Analysis | Why Zionist lobby in U.S. is no longer as influential as it once was

Pars Today – The victory of Abdulrahman Al-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic primary was the first clear setback to the notion that money, lobbying, and negative advertising can always determine political outcomes in the United States.

On the surface, the Democratic primary for a U.S. Senate seat in Michigan was simply one of dozens of intra-party contests held ahead of the U.S. midterm elections. In reality, however, it became a test of the balance of power between the traditional U.S. political establishment and the emerging progressive movement. The outcome went beyond selecting a party nominee, carrying a broader message about the gradual shift in American public opinion—particularly regarding the Gaza war—the influence of political lobbying, and the future of the Democratic Party.

Abdulrahman Al-Sayed, a physician and former public health official, succeeded in defeating Haley Stevens, a figure backed by a significant part of the Democratic establishment, despite Stevens enjoying extensive financial and political support. Tens of millions of dollars were spent by groups close to pro-Israel lobbying organizations, particularly AIPAC, in an effort to prevent Al-Sayed's victory. Alongside this financial backing, many influential Democratic figures also supported Stevens.

Nevertheless, the final result showed that the scale of campaign spending is no longer a guarantee of electoral victory.

What makes this election a turning point is not simply the defeat of one candidate or the failure of one lobbying group, but the emergence of a profound shift in the political behavior of a segment of American society. After nearly three years of the Gaza war, the issue of Washington's unconditional support for Tel Aviv has evolved from a foreign-policy issue into a domestic political issue in the United States. Younger voters, progressives, a significant segment of Muslim and Arab-American voters, and even some independent voters now consider the U.S. government's Middle East policy when evaluating political candidates.

Michigan holds a particularly important position in this regard. The state is considered one of the most competitive in the United States and is home to the country's largest Arab-American population and one of its largest Muslim communities. This made the Gaza war and U.S. policy toward the Israeli regime a central issue in the race, unlike many previous elections. Voters in the state were not simply deciding on the economy, taxes, or healthcare. They were also voting on America's moral and political direction.

More importantly, the election exposed the relative ineffectiveness of the traditional political-lobbying strategy. For decades, AIPAC had been regarded as the largest and most influential pro-Israel lobbying group in U.S. elections, using substantial financial resources to eliminate many critics of Israeli policies from the political arena. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that approximately $60 million was spent in support of Stevens, with more than $30 million provided by AIPAC. The newspaper described the Michigan contest as the most expensive primary election in U.S. history.

However, Michigan's Democratic primary showed that increasing campaign spending, when public opinion is undergoing a shift, is not necessarily effective and may even produce the opposite result. When voters feel that outside financial resources are being used to engineer an election outcome, the likelihood of a backlash increases—a phenomenon that many American analysts have also pointed to.

Donald Trump's strong reaction to Al-Sayed's victory can also be viewed from this perspective. The use of labels such as "communist" or accusing critics of Israeli policies of being hostile to Jews has been part of American political rhetoric for years. But the repeated use of such rhetoric increasingly reflects the difficulty of defending the status quo. The U.S. political landscape is no longer as unified as it once was, and divisions over Middle East policy have now spread into both major political parties.

At the same time, Al-Sayed's victory should be viewed as part of a broader trend that has emerged in recent years with the growing influence of progressive figures within the Democratic Party. This movement seeks to shift U.S. policy priorities away from foreign interventions and toward domestic issues, and away from increased military spending toward investment in healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

Regardless of the outcome of the November general election, Abdulrahman Al-Sayed's success demonstrates that this political discourse is no longer a marginal voice, but has become part of the mainstream struggle for power in the United States.