the race. Even if he doesn’t win the nomination, Jewish Democrats uncomfortable with his anti-Israel rhetoric and alleged insensitivity to rising antisemitism fear his surging campaign could end up causing them to rethink their long-standing affiliation with the Democratic Party

One prominent New York-based Democratic strategist told JI he expected some Jews to relocate to Florida or Texas if Mamdani becomes mayor.

But don’t expect a clear answer this evening: The primary result is unlikely to be confirmed for at least a week thanks to the city’s relatively new ranked-choice voting system. And regardless of the outcome, both Mamdani and Cuomo could also run in the general election on separate ballot lines, a possibility neither candidate has ruled out and one that portends a high-stakes race to November. 

In addition to the mayoral contest, we’ll also be keeping an eye on a few down-ballot primaries for City Council, including former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s comeback campaign for an open-seat in Manhattan and a pair of Brooklyn races where anti-Israel incumbents are facing challengers.

As the closely watched Democratic primary for mayor of New York City wraps up today, many Jewish and pro-Israel activists are now confronting a mounting sense of alarm that Zohran Mamdani, a far-left assemblyman from Queens, could win the nomination, propelling a fierce critic of Israel to the general election — and, potentially, Gracie Mansion.

In a city home to the largest Jewish community outside of Israel, Mamdani’s rise has fueled anxiety among Jewish leaders — particularly as his hostile positions toward Israel have hardly dented his standing in a competitive race that has narrowed to a two-person matchup.

Even if Mamdani does not win, Jewish Democrats uncomfortable with his strident criticism of Israel and alleged insensitivity to rising antisemitism fear that his surging campaign could end up alienating Jewish voters who have long called the party home.

“The Jewish community is going to face a real shock if Mamdani gets the nomination,” Mitchell Moss, an urban policy professor at New York University who is backing Cuomo, said in an interview with Jewish Insider on Monday. “A lot of people have come to realize that anti-Israel sentiment has metastasized into antisemitism.”

The Tik Tok-savvy Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist, has largely polled in second place behind his chief rival, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, though a poll released by Emerson College on Monday showed Mamdani narrowly prevailing. 

Cuomo’s campaign, for its part, has dismissed the survey as an outlier and cited other polls showing him with a more robust lead in the crowded race to unseat Mayor Eric Adams, who is seeking reelection as an independent. Fix the City, a pro-Cuomo super PAC that has slammed Mamdani’s approach to Israel in several attack ads, also released a new poll Monday that found Cuomo with a comfortable, 24-point lead over Mamdani in the final round of voting. 

While support for Israel had once been viewed as a prerequisite for any winning campaign in New York City, Mamdani’s bid has tested that proposition. He has suggested he is uninterested in visiting Israel if elected, breaking with long-standing precedent, and has declined to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. 

The two-term state lawmaker, who has endorsed boycotts targeting Israel, has said he would divest from Israel as mayor and promised to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for alleged war crimes if he were to enter the city. Perhaps most controversially, Mamdani has drawn scrutiny for defending calls to “globalize the intifada” — a slogan that critics interpret as stoking violence against Jews.

Despite backlash, Mamdani doubled down on that defense during a radio interview on Monday, saying the phrase “has a variety of meanings to a variety of people.”

Many Jewish and pro-Israel activists in New York City have found his response alarming. “No matter what the outcome tomorrow, the fact that Zohran has been able to capture the attention of so many people who are really blind to his antisemitic tendencies really says something about the state of our electorate right now,” Sara Forman, who leads a pro-Israel super PAC that has urged voters to rank Cuomo first and to exclude Mamdani entirely, told JI.

Mamdani’s “foreign policy stances are isolating Jews and freezing us out from our political home base in the Democratic Party,” Forman said in an interview on Monday. “If the Democratic Party doesn’t wake up and start speaking to its core constituencies of Blacks, Jews and Latinos, we’re going to find our party rebuilt in someone else’s image.”

Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran Democratic strategist, predicted a Mamdani victory could end up pushing “more Jews nationally into the Republican column” and said Orthodox Jews might choose to relocate to South Florida and New Jersey. “Whether he wins or loses,” Sheinkopf said, the contours of the race have sent a concerning message that he characterized as “Jews don’t matter.”

