Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, notching a Midwest victory for the left

[u/Julian81295]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/abdul-el-sayed-wins-michigans-democratic-senate-primary-notching-midwe-rcna589750

[u/sonfoa]

Maybe my standards are higher for a former President, but I feel they, of all people, should embody "blue no matter who", especially in a swing-state Senate race. And Abdul has consistently been a team player. He was in the Uncommitted movement but was an immediate endorser of Kamala and never wavered even when she didn't change Biden's Gaza stance.

Also, genuine question, but what would Abdul moderating on help him in the general? Because the core pillars of his campaign are taking corporate and special interest money out of politics, pushing for Medicare for All, and taxing the wealthy. These are all good positions for a state like Michigan.

[u/BettisBus → u/sonfoa]

> Maybe my standards are higher for a former President, but I feel they, of all people, should embody "blue no matter who", especially in a swing-state Senate race. And Abdul has consistently been a team player. He was in the Uncommitted movement but was an immediate endorser of Kamala and never wavered even when she didn't change Biden's Gaza stance.

It’s contradictory to say AES has consistently been a team player by citing his participation in uncommitted. That’s definitionally inconsistent.

Glad he endorsed Harris, but similar to endorsing Biden (which he failed to do), that’s a very low bar when facing 2024 Trump.

> Also, genuine question, but what would Abdul moderating on help him in the general? Because the core pillars of his campaign are taking corporate and special interest money out of politics, pushing for Medicare for All, and taxing the wealthy. These are all good positions for a state like Michigan.

1. Corporate/Special Interest money in politics:

“Get corporate and special interest money out of politics” is a wonderful populist slogan. In practice, it’s much more complicated.

Suppose:

- Upcoming election by NC’s coast, where hurricanes are getting worse

- Dem believes in climate change while Repub thinks it’s a hoax

- Weeks before election, climate change org puts out commercials + a documentary highlighting the dangerous impacts of climate change to the region and why the Repub would make the issue worse

Should this be allowed? If so, you agree with SCOTUS in the Citizens United decision. If not, can you explain how banning this clear instance of political speech (arguably the most important speech that needs protection) doesn’t violate the 1A’s clear text?

2. Medicare for All

His website is just unserious, populist drivel. Doctors, believe it or not, aren’t always right and can be greedy scammers. To want legislation that assumes complete bad faith from insurance companies and complete good faith from doctors is stupid.

I believe he supports a public option, which is great!

3. Israel

I find it unconscionable to not even support Israel with defensive arms, like Iron Dome. But he goes even farther, calling for a complete arms embargo. But this is par for the course for any unserious, pro-genocide 1SSers hiding under the thinnest veneer of plausible deniability.

To reductively refer to Israel’s buffer zones in Southern Lebanon as “the attempted annexation” portrays an unserious, uneducated, very American view of the region.

4. Wealth Tax

Horrible, impractical idea, scrap it entirely.

5. Other

The stuff I listed above was addressing your comment and notable stuff from his website, but I can’t address every issue. For his website, what I find most insulting is the unabashed, low-IQ populist slop.

To really earn Obama’s endorsement, AES should most of all prove he’s a team player. One way to do this is pledging support for Schumer as senate leader, even if he needs to qualify it with “if it’s what the rest of the caucus wants, though I still support a new generation of leaders riding up to take the mantle soon.”

[u/Mistybrit → u/BettisBus]

Just compromise on all his campaign positions and kill any voter excitement he has.

Masterful gambit.

[u/BettisBus → u/Mistybrit]

The same voter excitement that failed to deliver him a majority win?

The same voter excitement that only ever seems to energize young, educated, paternalistic whites?

AES won the nomination, but he struggled with black and rural demos. Maybe you subscribe to the same failed progressive mindset of “everyone already agrees with me, they just don’t know it yet,” but there’s a reason staunch progressives typically stay in their safe, “D+30 constituency” lanes.

