This is a monologue by Mark Halperin adapted for The Daily Wire by permission from Next Up With Mark Halperin and 2WAY.

***

Israel has become such a defining issue within both parties, but primarily within the Democratic Party. That was put in sharp relief this past week when Mr. Massie of Kentucky, a Republican, put forward a bill that would have cut off aid to Israel. And he’s the only Republican who voted for his own bill.

Every other Republican voted no. The Democrats in the House were split down the middle. Half the Democrats voted yes. Half the Democrats voted no. Amongst those voting to cut off aid to Israel was the number two Democrat in the House, Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker, and AOC. This divides both parties, but it’s an issue the Democratic Party’s dealing with, and it’s also an issue that Israel’s going to have to deal with, and Israel supporters in the United States are going to have to deal with. I can’t tell you how often I hear this — hours after the vote from American supporters of Israel, including some members of Congress who are crestfallen by this. Both sides, both the people who voted to cut off aid to Israel and those who support that position and those who think it’s a horrible vote, both sides are calling this a watershed.

Why is this happening, and what is its significance? First, here are a couple of House Democrats who voted to cut off aid to Israel and their explanation about this moment. Here’s Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), “Think about this just for a moment. Starting today, a majority of Democrats in this building refused to vote to send billions of dollars in weapons to the Israeli military.”

A young congressman from Texas who clearly is proud about the fact that half the Democrats voted to cut off aid. Here’s another member of Congress. This is Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-IL) explaining why she voted that way as well:

One issue facing the Democratic Caucus this week is a piece of legislation by Thomas Massie on Israel cutting off funding $3 billion worth of aid to Israel. Yes. Where do you stand on that? I’ll be voting for it. How come? Well, because the Israelis are out of control. Lebanon, Gaza. There’s no reason for us to continue to make these investments at this time.

Now, she’s from Illinois. These two representatives, part of half the Democrats in the House, including Nancy Pelosi, including AOC, who said something to the extent of, “Well, the amendment was flawed. It wasn’t a perfect piece of legislation, but they all felt they needed to send a signal.” Now, part of this is about Israel now, about Benjamin Netanyahu now, about what’s happened in Israel recently with Gaza. But part of it is broader than that. Part of it is a broader view of foreign policy and American aid, but part of it is a belief that the relationship with Israel has to change. And for those supporters of Israel, this is a watershed; this is a huge moment. Here’s a quote from Josh Gottheimer. He’s a Democrat congressman from New Jersey who voted very much against this piece of legislation. Josh Gottheimer is probably amongst the most pro-Israel members of Congress.

Here’s what he said in the New York Times. “Supporting the U.S.-Israel relationship is quickly becoming a minority view among congressional Democrats.” A shockingly seismic shift in a brief period of time.

Here’s Amy Siskind’s view. She’s a writer and a pro-Israel person on the Left. Here is her tweet, which really captures the views of many people in her party who oppose this piece of legislation:

What a politically astute move by Thomas Massie for bringing this anti-Israel vote up in the House because he is a conservative Republican with blind ambition and 2028 aspirations. And he knows this issue will split the Democratic Party in half, which it literally did. Republicans voted unanimously against it and Democrats were split in half.

Ro Khanna, who’s a congressman from California, more about him in a moment, who morphs himself with the ease of J.D. Vance and his equally blind ambition was all too happy to comply and go along and to put Democrats on the record.

I hope and pray that Bibi loses in the election later this year because Lord, help us as this is still an issue ahead of 2028. It will be that wedge that will split our party in half. And if a normal Republican runs like a Rubio, we will lose the presidency. Mark my words. Those of you who are seemingly in this fever dream who have made this your number one issue in litmus test, take note. You are going to take down our party with you and our chances of winning back the White House in 2028.

That seems perhaps premature, maybe cataclysmic to some, but I hear that from so many Democrats who aren’t as open about their fears as Amy Siskind is, because this issue really has become the hottest of hot buttons. We’ve seen how much this has tied Democrats in knots. We’ve seen how divided it’s made the party.