Mamdani has rejected accusations of antisemitism, saying his opponents have weaponized such charges to score “political points.” He has said he is sensitive to rising antisemitism across New York City and has vowed to increase funding to counter hate crimes by 800%.

Early voting tallies have suggested that Mamdani has galvanized his base of younger supporters who are enlivened by his calls to “freeze the rent” and to deliver free buses as he has emphasized a message of affordability.

Cuomo, meanwhile, is depending on strong turnout from Black, Latino and Orthodox Jewish voters who have long been part of his core coalition. The former governor has locked up major endorsements from a range of key Orthodox leaders in Williamsburg and Borough Park, a Hasidic enclave in Brooklyn where he spent time on Sunday rallying a community that could deliver thousands of votes in a close election.

One Satmar leader in Williamsburg told JI that he is expecting solid turnout from New York City’s largest Hasidic voting bloc, predicting up to 8,000 votes for Cuomo, who has worked to mend relationships with Orthodox leaders that soured over his crackdown on religious gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Cuomo campaign believes polls are missing the Orthodox vote, which could make the difference in a close election, according to an advisor who said that turnout from the community has been encouraging. “But what else are they missing is the question,” the advisor told JI on Monday, speaking anonymously to address the race.

Still, some Orthodox leaders remain on edge as Mamdani has continued to defy the odds over the course of the campaign. “He has really excited his base,” said one Orthodox leader in Brooklyn. “I am very fearful that he could actually make it, especially on ranked choice.”

Cuomo, who has won endorsements from Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) and former President Bill Clinton in recent days, has also struggled to overcome his own vulnerabilities in the race, including accusations of sexual misconduct that forced his resignation from office in 2021. He denies the allegations and said he regrets stepping down.

In the final days of the election, the former governor — who has called antisemitism “the most important issue” and touted his staunch support for Israel — has insisted that his decades of government experience make him better suited to handle threats from Iran after the U.S. bombing of its nuclear sites over the weekend.

“Who do you want in charge in that situation?” he said of possible Iranian retaliation for the attacks. “Who’s handled situations like Hurricane Sandy and COVID and terrorist threats? This is not a job for on-the-job training.” 

As for the bombing itself, Cuomo backed the effort to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capabilities, but he took issue with President Donald Trump’s decision to do so unilaterally without first consulting Congress — underscoring another key difference with Mamdani on Middle East policy.

Mamdani criticized the attack on Iran as “the result of a political establishment that would rather spend trillions of dollars on weapons than lift millions out of poverty, launch endless wars while silencing calls for peace, and fearmonger about outsiders while billionaires hollow out our democracy from within.”

The other candidates in the crowded primary, including Brad Lander, the city comptroller, and Adrienne Adams, the City Council speaker, have struggled to gain traction, polling has indicated.

Regardless of the primary result, which is unlikely to be confirmed for several days because of the ranked-choice system, both Mamdani and Cuomo could run in the general election on separate ballot lines, a possibility neither candidate has ruled out.

“This is a prelude to November,” said Moss, the urban policy professor, envisioning a high-stakes general election. “If Mamdani wins in New York,” he warned, “you can say goodbye to the Democratic Party for a long time.”

In my years of covering politics, it’s pretty rare for mainstream Jewish organizations to be wildly out of step with the predominant views of the Democratic Party. But in the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s decision to order bunker-busting strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites over the weekend, the views of the institutional Jewish community and many rank-and-file Democrats couldn’t have been more divergent.

Consider: The American Jewish Committee’s CEO Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman, praised Trump’s decision and called it “an historic moment for the United States, Israel and the world.” Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt thanked Trump for “holding true to the commitment that the United States will not stand by and watch the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and antisemitism develop nuclear weapons.”

Even the more-partisan Democratic pro-Israel group DMFI, which normally can be counted on to criticize the president, rejected its own party’s predominant view that further congressional approval should have been received before the strikes. “Iran was unwilling to give up its nuclear program through diplomatic negotiations across three different administrations, so the United States was left with no choice but to take decisive military action,” DMFI CEO Brian Romick said.

