Is New York Congressman Jamaal Bowman’s Primary Defeat a Warning to Progressive Democrats?
No. And here’s why
Today, we have a guest writer. Peter Dreier is a friend, political sparring partner, and fellow baseball fan. Peter is also the E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics at Occidental College, where he teaches courses on American politics and public policy, specializing in urban politics and policy, housing policy, community development, and community organizing. You can read more about Peter, including his writing for The Nation, Common Dreams, Talking Points Memo, and other national publications, here.
Congressman Jamaal Bowman speaks during rally in the Bronx with AOC, Bernie and Jamaal in support of re-election of Jamaal Bowman for Congress at St. Mary’s Park in New York on June 22, 2024. Photo credit: lev radin/Shutterstock
As many had predicted, centrist and Westchester County executive George Latimer defeated two-term incumbent Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a 48-year-old leftist, in Tuesday’s Democratic primary. New York’s 16th Congressional district includes a sliver of the Bronx and a large part of suburban Westchester County. On Wednesday morning, with 84% of the vote counted, Latimer was winning in a landslide, beating Bowman 58.4% to 41.6%.
Some pundits interpret Bowman’s defeat as emblematic of a larger trend, one that reflects the vulnerability of other left-leaning House members, including the so-called “Squad,” to a more moderate national mood. The New York Times called the outcome “a stinging defeat to the Democratic left.” Echoing the hopes of the American Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which poured big bucks into the effort to defeat Bowman because of his opposition to Israel’s ongoing campaign in Gaza, the Times claimed that the incumbent’s defeat “could have a chilling effect on other critics of Israel at a crucial point in the war.” USA Today’s headline made a similar prediction: “Jamaal Bowman's primary results may spell trouble for other squad members.”
But that view is myopic and misguided; furthermore, it should not influence Democratic strategy in the 2024 elections and beyond. The demographics of Bowman’s district, and his shortage of political skills, are not characteristic of the challenges that other Squad, and progressive, members of Congress, face.
Let’s look at the details.
The District
Three factors contributed to Bowman’s defeat. First, NY-16, while safely Democratic, was never overly progressive, particularly when compared to other districts represented by the party’s progressive wing. Second, Bowman was a stunningly incompetent politician: he made a few embarrassing blunders, and failed to develop close ties to his constituents. Third, AIPAC took advantage of these weaknesses in a heavily Jewish district. Putting close to $15 million into the race, the organization hoped to make him an example of what can happen to Democrats who don’t echo AIPAC’s full-throated support for the current Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu.
An African American middle school principal with no previous political experience, Bowman was also the beneficiary of an anomalous election in 2020, when he defeated Rep. Eliot Engel, a 16-term incumbent, a staunch liberal, and chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The election took place amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and a few months after the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police triggered an upsurge of anti-racist protest. Since Engel was first elected in 1988 the electorate in NY-16 had also evolved: the number of Black and Latino voters in the Bronx-centered district had grown significantly, and Engel was out of touch with his newer constituents.
In 2020, Bowman benefitted from a progressive surge in the Democratic party. In 2018, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had won nearby NY-14, defeating another longtime Democratic incumbent, and capturing the imagination, donations, and grassroots engagement of many liberal and progressive voters. By the next cycle, AOC was a media superstar and a popular incumbent, winning re-election by a wide margin.
Although their districts were very different demographically, Bowman partly rode to victory on Ocasio-Cortez’s coattails in 2020. However, by the time he ran for re-election 2022, New York’s decennial redistricting formula resulted in a redrawn NY-16. The Bronx part of Bowman’s constituency, where he had won by a large margin, was reduced to a sliver, while the wealthier Westchester suburbs (including White Plains, Scarsdale, Mount Vernon, Yonkers, Rye, and New Rochelle), which contain many liberal, but not left-wing, Jewish voters, comprised a much larger chunk of the district.
Redistricting undermined Bowman’s base. In 2020, he defeated Engel, a long-term incumbent, with 55.4% of the Democratic primary vote. Two years later, running against several relatively unknown Democrats, Bowman only got 54.4% of the primary vote.
Clearly, he was already walking on thin ice, even before this year’s primary campaign.
The Candidate
Bowman also didn’t help himself with his conduct as a Congressman. He did not cement his ties to key Democrats, small business groups, suburban or Jewish voters in his district. Bowman’s constituent services—the kind of civic housekeeping that makes voters loyal to politicians whose views they may disagree with—were also maladroit. His voting record in Congress was in sync with the Progressive Caucus but on some issues, he alienated party leaders. One good example of this was his vote against Biden’s 2021 infrastructure bill because it had been separated from the social spending bill.
