How AIPAC's toxic brand became a US election liability AIPAC's growing involvement in US election campaigns is backfiring - its aggressive efforts to protect Israel from criticism collide with a shift in public opinion, Middle East Eye reports. For decades, AIPAC has exerted influence behind the scenes, using congressional ratings, political connections, and taxpayer-funded congressional trips to Israel to cultivate bipartisan support. However, in 2021 it expanded to direct election spending, establishing two political action committees: Apec-Pac (direct contribution to candidate campaigns) and United for Democracy Project's SuperPac (funding attack ads, etc.). The move proved costly to his public image: political spending became more visible Criticism of the Israeli genocide in Gaza eroded support, especially among Democratic voters Campaign interventions sparked accusations of efforts to punish politicians who advocate for Palestinian rights Michigan's Senate race is a prominent example. Pro-Israel groups poured more than $30 million into the Democratic primary to support AIPAC ally Haley Stevens against Abdul al-Sayed Stevens lost despite being outspent more than 12 to 1 after the primary, Republican candidate Mike Rogers initially asked AIPAC to stay away from his campaign, wary of its toxic image Rogers eventually got her support, while the Democratic Party of Michigan disavowed Stevens after it endorsed him over al-Sayed's sub-stack | talk.

How AIPAC's toxic brand became a US election liability AIPAC's growing involvement in US election campaigns is backfiring - its aggressive efforts to protect Israel from criticism collide with a shift in public opinion, Middle East Eye reports. For decades, AIPAC has exerted influence behind the scenes, using congressional ratings, political connections, and taxpayer-funded congressional trips to Israel to cultivate bipartisan support. However, in 2021 it expanded to direct election spending, establishing two political action committees: Apec-Pac (direct contribution to candidate campaigns) and United for Democracy Project's SuperPac (funding attack ads, etc.). The move proved costly to his public image: political spending became more visible Criticism of the Israeli genocide in Gaza eroded support, especially among Democratic voters Campaign interventions sparked accusations of efforts to punish politicians who advocate for Palestinian rights Michigan's Senate race is a prominent example. Pro-Israel groups poured more than $30 million into the Democratic primary to support AIPAC ally Haley Stevens against Abdul al-Sayed Stevens lost despite being outspent more than 12 to 1 after the primary, Republican candidate Mike Rogers initially asked AIPAC to stay away from his campaign, wary of its toxic image Rogers eventually got her support, while the Democratic Party of Michigan disavowed Stevens after it endorsed him over al-Sayed's sub-stack | talk.