By contrast, it was tough to find many Democratic lawmakers — even among the many who are typical allies of Israel — to offer praise of the strikes severely degrading Iran’s nuclear program. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who earlier this month recorded a video taunting Trump for “folding” against Iran, criticized the president for carrying out the strikes without congressional authority. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV), one of the strongest pro-Israel stalwarts in the Democratic Party, likewise withheld support for striking Iran’s nuclear facilities while also reiterating her view that Iran should never be able to obtain a nuclear weapon. Like Schumer, she called on more congressional involvement.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), another strong pro-Israel ally running as the moderate Democrat in a Michigan Senate primary, sounded wary about the U.S. decision to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities. “The last thing our country needs is to be involved in another foreign war,” she said, echoing rhetoric from more progressive voices in the party.

To be sure, there have been a handful of Democrats sounding like the pro-Israel lawmakers that once dominated the party. Just look at the comments from Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ),  Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL),  Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), all of whom described the all-too-urgent threat that a nuclear Iran posed to Israel and the world.

As one pro-Israel Democrat put it to JI: There were notably more Democrats putting out statements cheering anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil being released from immigration detention than those expressing solidarity with Israel in its time of great need.

The debate over dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions has been a fraught one within the Democratic Party, ever since former President Barack Obama cut a nuclear deal with Iran in 2015 that many pro-Israel leaders found too accommodating towards the Islamic Republic. There were very messy internal divisions in the party back then as well.

But with public support for Israel among Democratic voters waning, according to recent polling, it looks like it’s getting harder for even sympathetic Democrats to vocally support the position, as Landsman did, that preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is a step towards peace. It’s possible to quibble with the administration’s lack of legislative outreach while also acknowledging the positive end result.

On national security, this is becoming a moment of truth for the Democratic Party at large, which is trying to moderate its record to win back power in Washington, but still is beholden to its activist base. The fact that Zohran Mamdani, a radical anti-Israel candidate defending the slogan “globalize the intifada” is running as competitively as he is in tomorrow’s New York City Democratic mayoral primary, is a sign of where the party could be headed without more mainstream leaders speaking out.

With his path to victory narrowing in the closing stretch of New Jersey’s gubernatorial primary, Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) had placed his hopes for a come-from-behind win on the state’s sizable Jewish community, a politically active voting bloc he saw as a crucial part of his coalition in a crowded race with overlapping constituencies and likely low turnout.

The moderate Jewish Democrat worked to court Jewish voters by touting his pro-Israel record and commitment to fighting antisemitism. Weeks before the election, he received a promising endorsement from the Lakewood Vaad, a coalition of influential Orthodox rabbis. The group, which represents the state’s largest Orthodox bloc, has not traditionally taken sides in primaries but urged Democratic as well as unaffiliated voters to back Gottheimer, promising to deliver thousands of voters he and his allies saw as one of their best chances to make the difference in a close race.

In the end, however, the veteran congressman came in fourth place in Tuesday’s Democratic primary, losing to a fellow House member, Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), by 22 points, even as she had claimed only a third of the vote in the six-way race.

Gottheimer’s poor overall performance across the state came in spite of relatively strong turnout in Lakewood, where he won more than 5,000 votes from the Orthodox community, including several unaffiliated backers, according to Shlomo Schorr, director of legislative affairs for Agudath Israel of America’s New Jersey office.

With nearly 3,000 registered Democrats in the Orthodox community in Lakewood, Gottheimer’s Vaad endorsement helped him secure those votes and to claim additional support from unaffiliated residents, though hardly as many as his allies had hoped to attract: Lakewood has more than 20,000 unaffiliated Orthodox voters — suggesting that only a small fraction of them had declared as Democrats in order to vote in the primary.

Even if he had sought to mobilize those Orthodox voters earlier in the primary, Gottheimer still would have come up short. “None of that would have made a difference,” Schorr told Jewish Insider, given the outcome on Tuesday. “We just don’t have the kind of numbers to flip such a lopsided race, obviously.”

“Had Gottheimer been competitive with Sherrill in the rest of the state, his advantage among the Orthodox community could well have put him over the top,” Dan Cassino, a political scientist and pollster at Fairleigh Dickinson University, said. “Orthodox voters are a reliable source of votes, and Gottheimer put a lot of effort into securing their support. In a game of inches, that could have been decisive, but this race wound up not being a game of inches.”

Micah Rasmussen, director of Rider University’s Rebovich Institute for New Jersey Politics, said that “Gottheimer was resourceful and smart to reach out to the religious communities of New Jersey — and it did bear fruit for him.”

