yandex99
Luminary
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2023
- Posts
- 8,948
- Reputation
- 8,396
New York City's Congressional Elections: Are White Yuppies Turning On the Jews?
Eric Striker • June 25, 2026 • 1,200 Words • 90 Comments • ReplyQ&A
Tweet
Reddit
Share
Share
Email
Print
More
www.unz.com
Darializa Chevalier
A recent slate of Democratic primary races in New York City, where Israel and Jewish money — not identity politics — was on the ballot has triggered a non-stop media cycle of teeth-gnashing and kvetching.
Upper class and educated white voters were instrumental in these competitive races, rejecting Jewish-funded candidates across the five boroughs. The extra scrutiny that informed voters are giving to Jewish donors in contested races is beginning to cause a problem for organizations like AIPAC, who have sought to deploy tricks such as pop up PACs and deliberately missing Federal Election Commission filing deadlines until after races are over to conceal their influence.
Conservative commentators such as Dan Bongino and Matt Walsh — echoing a delayed Donald Trump “TRUTH” full of Cold Warrior boilerplate — have sought to dishonestly frame the results of this election as a communist third worldist foreigner conspiracy. Their agenda is to try and get a rise out of white Republicans in flyover country over two Dominicans fighting in the Bronx, but this strategy is failing as even MAGA voters are increasingly suspicious of Jews and Zionism.
By and large, the two major races causing the freakouts were in NY’s 7th district, known as the “Commie Corridor,” where affluent young white leftist transplants in Western Queens and North Brooklyn carried DSA candidate Claire Valdez to a landslide victory. More controversially in NY-13, Darializa Chevalier — an authentically radical pro-Palestinian organizer and hardline anti-Zionist — pulled off an upset against incumbent congressman Adriano Espaillat.
The DSA’s decision to center Israel and Zionist political influence in these races was ideological, but also tactical. The DSA candidates were up against not just the Zionist Democratic political establishment, but also its pocket dogs, such as organized labor and the left-wing placeholding Working Families Parties, who all united against them.
These primary races did not talk about hating white people, hating America or even as much about Donald Trump as one would expect. The DSA showed resolve by largely ignoring these issues and laser focusing on the meaningful, moral question of whether progressives and leftists should be taking money from Jews to support wars for Israel in the Middle East.
In Reynoso vs Valdez, the two candidates had identical “woke” platforms on all issues. Reynoso, who is widely considered an AOC type “progressive,” was even pressured into reluctantly condemning Israel, which Valdez protested as being insincere. To distinguish herself, Valdez accused Reynoso of being in the pocket of AIPAC, to which he replied he was not.
Reynoso was technically correct, AIPAC formally did not directly provide any funds to him this election cycle. But he was exposed as dishonest when supporters of Valdez’s campaign nevertheless were able to pin him down by outlining all of the known Jewish Zionists funding his campaign independently, including sitting board members of the Anti-Defamation League and a super PAC controlled by well-known “Progressive Except Palestine” Jewish supremacists Randi Weingarten and Scott Stringer.
Reynoso’s strategy going into this race was to lock-in the Jewish bloc vote in South Williamsburg, which in conjunction with his polling advantage with blacks and Hispanics made him the early favorite. Unfortunately for Reynoso and his backers, this tactic was neutralized by the explosive turnout from the transient leftist white professional plurality in NY-7 which, when pitted against low turnout from non-whites, delivered a 20 point victory to Valdez.
Elsewhere in NY-13, covering the Bronx and Upper Manhattan, the 85% black and “Hispanic” (Dominican and Puerto Rican) electorate gave AIPAC confidence that their candidate, Adriano Espaillat, would be a lock-in.
The Jewish lobby spared no expense with Espaillat, the chairman of the virulently anti-white Hispanic Caucus and a demonstrated safe pair of hands for Israel during his five terms in Congress. Between personal fundraising and multiple millions in Zionist SuperPAC money, the establishment candidate outspent the no-name left-wing radical Darializa Chevelier by a margin of five to one.
It was Espaillat, not Chevalier, who emphasized vulgar racial and anti-white politics the most in his campaign. Espaillat’s AIPAC funded ads sought to make abolishing ICE and ending immigration enforcement the central issue, bragging that Espaillat is “the first illegal immigrant to be in congress.” This was paired with stunts featuring Espaillat harassing ICE agents at their holding facility in Newark.
In a separate amusing instance of dirty pool, Espaillat’s campaign sought to mobilize Dominican voters by starting a rumor that fellow Dominican Chevalier was secretly Haitian and planning to conduct a “Great Replacement” of Bronx’s Blatino natives with Haitians and Muslims.
