Representative Seth Moulton’s decision to return more than $35,000 in campaign donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) this October has sent ripples through the Democratic Party, highlighting a dramatic shift in the party’s relationship with Israel and its traditional Jewish supporters. Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat known for his national security credentials and centrist approach, announced on October 16, 2025, that he would not only return the funds but also refuse any future support from AIPAC, according to The Hill. This move came just one day after launching his primary challenge against incumbent Senator Ed Markey for the 2026 Senate race.
“I support Israel’s right to exist, but I’ve also never been afraid to disagree openly with AIPAC when I believe they’re wrong,” Moulton declared on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. He continued, “I am a friend of Israel, but not of its current government.” Moulton’s campaign confirmed that $35,000 in AIPAC-related donations, including $15,560 received in the third quarter of 2025, would be returned. OpenSecrets reported that AIPAC and its affiliates had given Moulton $42,850 over the past two years, making the group his top contributor.
While the act of returning campaign contributions might seem like a minor administrative decision, political observers say it signals a much deeper transformation within the Democratic Party. As The Algemeiner notes, “This small act — a single line on an FEC filing — reveals something much larger. It marks the moment when an ambitious, mainstream Democrat concluded that distancing himself from the organized Jewish community is a political asset, not a liability.”
Moulton’s move is not happening in a vacuum. Over the past two years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become a defining issue for progressive Democrats, especially in the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack and the subsequent Israeli military response. According to The Atlantic, progressive activists now demand that politicians not only rebuke Israel’s recent actions but also disavow AIPAC and pledge to condition U.S. support on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. This new litmus test is reshaping the party’s internal dynamics, creating awkward moments for Democratic officials caught between competing demands from the party’s center-left and progressive wings.
The pressure is mounting not just on Moulton but on Democratic leaders nationwide. In the same week as Moulton’s announcement, podcast hosts and journalists grilled high-profile Democrats on their positions regarding Israel and AIPAC. Senator Cory Booker was pressed about whether he considered Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal. California Governor Gavin Newsom was told by podcast host Van Lathan that he would not support any 2028 candidate who took money from AIPAC, prompting a visibly uncomfortable response. Radio host Charlamagne tha God asked Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro if AIPAC donations improperly influence U.S. policy on Israeli-Palestinian issues, and MSNBC’s Eugene Daniels pressed Vice President Kamala Harris on whether Israel’s actions amounted to genocide.
“It’s astonishing how quickly the politics are moving,” wrote Peter Beinart, a leading Jewish commentator and critic of the Israeli government, in a recent post on X. “The Democrats now deserting @AIPAC aren’t supporters of Palestinian rights. They’re ambitious politicians who see which way the winds are blowing. They don’t fear @AIPAC. They fear being associated with @AIPAC. The political rules of the last almost half-century are changing before our eyes.”
The trend is not limited to rhetoric. The rise of politicians like Zohran Mamdani, a New York State Assembly member and prominent Democratic Socialist, has emboldened progressives to take more skeptical stances on Israel without fear of electoral backlash. Mamdani’s victory in the New York mayoral primary, despite a history of criticism toward Israel and accusations of antisemitism, has served as a proof point for activists pushing the party to the left on this issue.
Polling data underscores the scale of the shift. Gallup found that in 2016, 53 percent of Democrats sympathized more with Israel than with the Palestinians. By 2025, that number had plummeted to just 21 percent, while sympathy for Palestinians soared to 59 percent—a complete reversal. Among Millennials, sympathies are now nearly tied, with 42 percent siding with Palestinians and 40 percent with Israelis. What was once a bipartisan consensus on Israel has become a generational and partisan fault line.
For centrist politicians like Moulton, the implications are stark. As The Algemeiner points out, “The activists who dominate social media and small-donor networks increasingly treat Israel as shorthand for Western capitalism and ‘settler power.’ In that moral framework, defending the Jewish State, or even maintaining ties to mainstream Jewish institutions, is suspect. So politicians adapt.”
This adaptation is not without its critics. Some, like Samuel J. Abrams, a politics professor at Sarah Lawrence College, argue that the party’s shift toward “moral performance politics” risks undermining the pluralism that once defined American liberalism. Abrams writes, “What looks like moral clarity is in fact moral conformity. That fear is corrosive. It does not only alienate Jews; it hollows out the liberal tradition itself.”
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have played a significant role in this ideological transformation. The DSA calls for “the full decolonization of all the occupied lands of the United States” and supports movements like Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. This rhetoric has migrated from campus protests into the language of mainstream progressive representatives. As The Algemeiner notes, “What began as fringe rhetoric now increasingly defines the emotional grammar of the party’s activist base.”
Yet, even as the party moves left on Israeli-Palestinian issues, the broader electorate remains divided. Most polls suggest that Israel-Gaza issues are not the top concern for average Democratic voters, but the intensity of activism around the issue gives it outsized influence in primaries and online discourse. Candidates seeking to win over both center-left donors and progressive activists now face the nearly impossible task of passing two conflicting litmus tests: affirming pro-Israel positions to woo traditional supporters while also criticizing AIPAC and U.S. aid to Israel to satisfy the activist base.
Moulton’s decision to break with AIPAC may be a sign of things to come, particularly in deep blue states like Massachusetts where progressive energy is high. But it also raises questions about the future of the Democratic Party’s coalition. Will the party continue to move away from its historic alliance with Jewish institutions and pro-Israel groups? Or will there be a backlash as centrists and traditional liberals push back against what they see as a politics of purity and exclusion?
One thing is clear: the ground is shifting beneath the feet of Democratic politicians. As the party grapples with a new moral and political landscape, every decision—no matter how small—can become a flashpoint in the larger battle over its identity, values, and future direction.