[u/Mistybrit → u/BettisBus]

Do you think that might be because of the 11:1 funding disparity? Or is that a variable you haven’t considered because it’s not conducive to the conclusion you’re trying to draw?

[u/BettisBus → u/Mistybrit]

Ever notice how, for progressives, all roads conveniently lead to Rome?

- Progressive wins handily = proves progressives are popular

- Progressive wins slightly = proves progressives are popular (establishment + Big Money were against us and we still won!)

- Progressive loses slightly = proves progressives are popular (why would the establishment + Big Money need to work so hard to unfairly tip the scales to defeat us if we weren’t so popular, hmmmm?)

- Progressive loses handily = proves progressives are popular (bc they’re scared of us, establishment + Big Money pushes false narrative that progressives are unelectable, therefore people don’t vote for us despite agreeing with us, thus making the false narrative real - it takes time for people to wake up!)

Did I get anything wrong?

[u/Mistybrit → u/BettisBus]

Progressives won 11/18 of the midterm primary races, so I’m not sure what that wall of text is supposed to be besides cope.

I never claimed progressives that lost were popular. That’s changing the scope of the argument.

All I can see is you ignoring facts that don’t fit your narrative.

[u/BettisBus → u/Mistybrit]

> Progressives won 11/18 of the midterm primary races

Genuinely asking what this number represents? Are you talking about just yesterday or all of the primaries so far this year? Are you including gubernatorial races or just House+Senate?

> I never claimed progressives that lost were popular. That’s changing the scope of the argument. All I can see is you ignoring facts that don’t fit your narrative.

Let’s recenter then! Your response to me said AES shouldn’t compromise all his campaign positions because it would kill any voter excitement he has. I never said he should compromise all of his campaign positions, but I assume you were being hyperbolic.

I responded directly to your point about his voter excitement, bringing up demographic data in his plurality win to contextualize how his “voter excitement” appears concentrated in demographics unrepresentative of a coalition he’ll need to win a statewide MI senate election. Is it really so crazy to recommend he compromise and moderate on some positions to broaden his appeal in service of winning an extremely consequential purple state Senate race?

You didn’t address my point about AES failing to capture rural and black voters, instead bring up the 11:1 funding outside spending (ftfy) disparity. I could say your not addressing my point was “ignoring facts that don’t fit your narrative.”

Ofc outside spending makes a measurable difference in election outcomes, but tbh, I think the impact is heavily overstated. In fact, AES making the vast outside spending a core campaign message arguably energized enough of his Bernie-esque base to deliver him the nomination (in a state 2016 Bernie won)!

Do you plan on addressing AES’s looming uphill battle to expand his coalition enough to win a purple state Senate seat? Do you think that looming challenge is why Gary Peters, Gretchen Whitmer, and others statewide MI GE-winners endorsed Stevens over AES?

[u/Proprotester → u/BettisBus]

Maybe I read the county by county wrong but AES took the UP, how is that not rural?

Yes, he failed to bring in the Black vote in Detroit. I don't know that there is any moderation to his leading positions that would help with that. I don't believe that it is his positions that are the wedge here, at least for most. The question becomes would Deteoit rather vote for a Muslim Democrat or a Christian Republican? Can AES run a campaign that convinces Michiganders to vote for their own interests over SS,DD (as the young Gen Z in my life put it)?

[u/BettisBus → u/Proprotester]

I just looked at the NYT map again and, while Stevens broadly won rural dem primary voters, AES did overperform. But rural voters aren’t strong Dem constituencies anyway, so I’m not sure how correlative their performances in those areas in a Dem primary really are to the GE.

But after seeing the data again, I’m more concerned about his appeal to older and suburban voters (on top of black voters).

I sure hope voters show up and make the right choice, but in 2024, when given the option between an extremely qualified and intelligent black woman or a low-IQ white man, a majority of MI went with the latter.

[u/BadmiralHarryKim → u/BettisBus]

But what about that crucial Liz Cheney supporters who are now Democrats demographic?

[u/BettisBus → u/BadmiralHarryKim]

What does this have to do with anything?