Today, Explained - How Israel is upending Democratic races

Episode Date: March 5, 2024

Super Tuesday is the biggest day of the presidential primary campaign, but the biggest race in the biggest state isn’t about Biden or Trump. Instead, the leading candidates for California’s open Senate seat — three Democrats and a Republican — are finding themselves talking a lot about Israel, Palestine, and the war in Gaza. This episode was produced by Avishay Artsy, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd, and guest-hosted by Alana Casanova Burgess. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's Today Explained. I'm Alana Casanova-Burgess, filling in as host on this Super Tuesday. Elections everywhere in the U.S., all at once. This could be Nikki Haley's last stand, and folks are mad at Biden about his support of Israel's war in Gaza. But we'll start with the Senate race in California. This was a seat that was occupied since 1992 by Senator Dianne Feinstein, who is, you know, was this legend of California politics, a real institution. This is Melanie Mason. She writes about California politics for Politico. Whoever gets this seat, it automatically catapults them to a new level of notoriety, a new level of prominence in the Democratic Party. Israel is a major talking point for candidates in that race,

and it's shaking up primary contests across the country. More ahead on Today Explained. The all-new FanDuel Sportsbook and Casino is bringing you more action than ever. Want more ways to follow your faves? Check out our new player prop tracking with real-time notifications. Or how about more ways to customize your casino page with our new favorite and recently played games tabs?

And to top it all off, quick and secure withdrawals. Get more everything with FanDuel Sportsbook and Casino. Gambling problem? Call 1-866-531-2600. Visit connectsontario.ca. Super Tuesday, Super Tuesday. So there's a Senate primary today in California. There are a whopping 27 candidates on the ballot. But there are four big ones, three Democrats and one Republican.

Melanie Mason from Politico, can you give us a little bit about each of them and the case they're making as to why they should be the next senator from California? Do you want to start with Congressman Adam Schiff from Burbank, or I guess as we've heard Trump call him? You little pencil neck. Pencil neck, shifty Schiff, there's like so many nicknames. And there's been nothing better for Adam Schiff than the fact that he has this antagonist in Trump. He buys the smallest shirt collar you can get and it's loose. Adam Schiff has been a congressman representing the Los Angeles area since 2000. And he was seen as kind of a pretty establishment, fairly centrist Democrat who had been on the House Intelligence Committee, had been involved mostly on sort of foreign affairs, national security side.

And then the Trump impeachment comes and he became the main house manager for the first Trump impeachment and has become sort of a face of the resistance, as it were, to former President Trump. You can't trust this president to do the right thing, not for one minute, not for one election, not for the sake of our country. You just can't. He will not change. And you know it. Between that and the January 6th committee really has sort of positioned himself nationally as somebody who would take on Donald Trump.

When our democracy was in danger, he stood up. Adam Schiff took on a corrupt president. He fought to protect our values and the rule of law. He's not exactly like the flashiest candidate, but he has somehow become the celebrity candidate because he has such a national following, which in practical effect means that he has raised just gobs of money. And so he has been sort of the consistent frontrunner from the beginning,

in part because of his national profile and in part because he has more money than God. All right. So Adam, gobs of money Schiff. Then we've got Katie Porter, right? She's Congresswoman from Orange County. And I'm picturing her with a whiteboard, right? That's how we know her. That's how she would love for you to picture her because that's definitely been the branding that she has done. Congresswoman Porter got elected in 2018.

She was part of that 2018 wave that was in reaction to the Trump presidency. And she is very infamous for having this whiteboard that she's used in congressional hearings to sort of take down CEOs or take down members of the Trump administration back then. CEOs will use tactics like, could you repeat the question? I'm sorry, I didn't catch all that. I couldn't follow all of the numbers you were throwing out there. I think the whiteboard helps prevent that. She's a former law professor, so she's incredibly good at distilling these bullet points of key information and making it very digestible.

She was also seen as a pretty formidable candidate coming into this race because of that celebrity that she had and the fact that there were a lot of people who were quite loyal to her more assertive brand of politics. And then you have Barbara Lee, long-serving congresswoman from Oakland, sort of activist of the bunch. Yes, and she really has kind of captured the longstanding admiration, particularly of progressives, because of this really fateful vote that she took back in 2001 in the aftermath of September 11th. She voted against the authorized use of military force act, which is sort of what laid the groundwork for the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq. And she has really run on that.

