AOC would trounce Chuck Schumer in primary as party leader ‘bleeding support' from Dems, Jewish voters: poll
'Squad' member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez would trounce Sen. Chuck Schumer in a primary – as the Democratic leader is 'bleeding support' from his party and Jewish voters, a stunning new poll found.
Socialist Ocasio-Cortez leads five-term incumbent Schumer by a 54%-33% among likely Democratic voters in the Big Apple, according to the poll conducted by Honan Strategy Group for the Jewish Voters Action Network.
AOC, 35, who now services as a member of the House of Representatives, leads Schumer among Jewish Democrats 45%-33% with 17% undecided, the poll found.
'This is a massive wake-up call for Schumer,' said Maury Litwack, co-founder of Jewish Voters Action Network. 'He's not only bleeding support in the Democratic Party overall but also in the Jewish community.'
The numbers are troublesome for Schumer, who is Jewish and has relied on Jewish voters as a key area of support in his 50-year political career. The 74-year-old Senate minority leader isn't up for reelection until 2028.
Litwack said the poll results are likely more of a reflection of dissatisfaction with Schumer than support for AOC, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America — a group that supports the controversial boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel.
Ocasio-Cortez herself has called Israel's retaliatory bombing of the Gaza strip 'genocide' after Hamas terrorists invaded Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. But Litwack was critical of Schumer's actions in the wake of those attacks and subsequent antisemitic protests in the United States.
'The leading Jewish elected official in the nation did not step up in a moment of rising antisemitism — and the poll reflects that,' Litwack said.
He said Schumer failed to pass the Antisemitism Awareness Act last year while Democrats controlled the Senate and White House and he served as Senate majority leader. The legislation would empower the US Education Department to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating potential violations of civil rights law.
Litwack also noted that Schumer was accused of advising Columbia University to ignore accusations of antisemitism, which was referenced in a bombshell House investigative report on campus protests. Schumer vehemently denied the claim.
Meanwhile, Schumer attacked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the Senate floor months into the war in Gaza, saying new elections should be held.
The senator wrote a book about antisemitism but his actions did not match his words in combatting it, Litwack said.Schumer also came under a firestorm of criticism from liberal party activists — already smarting over Donald Trump's second election to the White House — by voting in March to pass a six-month government funding bill. Some called on him to step down as the Senate Democratic leader, preferring someone else to be more confrontational with Trump.
The New York senior senator defended the vote, claiming a partial shutdown would have wrought 'devastation like we've never seen.'The phone text poll of 1,136 Democrats, conducted from May 15-18, has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.89 percentage points.
A spokesperson for Schumer didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
5 minutes ago
- The Hill
Johnson, heckled by Democrats, backs censure for Padilla
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Thursday said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) should be censured after he tried to approach and question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a press conference in Los Angeles, prompting federal agents to forcibly remove him from the room and handcuff him. Video of the altercation — captured by reporters on the scene — sent shockwaves through the Capitol, with Democrats slamming the way law enforcement personnel handled Padilla, and Republicans condemning the senator's conduct at the media availability. Pressed on whether Padilla should face consequences, Johnson initially demurred — 'it's not my decision to make, I'm not in that chamber' — before endorsing censure for the California Democrat. 'I think that that behavior at a minimum rises to the level of a censure,' Johnson told reporters. 'I think there needs to be a message sent by the body as a whole that that is not what we're going to do, that's not what we're going to act.' 'We're not gonna have branches fighting physically and having senators charging Cabinet secretaries,' he added. 'We got to do better and I hope that we will.' The comments came during a press availability in the Capitol after House Republicans narrowly passed a bill to claw back $9.4 billion in federal spending for public broadcasting and foreign aid. Johnson staged the gaggle to discuss the legislation, but was swarmed with questions about the altercation in Los Angeles. 'I saw the same video, a very brief video, that I think many people did — I think the senator's actions, my view, is it was wildly inappropriate,' he said. 'You don't charge a sitting Cabinet secretary, and everybody can draw their own conclusions, you can see it's a heated debate here.' As he delivered those remarks, a long line of House Democrats — including many in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and from the California delegation — walked behind the Speaker and heckled him and he spoke. Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-Calif), who represents the San Francisco bay area, shouted 'Mike, that's absurd.' Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) yelled 'why don't you stand up for Congress?' Another House Democrat exclaimed 'that's a lie.' Asked if he would respond to some of the comments, Johnson declined. 'I'm not gonna respond to that,' the Speaker said. 'I think the American people can draw their own conclusions. They saw a senator acting like a, wildly inappropriate, I'll leave it at that.' 