“But fundamentally, he needed a lot more than those handful of communities could deliver for him,” Rasmussen told JI.

Dan Cassino, a political scientist and pollster at Fairleigh Dickinson University, agreed. “Had Gottheimer been competitive with Sherrill in the rest of the state, his advantage among the Orthodox community could well have put him over the top,” he said. “Orthodox voters are a reliable source of votes, and Gottheimer put a lot of effort into securing their support. In a game of inches, that could have been decisive, but this race wound up not being a game of inches.”

In Lakewood, a deeply conservative community where Republicans vastly outweigh Democrats, Gottheimer had always been severely limited in his ability to claim a decisive share of the electorate, particularly in a race he lost by more than 175,000 votes. By contrast, Jack Ciattarelli, the Republican nominee backed by President Donald Trump, won Lakewood with more than 9,500 votes. In 2021, he came unexpectedly close to unseating outgoing Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, with strong support from the community, even as the Vaad had endorsed the incumbent last cycle.

“Considering he lost by 175,000 votes, there’s not much more he could have done,” a New Jersey political strategist and Jewish community activist said of Gottheimer, adding that the election results showed that the Lakewood Vaad is more capable of turning out significant votes than it was in the past — for second-time Republican nominee Ciatarelli. 

Lakewood helped deliver Ocean County for Ciattarelli, the strategist said, even as the county GOP chair endorsed one of Ciattarelli’s opponents. “That would have been a great day, just good news all around. But the Gottheimer thing kind of leaves people with a bad taste in their mouth.”

Meanwhile, a widely touted nonpartisan effort to register Jewish voters for the Democratic primary succeeded in persuading only a small minority of Lakewood voters to change their party affiliation, said Schorr, who pegged the number at some 250 voters. “It’s very difficult to get people, especially Orthodox Jews, to become registered Democrats,” Schorr told JI. “They’ll vote, maybe, in the election — but to change their affiliation from Republican to Democrat, that you’re not going to get them to do.”

The results raise questions about what basis had existed for the promises and expectations of that re-registration and turnout effort, according to the strategist, who noted the Lakewood votes simply never were up for grabs. “There aren’t a lot of Democratic votes in Lakewood, in the Orthodox community, to be had,” the strategist explained, while adding that Ciattarelli has worked hard to make connections and appeal to those voters.

A local Democratic strategist argued that the disappointing results of the Orthodox turnout effort need to prompt a re-assessment of the strategy.

Even as Gottheimer won his home county of Bergen in northern Jersey, he underperformed in Orthodox communities there and elsewhere in the state, such as Edison and Cherry Hill, said Schorr. “I think they could have done better just from the initial numbers I’ve seen,” he told JI. “The Lakewood area delivered, but other places did not.”

“For Josh, it was a challenge,” a Jewish leader said of Gottheimer. “It wasn’t enough for Josh, but at the end of the day, a pro-Israel and well-known friend of the Jewish community was still elected in part because of the Jewish vote in the state,” the Jewish leader said of Sherrill. 

Notwithstanding his strong record on Israel and antisemitism, across the wider Jewish community, Gottheimer also faced competition from a range of primary rivals including Sherill, former state Senate President Stephen Sweeney and Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, each of whom has, to varying degrees, built relationships with Jewish leaders during their tenures.

The results indicated that Sherrill overperformed and Gottheimer did not see a strong turnout surge, said a Jewish leader in the state who believes that many Jewish community members are now disillusioned with the results. Still, the Jewish leader expects Sherilll will maintain a positive relationship with the Jewish community going forward.

“For Josh, it was a challenge,” another Jewish leader said of Gottheimer, who sought to draw relatively minor contrasts with Sherrill on Jewish issues during the race, as she has called for increased federal action against antisemitism and demonstrated a largely pro-Israel record while in Congress. “It wasn’t enough for Josh, but at the end of the day, a pro-Israel and well-known friend of the Jewish community was still elected in part because of the Jewish vote in the state,” the Jewish leader said of Sherrill. 

Looking toward November, a Jewish leader said that moderate Democratic voters could be up for grabs for Ciatarelli, as many Jewish voters have been feeling disenchanted with the direction of the Democratic Party.

He is also likely to draw strong support from the Orthodox community, where in Lakewood alone there are around 30,000 registered Republicans.