Other Squad members voted against the bill too, but Bowman didn’t anticipate how much a brazen vote against Biden would hurt him in his own district. Furthermore, last September, unable to open a door in a House office building during Democratic attempts to delay a vote on a spending bill, Bowman pulled a fire alarm that sent the Capitol into chaos, forcing members to evacuate the building. He said it was a mistake, but it looked like the kind of prank typical of a teenager, not a member of Congress. Bowman later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and apologized, but the incident quickly became easy fodder for his opponents, including Latimer, to depict him as lacking maturity or common sense.
By Election Day, voters in NY-16 District clearly agreed.
Israel and DSA
To be sure, the Israel/Gaza war has been a difficult issue for Democratic progressives to navigate. But Bowman compounded his problems with Jewish constituents by issuing negative public statements about Israel, and by sowing confusion about the nature of his relationship with the often militantly pro-Palestinian Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Ironically, DSA, one of Bowman’s strongest organizational supporters—and an organization that helped drive his grassroots outreach during the 2020 campaign, had attacked Bowman earlier for being too pro-Israel.
DSA grew from 6,000 to 100,000 members nationwide in the wake of Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaigns in 2016, and 2020, and provided many of the ground troops for AOC’s 2018 victory. It has also helped elect other left-leaning candidates for the New York City Council, the state legislature, and Congress. But when Bowman began to act like an elected official, his DSA support weakened. After Bowman took a trip to Israel in 2021 sponsored by J Street, a liberal “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobby group, DSA denounced him and threatened to expel him from the organization.
Eventually, Bowman and DSA reconciled, in part because both he and the organization became increasingly critical of Israel. DSA endorsed Bowman again in May, 2024. But it was too late. DSA’s litmus-test leftism had embroiled Bowman in a public dispute that accentuated his ties to the group while at the same time confusing voters about his views about Israel.
Bowman also contributed to the confusion about where he stood on Israel. He supported a Congressional resolution memorializing the “nakba,” the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians after Israel became a sovereign state in 1948. Immediately after October 7, Bowman condemned Hamas’s attack against Israel, but he then soon insisted that Israel halt its retaliatory bombing of Gaza. Calling for a ceasefire, as Bowman did on October 16, 2023, may appear reasonable now, but at the time it was not popular among Democratic leaders—or even most liberal Jews.
Subsequently, Bowman escalated his rhetoric, accusing Israel of “genocide” against the people of Gaza. His participation in an event at a local Islamic center that included Norman Finkelstein, a controversial anti-Zionist writer who is anathema to all but the most left-wing Jewish groups, was also politically stupid. As a result, J Street, which had supported Bowman in his first two campaigns, took the unprecedented step of rescinding its endorsement.
Because Bowman lacked close ties with Jewish groups in his district, these incidents quickly made him a pariah for a key voting demographic. The small left-wing Jewish groups that continued to embrace him did not have the numbers or credibility to offset the loss of mainstream Jewish voters.
Enter Latimer—and AIPAC
As Bowman’s political weaknesses became increasing apparent, many Democrats in the district looked for a primary opponent. Despite his age, the 70-year-old Latimer was the perfect candidate. A Democrat, he had served on the Rye City Council, in the Westchester County legislature, and in the New York State Assembly. From 2013 to 2017 he served in the New York State Senate. In 2017, he ran successfully for Westchester County executive, unseating incumbent Republican Rob Astorino. Latimer was well-known and well-liked in NY-16, although he is, perhaps, slightly more centrist than most of its voters. (In 2008, Barack Obama won the district with 72% of the vote. In 2020, Biden captured the district by the same margin).
AIPAC, the Democratic Majority for Israel, and other pro-Israel groups, jumped in to embrace the Latimer campaign. Together, these organizations spent more than $16 million to defeat Bowman, making it the most expensive House primary race in history. Some left-leaning groups like the Working Families Party, spent close to $1.75 million to help Bowman, but the spending gap was overwhelming.
As importantly, Latimer’s allies used the money to poke insistently at Bowman’s vulnerabilities with Jewish voters. The Westchester Jewish Council sponsored Latimer’s visit to Israel a few weeks after October 7. Then, a Jewish-led group called Westchester Unites orchestrated an outreach and get-out-the-vote effort targeting synagogue members, and telling Jews that “antisemitism is on the ballot.”
As polls showed that he was likely to lose, a desperate Bowman doubled down on his own weaknesses. “My opponent supports genocide,” Bowman said at a recent rally in the Bronx. “My opponent and AIPAC are the ones destroying our democracy and it is on us, it is on all of us, to save our democracy.” Elsewhere, Bowman said that AIPAC’s support for Latimer was “fueled by racist MAGA Republicans.” He offended many Jewish voters when he suggested that “the Jews” in his district intentionally chosen to live in segregated enclaves. Last-minute campaign events with Bernie Sanders and fellow Squad members Ocasio-Coretz and Ayanna Pressley (MA-17) couldn’t rescue Bowman.
