While Bowman had his missteps, such as pulling a fire alarm, Latimer’s significant errors and controversial views—his stance on housing desegregation, reluctance to criticize Netanyahu and Israel’s bombing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and several racist remarks—did not dominate headlines. The media heavily scrutinized Bowman’s fire alarm incident, while largely ignoring Latimer’s acceptance of Republican money to support a devastating war in Gaza, his opposition to a two-state solution, and his support for actions that have led to severe humanitarian crises.

Latimer’s sole reason for being a competitive candidate—the endorsement he received from AIPAC due to his unconditional backing of Netanyahu’s horrific assault on Gaza—was similarly under-scrutinized. The assault on Gaza was barely debated other than within the “tactical framing” of Bowman’s relationship with pro-Israel Jewish voters in the district. Latimer rarely mentioned his unconditional support for the war himself, knowing it was unpopular. The mainstream media’s failure to examine Latimer reveals a significant disparity in coverage, undermining the democratic process.

So what can be done? Through my own work for progressive causes, I’ve realized how pivotal the issue of Palestine is in shaping the broader political landscape. Palestine serves as a wedge issue that the right exploits to fracture the center-left coalition. It is also a tool that conservative, corporate-backed Democrats use to marginalize the growing progressive wing.

Progressives who have avoided taking a strong stance on shaping the Palestinian rights movement must recognize the deep threat AIPAC poses to all our movements and collective interests. The stance a politician takes on Palestine often indicates their willingness to challenge entrenched power and stand up for genuine justice and equality. It is imperative that progressives understand the centrality of this issue and rally together to counteract AIPAC’s influence, for the sake of not just Palestinian rights but the integrity and future of all progressive causes.

We can criticize AIPAC all we want, but we must also focus on building our own powerful strategic infrastructure. Here’s how.

Build stronger donor networks. Bowman’s campaign was significantly outspent by his opponent, largely due to the influx of money from AIPAC and its affiliates. This highlights the critical need for coordinated and well-organized donor networks within the Palestinian rights and broader progressive movement. It’s not enough to rely on grassroots organizing alone; substantial financial resources are necessary to compete effectively in today’s political landscape. Research demonstrates that funding is especially consequential in House races, smaller races, and primaries.

There are numerous left-leaning foundations with substantial funds, yet they’ve failed to invest adequately in PACs like Justice Democrats, or in 501(c)(4)s that conduct robust Palestinian rights advocacy or Arab and Muslim civic engagement. The lack of investment in these areas is particularly concerning, as Arab and Muslim communities are one of the chief targets of far-right Trump authoritarianism. One bright spot is the recent example of Rashida Tlaib sending $500,000 toward Justice Democrats’ independent expenditure. This demonstration of solidarity from elected officials is unprecedented and deserves to be applauded because if one goes down, they all lose.

Liberal philanthropy needs to recognize that neutrality on Palestine threatens the very foundation of progressive liberalism. Arab and Muslim communities are key players in the anti-authoritarian coalition. The lack of investment is pushing these communities to the disillusioned sidelines of general elections or even towards voting for Trump, similar to the shifts toward the GOP seen among Latino voters.

Develop stronger membership organizations. The movement needs to invest in building authentic membership organizations that go beyond social media followings. Bowman’s campaign highlighted the limitations of email lists and/or staff-driven or donor-driven models that lack a real, engaged membership base. We need to build year-round engagement by continuously organizing, registering voters, and developing leadership.

Develop stronger staff, operatives, organizers, and leaders. A robust movement requires an investment in leadership development, political education, and skills training. Bowman’s loss demonstrated that we need more leaders and operatives capable of bridging social movements and electoral politics. Street mobilization efforts can fall short on their own.

