Talk:Israel lobby in the United States

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Thomas Massie's AIPAC claims

Hello.

The following seems like relevant information to add to this page. Is somebody here willing to do so please?

https://thehill.com/video/thomas-massie-tells-tucker-carlson-that-every-republican-congressman-‘has-an-aipac-person’/9771157/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-republican-claims-every-gop-colleague-has-an-aipac-babysitter-pressuring-them-to-cast-pro-israel-votes/ar-BB1nPXGP

David A (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Relevant, hilarious and mad. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Here are two more news sources for this if anybody is interested in adding it:

@Cdjp1 and Cinaroot: Would either of you be willing to handle it please? David A (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

It should be added in Thomas Massie's own page too. @David A Theofunny (talk) 19:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

WINEP description later on is without link and very problematic language

In 2011, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (a think tank founded by "a small group of visionary Americans committed to advancing U.S. interests in the Middle East") argued that the U.S.-Israel relationship is "A Strategic Asset for the United States.

winep was mentioned multiple times in the article and as pro Israeli/Zionist before this paragraph but suddenly it became a unknown think tank with the exact language that it used to describe itself Nohorizonss (talk) 10:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done I added "pro-Israel". The puffery self-description of WINEP was removed by this edit earlier this year. -- M.boli (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Mitchell Bard heavily used without citation

There is only one citation to Mitchell Bard, for his comments on "the Arab lobby", but he is cited extensively in at least 4 other places in the article. Bard runs a pro-Israel website while also arguing that an Israel lobby does exist, so a citation would make this article stronger. ElasticSnake (talk) 02:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

The many usages of Mitchell Bard were at one time sourced to a web site written by Bard, but this edit removed them in April. -- M.boli (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I re-added the reference to Bard's web site article describing Israel and Arab lobbies, viz:

• Bard, Mitchell. "The Pro-Israel & Pro-Arab Lobbies". Jewish Virtual Library. Retrieved 2025-08-10.

The original citation was 2009. I re-added inline citations in the first section where Bard's article was used, verifying that the quotes in this section matched the current 2025 version of the article. Somebody would have to similarly verify that this page's content matches the reference's current content when restoring the other cites. -- M.boli (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2026

Change “According to Mitchell Bard, there are, three key formal lobbying groups” to “ According to Mitchell Bard, there are three key formal lobbying groups” ~2026-11222-57 (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing it out. LizardJr8 (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for following the recommended edit request procedure. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Lead image

Should we use the AIPAC Congress map, or just the AIPAC building? nhals8 15:21, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

It is hard to think of scenarios where it is appropriate to put political oppo-research for negative campaign ads as a headline graphic on a Wikipedia article. And your explanation "based on publically available information" in your edit summary is ignorant as hell. Deceive based on public information is what oppo-research firms do.

There is plenty of reliable academic research on the influence of the Israel Lobby in this article. The graphic adds little except to make a striking visual of some people's point-of-view.

Furthermore I note that putting that stupid graphic back before opening the discussion is not according to WP:BRD. But I'll leave it at the wrong version instead of edit warring. -- M.boli (talk) 15:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

I think it does visualize the sheer impact and influence that the Israel lobby has over the US, though, which honestly makes me think that would've supported your point of reliable academic research on the influence of AIPAC in this article.

Oh and for the record, Track AIPAC takes data from the Federal Election Commission. nhals8 16:10, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

The graphic in question is being badly misrepresented in the caption which the other editor has added. Misrepresentations can easily be understood by reading the source. Track AIPAC says clearly that it represents lobbying activity by "the Israel Lobby", which is the topic of this article. It lists a bunch of different pro-Israel lobbying organizations in their description of the graphic, and also says it includes "lobby donors". The other editor's inistance on the caption saying "lobbied by AIPAC" is factually false. It is true that Track AIPAC a number of places uses "AIPAC" to represent the whole Israel Lobby. (I just edited that mistake in my own comment above.) But read the description on their site shows that it is as I described. And similarly read this article.

The statement "according to the Federal Election Commission" is also false. Yes, Track AIPAC "takes data" from the FEC. The FEC in no way categorizes donations as Israel-lobby or not. There is a heck of a lot of interpretation that Track AIPAC puts in to labeling a congressperson as having been "lobbied" the Israel Lobby. Fortunately this false statement was not reverted back in.

In addition to the graphic being badly misrepresented, my original point still stands. It is hard to think of scenarios where it is appropriate to put political oppo-research as a headline graphic on a Wikipedia article.

.nhals8 (talk · contribs) Please note the contentious topics procedures in effect on this article. It is at the top of this very talk page. You are reverting too much. You aren't even bothering to read the source you are adding. You WP:BOLDly inserted this graphic, I removed it, and your re-insertions are now far past the Bold-Revert-Discuss cycle.

Enough for now. -- M.boli (talk) 00:53, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

You've both violated the one revert rule.

@.nhals8, it is up to the editor proposing new changes to get consensus for them per WP:BURDEN. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:04, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

And I would ask you to self-revert to the status quo which existed prior to this edit war @.nhals8. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:05, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done nhals8 02:20, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

That's very much appreciated in this highly contentious topic area, so thank you for that. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit request 8 April 2026

Description of suggested change:

The first paragraph of the section 'Voting power' is without citation and seems to be contradicted by this source - https://www.brandeis.edu/stories/2024/october/election-saxe.html. Bard claims that 94% of Jews live in thirteen key electoral states, but the source indicates that the majority of Jews live in what are considered uncontested states (California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York). So the Jewish vote is not as decisive as Bard suggests.

Moreover, the next paragraph claims that there is a Jewish 'swing vote' based on the issue of Israel. There may be some truth to this, but it is perhaps important to acknowledge that 'prior to the 2020 election, found that more than 70% of the Jewish population identified as Democrats or were independents who leaned Democratic.' Kamala Harris won around 70% os the Jewish vote in 2024. Jewish voters are consistently strong supporters of the Democrats, typically due to higher levels of education, and aren't as likely to swing as the paragraph suggests. Hibbert123 (talk) 15:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

The voting power paragraph, along with some other material in this article, come largely from a single article by Mitchell Bard: The Pro-Israel & Pro-Arab Lobbies.

Bard worked for AIPAC at one time, was most recently described as leading a what seems to be an Israel advocacy organization, and (until a few years ago) was an active public intellectual advocate for Israeli causes in the United States.

The Bard article seems thinly sourced. The article seems to be oriented to promote a narrative of Jewish voter influence, while downplaying the influence of opposing voters. My feeling, from this article and other things published on his web page, is that Bard was trying to persuade politicians that it was to their advantage to listen to the pro-Israel lobby.

(Correction to above: there were citations to two editions of the Bard article, which I have now merged into one citation in the article linking to the newer edition.)

I think this aspect of the article could benefit from a good rewrite with better (and perhaps more up-to-date) sources. -- M.boli (talk) 17:28, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. It looks like you have identified a legitimate issue with the article, but in order for your edit request to be implemented, you'll need to propose exactly how the article should be changed. Day Creature (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2026 (UTC)