But perhaps these errors might not have been fatal had Bowman not failed to connect with constituents most likely to vote in the primary over the previous nine months. Jews make up slightly less than 10% of Westchester’s population, but they represent about 20% of voters in recent elections. On Tuesday, it was close to 25%.
It should be emphasized that few American Jews share AIPAC’s “Israel right-or-wrong” stance. Jewish voters—including those in NY-16—are overwhelmingly Democrats, liberals, and critical of the Netanyahu government. But AIPAC, which has essentially become an arm of the GOP, was nevertheless able to exploit Bowman’s political ineptitude. Many Jews who had voted for Bowman in 2022 switched to Latimer this year. And his support even declined among Black and Latino voters in the small part of the Bronx that remained in his district.
Democratic Diversity
So, what does this mean for the Democratic Party more generally?
AIPAC and its allies are kvelling (in Yiddish, that means rejoicing) that, after several failed attempts, they have finally defeated a member of the Squad. But if they think that Bowman’s loss is a template for destroying the Sanders/AOC wing of the Democratic Party, they are seriously mistaken.
Progressive and democratic socialist candidates have been able to prevail in a small but growing number of House districts. These include Squad members Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Ayanna Pressley (MA-7), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), Ilhan Omar (MN-5), Summer Lee (PA-12), and Greg Cesar (TX-35). It also includes Squad-adjacent members like Jamie Raskin (MD-8), Pramila Jayapal (WA-7), Judy Chu (CA-28), Maxwell Frost (FL-10), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.-9), Raul Grijalva (AZ-7), Marc Pocan (WI-2), and Mark Takano (CA-39). These members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus work to push liberal and centrist Democrats to embrace bolder ideas and create a sharper contrast with the GOP.
But with the possible exception of Cori Bush, who faces an AIPAC-funded primary opponent in her St. Louis district on August 6, the other Squad and Squad-adjacent Democrats are not vulnerable, even if AIPAC and its allies pour big donations into defeating them. This is partly because their districts are generally more progressive than Bowman’s. They are also better politicians than he is.
For example, in 2022, Representative Summer Lee barely won both the Democratic primary and the general election against AIPAC-funded candidates in a Pennsylvania district that includes Pittsburgh and its surrounding suburbs. Last October, like Bowman, she called for a cease-fire in the Israel/Gaza war. But Lee was more politically astute. Simultaneouslyy, she worked hard to strengthen her ties to the unions, community groups, businesses, and Jewish organizations in her district.
This year, AIPAC stayed out of the Lee’s race. But an AIPAC-like mega-donor, Republican Jeffrey Yass, bankrolled a Super PAC that attacked Lee over her stance on Israel, and boosted her primary challenger, Bhavini Patel. But it didn’t work. In the April primary, Lee still won—with 60% of the vote.
Conservative Wishful Thinking
In other words, political skills matter. Two years ago, many pundits and journalists viewed the recall of left-wing San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin as a barometer of the national mood, suggesting that the brief era of electing progressive DAs was over.
That was a mistake since, like Bowman, Boudin was not a very good politician. As I wrote at the time, Boudin hurt himself with rookie mistakes. And contrary to the pundits’ predictions, there has been no evidence of progressive DAs around the country being unseated, despite efforts spearheaded by conservative groups, police unions and business/real estate lobbying groups.
In fact, voters have elected even more progressive DAs since then. Similarly, it would be a mistake to conclude from Jamaal Bowman’s defeat on Tuesday that the political winds are shifting against progressive and left Democrats in Congress, or that Democrats would be well-served to find more candidates like Latimer in these districts.
The Democratic Party is hardly monolithic, and the nature of a district also matters. Arguably, it is healthy for democracy to have differences and debates within the party over key issues. The growing number of progressive Democratic victories, not only for Congress but also for local offices, state legislatures, district attorneys, and other offices, reflects the party’s leftward shift and, to some extent, a national desire for change.
Perhaps because of this, Joe Biden has been a much more progressive president than most political observers anticipated, in large part because he embraced, and then slightly watered down, ideas from the party’s leftists about corporate regulation, the minimum wage, abortion, climate change, health care (including drug prices), student debt, and gun safety. Biden may be the most pro-union president in history.
President Biden kicks off the AFL-CIO’s annual Tri-State Labor Day Parade in Philadelphia, PA, September 4, 2023. Photo credit: OogImages/Shutterstock
But it also follows that there are many parts of the country where progressive Democrats have little chance of winning a primary, much less a general election. Even in some Blue Congressional districts, many Democratic voters are centrists or liberals, not progressives, much less democratic socialists.