Refusing to give up even as polls showed Espaillat winning by 8 points, DSA volunteers sought to maximize turnout amongst the affluent white minority in gentrified parts of their district by calling every single registered Democrat in Upper Manhattan who had voted in any election in the last six years.
The DSA’s gambit worked. In an election race where only 7% of eligible voters participated, Espaillat’s commanding dominance of his district’s non-white supermajority in the Bronx was washed out by high turnout from white activists and students in Northern Manhattan, successfully providing the outsider a narrow 2,000 vote victory.
Chevelier, who even Bernie Sanders refused to endorse for being “anti-Semitic,” will now be going to Washington.
The aftermath of this election has left Jewish commentators and donors asking what happened. Why are wealthy white yuppies breaking from their liberal progressive parents and fighting tooth and nail to elect communists, even if it could objectively harm their personal economic interests?
One possible explanation is intra-elite competition. White and some non-white leftist lesser elites have suffered considerably in the last three years since the October 7th Palestinian uprising. The experience of being witch hunted out of the Jewish governed world of non-profits, universities, and media for their criticism of Israel’s genocide has accumulated and left a sour taste in many mouths.
In the case of Chevalier, her decision to run was strongly inspired by the experience of witnessing her pro-Palestine co-organizer Mahmoud Khalil, who as punishment for criticizing Israel was seized without cause by federal agent, stripped of his Green Card, then held without trial for months in a detention facility before finally being ordered deported.
In other words, the DSA’s anti-Zionist campaign is not populist in the traditional sense of mobilizing the common man’s grievances. It is instead a gathering of rejected elites angered by watching their media jobs get taken from them and given to Bari Weiss.
With their prestige stripped away from them and blacklisted from the elite, these rich kids have correctly identified the cause of their demotion — the Zionist power structure — and are now lashing out, in most cases electorally, in others, more violently.
It isn’t clear how deep this fury goes, but the recent elections make it clear that there is a rapidly growing and tense divide between Jews and Ivy League educated non-Jews. It should be noted that there are still a number of Jews involved in the campaigns and political teams of some of these radical anti-Israel candidates, so the rejection is not wholesale for now. But with a majority of Republican voters under 50 awakened to the problem of Zionist power and a much higher number of Democrats feeling the same, the walls are nevertheless starting to close in on the American Jewish status quo.
Eric Striker • June 25, 2026 • 1,200 Words • 90 Comments • ReplyQ&A
Tweet
Share
Share
More
New York City's Congressional Elections: Are White Yuppies Turning On The Jews?
A recent slate of Democratic primary races in New York City, where Israel and Jewish money — not identity politics — was on the ballot has triggered a non-stop media cycle of teeth-gnashing and kvetching. Upper class and educated white voters were instrumental in these competitive races...
A recent slate of Democratic primary races in New York City, where Israel and Jewish money — not identity politics — was on the ballot has triggered a non-stop media cycle of teeth-gnashing and kvetching.
Upper class and educated white voters were instrumental in these competitive races, rejecting Jewish-funded candidates across the five boroughs. The extra scrutiny that informed voters are giving to Jewish donors in contested races is beginning to cause a problem for organizations like AIPAC, who have sought to deploy tricks such as pop up PACs and deliberately missing Federal Election Commission filing deadlines until after races are over to conceal their influence.
Conservative commentators such as Dan Bongino and Matt Walsh — echoing a delayed Donald Trump “TRUTH” full of Cold Warrior boilerplate — have sought to dishonestly frame the results of this election as a communist third worldist foreigner conspiracy. Their agenda is to try and get a rise out of white Republicans in flyover country over two Dominicans fighting in the Bronx, but this strategy is failing as even MAGA voters are increasingly suspicious of Jews and Zionism.
By and large, the two major races causing the freakouts were in NY’s 7th district, known as the “Commie Corridor,” where affluent young white leftist transplants in Western Queens and North Brooklyn carried DSA candidate Claire Valdez to a landslide victory. More controversially in NY-13, Darializa Chevalier — an authentically radical pro-Palestinian organizer and hardline anti-Zionist — pulled off an upset against incumbent congressman Adriano Espaillat.
The DSA’s decision to center Israel and Zionist political influence in these races was ideological, but also tactical. The DSA candidates were up against not just the Zionist Democratic political establishment, but also its pocket dogs, such as organized labor and the left-wing placeholding Working Families Parties, who all united against them.
These primary races did not talk about hating white people, hating America or even as much about Donald Trump as one would expect. The DSA showed resolve by largely ignoring these issues and laser focusing on the meaningful, moral question of whether progressives and leftists should be taking money from Jews to support wars for Israel in the Middle East.