I didn't quit when I refused to give the president completely unlimited war powers after September 11th and in the face of countless death threats. I was the only no vote. I didn't quit then and I won't quit now. Her problem is she just has not been able to raise many like the other two Democrats that she's running against. So all of those compelling storylines,

she doesn't really have the ability to communicate that to the voters. Okay, so three Democrats, one Republican in the race, Steve Garvey, former baseball player? That's right, former Dodger, former Padre. Deep right field, way back, cut a gun back to the wall. It's gone! Home run Garvey,ed glove as a kid, even though I actually was too young to ever see him play. But I mean, that just goes to show like Steve Garvey, people know him in California.

If you're a baseball fan, you know Steve Garvey. He is certainly kind of iconic in that sense. But this is his first time as a candidate. And it shows. I mean, he is running as this pretty squishy Republican who won't really take positions on really any issues at all. He, for example, voted for Trump twice, but won't say if he will vote for Trump again in this election. I will look at the two opponents. I will determine what they did.

And at that time, I will make my choice. Well, California, I think what they say is true. Once a Dodger, always a Dodger. He also just really isn't running very much of a campaign. But for reasons that I'm sure we will get to, that doesn't matter because Adam Schiff, the Democrat, is sort of doing it for him. And that has accrued to his benefit a lot. Okay, but this is a different kind of primary, right? This is not Democrats and Republicans are in different buckets. This is a free-for-all kind of? That's right. So California, in the last couple election cycles, has adopted this top two primary, which means that it doesn't matter what party you're in, just the top two vote getters of the primary election will advance to the November general. So there is a possibility that you could have two Democrats advance or a Democrat or

Republican. The latest Berkeley IGS poll has Republican Steve Garvey on top with 27 percent support among likely voters, followed by Schiff with 25 percent, Porter 19 percent and Lee 8 percent. Adam Schiff has consistently polled among the top Democrats, but Steve Garvey, as the Republican, has been moving up and up and up. It seems that he's really coalescing the Republican vote behind him. Katie Porter seems to be battling a little bit more to try and get into that second spot. And that's looking harder and harder for her to do. And then Congresswoman Lee has just consistently not really been able to pull above double digits.

You mentioned earlier that Schiff has been sort of promoting Garvey. Yeah. So because Schiff has so much money that he can spend, he basically has money to run two campaigns. So he's running his own campaign where he has advertisement that's his own bio, his own sort of positive vision, talking about what he would do as Senate. And then he's running this other set of ads that technically are anti-Garvey ads. Two leading candidates for Senate, two very different visions for California. Steve Garvey, the leading Republican, is too conservative for California. He voted for Trump twice and supported Republicans for years, including far-right conservatives. There are millions of Republicans in this state, but the reality is, is looking ahead in a state as blue as California, a Schiff-Garvey matchup

almost virtually ensures that Schiff would be the next senator from California. We don't obviously make 100% predictions, but the math would be extremely difficult for Steve Garvey going forward. So we've got essentially Schiff, the Trump antagonist, Katie Porter, the explainer, Barbara Lee, the activist. And among them, are we seeing any actual policy differences or just vibes? I'd say mostly vibes. I think there's two areas that have emerged as a point of difference. And one of them I will say I did not have on my bingo card going into this race. And this was a question of earmarks. Katie Porter has really put her foot down. Earmarks are about inviting corruption, conflicts of interest and rewarding people's donors. The other two Democrats say, of course, we need earmarks. Earmarks are ways that we can pay for housing programs or homelessness programs in our communities. The other issue where there is some genuine policy

differentials, and I think does reflect a larger conversation, is about the Israel-Hamas war. As soon as Hamas' attack on Israel happened on October 7th, Congresswoman Lee, who remember is this anti-war activist, has sort of been a hero in the party because of that, immediately came out, literally the next day came out and called for an immediate ceasefire. The only way Israel is going to be secure is through a permanent ceasefire. The only way that is going to happen is with a political and diplomatic solution. And she had really put a marker down early, I would say much earlier than most of the progressives in her party, who very quickly, I think, coalesced around the ceasefire idea or the ceasefire concept as something to rally around. Congressman Adam Schiff, on the other side,

has been sort of steadfast in not calling for a ceasefire. I don't know how you can ask any nation to ceasefire when their people are being held by a terrorist organization. Katie Porter has sort of found herself a little bit in the mushy middle. So I've called for a release for all the hostages, resources to rebuild Gaza, making sure Israel is secure and a free state for Palestinians where they can thrive. But just the fact that she sort of put herself in this middle ground position so that she could say that she supported some form of ceasefire, I think in a way symbolizes Democrats, or at least some Democrats,