Bowman’s NY-16 is one of those places.
Here are some others. According to The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter, vulnerable Democratic districts include ones currently held by Democrats: (Yadira Caraveo CO-8); Jared Golden (ME-2; Don Davis (NC-1); Gabe Vasquez, (NM-2); Marcy Kaptur, (OH-9); Emilia Sykes, (OH-13); Susan Wild (PA-7); Matt Cartwright (PA-8); and Marie Perez (WA-3). There are open seats being vacated by Elissa Slotkin (MI-7), and Dan Kildee, (MI-8). AIPAC and its allies will focus on seats currently held by Republicans, and targeted by Democrats: David Schweikert (AZ-1); Juan Ciscomani (AZ-6); John Duarte (CA-13); David Valadao (CA-22); Mike Garcia (CA-27); Ken Calvert (CA-41), Thomas Kean (NJ-7); Anthony D’Esposito (NY-4); Mike Lawler, (NY-17); Marc Molinaro (NY-19); and Laurie Chavez-DeReme (OR-5).
Don’t expect to see AIPAC and its allies successfully meddling in many Democratic primaries, because they are more likely to succeed by focusing their efforts, and their money, on defeating Democratic incumbents and Democratic challengers in toss-up districts.
This week, AIPAC will brag that it helped defeat Jamaal Bowman. But, in fact, Bowman was the architect of his own demise.
Short takes (on tonight’s debate):
The two presidential debates that are scheduled for this election season are unique in one respect: they will not be organized by a nonpartisan body. For many years the League of Women Voters sponsored these events; in 1987, they were taken over by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a joint enterprise of the Democratic and Republican parties. The success of Thursday night’s event will depend “on how well CNN anchors and debate moderators Jake Tapper and Dana Bash execute their duties,” writes Jeffrey McCall at The Hill. But there is another metric too: bringing CNN into homes that haven’t watched that channel in years, as Fox and MSNBC have sucked partisans away from the liberal space. McCall argues that CNN could use that space to establish what it means for network anchors to be absolutely neutral—which includes not identifying false claims. “There is no reason for Tapper and Bash to become pseudo-debaters,” McCall argues. “After all, the political opponents will be right there facing each other. If Trump or Biden makes an unsubstantiated claim, it frankly is not the moderator’s job to challenge the assertion. It should be up to each candidate to rebut one another and probe the other’s policy or character weaknesses. If Trump or Biden fail to do so over the 90-minute event, the moderators should avoid filling in the gaps for either candidate.”(June 26, 2024)
Anonymous rumblings out of the campaign say that Donald Trump has made his VP choice, and the only thing left to decide is when to make the big reveal. And in true reality television style, the announcement could come today or tomorrow before the start of the presidential debate. “Trump said over the weekend that he knows whom he will choose and that his running mate will be present for the debate,” write Henry J. Gomez, Dasha Burns, Matt Dixon, Julie Tsirkin and Jonathan Allen at NBC News. Three final candidates for Prom Queen—Florida Senator Marco Rubio, Ohio Senator JD Vance, and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum have all indicated they will be in Atlanta tomorrow. But it is an indication that there are still a lot of amateurs shooting from the hip in the Trump campaign, even in round three, because everyone who is leaking has a different story about why Trump would do something so inane. “People familiar with discussions about a pre-debate announcement had differing views about Trump's leanings,” the NBC team explains. “One said he is eager to fill his ticket before he squares off with Biden. Another source said he would like the opportunity to throw a curveball to distract Biden before they meet but understands that such a move could create logistical and political complications.” Maybe the Trump team is bringing whoopee cushions and hand buzzers too? (June 25, 2024)
According to the Former Guy’s own Truth Social account, Trump White House physician and current congressman Ronny Jackson (TX-13) has sent a letter to Joe Biden demanding that the President undergo testing for performance enhancing drugs prior to tomorrow’s debate. “In his letter, Jackson echoed Trump’s and right-wing media’s insistence that Biden is suffering from cognitive decline,” writes Edith Olmsted at The Nation. She also speculates that Biden declining to be tested, or perhaps not even acknowledging the demand, might be a ploy to allow Trump to avoid the event at the last. minute. “Trump has historically taken a hit in the polls after debating with Democrats, in 2016, and again in 2020. While Trump loves to hype up a crowd, he’s just not that convincing when he’s sharing the stage,” Olmsted reminds us. (June 25, 2024)
In the real world of politics, a 60-40 election outcome is a landslide.
It looks like a 20% margin to me--but it is actually quite a remarkable tilt against an incumbent.