Politics
She was one of AIPAC’s top targets last election. Now she wants back in Congress.
Two years after a high-profile primary defeat that sent shockwaves through the progressive Squad, Cori Bush wants to go back to Washington.
But as the activist-turned-politician seeks to reclaim her seat, she must also contend with the changed landscape of the Beltway — including a Democratic Party engaged in fierce infighting over the country’s support for Israel that has only intensified since her ousting from Congress, which she argues will fuel her comeback bid.
“I need to go back. I didn’t finish the work that I was doing,” Bush said in a recent interview. “It was interrupted by big money. It was interrupted by AIPAC and their allies who made the decision that they didn’t want this activist, this advocate, who had been speaking out against war and imperialism, that had been speaking out against a genocide in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli government.”
The fight over the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and its political arm’s support for candidates has reached a fever pitch among Democrats this election cycle. More and more Democrats have denounced the organization’s influence and, some 2028 presidential contenders have vowed to not accept funding from the organization.
The race in Missouri’s 1st District — a plurality Black district anchored in St. Louis — two years ago was one of the highest-profile fights between critics and supporters of Israel in the Democratic Party, occurring as activists pressured then-candidate Joe Biden over his stance in the raging Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
Then-county prosecutor Wesley Bell — backed by more than $8.5 million in outside spending from the AIPAC-affiliated United Democracy Project — beat Bush by about 5 points in the primary before easily winning the seat in November. AIPAC’s political arm has yet to spend in the district this year, but they endorsed Bell once again in the 2026 cycle.
“Cori Bush was a disastrously ineffective Member of Congress who didn’t deliver for her constituents,” Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for AIPAC’s United Democracy Project, said in a statement. “When voters are reminded of that record of non-accomplishment, they will be no more likely to elect Cori Bush to Congress than they were to re-elect her two years ago. She was a terrible Member of Congress that didn’t [do] anything for St. Louis.”
Usamah Andrabi of Justice Democrats, a progressive organization that endorsed Bush this cycle and last, argued Bell’s history of accepting AIPAC support may now be his downfall.
“Voters are waking up to [AIPAC’s] influence, and that is why you are now seeing AIPAC’s endorsement becoming, I think, a death for so many candidates and incumbents across the country,” said Andrabi.
AIPAC has had a mixed record in Democratic primary contests this year, including a faceplant in New Jersey and a split decision in Illinois, as progressive candidates more outwardly attack the organization.
Dorton highlighted Bush’s missed votes and her vote against Biden’s infrastructure bill as the reason she lost to Bell. For his part, Bell appeared unconcerned about the impact that AIPAC’s past support could have on his reelection bid, calling it nothing more than a “headline” for his opponent.
“Folks in my district, money in politics doesn’t impact whether they can get gas in their car and pay for food and the price of eggs and bringing jobs into our district,” Bell said in an interview. “And so that is a headline that my opponent likes to play into.”
Antjuan Seawright — a longtime Democratic strategist and adviser to top Democratic campaign committees — also argued that a focus on AIPAC won’t motivate most primary voters.
“I know there are some in and outside of our party who want to make the conversations about the type of money folks may or may not receive, but I tend to think it’s more important about the type of services we provide,” Seawright said. “As long as the people feel like you’re representing them, then why should the race be about the type of money instead of about the services you provide to the district?”
But the divide in the Democratic Party over support for Israel has only grown since Bush’s 2024 defeat, particularly amid the war in Iran launched by President Donald Trump and Israeli leaders.
Sixty-seven percent of registered Democrats said in an NBC News poll this month that they sympathized more with Palestinians rather than Israelis in “the Middle East situation.” And a recent Quinnipiac poll found that 53 percent of voters, including 89 percent of Democrats, oppose the U.S-Israel military action against Iran.
A similar division is playing out among Republicans. Most self-described MAGA voters firmly back the president’s actions, but prominent members of the conservative movement like Tucker Carlson have criticized the conflict, and Joe Kent, who was serving in a senior intelligence role, quit the administration.
“Without a doubt, the fact that Wesley Bell is historically one of the largest recipients of AIPAC money ever is a massive albatross around his neck that should be hit on consistently,” Andrabi said.
And he argued that primary voters are now rewarding Democrats willing to buck party leadership.
“Voters are looking for leaders who are willing to call out their own party when they are failing communities, call out their own party when they are too beholden to corporate lobbies like AIPAC,” he said. “Cori has done that her entire time [in Congress].”
AIPAC-backed groups two years ago broadly did not focus on Israel in contests across the country. They instead targeted Bush’s vote against Biden’s crowning infrastructure bill and missed House votes — a strategy the organization has continued in early primaries this year — and something that Bell amplified.
“I don’t want to hear about someone who claims to fight but won’t show up to do the job,” Bell said.
Bush was among six progressive Democrats who voted against Biden’s infrastructure bill. The group argued that the bill was incomplete without the separate economic package, known as the Build Back Better Act.
