Bulwark Takes — Summary: “AIPAC Spent $7 Million to Stop Daniel Biss. He Won Anyway.”
Date: March 25, 2026
Host: Lauren Egan (The Bulwark)
Guest: Daniel Biss (Mayor of Evanston and Democratic nominee, IL-9)

Episode Overview

This episode examines how Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss won the Democratic primary in Illinois’s 9th congressional district despite a $7 million campaign by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) to defeat him. The discussion unpacks Biss’s campaign strategy, the dynamics of outside spending in Democratic primaries, and the future implications for party politics and progressive candidates confronting AIPAC’s influence.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Recap of the Race and AIPAC’s Involvement

[00:45–03:40]

• Biss provides a concise recap:
  • 15-candidate Democratic primary.
  • AIPAC targeted Biss for his refusal to promise unconditional military aid to Israel, instead supporting another candidate.
  • AIPAC invested heavily: raised funds, organized events, and spent over $7 million via a shell super PAC (‘Elect Chicago Women’)—far more than all other expenditures in the race.
  • Biss and his campaign centered the race on transparency, calling out AIPAC’s funding sources and motives, including Trump donor involvement and attempts at secrecy.
  • On election day, AIPAC’s candidate finished a distant third; Biss’s main opponent was “much more anti-Israel” than Biss himself, highlighting AIPAC’s strategy flop.

Notable Quote:

“We made a decision pretty early on that we were going to make this the issue... This is money from AIPAC and Trump donors... they're trying to hide this from you, they're lying to you about it.”
— Daniel Biss [02:14]

2. The Personal Impact: Identity, Criticism & Antisemitism

[03:40–05:14]

• Lauren Egan asks about the personal toll: Biss is Jewish, with an Israeli mother and Holocaust survivor grandparents.
• Biss describes the attacks as deeply personal and insulting:
  • Claims by opponents implied Biss was anti-Jewish or indifferent to antisemitism—“All of which is wrong and pretty insulting.”
  • Felt AIPAC’s inflexibility and erasure of nuance was “very un-Jewish,” ignoring Judaism’s tradition of debate and pluralism.

Notable Quote:

“Their approach was so hardline... there cannot be nuance... it just somehow felt very un-Jewish to me.”
— Daniel Biss [04:34]

3. Direct Engagement with AIPAC: Good Faith or Political Weaponization?

[05:14–07:14]

• Biss initially sought dialogue with AIPAC, hoping to keep them neutral.
• He reflects that while talking to those you disagree with is a legislator’s responsibility, AIPAC acted in bad faith and later weaponized those conversations.
• AIPAC saw Biss’s Jewish identity as a unique threat:
  • “You are the most dangerous person possible because... we can’t just say, 'that’s some knee-jerk anti-Israel or antisemitic person.'”
  • His perspective couldn’t easily be dismissed, so they sought to “crush” him.

Notable Quote:

“Their position was, ‘No, Daniel, you are the most dangerous person possible because your Jewish identity... means we can’t dismiss you.’”
— Daniel Biss [06:08]

4. Effects on Party Discourse and Antisemitism

[08:27–10:52]

• Lauren Egan notes Democratic strategists fear that AIPAC’s closed-off stance could push voters and candidates to more extreme or even antisemitic positions.
• Biss agrees this is dangerous:
  • Cites a broader range of Israeli debate compared to the US.
  • Warns that weaponizing accusations of antisemitism against legitimate dissent is “counterproductive”—repeated false labeling can create real alienation and resentment.
  • He points out the “absurdity” of being accused of suppressing Jewish voices when he was endorsed by J Street, another major Jewish, pro-Israel group.

Notable Quote:

“If you label someone who’s not antisemitic but has a legitimate political disagreement... as an antisemite, you’re pushing them away and... creating antisemites.”
— Daniel Biss [09:44]

5. Campaign Strategy: Polling, Messaging, and Transparency

[10:52–15:29]

• Biss’s team polled the district months before AIPAC began spending:

  • Found AIPAC to be “toxically unpopular” with high name recognition among the district’s many Jewish voters.
  • Began relentless messaging early: press releases, statements tying AIPAC to outside money and Trump donors, and continuous transparency about funding sources.
  • Spent limited ad dollars explicitly calling out AIPAC and the hidden money, explaining the origins and motives behind the advertising blitz.

• Challenges: AIPAC never mentioned Israel/Palestine directly in ads; tried to obscure connections via shell PACs and focus on unrelated hot-button issues.

• The secrecy and ambiguities around the funding actually helped Biss, as it forced his opponent to constantly “explain” the support.

Notable Quote:

“The fact it was so cloak and dagger... meant that my opponent... had to keep on explaining it. And I think she probably made a mistake to continue trying to hide it instead of just coming clean.”
— Daniel Biss [14:15]

6. Lessons for the Democratic Party and 2028

[15:29–18:05]

• Biss warns AIPAC and similar super PAC involvement is “unbelievably dangerous.”
• “Don’t meet with them”—Biss acknowledges strategic error in talking to AIPAC and advises future candidates to keep their distance, as their bad faith cannot be trusted.
• Calls for the party to reject not only AIPAC but also AI or crypto super PACs that pour outside money into primaries and distract from true policy debate.
• Emphasizes that relentless truth-telling is the only antidote:
  • Candidates should prepare their supporters for outside attacks and explain clearly who’s funding negative campaigns.
  • Warns against twisting oneself to please AIPAC just to avoid being targeted—urges authenticity and faith in constituents’ values.

Notable Quote:

“Be yourself. Explain to your constituents what you stand for. And I’m guessing if it’s not where AIPAC is, it’s probably where your constituents are on this issue right now.”
— Daniel Biss [17:32]

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• “[AIPAC’s approach] felt very un-Jewish to me... Just gross, honestly.” — Biss [04:54]
• “I was proud to be supported by J Street, another predominantly Jewish organization that has a different vision of what it means to be pro-Israel.” — Biss [10:31]
• “We were totally relentless because we felt like we’re going to be outspent by so much. We’ve got to make sure voters understand what this is about, otherwise we’re just going to get drowned out.” — Biss [12:58]

Important Timestamps

• 00:45 – Introduction to Biss’s win and the primary context
• 01:27 – Biss’s summary of AIPAC’s involvement and tactics
• 03:40 – Personal reflections on attacks relating to Biss’s Jewish identity
• 05:31 – Early attempts to engage with AIPAC and reasons for AIPAC’s hostility
• 08:27 – Discussion of potential for alienation and risk of fueling antisemitism
• 10:52 – The campaign’s strategic polling and relentless early messaging
• 13:34 – The effectiveness (and challenge) of relentless transparency and narrative ownership
• 15:47 – Lessons for Democrats and advice to candidates confronting outside spending

Final Thoughts

Daniel Biss’s victory in the Illinois 9th is portrayed as a template for Democrats seeking to counter huge outside spending—specifically by AIPAC—using honesty, transparency, and confidence in voters’ intelligence. Biss urges future candidates to resist bad-faith actors, avoid compromising their principles for political expediency, and make sure constituents are fully informed about the sources and motives of negative campaigning.

For those strategizing Democratic campaigns or following debates over outside money and foreign policy influence, this episode is essential listening and offers a roadmap for confronting—and countering—super PAC-driven interference.