And we’ve seen how afraid Democrats who might want to run for president are of the pro-Palestinian, in some cases, pro-Hamas wing of their party. The group AIPAC, which has been the biggest supporter of Israel, is on the run. They’ve become a hot-button issue and an anvil around the necks of supporters of Israel. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) went to Israel and was in a confrontation with the Israeli military forces and settlers there. It made news. He has become the face — the poster child — of Democratic politicians who previously were friendly to Israel, now very hostile to Israel, adopting the description of what Israel has done in Gaza, calling it genocide. Ro Khanna went on Drop Site News and talked to reporters there, including a guy named Jeremy Scahill, about whether he would condemn those who would kill Israeli soldiers. I guarantee you that 10 years ago, Ro Khanna would’ve answered that question effortlessly.

This exchange has gotten wide currency amongst lots of people, including pro-Israel folks, as Ro Khanna struggles in this interview to answer what is no longer a simple question, apparently:

SCAHILL: Military bases in the Gaza envelope. Did the Al-Qassam Brigades[…]have a right to kill Israeli soldiers? Yes or no? On October 7th, did Palestinians have a right to attack Israeli military bases in the Gaza Strip? Yes or no?

KHANNA: I mean, I think October 7th attack was a terrorist attack, so I don’t justify…

SCAHILL: Was it a terrorist attack when the first targets that were hit on the morning of October 7th were multiple military bases? Did Palestinian forces have a right to attack those military bases?

KHANNA: I am not for violent violence in any way. I mean, I am for making sure that we end the occupation.

SCAHILL: Did they have a right to do it, Congressman? Did they have a right to attack Israeli soldiers?

KHANNA: No, I’m not going to say that Hamas had a right to attack Israeli soldiers or kill Israelis. I don’t think that advances peace or advances Palestinian statehood.

The fact that he struggled to answer that question, “Did Hamas have the right to kill Israeli soldiers?” So many people, as I said, have pointed out the struggle there to me. Leaders of the Democratic Party who are pro-Israel are either flipping, like Nancy Pelosi (Again, she downplayed her vote by saying the amendment was flawed, but they’re flipping to a position that really bothers pro-Israel folks), who has been such a staunch ally of Israel, including fundraising by pro-Jewish Americans. Nancy Pelosi and Ro Khanna have both moved. And yet Ro Khanna couldn’t answer that simple question. Here’s Rahm Emanuel, who went to Israel and gave a speech that was at times supportive of Israel and at times critical of Israel. Here he is in an interview after that widely discussed speech, talking about his own view of where things stand and the kind of problem Israel has.

INTERVIEWER: There’s a different conversation within the Democratic Party about whether Israel should be allowed to buy weapons, even defensive weapons. What do you make of that?

EMANUEL: I want this to get across. Israel does not have a problem in the Democratic Party. Israel has a problem in America, and very specifically, a generational problem under 30.

INTERVIEWER: Are you the most acceptable thing, pro-Israel, acceptable in the Democratic Party today?

EMANUEL: Well, look, I consider myself pro-American, but there’s been a change in some elements of the party, and it’s a change because what’s happened and how things have played out have changed. I don’t support the Democratic socialists. I don’t support people that believe in open borders. And I also don’t support people that were celebrating on October 8th.

So Rahm Emanuel’s a very smart guy, and he’s right. This is not just a Democrat problem. Although make no mistake, Israel has a big problem with the Democratic Party because the Democratic Party, in large part, has a big problem with Israel. But it is a problem with younger people, and it is a problem that therefore strains all of America, including the vice president. JD Vance, who has been one of the leading voices on this issue. When Republicans say, “Well, all our problems with Israel are with podcasters and bloggers and people on social media.” Israel’s got a problem with JD Vance. JD Vance, in an interview with Joe Rogan last week, said a number of things that no previous vice president would’ve said. In fact, Kamala Harris wouldn’t say these things in the presidential campaign, and it hurt her quite a bit. It hurt her quite a bit with the wing of her party, whose views of Israel have changed as Josh Gottheimer said so quickly and so dramatically; a lot of this is about Netanyahu.

A lot of this is about Gaza, but some of it is for the members of the Democratic Party who voted the way they did with Nancy Pelosi; some of this is for people in the Republican Party who feel the way JD Vance does about Israel’s sustained influence in the United States. Like many countries, Israel has influence in the United States. Israel gets aid from the United States, like many countries. I urge you to listen to the totality of what JD Vance said in his interview with Rogan about Israel. Listen to the whole thing. It’s interesting. But this is not out of context — as I’m about to show you. This is JD Vance saying things about Israel, which Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, Dick Cheney — no previous American vice president or president would have said. And it’s another indication, along with the vote in the House, of how much things have changed.