But Bush argues her activism — including pushing party leaders from the left — is where the base of the Democratic Party now is.
“The thing is, people are moving toward the things that I was speaking about,” Bush said. “I called it a genocide before many others did. I spoke up for Medicare For All before others did. I pushed for the Equal Rights Amendment in a way that hadn’t been done in a very long time, and I created a caucus to stand for the Equal Rights Amendment.”
The tensions between Bell and Bush are a stark difference from their relationship pre-2024. According to Bush, the two had been friends — until Bell launched his campaign against her without a heads up. Bush said the two haven’t talked since, and she didn’t let him know when she decided to run against him this year “the same way he didn’t reach out to me to tell me he was going to run against me.”
Still, Bell already has a few advantages in the race: Not only is he the incumbent, but he secured the endorsement of the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, one of the most influential Black political organizations. And Bell’s campaign war chest is much larger than hers: He has nearly $850,000 on hand as of the end of 2025, according to campaign finance records, compared to just over $200,000 for Bush.
Bell has pitched himself as a pragmatist, saying that voters in the district don’t actually think about many of the issues that Bush pushes for.
“She wasn’t present in St. Louis. She didn’t meet with stakeholders; she didn’t meet with constituents,” he said, highlighting the money he brought to district businesses over the last two years. “The MO in Missouri does not stand for Middle East. It stands for Missouri.”
Bush, meanwhile, has signaled she will lean into her progressive activism for her comeback bid. She said she still speaks regularly with members of the Squad: Democratic Reps. Ayanna Pressley, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. None of the members responded to a request for comment.
Seawright, the Democratic strategist, said the back-and-forth between the two candidates exemplifies the party’s “growing pains.”
“The primaries, hopefully, will do what they’re supposed to do and settle whatever differences and disputes we may appear to have, but also change the direction of how we move forward,” he said. “No matter the differences we may appear to have amongst each other, they do not compare to the differences we have with the other side.”
A version of this article first appeared in Blue Light News Pro’s Morning Score. Want to receive the newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to Blue Light News Pro. You’ll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day’s biggest stories.
Daniel Lurie is already imagining the scene at Levi’s Stadium on July 1.
The San Francisco Democrat — who, according to at least one recent poll, is the most popular mayor in America — was circulating around his city ahead of Levi’s Stadium hosting Turkey vs. Paraguay tonight, when he began to wrap his head around his good fortune.
The venue is scheduled to host the Round of 32 match featuring the Group D winner on July 1, and that’s very likely to be the U.S. team.
“It’ll be incredible,” Lurie, a no-nonsense technocrat, told Blue Light News. “It’ll be a thrilling moment for San Francisco, and for our region.”
He beamed in to a FaceTime interview from Southern Station, having already been at two watch parties that capture the new San Francisco he’s trying to build: the East Cut neighborhood, and then Fieldwork Brewing at China Basin.
And Lurie knows ball: Not only has he attended five World Cups, he is also an investor in 49ers Enterprises, which purchased Leeds in 2023.
He drew a parallel to his English club’s own turnaround this season: newly promoted and expected to go straight back down, Leeds instead finished safely mid-table. Lurie is trying to engineer a similar revival in San Francisco, using major events like the World Cup and February’s Super Bowl to project competence and attract visitors and families.
In San Francisco, such a turnaround means restoring a sense of competence to city government — and managing large events like the Super Bowl and the World Cup are key to that effort.
“We are managing for results here in San Francisco, and what’s critical about those results is keeping people safe, making sure that people want to be here in San Francisco, that they have a great time, and that they want to come back,” Lurie said.
His turnaround effort will be vastly aided by Open AI’s expected IPO, which will expand his tax base but also pose challenges.
“We got Anthropic. We got Open AI. We have a company that’s four years old in Cursor that just got acquired by Elon Musk’s company for $60 billion and hardly anyone’s talking about that,” Lurie said. “I think we want these companies here. We want them paying their taxes here, and we want them being engaged in the community. We want them involved in civic life, we want their employees involved and engaged in their neighborhoods, but we also want an economy, and we want an economy that works for everyone — that lifts up the entire community, and isn’t just for the select few.”
Lurie said he is laser-focused on affordability.
“We are every day focused on building more housing, building more affordable housing, making child care more affordable,” Lurie said. “We are the first city in the country to provide access and opportunity to free early childhood education, [age] zero to five, for any family of four making $210,000 a year or less.”
The aim? Draw more families within the city’s confines.
“We’re gonna hopefully keep more working families here in our city, and we want them to believe that they can build a life here long term, so people don’t get priced out — so we have a lot of work to do.”
Lurie largely avoids the national spotlight — the rare exception coming when he netted a jumper on “The Pat McAfee Show” early this year — and feverish culture war issues in favor of a get-shit-done approach to governing.
“Our number one industry is tourism,” Lurie said. “And when people visit our city or when they take their kids to school each day, they don’t care if their mayor is a Democrat or a Republican.”
