This article is noteworthy for the historical track record of Cori Bush’s challenger, Wesley Bell. It covers how Bell betrayed the BLM movement despite the widespread support he received from it.
Also noteworthy are these two paragraphs that explain how Bell has incredible funding from the genocide enabling Israeli-aligned AIPAC lobby.
But rather than build his campaign against Hawley, Bell dramatically shifted his priorities, pivoting to mount a challenge against a left-wing Missouri politician instead. Last June, Bell called Cori Bush to promise he wouldn’t run against her. Then, after the Hamas attack in Israel on October 7 and the outbreak of Israel’s assault on Gaza, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) “let it be publicly known that a challenger to Bush would have effectively bottomless fundraising support,” writes Ryan Grim. Bell subsequently dropped out of his race against Hawley and turned around to challenge Bush. This opened the floodgates for the Israel lobby, which has spent a staggering $7 million on Bell’s run to capture Bush’s seat.
As of July 2024, AIPAC’s massive donations only account for 62 percent of Bell’s contributions — in part because Missouri Republicans have lavished Bell’s coffers. The Huffington Post reported that Bell’s campaign filings included donations “from notable sources such as Steven Tilley, a GOP former Missouri House speaker who’s now a lobbyist,” and “Daniel Loeb, the billionaire founder of the hedge fund Third Point, who has donated millions to Republican causes.”
Why should I care about this?
Another country can use a PAC to pour unlimited amounts of money to influence US politics and you don’t feel like you should care about that? Replace Israel and Palestine with an issue you care about and someone funding your opponents view.
Isn’t AIPAC a US-organization funded by people in the US?
Its primarily US billionaires using PACs the indirectly bankroll politicians, which is not any better. They still have the goal of making policies to benefit themselves.
In name only. Its sole purpose is to function as a de jure separated but de facto integrated part of the Israeli government.
You act like that is a unique problem related to Israel and Palestine. I think there are much bigger priorities.
You could list your priorities and probably find a PAC being funded by interests with more money than the average American can donate to the cause. This isn’t exclusive to Israel/Palestine, it’s just clear that Israel’s goal is to silence any voices that speak against them in Congress so they can continue to get their funding for more weapons.
At the end of the day, the Citizens United ruling has given special interests groups, including those who don’t have the success of America in their minds, outsized impacts on our elections and therefore our national and foreign policy.
It’s chilling to think that another country can come here, spend millions with little or no rules or oversight to influence our politics. The average American voter doesn’t have millions of dollars to pour into races to defend their interests. We’re continually having our voices diluted by corporate and now foreign spending. This was happening before but now with PACs it’s essentially opened the floodgates.
Because Bush is one of the staunchest supporters of women’s reproductive rights in Congress, and the guy who is primarying her has not only betrayed his constituents before, but is also pretty definitely not a Democrat, and is being funded largely by conservative PACs as a spoiler/5th column candidate.
Thanks for the explanation.
Because it’ll be on the test.