Two years after a high-profile primary defeat that sent shockwaves through the progressive Squad, Cori Bush wants to go back to Washington.
But as the activist-turned-politician seeks to reclaim her seat, she must also contend with the changed landscape of the Beltway — including a Democratic Party engaged in fierce infighting over the country’s support for Israel that has only intensified since her ousting from Congress, which she argues will fuel her comeback bid.
“I need to go back. I didn’t finish the work that I was doing,” Bush said in a recent interview. “It was interrupted by big money. It was interrupted by AIPAC and their allies who made the decision that they didn’t want this activist, this advocate, who had been speaking out against war and imperialism, that had been speaking out against a genocide in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli government.”
The fight over the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and its political arm’s support for candidates has reached a fever pitch among Democrats this election cycle. More and more Democrats have denounced the organization’s influence and, some 2028 presidential contenders have vowed to not accept funding from the organization.
The race in Missouri’s 1st District — a plurality Black district anchored in St. Louis — two years ago was one of the highest-profile fights between critics and supporters of Israel in the Democratic Party, occurring as activists pressured then-candidate Joe Biden over his stance in the raging Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
Then-county prosecutor Wesley Bell — backed by more than $8.5 million in outside spending from the AIPAC-affiliated United Democracy Project — beat Bush by about 5 points in the primary before easily winning the seat in November. AIPAC’s political arm has yet to spend in the district this year, but they endorsed Bell once again in the 2026 cycle.
“Cori Bush was a disastrously ineffective Member of Congress who didn’t deliver for her constituents,” Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for AIPAC’s United Democracy Project, said in a statement. “When voters are reminded of that record of non-accomplishment, they will be no more likely to elect Cori Bush to Congress than they were to re-elect her two years ago. She was a terrible Member of Congress that didn’t [do] anything for St. Louis.”
Usamah Andrabi of Justice Democrats, a progressive organization that endorsed Bush this cycle and last, argued Bell’s history of accepting AIPAC support may now be his downfall.
“Voters are waking up to [AIPAC’s] influence, and that is why you are now seeing AIPAC’s endorsement becoming, I think, a death for so many candidates and incumbents across the country,” said Andrabi.
AIPAC has had a mixed record in Democratic primary contests this year, including a faceplant in New Jersey and a split decision in Illinois, as progressive candidates more outwardly attack the organization.
Dorton highlighted Bush’s missed votes and her vote against Biden’s infrastructure bill as the reason she lost to Bell. For his part, Bell appeared unconcerned about the impact that AIPAC’s past support could have on his reelection bid, calling it nothing more than a “headline” for his opponent.
“Folks in my district, money in politics doesn’t impact whether they can get gas in their car and pay for food and the price of eggs and bringing jobs into our district,” Bell said in an interview. “And so that is a headline that my opponent likes to play into.”
Antjuan Seawright — a longtime Democratic strategist and adviser to top Democratic campaign committees — also argued that a focus on AIPAC won’t motivate most primary voters.
“I know there are some in and outside of our party who want to make the conversations about the type of money folks may or may not receive, but I tend to think it’s more important about the type of services we provide,” Seawright said. “As long as the people feel like you’re representing them, then why should the race be about the type of money instead of about the services you provide to the district?”
But the divide in the Democratic Party over support for Israel has only grown since Bush’s 2024 defeat, particularly amid the war in Iran launched by President Donald Trump and Israeli leaders.
Sixty-seven percent of registered Democrats said in an NBC News poll this month that they sympathized more with Palestinians rather than Israelis in “the Middle East situation.” And a recent Quinnipiac poll found that 53 percent of voters, including 89 percent of Democrats, oppose the U.S-Israel military action against Iran.
A similar division is playing out among Republicans. Most self-described MAGA voters firmly back the president’s actions, but prominent members of the conservative movement like Tucker Carlson have criticized the conflict, and Joe Kent, who was serving in a senior intelligence role, quit the administration.
“Without a doubt, the fact that Wesley Bell is historically one of the largest recipients of AIPAC money ever is a massive albatross around his neck that should be hit on consistently,” Andrabi said.
And he argued that primary voters are now rewarding Democrats willing to buck party leadership.
“Voters are looking for leaders who are willing to call out their own party when they are failing communities, call out their own party when they are too beholden to corporate lobbies like AIPAC,” he said. “Cori has done that her entire time [in Congress].”
AIPAC-backed groups two years ago broadly did not focus on Israel in contests across the country. They instead targeted Bush’s vote against Biden’s crowning infrastructure bill and missed House votes — a strategy the organization has continued in early primaries this year — and something that Bell amplified.
“I don’t want to hear about someone who claims to fight but won’t show up to do the job,” Bell said.
Bush was among six progressive Democrats who voted against Biden’s infrastructure bill. The group argued that the bill was incomplete without the separate economic package, known as the Build Back Better Act.
But Bush argues her activism — including pushing party leaders from the left — is where the base of the Democratic Party now is.
“The thing is, people are moving toward the things that I was speaking about,” Bush said. “I called it a genocide before many others did. I spoke up for Medicare For All before others did. I pushed for the Equal Rights Amendment in a way that hadn’t been done in a very long time, and I created a caucus to stand for the Equal Rights Amendment.”
The tensions between Bell and Bush are a stark difference from their relationship pre-2024. According to Bush, the two had been friends — until Bell launched his campaign against her without a heads up. Bush said the two haven’t talked since, and she didn’t let him know when she decided to run against him this year “the same way he didn’t reach out to me to tell me he was going to run against me.”
Still, Bell already has a few advantages in the race: Not only is he the incumbent, but he secured the endorsement of the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, one of the most influential Black political organizations. And Bell’s campaign war chest is much larger than hers: He has nearly $850,000 on hand as of the end of 2025, according to campaign finance records, compared to just over $200,000 for Bush.
Bell has pitched himself as a pragmatist, saying that voters in the district don’t actually think about many of the issues that Bush pushes for.
“She wasn’t present in St. Louis. She didn’t meet with stakeholders; she didn’t meet with constituents,” he said, highlighting the money he brought to district businesses over the last two years. “The MO in Missouri does not stand for Middle East. It stands for Missouri.”
Bush, meanwhile, has signaled she will lean into her progressive activism for her comeback bid. She said she still speaks regularly with members of the Squad: Democratic Reps. Ayanna Pressley, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. None of the members responded to a request for comment.
Seawright, the Democratic strategist, said the back-and-forth between the two candidates exemplifies the party’s “growing pains.”
“The primaries, hopefully, will do what they’re supposed to do and settle whatever differences and disputes we may appear to have, but also change the direction of how we move forward,” he said. “No matter the differences we may appear to have amongst each other, they do not compare to the differences we have with the other side.”
A version of this article first appeared in POLITICO Pro’s Morning Score. Want to receive the newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to POLITICO Pro. You’ll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day’s biggest stories.