This is JD Vance with Joe Rogan:

VANCE: There are some people within their system we know beyond a shadow of a doubt who are manipulating and trying to change American public opinion to keep the war going on indefinitely. But I definitely think you have seen this very discreet, extremely well-funded campaign to try to derail the negotiation and try to derail the deal. And again, there’s this Time article that came out yesterday, a friend sent it to me. It’s like worth reading because it lists a bunch of people who have quite literally been paid by a former Trump campaign person who was himself paid by certain elements within the Israeli government. And those people are attacking me viciously for quite literally trying to accomplish the negotiation objective that the president set for the country. What bothers me is actually when Americans allow, meaning American leadership, allows that influence to affect their judgment and to affect what they are advocating for.

Again, I’m not saying he’s right or wrong. Factually, there’s support for some of the things he’s saying. But you see now in Rahm Emanuel and in JD Vance — Rahm Emanuel, longtime supporter of Israel, but as he’ll tell you, a critic of Bibi Netanyahu from the past — you see a change in where this debate is in America. In both parties, there’s an audience that’s loud and angry and visible that wants the relationship with Israel to change and believes it has to change. Now, some people say, maybe this will cool off after Netanyahu is out of office, and he might be out of office this year. But other people I’ve talked to say, no, this is bigger than Bibi Netanyahu. And it’s become a fetish for folks. Now I will say this: this is such an emotional issue. I have people in my life so pro-Israel that this period with young people and with members of Congress is amongst the most painful things they’ve seen in the National Town Square.

And then I have people in my life who say, “This is wonderful because the relationship with Israel has been so dysfunctional.” Vance said something else to Rogan that I think is also extraordinary and I think speaks to where this conversation should go. I don’t know that it will. Here’s JD Vance, I think, being accurate, and it could apply equally to Rahm Emanuel. Here’s JD Vance talking about where he thinks he should be seen as standing on Israel:

VANCE: People don’t realize this. I’m actually in this… There’s this massive pro-Israel, anti-Israel debate in the United States of America. I’m like the reasonable moderate.

The reasonable moderate. And you know what? It’s the truest thing he said in the interview because he is. He is like Rahm Emanuel and like some other people in both parties; he recognizes there’s no position that’s going to lead us to a better place and a stronger alliance with Israel.

There is either the AIPAC position or the traditional position of being with Israel, no matter what. And there’s no progress to be made in the position on the other side, against Israel, no matter what. The United States and Israel need to be allies. There needs to be a military-to-military relationship of some sort. There needs to be a cultural and economic relationship. But what we need is a productive discussion that isn’t just red-hot rhetoric in Congress, on social media, or the kind of interview we saw Ro Khanna do. What we need is people who are reasonable moderates on this issue.

They’re not the only voices that should be at the table. The pro-Israel voices should and will be at the table. The pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas voices will be at the table. But what we need is a conversation led by people like JD Vance and Rahm Emanuel, who are positing the existence of a reasonable moderate position here, who are positing an understanding of the way it was and the way some people want it to be.

I underestimated this issue. Several months ago, when people told me this would be the dominant issue in the Democratic nomination fight in 2028, and that it would be a huge general election issue, the Republican nominee for president would also be under pressure to take a different position. I didn’t believe it. And now I’ve probably over-corrected. Now I see just how emotional this is, just how powerful it is, crystallized by that vote in the House, crystallized by that exchange with Ro Khanna, crystallized by the reaction to Rahm Emanuel’s speech in Israel, and crystallized by the words the vice president of the United States making an open accusation about Israel, that there are forces within the Israeli government, Israeli society who don’t want the war to end and are using their influence to try to keep the war going.

That’s an extraordinary claim for anyone of influence to make, even more so from the vice president of the United States. I’m going to keep reporting on this story because it is not going away.

***

Mark Halperin is an American journalist, political commentator, author, and founder of the interactive media platform 2WAY. He previously was political director for ABC News, where he also edited the Washington, D.C., newsletter The Note.

Menu

What Explains The Seismic Democratic Shift On Israel?