AIPAC se pojavljuje kao ključna tema na posljednjoj demokratskoj debati prije glasa u Michiganu

AIPAC dominated the final Democratic Senate primary debate in Michigan on Monday, overshadowing the candidates themselves, U.S. Representative Haley Stevens and former county health official Abdul El-Sayed. The discussion centered around the influence of the pro-Israel lobbying organization, whose financial backing for Stevens has reached unprecedented levels. This focus highlighted the deep divisions within the Democratic Party over Israel policy, particularly as the August 4 primary approaches in a pivotal swing state. Stevens faced repeated questioning from both El-Sayed and the debate moderator, Roop Raj, regarding her ties to AIPAC. Despite being pressed twice, she maintained that she had been "very clear, consistent and transparent" about her relationship with the group. Instead of answering directly, she shifted the conversation to praise the large Jewish population in her congressional district, emphasizing her commitment to supporting the community and advocating for the return of Israeli hostages. When asked again whether AIPAC’s spending would lead her to act in accordance with their interests, Stevens responded by drawing a comparison between the financial support given to herself and that received by El-Sayed. She suggested that the distinction between super PACs backing different candidates was minimal. El-Sayed, who has consistently criticized Stevens' alignment with AIPAC throughout the campaign, used the debate platform to reinforce his argument. He claimed that AIPAC had invested heavily in Stevens' campaign because they knew she would serve as a dependable ally on issues related to Israel. He referenced her opposition to a recent House amendment aimed at cutting off U.S. military and other forms of aid to Israel, a move backed by over 100 Democrats. El-Sayed accused Stevens of voting to allocate taxpayer funds to a foreign government that he argued was supporting groups opposed to Palestinian self-determination. He further criticized specific AIPAC advertisements that linked Stevens to former President Barack Obama, despite the latter not endorsing her candidacy. According to El-Sayed, such tactics exemplify the consequences of suggesting that Palestinians might deserve rights as well. Beyond the topic of AIPAC, the debate also touched upon other financial aspects of the campaign. Stevens faced criticism for falsely stating that she had not accepted funding from a local power utility. Meanwhile, she targeted El-Sayed for withholding his tax returns and labeled him a "millionaire." The frequent mention of AIPAC underscored the growing unease among Jewish leaders concerning the impact of the organization's influence on the Democratic electorate. Some expressed concern over the potential implications of this trend, noting that it could affect the safety and security of Jewish communities. El-Sayed and Raj cited reports indicating that AIPAC and its affiliated organizations had spent up to $46 million to support Stevens' campaign. However, these claims remain unverified by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Independent political ad tracking data suggest the amount might be closer to $30 million, which would still constitute the highest level of expenditure by AIPAC in a single campaign. As of now, an AIPAC representative has not commented on these allegations.