As New Jersey’s competitive gubernatorial primary takes place today, Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) looks like the front-runner in the crowded Democratic field but without much public polling and a late flurry of advertising, there’s still a considerable amount of uncertainty as to who will emerge as the nominee in the six-way race.  

Sherrill, a military veteran who has represented a suburban north New Jersey seat since 2018, is the favorite of many Democratic Party officials and has been leading in the limited public polling of the race. The congresswoman has also been one of the top fundraisers in the field, along with Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), who has been courting support from the state’s sizable Jewish community.

“Josh has been betting on the Jewish community coming out strong, and there is a realistic possibility that if new voters emerge in places like Lakewood, which is the fifth-largest city in New Jersey now, it could play a decisive role,” one Jewish community activist, who asked to remain anonymous to discuss the primary, told Jewish Insider on Monday. 

But even as Gottheimer won a key endorsement last month from the Lakewood Vaad, an influential coalition of rabbis from the state’s largest Orthodox Jewish community, other observers expressed some skepticism that the moderate congressman’s strategy of consolidating Jewish support will be enough for him to prevail in the primary to replace Gov. Phil Murphy, a term-limited Democrat.

“I just don’t know if it’s going to be able to be enough to give him the edge,” said Shlomo Schorr, the director of legislative affairs for Agudath Israel of America’s New Jersey office. “It was maybe a bit too late to get the turnout that they had wanted and needed.”

Though Schorr said that Gottheimer’s strong showing in early voting so far in major Orthodox communities such as Teaneck and Lakewood could peel support away from Sherrill, he also speculated that it could help to fuel another candidate, Steve Fulop, the mayor of Jersey City, running as a progressive-minded anti-establishment challenger. 

Fulop, a Jewish Democrat whose campaign is appealing to progressive, younger voters, has said “every single person has a pathway to win.” He has faced backlash from Jewish leaders for opposing legislation to enshrine the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism into state law, though he later walked back his remarks in a mailer aimed at Jewish voters.

Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark whose coalition in some ways overlaps with Fulop, has experienced a late surge thanks largely to his high-profile arrest last month outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey, even as his record of commentary on key issues such as Israel and antisemitism has raised concerns among many Jewish leaders in the state.

The other Democrats in the primary include Stephen Sweeney, a moderate who served as president of the state Senate, and Sean Spiller, the president of the New Jersey Education Association who has drawn significant outside support from a super PAC spending more than $8 million to boost his campaign. 

Jack Ciattarelli, a former state assemblyman backed by President Donald Trump, is favored to clinch the Republican nomination. He came close to unseating Murphy in 2021, winning Lakewood in the process. The Vaad has also endorsed his campaign this cycle.

The results of the Democratic primary are more volatile, particularly without the so-called county line that had bestowed establishment-backed candidates with preferential ballot placement.

“With no line, all bets are off,” said a Jewish activist who is not taking sides in the race, speaking on the condition of anonymity to address the primary. “It’s all turnout. I still think it’s Mikie’s to lose. Her team is confident, as is the candidate. But I guess they all are.”

As Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) faces attacks from the media and fellow lawmakers in the Democratic Party, he hit back at members of his own party on Tuesday in remarks to a group of bipartisan activists in Washington.

Speaking to members of NORPAC, a pro-Israel advocacy organization, Fetterman offered some of his sharpest criticism yet of the Democratic Party’s approach to Israel after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks.

“Israel and your community deserves much better from my party,” Fetterman said, earning loud applause. 

He described how American universities have produced a “monoculture that produced, actually, rampant antisemitism,” and called to address it — but suggested Democrats are not interested in doing so. 

“We have to address that. But in my party, you will pay a price,” said Fetterman. “That’s OK. I think that’s what defines character … that you’re going to support things even if it moves against your own political interest.”

Several recent reports have suggested that Fetterman is struggling with mental health challenges, which Fetterman has denied. 

Jake Rakov, a former congressional staffer for Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) who is now challenging Sherman for his Los Angeles-area congressional seat, has plenty of criticism aimed at his old boss. But one issue on which they appear largely in step is support for the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Rakov, 37, told Jewish Insider that the Democratic Party needs “a new generation to step up if we want to get anything done in Washington.” He’s one of a series of young insurgent candidates delivering a similar message as they challenge longtime Democratic incumbents whom they characterize as complacent and disconnected.

