Member Newsletter
I wanted to share a few thoughts on Tuesday’s primary in New York’s 16th congressional district, which pits Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D) against Westchester County Executive George Latimer. It is apparently going to be the most expensive congressional primary ever. The headlines are that AIPAC itself, and a number of AIPAC adjacent pro-Israel groups, are pouring money into the race and Bowman is being wildly outspent. And that’s true. Limited polling suggests Latimer is a strong favorite. But this headline version misses a lot of the story. Or, more specifically, it mistakes cause and effect.
There are four interrelated issues worth noting here.
First: this isn’t the first time a squad member has faced a primary. Nor the first time it’s been funded at least in part by a lot of pro-Israel money. The difference here, and why Bowman is likely to lose, is that Bowman’s district is very different from those which most of the squad come from and one that isn’t really a fit for Bowman’s politics, especially on Israel and especially in the hyper-politically charged atmosphere of the last eight months. Bowman’s district contains a small portion of the Bronx but is overwhelmingly made up of southern Westchester County, which is the largely suburban county immediately to the north of New York City. It’s pretty racially diverse — not in the sense of “diverse” as code for a minority district but containing the major ethnic and racial groups in the U.S. in relatively comparable percentages. It’s about 40% white, almost 30% Hispanic, about 21% Black, about 7% Asian. It’s relatively affluent but with many middle and lower income areas. It also contains a substantial Jewish population.
Bowman has called the Israel-Hamas war a “genocide,” endorsed the BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) movement, frequently discusses Israel as a “settler-colonial” state, now says he supports ending funding of the “Iron Dome” missile defense. Set aside for the moment whether you agree with those positions or find them objectionable. They’re just not positions that are at all popular or safe to run with if you represent a mostly suburban district right outside New York City. This is a purely factual statement. J Street, which is sort of the anti-AIPAC, supporting peace-making and two states, has proven an effective backstop or shield for numerous House Democrats who support Israel but not it’s governments of the last 15 years. But he managed to lose J Street’s support because of his intemperate remarks since October 7th.
To put it simply, on Capitol Hill Bowman has played the part of a movement politician while representing a fairly normie Democratic suburban district. That’s a big disconnect in the making and it’s become more so over his two terms in office. As an important context, Bowman polled only 57% of the vote in the 2022 primary against two fairly weak opponents who received pretty modest funding. He got into office by winning a low-turnout primary in 2020. But he’s steadily lost the support of major constituencies in his district, which was already more passive than active. Things even got worse for Bowman, and his fate was likely sealed, when he drew basically the perfect (from an anti-Bowman perspective) challenger. George Latimer is well-known in the district and generally well-liked. He kind of has to be, as the incumbent Westchester County executive who has been in office since 2018. Total down-the-line normie Dem.
It’s not the flash flood of spending from pro-Israel groups that has Bowman on the ropes politically. That confuses cause and effect. The money is pouring in because he’s made himself so vulnerable in his district and was likely to lose. Groups like AIPAC very much want Bowman out of Congress. But probably even more they want to make an example of him. Even more cynically, they want credit for his defeat, which was probably highly likely, if not inevitable even, before the money started pouring in. Because this is also part of a much larger struggle to define the standing of pro-Israel groups within the Democratic coalition vis a vis left-wing progressives who tend to be fairly anti-Israel, as well as rising ethnic and religious groups (Arab-Americans, Muslim-Americans, etc.) who tend in that direction as well. All those things are happening at once. Bowman made New York’s 16th district an especially good place to have that fight.
As I said above, he’s built a reputation as one of the most provocative movement politicians in the Democratic caucus while representing a texbook normie Dem district.
Second: As the race has evolved, it’s become about turnout, not persuasion. It’s important to remember just how small a primary electorate can be. In the Republican primary in Virginia, that Freedom Caucus Chair Bob Good seems to have lost, the entire turnout was just a little over 62,000 — so less than 10% of the population. I expect NY-16 will be higher for a number of reasons. But those numbers are so small that boffo turnout in a couple neighborhoods could win or lose the race. In the last weeks of the election Bowman has clearly decided his path to victory is turnout rather than persuasion so he has mostly doubled down on the positions that got him into trouble. That’s almost certainly the right idea, even though it’s more likely than not to increase his margin of defeat.
Polls show Bowman’s down. But it’s extremely difficult to poll a super low-turnout race like this. So a major uncertainty hovers over those polls, far more than in a general election. Bowman’s only shot is organizing a huge turnout from his supporters. But with a small primary electorate that’s possible. Certainly not going to change any opponents’ minds. That fact has led him to lean even further into the positions and comments that are likely ending his career in the House. It’s not crazy. It’s the only plausible course to victory. He needs to supercharge his existing supporters.
