In the 2024 election, around 15 million Democratic voters chose to abstain from voting for either major candidate. This wasn’t simple voter apathy—it was a message. Many Democrats felt alienated by their party’s response to the Gaza war, which they saw as increasingly detached from the values of peace and justice they believed the party represented. Influential lobbying from groups like AIPAC and surprising endorsements from Republicans like former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz Cheney only fueled these concerns, signaling to voters that Democratic leaders might be prioritizing political alliances over humanitarian values.
A Reality Check on Foreign Policy
For decades, the Democratic Party has built its platform on social justice, human rights, and support for the marginalized. Yet, for many in the party’s base, the Gaza conflict has thrown this commitment into question. Rather than hearing strong calls for de-escalation and humanitarian support, many voters saw Democratic leaders backing positions that appeared more aligned with powerful political lobbies than with a clear stance for peace.
A critical moment that deepened this sense of disillusionment came when President Biden openly defended Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accused Netanyahu and the Israeli government of potential genocide. By standing with Netanyahu against the ICJ’s serious charges, Biden sent a stark message that exposed a contradiction in Democratic values surrounding civil and human rights. This position left many Democrats questioning whether the party’s leadership was willing to uphold the humanitarian principles it professes—or whether it was willing to look the other way.
When Vice President Kamala Harris subsequently took up the mantle as the 2024 Democratic presidential candidate, she did not address or correct Biden’s stance on the ICJ’s accusations. Her silence signaled a tacit endorsement of Biden’s position, which only reinforced the perception of a party willing to compromise on issues of international justice. For voters deeply committed to global human rights, this lack of accountability was profoundly disappointing.
The Influence of Political Lobbies and Endorsements
The role of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) further complicated matters. AIPAC has consistently poured millions into campaigns to oppose progressive Democrats like Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, both of whom have called for a re-evaluation of U.S. foreign aid policies, particularly in contexts where human rights abuses are reported. This outsized influence from pro-Israel lobbying groups underscored a growing disconnect, suggesting that voices pushing for reform in U.S. foreign policy were being sidelined.
The endorsement of the Democratic candidate by former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz Cheney—both known for their unwavering support of military intervention—only amplified these concerns. For many Democrats, this endorsement represented a troubling alignment with figures emblematic of pro-war and interventionist policies. The Cheneys’ backing seemed to signal a shift within the party, one that many felt was drifting away from its stated commitment to peace and diplomacy. This coalition with pro-war voices left a bitter taste for voters who saw it as a profound misalignment with Democratic principles. The choice to abstain became, for some, a matter of integrity—an unwillingness to support a position that seemed to favor political expediency over human rights.
A Disconnect Between Values and Actions
Ultimately, the combined influence of pro-Israel lobbyists, the endorsement by the Cheneys, and the uncorrected stance on the ICJ’s accusations conveyed a troubling message to the Democratic base: that the party was increasingly willing to sacrifice its commitments to civil rights and justice on the international stage. This perceived abandonment of core values led many voters to withhold their support, questioning whether the Democratic Party would prioritize political alliances over its own values.
Not a Time for Blame—A Time for Reflection
This isn’t the time for a blame game within the Democratic Party. Instead, it’s a reality check. The message from the American people, made clear in their turnout, is simple: they don’t want war. They don’t want billions of dollars sent overseas for foreign conflicts while families at home struggle with rising costs, stagnant wages, and limited access to essential resources. It’s a message that highlights a growing frustration with both parties’ foreign policies—policies that many Americans feel prioritize international agendas over domestic needs.
The American people are weary of seeing endless foreign aid allocated to conflicts while their communities face a crisis of resources. With homelessness, inflation, healthcare costs, and economic uncertainty on the rise, many Americans believe those billions would be better spent improving the lives of citizens here at home rather than financing wars abroad. The message to Democratic leadership is clear: align with the immediate, everyday needs of the American people or risk losing the faith of those who helped build the party.
The Cost of Alienating Voters
This abstention from millions of Democratic voters wasn’t just a protest; it was a wake-up call. The party cannot continue to ignore the moral priorities of its base and expect unwavering support. If the party fails to listen, it risks alienating its progressive wing, whose members are increasingly unwilling to compromise on issues of human dignity, justice, and resource allocation.
A Path Forward
The Democratic Party now faces a pivotal moment. It must reassess its stance on foreign policy and how it responds to humanitarian crises abroad without sidelining the needs of Americans at home. This means taking steps to limit the influence of powerful lobbying groups like AIPAC and rethinking alliances that alienate the party’s core values. It means listening to Americans who want leaders committed to addressing the issues affecting their families and communities rather than extending endless resources to conflicts overseas.
This isn’t about party loyalty—it’s about realignment with the values of justice, compassion, and prioritizing American needs that many Democratic voters expect from their leaders. The 2024 election should serve as a turning point. Democratic leaders must understand that the American people demand a party willing to champion both humanitarian values abroad and quality of life at home. The decision they make now could shape not only the future of the party but the very trust and loyalty of the American public.