As of Friday evening, as he prepared to watch Turkey vs. Paraguay, Lurie couldn’t fully allow himself to contemplate what it would mean for Levi’s Stadium to play host to a U.S. squad that’s rocking and rolling over opponents.
“We cannot jinx it,” Lurie said. “But it’s looking very much like we will host USA in the first knockout round. My hope: I’ll be there to root on USA.”
Brazil has won a record five World Cups, but the most important match it has ever played may have been an exhibition match against Haiti that was meaningless in sporting terms but has had a long influence on each country’s politics.
On Aug. 18, 2004, Brazil’s players drove through the streets of Port-au-Prince in armored personnel carriers, World Cup champions greeted like liberators. Two months earlier, Brazil’s military had arrived to lead a multinational peacekeeping force established by the United Nations following a bloody coup d’état.
“We’ve only seen such joy in the eyes, the exuberance of the eyes, when we paraded in Brazil after winning the World Cup,” coach Carlos Alberto Parreira said afterwards. “I will never forget this moment.”
The team was accompanied to the U.N.-hosted friendly match that followed — “They play, peace wins,” went the slogan — by Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, then in his first term as Brazil’s president. More than two decades later, Lula is back in office, now cemented as the most accomplished leader the world’s left has seen in the 21st century. His approach to foreign policy, say observers, was shaped partially on the soccer pitch that day in Port-au-Prince.
“It showed he was trying something different as a diplomatic tool,” said Mauricio Savarese, an Associated press political reporter in São Paulo who has researched the legacy of the 2004 game. “That match at the time was a symbol of Brazil’s soft power. You really showed how Brazil could win hearts and minds with a policy that was not exactly bowing to the United States or to the China or to Russia, but independent.”
The match, designed to build goodwill between a shell-shocked population and its benevolent occupiers, began after players from the two national teams unfurled a pre-match banner that read “Social Justice is the True Name of Peace.” The peacekeeping mission represented an early commitment to “continental solidarity,” as Lula defined it in a speech the following year to up-and-coming diplomats where he cited the Haiti mission as an example of “non-indifference.”
Lula was feeling his way toward a foreign policy centered around South-South Cooperation and the BRICS alliance of emerging markets. Lula has used that role as de-facto leader of the democratic developing world to, with mixed results, position Brazil as a leader on climate change — it hosted last year’s COP30 in the Amazon city of Belém — and a mediator when thorny international conflicts arise. It has a position of official neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine war, so as to serve a potential role as mediator, as it did when partnering with Turkey in 2010 to broker a nuclear-fuel swap with Iran.
That same year, an earthquake hit Haiti, killing over 100,000 people while injuring and displacing millions more. It also destroyed the headquarters of the U.N. Stabilisation Mission in Haiti, even as Brazil led a post-disaster humanitarian relief effort. The experience further deepened ties between the two countries, as Brazil introduced a humanitarian-visa program for the first time to welcome Haitians fleeing the devastation; it has since been extended to Syrian war refugees, as well. One historically Italian neighborhood in São Paulo is now known as Little Haiti.
The broader peacekeeping mission began to resemble a military quagmire in humanitarian garb: Brazilian troops were blamed for human-rights violations and a cholera epidemic, while doing little to improve the overall security situation. For Lula and his protegée Dilma Rousseff, the Haiti project became a political liability, in both Haiti and Brazil.
As the two nations prepare to face off against one another in Philadelphia on Friday, Lula is not expected to be in attendance. Instead his travel schedule this week was built around the G7 summit in France, in which Brazil participated as one of five “partner countries” — a reflection of its increased global standing over the past few decades. If Lula shows up at one of Brazil’s matches later in the World Cup, it will likely be with a domestic audience in mind rather than a foreign one: he is in the midst of a reelection campaign for his fourth term, against a son of his longtime antagonist Jair Bolsonaro.
“I doubt that anyone is going to vote for him just because he’s recognized abroad as a key leader,” said Savarese, Brazilian political journalist who wrote the book “Dilma’s Downfall.” “But of course that helps with some moderates, which are a very thin part of Brazil’s electorate, and they’re going to be decisive in October’s election, that is also one of the things that tips the balance in his favor, as is being seen as this pragmatic leader who can also be respected even when he’s speaking about issues that clearly don’t affect as much in Brazil’s daily life.”
That day in Haiti, not yet a global figure, Lula confronted one limit on his power. He reportedly asked his team not to score too many goals, in the interests of goodwill. The players did not oblige, winning 6-0, including an astonishing solo effort from Ronaldinho.
Blue Light News has been crunching the numbers to see how all 48 of this year’s World Cup participants rank in several other off-field categories, which we’ll share more of over the weekend.
In today’s item, we look at whether GDP per capita has any connection to soccer performance. As you can see, the chart does show some positive correlation — note, for example, wealthy tournament contenders such as France, the Netherlands and Germany all in the upper right corner.
But it’s not a perfect indicator. By this metric, Qatar is the wealthiest country in the tournament — and it lost 6-0 to Canada on Thursday …
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship9 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words