Progressives face an existential threat from AIPAC. And there's nothing to stop it.

[Igel]

6. This kind of logic produces a prediction.

Look at races and the spending for each side.

The side with the most spending should almost invariably win.

Now, I'd argue that there's a bias towards more money = more winning, but that's often because more popular candidates have an easier time raising funds. (So we have to modify the hypothesis by focusing on large donors providing a certain %age of a candidate's spending.)

I've lived through a lot of "we must win, we have a bigger war chest" losing campaigns and a lot of "we're screwn, they're outspending us!" winning campaigns that falsify the prediction.

Money matters; money isn't determinative, beyond a certain amount. (Much like money for an individual or family; increase $ and happiness increases up to a certain $age, then it's basically flatlined.)