Third point: If you watch the ads (which I see on TV at the gym even though I don’t live in the district) they put a huge amount of focus on Bowman’s supposed disloyalty to Joe Biden. They reference examples where Bowman said Biden “lied” about various things. He also voted against Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law, one of Biden’s major legislative accomplishments. As we know, a number of progressives were either skeptical of or voted against the infrastructure bill thinking that it was going to replace or nudge aside the Build Back Better bill. As it happens, a significant amount of the BBB came back late in 2022 in the form of the Inflation Reduction Act, which Bowman did vote for. Together the ads paint a fairly convincing portrait (and a not totally unfair one) of a Democratic representative who spends most of his time either beating up on or not having the back of Joe Biden. In a highly polarized age, that’s an effective attack, especially in a district that is heavily Democratic. The frequency of this attack in the ads makes clear that the people making the ads have identified this as a big vulnerability for Bowman.
Fourth point: This is a much more general point that is more about AOC than Bowman. But it’s important. Bowman simply isn’t a very effective politician. It’s not obvious that Bowman should mold his views to fit his district. There’s an argument that he should remain true to his beliefs and if that means losing an election, it is what it is. But many of the comments and decisions that are coming back to haunt him aren’t about fundamental beliefs or even policy positions. They’re provocative and often off-the-cuff statements and decisions. You can be extremely anti-Israel and criticize U.S. diplomatic protection for and arms supply to Israel without identifying the current war as a “genocide.” It’s a choice. It doesn’t really add anything in terms of what you’re advocating, but it’s a conversation and support ender for most Jewish voters who happen to be substantially represented in Bowman’s district. He was compelled to apologize for questioning reports of sexual assault or abuse by Hamas paramilitaries during the October 7th massacres. What this all comes down to is that Bowman is just not a terribly effective or adroit politician. The examples here are about Israel but they’re far from the only ones. I’ve never bought the idea that the fire alarm incident was meant to delay that vote. But there’s just a list of these weird little stories. If you’re in a safe district (from the perspective of a primary challenge) you can ignite a lot of controversies and have a lot of goofs. But he’s simply not.
Which brings me back to AOC.
AOC is backing Bowman to the hilt, which makes perfect sense. She participated in the mega rally in support of him in the district a few days ago, along with Bernie Sanders and other progressives luminaries. I suspect she also played a big role in organizing it. But in AOC we can see the difference between an ordinary politician, or a not especially able one, and one who is a truly historic political talent.
A lot of skill, smarts and charisma went into AOC’s initial win over Joe Crowley in 2018. It also required a lot of luck. That takes nothing away from her. Every star has to align to pull something like that off. We’ve seen various political neophytes rise to stardom over the last 20 or 30 years. They almost all fade or collapse over time. AOC’s power and brand has only increased.
At the pinnacle of the political world like that, especially as a Latina woman and as someone who rocketed to the top with basically zero electoral experience, it is really hard to capture how many opportunities there are to fail. All of the opposition is out to get you. Often in nasty and underhanded ways. Many of your own team wouldn’t mind seeing you at least knocked down a few pegs. You basically have to thread every needle and get everything right every time. There’s no other way to put it. Every time. You need to bat like a 1.000.
In addition, the talents that get you that upset primary win are not the talents that allow you to navigate Capitol Hill or become a power player with the likes of Pelosi, Biden, Jeffries, Schumer, Sanders, et al. You need all those talents together. She’s where she is because of that. Those politicians now come to her.
In the wake of October 7th and the Israel-Gaza War, AOC has been extremely critical of Israel. But she’s also avoided needlessly provocative language and intemperate actions. She condemned that recent protest down on Wall Street where extremists were rallying against the victims of the Nova music festival massacre. Before that I noticed that she was appearing on a panel about anti-Semitism with Randi Weingarten, the longtime progressive leader of the American Federation of Teachers who is also active in progressive Jewish communal politics. These are just a few moves I’ve noticed recently. It’s not something I’ve followed super closely. So it’s a representative, not an exhaustive list.
To be clear, I don’t present these moves as matters of cynical positioning. I think this is who AOC is. But I’ve never met her. I don’t know her. I have no idea how her mind works. All I can judge are the results, what she does. She’s made it all seem so comparatively effortless, her own star now just of the political firmament, that it’s easy to forget how many opportunities she has had to fail. The contrast between her and Bowman, who she clearly sees as an ally and for whom she is pulling out every stop, couldn’t be clearer.