285
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2026
285 points (99.7% liked)
politics
30708 readers
3471 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
AIPAC seems to be an undermining factor to American democracy.
All monied interests are. But yes AIPAC is one of the worst considering it's openly by and for the benefit of a foreign government. Imagine if the PRC had such an organization how that would be perceived.
The good news here is their willingness to support a republican here could make them into a great liberal boogie man with the right messaging.
The Democratic Party is just as much in the pocket of AIPAC as the Republican Party; if anything this will just cause AIPAC to increase their lobbying further.
Edit: I'm not trying to make a 'both sides' argument; the Democratic Party is far and away superior to the Republican Party. However, the party itself is not nearly as anti-Israel as its most progressive-leaning candidates are, meaning that a nationwide Democratic victory is unfortunately unlikely to result in the complete cessation of arms sales to Israel or recognition of genocide in Gaza.
They don't deserve the down votes, they're right. Until the Gaza Genocide, a LOT of Dems were happy to take money from AIPAC, because there was little to no negative consequences for it.
Now it has become TOXIC to take AIPAC money, but they hate losing such a reliable pipeline, and their AIPAC handlers are probably demanding they EARN the bribes they've been paid, so they're really motivated to stay on the side of Israel, unless...
...unless it means they lose their office. It doesn't make sense to support Israel if it means it's the last political decision they'll ever make. We need to punish those who are still sucking AIPAC teat at the ballot box, in multiple successive elections, until Dem candidates know that AIPAC is poison, and stay away.
I mean that obviously isn't true, that's what this whole article and comment section is about. Democratic candidates standing up to AIPAC.
Now if you said almost as much, I would give you a pass.
It just means that it's cheaper for them to lobby Republicans than Democrats as the former are predisposed to unconditionally supporting Israel. As a result, 58.6% of AIPAC congressional lobbying went to Democrats in 2024.
Not that resistance isn't building against AIPAC, but the central Democratic Party is far less anti-AIPAC than candidates like El-Sayed.
AIPAC was literally created because their predecessor had to register as a foreign agent...
AIPACs first recipients of funds, were the people who sat on the very same committee. I want to think just months later, but it was at least the same people.
And that's the story of how shit got so fucked up, and why AIPAC doesn't have to register as a foreign agent.
We need to ban both MAGA and AIPAC, as Domestic Terror Organizations.
Hmmm. It seems like we give a lot of money to Israel and they return the favor by using that money bribe all of the politicians over here
Do you hate free speech?
Have you ever considered: fuck the supreme court, they're wrong
Only about 50% of the time recently.
PUT ISRAEL FIRST DONATE TO AIPAC
Fuck AIPAC and fuck each and every Zionist twat that supports them.
/s
I'm relieved to see that.
I saw ads begging for contributions from americans, jaw hit the floor, I genuinely couldn't believe it, cheeky tarts