'What I saw was agents asking him to quiet down so that the secretary could continue her press conference. He refused to do so. What were they supposed to do? They have to restrain someone who is engaging in that kind of behavior. They moved him out of the room,' Johnson later added. 'A sitting member of Congress should not act like that, it is beneath a member of Congress, it is beneath a U.S. senator. They are supposed to lead by example and that is not a good example.' Earlier on Thursday, Padilla interrupted a press conference Noem was holding in Los Angeles amid widespread protests against the Trump administration's deportation efforts and against Trump mobilizing the National Guard and Marines to protect agents. Multiple men forcibly removed him from the room and handcuffed him. 'I'm Sen. Alex Padilla. I have questions for the secretary,' Padilla is heard saying as he struggled with officers holding him back. As he was aggressively moved out two double doors the senator can be heard saying 'Hands off!' 'Senator Padilla is currently in Los Angeles exercising his duty to perform Congressional oversight of the federal government's operations in Los Angeles and across California,' Padilla's office said in a statement immediately after the altercation. 'He was in the federal building to receive a briefing with General Guillot and was listening to Secretary Noem's press conference. He tried to ask the Secretary a question, and was forcibly removed by federal agents, forced to the ground and handcuffed. He is not currently detained, and we are working to get additional information.
5 minutes ago
Democrats slam military parade as Trump's multimillion-dollar 'birthday party'
Congressional Democrats and at least one high-profile Republican are slamming the multimillion-dollar cost of the Army 's 250th anniversary parade on Saturday that President Donald Trump has long sought to celebrate the military. Trump has said the cost -- projected to be as much as $45 million for the Army alone, not counting security and other expenses -- will be "peanuts compared to the value of doing it." However, his critics argue the money could be better spent elsewhere. "If it was really about celebrating military families, we could put $30 million toward helping them offset the cost of their child care, food assistance and tuition," Sen. Tammy Duckworth said on X. "But it isn't. Trump is throwing himself a $30 million birthday parade just to stroke his own ego." The Army said it has accounted for spending between $25 million and $45 million on the parade, which will include 6,700 troops and dozens of tanks, military fighting vehicles and aircraft staged on or near the National Mall. "Money should be put in medical defense research instead of wasted on some pomp and circumstance for the president," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday. "This is not consistent with what the men and women in uniform deserve." Saturday's parade also falls on Trump's 79th birthday, and when it ends near the White House, the Army's Golden Knights parachute team will present him with an American flag, after which he'll administer the constitutional oath to Army enlistees. "We all like to enjoy a nice birthday party," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., posted on X. "But most of us don't celebrate with a $45 million taxpayer-funded military parade. "Save taxpayer money. Have a birthday cake and blow out a few candles," he said. "Don't shut down the capital and roll out 60-ton tanks through the streets." "I wouldn't have done it," Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul said. "We were always different than, you know, the images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea. We were proud not to be that." Some Democrats echoed that criticism. "It's outrageous," Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., said. "This is something that would happen in North Korea, not the United States of America. Donald Trump thinks he's a king. He's not. He was elected as president of the United States, and he should act as such." Army spokesman Steve Warren defended the parade, saying, "It is a lot of money, but I think that amount of money is dwarfed by 250 years of service and sacrifice that American soldiers have given this country. "We're looking at this as an opportunity to really strengthen the connection between America and her Army," he added. "So, yeah, it's a lot of money, but it pales in comparison to what we're selling." The White House this week also requested a flyover by the Air Force Thunderbirds. When asked Thursday what he hopes the public will remember about the parade, Trump said, "How great our country is, very simple, and how strong our military is." "We have the strongest military in the world," he added. The White House has not responded to requests for a total cost estimate that would include money spent on security and other arrangements. Several Republicans say they're skipping the parade due to prior commitments, including House Speaker Mike Johnson. Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said she would attend and defended the display. "Washington D.C. is the safest it's ever been!!" she wrote. "I wish our great military men and women could just stay here. I am so excited for the parade celebrating the 250th anniversary of our United States Army!!" Protests of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown are planned across the country to counterprogram the parade, with the flagship "No Kings" protest occurring in Philadelphia. Nine small protests are also expected in Washington, according to the Secret Service and local officials. Trump has warned protesters will be met with "heavy force." On Friday, he disputed the characterization of him as a king. "I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved," he said, adding, "No, no, we're not a king. We're not a king at all."
