Message to Candidates: Stopping Military Aid to Israel Is a Winning Issue

Washington Watch

September 15th, 2025

Dr. James J. Zogby © 

President 

Arab American Institute  

What to do or say about Israel’s war on Gaza has establishment Democratic consultants and the elected officials for whom they work in a tizzy. 

One recent news account reported that Senate and House Democratic leaders are worried about the “Mamdani effect”—meaning their concern that should Zohran Mamdani win the 2025 mayor’s race in New York City, it may scare “moderate” voters away from voting for Democrats in November 2026. Additionally, a slew of commentary pieces have cautioned Democratic candidates against embracing “progressive” policies urging them instead to hue to more centrist positions. While other issues factor into this concern, at the top of the list is Mamdani’s and other progressives’ criticism of Israel and support for Palestinians, both of which establishment Democrats view as too radical for voters. 

In this context, it was interesting to note that during the recent Democratic National Committee debate over a resolution criticizing Israel and calling for an end to US arms supplies to that country, the major argument raised by the consultant groups was that if the resolution were to pass it would damage the prospects of Democrats’ winning control of Congress in the 2026 elections. 

Then there are the articles suggesting that “leftist” Democrats are pushing to make Israel’s war against Palestinians a “litmus test” for 2026 candidates. Many of these pieces report on a few Democratic elected officials or leading 2026 candidates who, in recent weeks, have felt forced to retract comments supportive of Israel in the face of backlash from voters. 

The consultants and Democratic Party congressional leaders are wrong. It’s not some insidious leftist conspiracy that has caused candidates to change their views. Rather it’s the mood of voters that has changed, and candidates who have their finger on the pulse of the electorate know they must change too. 

We’ve seen recent polls that show a dramatic shift in voter sympathy for Palestinians over Israelis and support for stopping military supplies to Israel. To learn how these shifting attitudes might translate into voter behavior, at the end of August, the Arab American Institute commissioned John Zogby Strategies to conduct a nationwide poll of 1005 voters. The poll didn’t ask whether or not respondents were supportive of Israel, its policies, or the support it receives from the US. Instead, voters were given a number of positions that might be taken by a candidate for office and asked whether, given that position, they were more or less likely to support that candidate. 

The questions asked included the following: 

1. Would you be more or less likely to support a candidate if they were in favor of reducing or ending military aid to Israel? 

2. Would you be more or less likely to support a candidate if they spoke out to stop Israel’s war on Gaza? 

3. Would you be more or less likely to support a candidate if they spoke about what Israel is doing in Gaza as a genocide? 

4. Would you be more or less likely to support a candidate if they received support from a pro-Israel lobbying group, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)? 

In response to questions 1, 2, and 3, a plurality of all voters would be more inclined to support the candidate who took these positions. A plurality would be less inclined to support candidates who received funding from AIPAC. 

As expected, there is a partisan split with Democrats more likely to support candidates who are critical of Israeli policy. The one exception is in response to stopping the war— where Democrats and Republicans agree. 

In analyzing the data from this poll, we found that the percentage of voters calling themselves conservative (39%) was greater than those who termed themselves liberal (26%). But those who said they were moderates were the second largest group (34%). While the views of liberals and conservatives were at times mirror-images of one another, what was striking was the degree to which, on these issues, the attitudes of liberals and moderates were largely the same. Sixty percent (60%) of voters in both groups more likely to support candidates who seek to stop Israel’s war on Gaza as opposed to only 10% who would be less likely to support a candidate who takes such a view. Among conservatives, attitudes are evenly divided. Much the same holds true with regard to decreasing military aid to Israel and calling Israel’s policies in Gaza genocide. 

The bottom line is that when Democratic consultants try to steer candidates onto what they consider “safe centrist ground” by appealing to “moderates” they are only establishing how out of touch they are with the views of the electorate. The Democratic establishment should end their fretting about candidates losing this election because they may take positions that are critical of Israel and supportive of Palestinian rights. Instead, they should be encouraging them to do so. It is where the majority of voters are—liberals and moderates included.