Forge coalitions across differences. The necessity for stronger coalitional alliances with various communities cannot be overstated. Bowman’s campaign needed broader support from Black, Hispanic, and Jewish communities, reflecting a gap in coalition-building. One place to draw inspiration from is the climate movement, which worked for over a decade, across multiple movement cycles, to build multiracial and multi-sectoral alliances spanning climate activists, environmental justice communities, and labor unions. This created a broad base of support for the sea change in climate policy that occurred with the Green New Deal and subsequent climate legislation.

Prioritize political education, strategic dialogue, and alignment-building. A key takeaway from Bowman’s loss is the importance of some degree of political education and alignment within the movement, particularly regarding the significance of Democratic primary elections in driving policy change.

If Palestinian-led youth organizations undermine candidates like Bowman out of frustration with the Biden endorsements or the political process, it disrupts the strategy of building a left-progressive pro-Palestine bloc in Congress anchored in the youth vote and progressive and social movement allies. This contradiction causes the media and politicians to question our collective support for the youth movement or why they should sympathize with the movement in the streets. We must ensure that our actions and messaging are somewhat aligned to maintain credibility and effectiveness.

Support Palestinian-led, multiracial mass membership organizations that blend disruptive protest with electoral organizing in Democratic primaries. There is an urgent need to support Palestinian-led and multiracial organizations to channel the energy of mass street protests into productive political action. Similar to the Sunrise Movement, United We Dream, and March for Our Lives, this organizing would integrate street mobilization with legislative advocacy and electoral engagement, transforming grassroots activism into substantial political influence. Funding and support for these efforts are crucial for the movement’s success.

Institutionalize the movement moment. AIPAC will be emboldened by Bowman’s defeat, aiming to unseat Ilhan Omar, Summer Lee, Rashida Tlaib, and others by 2026 and prevent any pro-Palestine Democrat from being elected to Congress ever again. To counter this, we must unite stakeholders from the key forces in the progressive Democratic coalition: racial justice groups, labor unions, reproductive, environmental, immigrant, and LGBTQ rights groups, and other progressive movements within the party. Establishing hubs in key districts and states, fostering a cohesive campaign, and building a united front against AIPAC’s influence will ensure that pro-Palestinian rights remain a priority.

Prioritize strategic communications. Youth-led social movements are driving change but struggle to effectively engage with mainstream media and navigate Washington politics. It’s not about any one policy, but rather about a structural infrastructure gap that persists and blocks the shared ambitions of young people, social movements, and progressive advocates.

The conservative right adeptly employs a divide-and-conquer strategy against the center-left coalition, especially targeting the rifts between “leftists” and “moderates.” The emergence of young people and progressives on the main political stage thus presents an opportunity but also a vulnerability—if these groups can’t effectively communicate their demands, like those concerning Palestine, “defunding the police,” or the Green New Deal, through mainstream media channels, they risk falling prey to the far right’s potent messaging machine.

A key issue for the Palestinian human rights movement is the lack of identifiable, developed youth spokespeople and earned mainstream media persuasion strategies (like the Green New Deal sit-in at Pelosi’s office or the Dreamers campaign), which hampers its ability to control its narrative and influence Democratic voters. It makes sense considering how heavily scrutinized and attacked Palestinian leaders are by their adversaries and by mainstream media. But without choosing its spokespeople, the media and algorithms will do it for them, often to the movement’s detriment. Electing allies is just the beginning; the crucial step is molding a political climate where champions and movements can thrive.

Bowman’s primary loss is a learning opportunity for the Palestinian rights and progressive movement. By building stronger donor networks, developing robust membership organizations, focusing on leadership development, forging coalitional alliances, and prioritizing strategic communications and political education, the movement can position itself for greater success in future elections.

These lessons underscore the importance of a comprehensive, strategic approach in navigating the complex political landscape and advocating for justice and human rights. Incorporating these strategic steps will enable the Palestinian rights and progressive movement to turn the setback of Bowman’s loss into a catalyst for growth and empowerment, ensuring that future campaigns are more resilient and effective.