Newsweek
8 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Bernie Sanders Introduces Bill Backing RFK Jr., Elon Musk Priority
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator Bernie Sanders is leading a new bill to address a key priority of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who serves as President Donald Trump's Health and Human Services Secretary. Why It Matters Sanders, a Vermont independent, alongside Senator Angus King, a Maine independent, introduced the "End Prescription Drug Ads Now Act," which, if passed, would ban prescription drug advertising on TV, radio, print and digital platforms as well as social media. Critics say these ads contribute to the high price of healthcare while doing little to improve care in the United States, though proponents say the advertisements can improve patients' knowledge of healthcare. Most wealthy countries, with the U.S. and New Zealand being two notable exceptions, ban pharmaceutical drug advertisements. The bill also represents an issue where Sanders, viewed as perhaps the most progressive senator, has found common ground with Kennedy inside the Trump administration, though the secretary has not commented on this bill specifically. What to Know Sanders and King announced the legislation on Thursday, highlighting that the pharmaceutical industry spent more than $5 billion on TV ads in 2024 and that many of these drugs cost more in the U.S. than in other countries that do not allow drug companies to run ads on TV. "The American people are sick and tired of greedy pharmaceutical companies spending billions of dollars on absurd TV commercials pushing their outrageously expensive prescription drugs," Sanders said, describing the fact that the U.S. stands mostly alone in allowing pharmaceutical ads as an "international embarrassment." vSenator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, questions U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during a committee hearing on May 14, 2025 in Washington, D.C. vSenator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, questions U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during a committee hearing on May 14, 2025 in Washington, director of communications Anna Bahr confirmed to Newsweek his office has reached out to Republicans to join the bill. Bahr pointed to lobbying from the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries as to why the U.S. has not joined other countries in bannign the ads. "Over the past 25 years, the drug companies have spent $8.5 billion on lobbying. Today, they have some 1,800 well-paid lobbyists in Washington, D.C. – including former leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties," she said in a statement to Newsweek. "Unbelievably, that is more than three lobbyists for every member of Congress. During that same period, they have provided over $700 million in campaign contributions. And they are equal opportunity contributors. They contribute heavily to both Republican and Democratic candidates." Secretary Kennedy—as well as Elon Musk, who previously served in Trump's administration—have expressed support for ending pharmaceutical advertising. "Let's get President Trump back in the White House and me to DC so we can ban pharmaceutical advertising," Kennedy wrote in a post to X (formerly Twitter) on November 3, 2024. During his own presidential campaign, Kennedy said he would have issued an executive order ending the advertisements on his first day in office. Newsweek reached out to DHS for comment via the department's press contact form. Caleb Alexander, professor of epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Newsweek that while a potential ban's impact on drug prices remains uunclear, there would be benefits to ending these advertisements. Pharmaceutical advertisements can drive up "inappropriate demand" for prescription drugs in settings where they may not be needed, he said. "In terms of the potential benefits of banning [direct-to-consumer advertisements], the most immediate and likely is that it would temper demand for products in settings where they may not be needed," Alexander said. The U.S. has "evolved to believe" the benefits of the ads, such as empowering patients to identify health concerns, outweigh the risks, though much of the research on the topic indicates that the benefits may not be worth the drawbacks, he said. What People Are Saying Alexander told Newsweek: "Direct to consumer advertising has been a lightning rod for controversy, and it remains a curious and unique feature of the U.S. marketplace. While a ban on direct advertising may be welcomed by many, it's not going to fundamentally transform the marketplace for prescription drugs in the United States, simply because DTCA is highly concentrated among a small number of products. It may be a reasonable political and public health target, but I think that if you just look at the way the dollars flow, there's vastly more money spent on marketing drugs to prescribers." Senator Angus King wrote in a statement: "The widespread use of direct-to-consumer advertising by pharmaceutical companies drives up costs and doesn't necessarily make patients healthier. The End Prescription Drug Ads Now Act would prohibit direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceutical drugs to protect people. This bill is a great step to ensure that patients are getting the best information possible and from the right source: their providers and not biased advertisements." Elon Musk wrote to X in November 2024: "No advertising for pharma." What Happens Next It's unclear whether a majority of senators are also in support of the bill. So far, Democratic Senators Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Peter Welch of Vermont, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Dick Durbin of Illinois have co-sponsored the bill, according to Sanders' office.
