By Tim Reid
WASHINGTON, March 18 (Reuters) – The Iran war is influencing Democratic primaries ahead of November’s midterm elections, with progressives faulting moderate rivals for not opposing President Donald Trump’s bombing campaign strongly enough and for what they call overly close ties with defense contractors and Israel.
The tensions are emerging in Democratic primaries for Senate and House seats in Michigan, Colorado, Illinois, Maine and North Carolina, a Reuters review shows. At least half a dozen progressives are challenging establishment-backed or moderate rivals, arguing that donations to their opponents from defense contractors and pro-Israel groups undercut their opposition to the war.
These primary battles highlight a broader struggle inside the party over its future as it tries to rebuild after election losses in 2024 and starts to consider potential candidates for the 2028 presidential election.
For progressives, the U.S.-Israeli bombing of Iran has sparked anew longstanding demands to end American-led wars and curb the influence of defense industry and billionaire donors, while shifting attention to economic fairness and equal rights at home.
Progressives have seized on the Iran war in speeches, media interviews, TV ads and fundraising appeals, accusing some of their opponents of taking donations from defense contractors and from groups affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful pro-Israel political lobbying group.
“It’s difficult to trust politicians who take money from weapons manufacturers and AIPAC, all of whom are for this war, and for those politicians to then stand up and say they against the war,” said Abdul El-Sayed, who is a Democratic primary candidate for a Senate seat in Michigan.
Candidates like El-Sayed say it’s not enough to oppose the Iran war – Democrats must back that rhetoric by refusing such donations. Their more moderate opponents have sharply rebutted the attacks, saying they have been quick to oppose the Iran war and that progressives are manufacturing a conflict for electoral gain.
While Democratic lawmakers in Congress have largely unified against a war that is unpopular with most Americans, the primary-season disputes underscore how the party risks squandering a potential political advantage at a time when Republicans are heading into the midterms facing significant political headwinds.
FIGHT LOOMING IN 2028
The main point of friction is whether the party should be appealing more to swing voters or focus on energizing its core supporters. These internal cross-currents, about ideology but also tactics, have been swirling for many election cycles.
The tensions are not just over foreign policy, but how boldly to pursue economic reforms and how closely the party should align itself with corporate America.
“The day after the midterms are over in November these tensions will burst forth,” said Bill Galston, a veteran Democratic strategist.
In a North Carolina Democratic House primary this month, Nida Allam, a county commissioner, issued an ad focused on the Iran war and her opponent, Democratic incumbent Valerie Foushee.
A central part of Allam’s campaign focused on the fact that in this election cycle, Federal Election Commission filings show Foushee’s campaign took $3,000 each from political committees controlled by two weapons manufacturers, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.
When Foushee ran for Congress in 2022, AIPAC’s political action committee spent over $2 million in support of her campaign, according to FEC filings, although she said she would forgo AIPAC-linked assistance this cycle.
“I will never take a dime from defense contractors or the pro-Israel lobby,” Allam said in her ad. “I have opposed these forever wars my entire career.”
Foushee narrowly won the March 3 primary by one percentage point and is likely to win re-election in November. But Allam’s attack over Iran was part of an opening salvo in the party’s internal fight heading into 2028, Galston said.
“Trump’s senseless war in Iran puts civilians abroad and our servicemembers at risk,” Foushee said in a statement to Reuters. “Americans are tired of sending taxpayer money abroad for endless wars while the cost of groceries, healthcare, and housing continues to rise here at home.”
Progressive challengers also say their opponents have voted to increase the Pentagon’s budget, rather than backed failed congressional efforts to siphon money away from the Defense Department and towards domestic programs.
In Colorado’s Democratic U.S. Senate primary, Julie Gonzales, 43, a state senator, is challenging incumbent John Hickenlooper, 74. He is expected to win his primary and the general election in November.
Gonzales has taken issue with Hickenlooper’s vote in October to increase the U.S. defense budget under Trump. She says it is hypocritical to make anti-war statements while simultaneously voting to fund America’s war machine.
“Whatever he says, John Hickenlooper owns this war,” Gonzales told Reuters.
Like most Senate Democrats, Hickenlooper voted in favor of a resolution this month to curb Trump’s ability to wage war abroad.
“I think he started an illegal war with Iran. Americans don’t want another endless war in the Middle East,” Hickenlooper said in a video he posted on X.
Opinion polls show that about one in four Americans support the war, with just 10% of Democratic voters backing it.
Melat Kiros, a progressive Democratic candidate running against a Democratic incumbent in a House primary in Colorado, seized on Iran the morning the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign started on February 28.
In an Instagram video filmed as she walked down a street, Kiros denounced politicians who take contributions from the defense industry.
“The only way things change is if we make sure that our elected representatives aren’t in the pockets of the military industrial complex,” she said.
In an interview with Reuters, Kiros criticized her opponent, Diana DeGette, for twice voting against motions by progressive lawmakers to cut the Pentagon’s budget in 2020 and 2021.
“The greatest hypocrisy I’m seeing is these folks now saying we shouldn’t be spending this money on war.”
DeGette’s campaign did not respond to Reuters for comment, but in a March 5 statement she said, “This war is costing at least $1 billion every day. That is billions of dollars that could go towards affordable health care and housing. I refuse to support this war.”
IRAN TO BE ‘TESTING GROUND’ FOR DEMOCRATS’ FUTURE
Matt Bennett, a co-founder of the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way, said that efforts by progressives to press internal party debates over Iran and the party’s broader direction could undermine Democratic prospects in the midterms.
He argued that winning against Republicans and regaining the White House would require nominees who can attract moderate voters.
“These hyper progressives that are running in these primaries don’t do that, and that’s the concern.”
Progressive groups argue voters are frustrated with politics as usual.
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, a group that has endorsed a slate of progressive Democrats this year – including Allam and Kiros – said the party’s supporters want leaders to take on corporatism and the defense industry.
“The war with Iran is a great testing ground for that sort of future of the Democratic Party,” Andrabi said.
The Democratic National Committee, which oversees election strategy and candidate support, did not respond to Reuters’ questions about internal disagreements over Iran, instead emphasizing the economic and political issues it wants voters to focus on.
“More than a year into his term, prices are higher than ever and Trump’s latest foreign conflict has plunged our nation into a deadly and costly war that no one asked for,” said Mia Ehrenberg, a DNC spokesperson.
(Reporting by Tim Reid in Washington. Additional reporting by Jason Lange, editing by Ross Colvin and Alistair Bell)
