Progressive Analilia Mejia has pulled off a long-shot win in a special election primary for New Jersey’s 11th congressional district, defeating favorite Tom Malinowski thanks to AIPAC’s intervention in the race.

Malinowski conceded Tuesday morning, saying in a post on X that Mejia “deserves unequivocal praise and credit for running a positive campaign and for inspiring so many voters on Election Day.”

“But the outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads during the last three weeks,” Malinowski’s post said.

  • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    15 hours ago

    …why does this article end like mid-thought? I’m not even totally clear on exactly what happened. They funded the progressive before she made her position known?

    • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The non-progressive forerunner dared to say that we might want to reconsider sending unconditional arms to Israel. In response, AIPAC released a series of negative ads against him. This split the non-progressive votes, and cleared the way for the progressive to win.

        • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          I’m sorry, but I don’t understand this post (and that’s not my downvote).

          Edit: I like your joke and I’m happy I could help. To be fair, I already heard about this AIPAC blunder, so I didn’t need to rely on how this specific article was written.

          • MehBlah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            You didn’t answer his first question. The primary question he asked

            So he ended his response early like he states the article did.

            • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              Them:

              why does this article end like mid-thought?

              You:

              You didn’t answer his first question. The primary question he asked

              Surely you can’t be serious. Nobody is going to be able able to jump into the author’s brain like that, and it is obviously not a serious “primary” question.

              • MehBlah@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                12 hours ago

                That is right. When you don’t know you don’t say. You should have just not answered at all.

                • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  12 hours ago

                  Please re-read the exchange. I clearly and concisly answered the primary question, which is about what happened in regard to AIPAC funding in the election.

                  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    How about we see that differently. The first question is what I consider the primary question.