Party primaries tend to discourage ideological heterodoxy. For Democrats, this makes getting pro-Israel candidates into office more difficult. Witness, for example, Scott Wiener’s ostentatious spectacle of shame in California. The progressive gatekeeping on Israel is so intense that candidates who simply don’t hate the Jewish state are having to obscure their heresy just to squeak past the anti-Zionist bouncers.
The best chance is to run someone with name recognition who won’t be susceptible to their opponents’ attempts to define them. Even better would be to run a candidate who has already represented the state or district, so voters will easily picture them in the seat.
Enter Elaine Luria. The former two-term congresswoman from Virginia is running to get her seat back. In an encouraging sign, she spoke at length to Jewish Insider about specifically aiming to bring some balance to the Democrats’ congressional contingent on the subjects of Israel and anti-Semitism.
“Having more people like me who are willing to speak up on that issue, in support of maintaining security assistance through the memorandum of understanding and continuing to maintain a strong relationship with Israel is important,” Luria told Marc Rod.
Luria was once the kind of Democrat that party leaders wanted to recruit: liberal but poised, with a military career on the resume. (Luria spent 20 years in the Navy.)
Military experience tended to go hand-in-hand with support for Israel, just as exposure to reality tends to increase support for Israel. Those with national security experience in the field would be much less vulnerable to the paranoid conspiracism of the Code Pink world and campus activists, the thinking went. An inherent toughness could make it less likely they’d bend or break in the face of progressive pressure.
And all of that was true—except that last part. One by one, “moderate” Democrats fell in line. Elissa Slotkin, now a senator from Michigan, entertained the idea that AIPAC should register as a foreign agent. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Marine, folded like a cheap suit in the face of anti-Israel primary pressure this cycle. Accommodating progressive anti-Semitism became the norm, with very few exceptions (Ritchie Torres, John Fetterman).
Luria says she wants to turn back that tide, or at least show it some resistance. The question is how far she is willing to go when locking horns with her party.
During Luria’s time in Congress, she was at the forefront of a group of Democrats criticizing Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism, but she opposed removing Omar from her committee assignments, as Republicans had done with Steve King.
Luria’s willingness to call out some of the anti-Semitism from her own party has the potential to shift the debate if she gets back into office. But the extent of her impact will be decided by where Luria places the limits of her posture. Would she go beyond statements? That is, would she support actual consequences for Democrats who engage in rank anti-Semitism?
Most of the time, Luria seems willing to criticize Omar by name. Will she do the same for Rashida Tlaib, who has been headlining a conference tied to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine? How about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the thin-skinned Squad ringleader and blood libel specialist who may run for president in 2028?
As of now, the odds are in Luria’s favor. Virginia Democrats still nominate ostensibly moderate candidates, and the national mood certainly seems to have swung against Republican incumbents. (Republican Rep. Jen Kiggans, who defeated Luria two years ago, holds the seat.)
Is Luria prepared to be a Slotkin/Moulton Democrat, living in fear of the Hamasniks in her party, or can she envision herself as a Torres/Fetterman Democrat, the much more rare breed with a spine strong enough to stand on principle? The fundamentals of the midterm elections mean we’ll probably soon find out.