growing concerns about how Israel is conducting this military operation and a sense that there is a real uneasiness out there. And increasing that pressure, calling for some form of ceasefire is a way to do that. I think that there are people who feel very, very strongly about this issue. Just as we've seen across the country, there are people who come out and protest. There are people who say that this will be a determinative issue. But I think that if we're talking more broadly about the electorate as a whole, I don't think that this is necessarily an issue that is determining what people's vote is going to be. And so I think for the people who care very deeply, it might be that single determining factor,

but I do not think that's the case for the majority of voters. Melanie Mason, Politico.com. A lot of voters might not be deciding based on Israel, but that's not stopping interest groups from pouring money into competitive primaries. How that's reshaping this year's election, ahead on Today Explained. Support for Today Explained comes from Ramp. Ramp is the corporate card and spend management software designed to help you save time and put money back in your pocket. Ramp says they give finance teams unprecedented control and insight into company spend. With Ramp, you're able to issue cards to every employee with limits and restrictions and automate expense reporting so you can stop wasting time at the end of every month.

And now you can get $250 when you join Ramp. You can go to ramp.com slash explained ramp.com slash explained r a m p.com slash explained cards issued by Sutton Bank member FDIC terms and conditions apply. BetMGM, authorized gaming partner of the NBA, has your back all season long. From tip-off to the final buzzer, you're always taken care of with a sportsbook born in Vegas. That's a feeling you can only get with BetMGM. And no matter your team, your favorite player, or your style, there's something every NBA fan will love about BetMGM. Download the app today and discover why BetMGM is your basketball home for the season. Raise your game to the next level this year with BetMGM, a sportsbook worth a slam dunk and authorized gaming partner of the NBA.

BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. Must be 19 years of age or older to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have any questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Support for today explained comes from Ramp. If you're a finance manager,

you're probably used to having to toggle between multiple disjointed tools just to keep track of everything. And sometimes that means there's limited visibility on business spend. I don't know what any of that means, but Ramp might be able to help. Ramp is a corporate card and spend management software designed to help you save time and put money back in your back pocket. Ramp's accounting software automatically collects receipts, categorizes your expenses in real time. You can say goodbye to manual expense reports. You will never have to chase down a receipt again.

You can customize spending limits and restrictions so your employees are empowered to purchase what your business needs. And you can have peace of your business needs and you can have peace of mind. And now you can get $250 when you join RAMP. You go to ramp.com slash explained, ramp.com slash explained, ramp.com slash explained. Cards are issued by Sutton Bank, a member of the FDIC, and terms and conditions do apply. Explained. 2024 Explained. Today Explained is back. I'm Alana Casanova-Burgess. Ross Barkin writes about politics for the New York Times Magazine and other places. Lately, he's been looking at the fracture in the Democratic York Times Magazine and other places. Lately, he's been looking at

the fracture in the Democratic Party over Israel and Palestine. For the last few decades, it was almost impossible to find a Democrat who was willing to criticize the actions of the Israeli government in any way. That consensus has only started to erode in the last few years. You've seen the rise of a new, younger left. You've seen Democrats enter Congress like Ilhan Omar, like Rashida Tlaib, like Summer Lee, like Jamal Bowman, who are willing to criticize the Israeli government. Most of those politicians are in the squad. The squad is now around eight Democrats. The squad didn't exist at all until 2019. So that's important to keep in mind. You have a very different

political dynamic today than you did a decade ago or 20 years ago. And that is definitely playing into what you see today. And you've also seen a strengthening of the pro-Israel lobby. APEC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, has always been very powerful. But in recent years, it started to play a much more significant role in primaries. And another organization that's related, Democratic Majority for Israel, has been in particular focusing on Democratic primaries. This election, AIPAC is expected to spend approximately $100 million just to try to

unseat progressive members of Congress who dare to speak out about what's going on in Gaza. AIPAC and DMFI, who are separate, there is a difference. Democratic majority for Israel only endorses Democrats. AIPAC, on the other hand, is long-funded Republicans and pro-Israel Democrats, and they have no problem giving money to Trump Republicans. Democratic majority for Israel draws the line at that, but when it comes to Democratic primaries, the two are completely aligned in that they each want to defeat, crush, eliminate the progressive Israel skeptical left. So you mentioned AIPAC, you mentioned the Democratic majority for Israel. How are they participating in these primaries in ways that maybe we haven't seen them do that before. They are spending and will spend enormous

sums of money in Democratic congressional primaries. That is new. Democratic majority for Israel really came on the scene around 2022 when they spent a lot of money to defeat Nina Turner, who was a high-level member of Bernie Sanders' campaign, a former state senator who's running for a congressional seat in Ohio. The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee has inserted its way into many Democratic primaries over the past couple of years, specifically targeting progressive candidates such as myself. I still got the battle scars, y'all. They spent heavily against her in favor of her opponent who won the race, Chantel Brown.