The former Sherman staffer worked for the California congressman for a year in 2017 as his deputy communications director. He said that he feels Sherman, who has served in the House since 1997, has failed to adapt his talking points and approach to the second Trump term, adding that he doesn’t feel Sherman is bringing the “energy” needed to challenge President Donald Trump and is not responsive, accessible or accountable to constituents.

Rakov’s campaign pitch is light on policy specifics, centered around a pledge to push for 10-year term limits for members of Congress, to not take corporate PAC funding and to hold monthly in-person town halls. But he told JI his focus areas would include science and technology policy, cybersecurity, transportation and infrastructure issues. 

Sherman’s campaign is indicating he’s not particularly worried about the challenge.

“Congressman Brad Sherman typically has half a dozen challengers every two years. Democrats, Republicans and others,” a Sherman campaign spokesperson said. “Mr. Rakov may be the first who apparently has never voted in Sherman’s district prior to announcing his candidacy. We welcome his entry into the race. Rakov has not identified any single one of Congressman Sherman’s thousands of votes that he disagrees with. So, at least there is an important aspect of the job that he believes Sherman has performed flawlessly.”

Sherman, who is Jewish, represents one of the most Jewish districts in the country and is a vocal and relatively hawkish supporter of Israel. Rakov, whose husband is Jewish, did not indicate any significant breaks with his former boss on that issue.

“I’m a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship. I understand the need to maintain that relationship and I would also be a proactive advocate in Congress for continuing to strengthen the vital allyship between our two countries,” Rakov said. “I see the need of that, especially in the state of the Middle East right now, for having such a close ally in the region.”

He said that he supports continued U.S. aid to Israel, explaining Israel “has the right to defend itself against terrorists and those who want to attack it.”

Rakov traveled to Israel with his husband shortly before the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attacks to visit his husband’s family. Rakov described it as an “absolutely amazing experience” seeing how “diverse” and “engaged” the Israeli people are.

“It was just amazing to see the culture and the Old City [of Jerusalem], all the history there, and everything was very awe-inspiring,” Rakov said.

Rakov said he was also struck by the conversations Israelis were having among themselves about the Israeli government and the country.

Rakov said he wants to see a path forward to reach peace and a negotiated two-state solution, and said the U.S. should play a central role in driving toward that goal.

Rakov’s support for Israel separates him from some of the other prominent challengers going after longtime Democratic incumbents, several of whom have carved out positions to the incumbents’ left on Israel policy.

Rakov also said that it’s in the U.S.’ interest to ensure Iran cannot develop nuclear weapons. He said he doesn’t have the expertise to discuss the possibility of military intervention, but said that he supports diplomatic overtures and providing support for the Iranian people to achieve democracy and a “functioning government that supports their rights.”

The district also has a significant Iranian-American diaspora population.

At home in the U.S., Rakov said that he wants to see better education and dialogue to combat antisemitism, especially on college campuses, instead of the punitive measures that the Trump administration has pursued, such as cutting off funding to schools. He said the administration should instead be focusing on “adding resources to educate students about antisemitism and discrimination in all forms.”

“If there are bad actors and if they violate the law, that’s very obviously not a peaceful protest or a First Amendment protected thing,” Rakov said. “I disagree with the idea of defunding universities or cutting back funding. I think this doesn’t solve the problem at hand.”

Shabbos Kestenbaum, a Jewish activist who has emerged as a surrogate at Trump campaign events for speaking out against antisemitism within the Democratic Party, backed out of former President Donald Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally on Sunday over Tucker Carlson being granted a speaking slot. 

Kestenbaum, a recent Harvard graduate who spoke at the Republican National Convention in support of Trump’s 2024 bid, told Jewish Insider he decided against participating in the event over Carlson’s attendance. 

Kestenbaum said he was in discussions with the Trump campaign about speaking at the rally, but that the plans were scrapped to make room for speeches from Carlson, Elon Musk and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), among others. 

“I believe President Trump, through the advocating for the Antisemitism Awareness Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act protections, Abraham Accords, and other measures, is the best choice for American Jewry,” Kestenbaum told JI in a statement on his decision. “I will be voting for him and will continue to make the argument for him to moderate and liberal Jewish voters as the election closes.” 

