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.

  • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 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
        14 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
          ·
          16 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
            13 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
              ·
              14 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
                14 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
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

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

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

                    The first question obviously wasn’t a serious question, but they were clearly confused about who AIPAC was funding.

                    No AIPAC did not accidentally fund the progressive. Instead they accidentally went after the moderate with the best chances of winning. I was happy to clear that up.