In Reynoso vs Valdez, the two candidates had identical “woke” platforms on all issues. Reynoso, who is widely considered an AOC type “progressive,” was even pressured into reluctantly condemning Israel, which Valdez protested as being insincere. To distinguish herself, Valdez accused Reynoso of being in the pocket of AIPAC, to which he replied he was not.
Reynoso was technically correct, AIPAC formally did not directly provide any funds to him this election cycle. But he was exposed as dishonest when supporters of Valdez’s campaign nevertheless were able to pin him down by outlining all of the known Jewish Zionists funding his campaign independently, including sitting board members of the Anti-Defamation League and a super PAC controlled by well-known “Progressive Except Palestine” Jewish supremacists Randi Weingarten and Scott Stringer.
Reynoso’s strategy going into this race was to lock-in the Jewish bloc vote in South Williamsburg, which in conjunction with his polling advantage with blacks and Hispanics made him the early favorite. Unfortunately for Reynoso and his backers, this tactic was neutralized by the explosive turnout from the transient leftist white professional plurality in NY-7 which, when pitted against low turnout from non-whites, delivered a 20 point victory to Valdez.
Elsewhere in NY-13, covering the Bronx and Upper Manhattan, the 85% black and “Hispanic” (Dominican and Puerto Rican) electorate gave AIPAC confidence that their candidate, Adriano Espaillat, would be a lock-in.
The Jewish lobby spared no expense with Espaillat, the chairman of the virulently anti-white Hispanic Caucus and a demonstrated safe pair of hands for Israel during his five terms in Congress. Between personal fundraising and multiple millions in Zionist SuperPAC money, the establishment candidate outspent the no-name left-wing radical Darializa Chevelier by a margin of five to one.
It was Espaillat, not Chevalier, who emphasized vulgar racial and anti-white politics the most in his campaign. Espaillat’s AIPAC funded ads sought to make abolishing ICE and ending immigration enforcement the central issue, bragging that Espaillat is “the first illegal immigrant to be in congress.” This was paired with stunts featuring Espaillat harassing ICE agents at their holding facility in Newark.
In a separate amusing instance of dirty pool, Espaillat’s campaign sought to mobilize Dominican voters by starting a rumor that fellow Dominican Chevalier was secretly Haitian and planning to conduct a “Great Replacement” of Bronx’s Blatino natives with Haitians and Muslims.
Refusing to give up even as polls showed Espaillat winning by 8 points, DSA volunteers sought to maximize turnout amongst the affluent white minority in gentrified parts of their district by calling every single registered Democrat in Upper Manhattan who had voted in any election in the last six years.
The DSA’s gambit worked. In an election race where only 7% of eligible voters participated, Espaillat’s commanding dominance of his district’s non-white supermajority in the Bronx was washed out by high turnout from white activists and students in Northern Manhattan, successfully providing the outsider a narrow 2,000 vote victory.
Chevelier, who even Bernie Sanders refused to endorse for being “anti-Semitic,” will now be going to Washington.
The aftermath of this election has left Jewish commentators and donors asking what happened. Why are wealthy white yuppies breaking from their liberal progressive parents and fighting tooth and nail to elect communists, even if it could objectively harm their personal economic interests?
One possible explanation is intra-elite competition. White and some non-white leftist lesser elites have suffered considerably in the last three years since the October 7th Palestinian uprising. The experience of being witch hunted out of the Jewish governed world of non-profits, universities, and media for their criticism of Israel’s genocide has accumulated and left a sour taste in many mouths.
In the case of Chevalier, her decision to run was strongly inspired by the experience of witnessing her pro-Palestine co-organizer Mahmoud Khalil, who as punishment for criticizing Israel was seized without cause by federal agent, stripped of his Green Card, then held without trial for months in a detention facility before finally being ordered deported.
In other words, the DSA’s anti-Zionist campaign is not populist in the traditional sense of mobilizing the common man’s grievances. It is instead a gathering of rejected elites angered by watching their media jobs get taken from them and given to Bari Weiss.
With their prestige stripped away from them and blacklisted from the elite, these rich kids have correctly identified the cause of their demotion — the Zionist power structure — and are now lashing out, in most cases electorally, in others, more violently.
It isn’t clear how deep this fury goes, but the recent elections make it clear that there is a rapidly growing and tense divide between Jews and Ivy League educated non-Jews. It should be noted that there are still a number of Jews involved in the campaigns and political teams of some of these radical anti-Israel candidates, so the rejection is not wholesale for now. But with a majority of Republican voters under 50 awakened to the problem of Zionist power and a much higher number of Democrats feeling the same, the walls are nevertheless starting to close in on the American Jewish status quo.