“I also believe that Tucker Carlson is a dangerous antisemite who has no business in electoral politics. I will continue to call out far-left and far-right antisemitism. Whether it be the right or left, I will never attend an event with an antisemite,” he added. 

The Trump campaign did not respond to JI’s request for comment on Kestenbaum’s withdrawal from the event over Carlson. Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) have stood by the conservative commentator despite his decision to host Holocaust denier Darryl Cooper on his popular podcast last month.

At the Madison Square Garden rally, which featured a litany of derogatory and bigoted remarks towards minorities, Carlson mocked the media attention to Vice President Kamala Harris’ racial identity: “She’s just so impressive as the first Samoan Malaysian, low-IQ, former California prosecutor ever to be elected president,” Carlson said.

Carlson has emerged as a valued adviser to the Trump campaign, and will be hosting Trump as a featured guest as part of his cross-country speaking tour on Thursday in Glendale, Ariz. Carlson was given a primetime speaking spot on the final night of the Republican National Convention, and was feted in Trump’s presidential box in Milwaukee. 

Carlson also lobbied Trump to choose Vance as his running mate; the senator appeared on his podcast after the much-maligned episode with Cooper.  Vance was the guest at Carlson’s Sept. 21 stop in Hershey, Pa. on his nationwide tour.

Jewish Insider’s features reporter Matthew Kassel contributed to this report.

Former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s congressional bid hid a snag on Saturday when she came in fifth with just 5.2% of delegates at the Democratic Party of New Mexico’s pre-primary convention. She needed at least 20% of delegates to automatically qualify for the primary ballot.

Down but not out: Plame, who was famously outed as a covert CIA officer in 2003, could still appear on the ballot, but needs to submit a larger number of voter petition signatures within 10 days of the convention.

Background: Plame is running in New Mexico’s third congressional district, in the northern portion of the state, which includes Santa Fe. The seat is currently held by Democratic Rep. Ben Ray Luján. Luján is running for the Senate seat held by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM), who is not running for reelection.

Overpowered by less-funded competitors: Two candidates, attorney Teresa Leger Fernandez and Sandoval County treasurer Laura Montoya, made the delegate cutoff, with Fernandez picking up 41.9% of delegates and Montoya claiming 20.47%. Plame’s disappointing showing comes despite her national media profile and her fundraising haul of more than $1 million — more than 1.5 times what Fernandez has raised. Montoya trailed even further behind, with just over $28,000 raised.

Race will likely remain crowded: There are seven Democratic candidates hoping to make the June 2 primary ballot. Most of them, including Plame, said that they already have the signatures to make the ballot, despite failing to qualify at the convention.

Accusations of antisemitism: Plame faced accusations of antisemitism in 2017 after she shared an article on Twitter entitled “America’s Jews are Driving America’s Wars” from the Unz Review, which defends conspiracy theories. Plame initially defended sharing the article, telling critics to “calm down,” claiming she didn’t endorse the post and encouraging people to “put aside your biases and think clearly.” She later apologized, saying she didn’t carefully read or consider the article before sharing it. But Twitter users found she’d shared other Unz articles over the course of several years, including “The Dancing Israelis,” which recounted an antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theory, and “Why I Still Dislike Israel,” which Plame praised as “well put.”

Plame’s defense: Plame told The New York Times that she is “of Jewish descent,” although she was raised Lutheran, and said she’d started attending services at Temple Beth Shalom, a synagogue in Santa Fe in the “aftermath” of her controversial tweet. The synagogue’s principal rabbi said she’d been coming to services for several years, but a synagogue board member told the New York Times she’s not on the membership list.

Demographics not on her side: New Mexico’s third district is 41% Hispanic and 19% Native American, leading many to see Plame — who is white and moved to New Mexico in 2007 — as an outsider, according to the NYTimes. Voters also told the NYTimes she doesn’t speak Spanish and struggles to properly pronounce Spanish words and surnames. Her perceived outsider status is likely to hurt her in some regions, where ethnic and regional divides shape voting patterns, pollster Brian Sanderoff told The Washington Post. “I reject the notion that you have to be born in a place to love it or to want to serve,” Plame told the Post. “But if people aren’t going to vote for me because of that, then I’m never going to change their mind.”