Typically what APEC would do was donate money in general elections to both parties to keep a kind of consensus. They're still doing bipartisan donations, but their focus has changed from keeping Republicans and certain Democrats in the pro-Israel fold and the Israel hawk fold to really coming hard against this Israel skeptical, or even politicians who are willing to lightly criticize Israel. There's a few policy positions that APEC and DMFI particularly revile. One is conditioning military aid to Israel. This is something that has become increasingly accepted on the progressive left, that if the U.S. is going to continue to fund Israel, it can't be a blank check. In 2022, Andy Levin, who's a Jewish Zionist in favor of a two-state solution, also progressive, was the president of a synagogue, someone who traveled to Israel many times,

who believed fully in the project of Zionism. He was pushing legislation to condition military aid to Israel. AIPAC can't stand the idea that I am the clearest, strongest Jewish voice in Congress, standing for a simple proposition that there's no way to have a secure democratic homeland for the Jewish people unless we achieve the political and human rights of the Palestinian people. AIPAC opposed him furiously and he lost his re-election to Haley Stevens, who is still in Congress and who is an unflinching supporter of Israel. Can you talk about what the AIPEC spending and the DMFI spending result in? Like attack ads? Are those ads actually mentioning Israel? They will run ads that have nothing to do

with Israel and they'll attack politicians based on whatever their polling says makes them most vulnerable. For example, in California, they're targeting a state senator, Dave Min, who's running for Katie Porter's open house seat, and they're attacking him over a drunk driving incident, not over any alleged insufficient support of Israel. Dave Min wants your trust, but Min was arrested for drunk driving, putting us all at risk. More voters in California will care about Dave Min driving drunk than Dave Min supposedly not supporting Israel enough.

And that is often the approach they take. And there's a reason they do it. It's an approach that usually works. What about the other side? Like, are there groups more critical of Israel also getting involved in primary campaign spending? To an extent, but they just have a lot less money. So the traditional player has been J Street,

but they are somewhat marginalized in this moment. J Street is something of the liberal counter to AIPAC. They are Zionist. They are supportive of Israel, but they are willing to criticize the Israeli government, criticize Benjamin Netanyahu, and they endorse candidates who take those positions. But J Street unendorsed Jamal Bowman and they're not helping the squad members in the APEC DMFI onslaught. So J Street is not really in play here. Jewish Voice for Peace is trying to be more involved.

They are a growing and very professionalized anti-Zionist organization that is behind a lot of the big attention-grabbing protests you see, like the occupation of the Statue of Liberty or Grand Central Station. Here at home, an almost surreal scene inside Grand Central Terminal tonight as hundreds of demonstrators took over the place, calling for a ceasefire in the war. They have a political action arm that they use to endorse candidates. They will be volunteering. They'll probably be sending some money there, but on a much, much smaller scale. There's DSA, Democratic Socialists of America.

You know, in some of these congressional races, DSA could be in play. Again, DSA is a volunteer-run organization, so it's about people showing up, but it's not about spending millions of dollars on television ads. What does this mean for the Democratic Party? And not just in the political sense, but in the kinds of policies that we see that party support. We've had this progressive movement of more congresspeople on the left. Could this end that? On one hand, the squad could shrink, the spending against them could be

successful, and other Democrats could be even more terrified of crossing APEC in the future, and you could see this Israel skeptical left start to shrink. On the other hand, if you look at the actual number of young people, especially who are starting to vote and who are engaging on this, the Israel skeptical faction is only growing. And this is something I think even the most staunch Israel supporters recognize. And what they fear is that the old consensus is starting to crumble. I would say my most bold prediction, which could turn out to be wrong, but I'll make it here, is that Joe Biden will be the last Democratic president for some time who offers mostly unconditional support for the Israeli government. I think that is going

to be increasingly untenable unless the politics in Israel start to change. Israel is governed by a conservative right-wing majority, and it's no secret that Benjamin Netanyahu is holding on in the hopes that Donald Trump is elected president again, because Trump and Netanyahu align on politics. They have the same vision for the future of Israel, and Netanyahu would like to see someone like Joe Biden lose. So while I think today and tomorrow, APEC can keep winning and blow squad members out of the water and spend money, on the left, at least, none of this is

going to hold in the same way because the politics of these two countries are going to diverge. That's Ross Barkin. Check out his sub stack, Political Currents. Today's show was produced by Avishai Artsy, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, and mixed by Patrick Boyd. I'm Alana Casanova-Bridges, and this is Today Explained. Thank you.