And the Democratic nominee for senator from Michigan is …
… projected to be Abdul El-Sayed, although the results are very close. This is in line with what’s happening in many other races, and I think it reflects the fact that, at present, polls indicate that one-third of Democrats identify as Democratic Socialists.
Of course, El-Sayed has been eager to deny he’s a socialist or a DSA member; he knows it might scare people off in the general. But funny thing, he’s endorsed by AOC and Bernie Sanders. From the linked interview:
… “[W]hy don’t you consider yourself a member of the democratic socialist movement? Given your proximity in your relationship to all of these officials [AOC and Sanders].”
“Because I’m simply not a socialist,” El-Sayed said. “I believe in science. For me, you got to bring results. I’ve studied a lot of the solutions that I fight for, things like Medicare for All, things like rethinking the way that our financial system implies that corporate CEOs are more interested in a quarterly bottom line than they are in the long-term sustainability of their business.”
Oh, I get it – he’s not a socialist because he’s not a socialist. And because he’s a scientist.
And then there’s this:
Psaki pressed him again and noted that socialists would say that they believe in science as well, saying, “If you’re the nominee, Mike Rogers and the Republicans are going to try to label you as a democratic socialist. You’re going to say you’re not. But I’m saying, help us understand what’s the difference between your version of capitalism and their version of democratic socialism.”
El-Sayed then criticized Rogers, the presumptive Republican nominee for the Michigan Senate race.
“We’re so concerned about what they’re going to say about us that we forget that we also have mouths and can talk about that,” El-Sayed said. “Let’s talk about Mike Rogers. Mike Rogers is the worst kind of corporatist.”
The worst kind of corporatist.
More about El-Sayed and the DSA:
El-Sayed has attended Democratic Socialist of America (DSA) events over the years.
Between 2017 and 2020, El-Sayed attended and spoke at six events held by the DSA, including a 2019 fundraiser which he headlined. El-Sayed has distanced himself from the DSA in interviews and has previously outright rejected being labeled as a “socialist.”
“I’m not technically or practically DSA,” El-Sayed told The Wall Street Journal earlier this month. In an interview with CNN, he similarly stated that “I am not somebody who is a socialist. I believe in capitalism, I just believe that capitalism has to be regulated.”
Let’s just call him a leftist who is favored by Democratic Socialists and very close to them.
Back to that poll on Democrats who support DSA. Some of their apparent characteristics:
According to CNN’s poll, Democratic-aligned Americans who identify as democratic socialists:
Tend to be younger (59% are younger than 45, compared to 46% of non-democratic socialists aligned with the Democratic Party) and are more likely to be White (57% to 49%)
Are less likely to have a college degree (66% to 54%) and more likely to earn less than $100,000 a year (76% to 65%)
Are more likely to say they are extremely motivated to vote this year (66% of those who are registered voters say so, compared to 57% for non-democratic socialists), though both groups overwhelmingly support Democratic congressional candidates (99% of democratic socialists and 94% of non-democratic socialists).
It’s not the least bit surprising that they’re young and that they’re white. What does surprise me is that they are less likely to have college degrees. It’s also not at all surprising that they are highly motivated to vote, which I believe is key in leading to these far-leftist primary victories.
Many Democrats are alarmed at this development. I wonder whether they’re alarmed because they find the viewpoints of the Mamdanis and the El-Sayeds of this world alarming, or whether their alarm is just that they think such candidates will end up losing to Republicans in elections in any city, district, or state that isn’t already deep blue. I think it’s the latter, especially based on that last quoted paragraph, which indicates that both the DSA supporters and non-supporters will almost certainly be voting for whatever candidate has a “D” after his or her name, radical or not.
I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general. That seems especially dangerous to me for obvious reasons: don’t think you are able to predict that these candidates will be losers. Their supporters are exceptionally motivated to vote. Don’t discount the possibility of fraud, either, especially in the large blue cities.
“I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general.”
Sigh. Wasn’t that a factor in how gadfly Donald J. Trump got to be President Trump-45 (but in political reverse, obviously)?
The worst kind of corporatist.
I’ve noticed this trend with the rabid Democrat base. Facts and reasoning are irrelevant. Just go with ad hominem slurs. Especially if they are cute or seemingly clever slurs. On the reverse side, don’t explain why the Dem candidate is great, just go with… (can’t say ad hominem praise) platitudinous praise.
Are we approaching “Idiocracy?” Or, is this just the nature of being rabid about one’s politics?
I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race,…
Oh, my. No, no, no.
“The worst kind of corporatist.”
Gets me to wonder whom El-Sayed may regard as a good kind of corporatist.
Probably a groveling, sniveling, self-hating socialistic* left-sympathizing CEO.
* contrast with “socialist”
Musing out loud (so to speak), answered my own question. Carry on, folks . . .
First runs a more Democrat then rule as a Socialtext
And voting for I r your worst enemy hoping they are easier to beat forgets vote fraud still rules the day until it is eradicated, and it’s barely been touched in any court so far.
@ Neo > “Don’t discount the possibility of fraud, either, especially in the large blue cities.”
A random speculation: I’m sure that the Democrat fraud machinery will be cranked up in the general, so that any D nominee will “beat” any R candidate.
However, within the primaries themselves, does the frauding also occur for one candidate or another? If so, what if there are rival fraud machines in operation?
Are the machine’s components available to anyone who has the money and the motivation, or do some elements in the Democrat hierarchy have a “lock” on some of them?
Who is herding the wolves?
This from Wikipedia is kinda interesting:
So he’s both a jock and smart guy with advanced degrees. But rather than actually practice medicine, he chooses to get embedded in public health policy. He doesn’t even bother with a medical license.
What is it about lefty politicians, that they seem to be so allergic to working a regular job? They have to be regulating or messing with other people’s lives, right from the start. I’d feel better if these folks actually held down a conventional job for a while before jumping into governance, either as pols or regulators.
Certainly it’s possible that both sides are frauding in the primaries. After all they are all Democrats.
But I think the rise of the DSA types in the party is mostly due to turnout and enthusiasm. The Dem establishment has become exceeedingly tired, old, and sclerotic. That is why they have ended up with candidates like Biden and Harris. AOC has risen to prominence not just because of her leftist views but because of her youth.
There was also a third D candidate, progressive but relatively pro-Israel, who got 4% of the vote despite having suspended her campaign in July. So El-Syed won with only 48.3% or so of the vote. How many of his votes were of R crossovers is anyone’s guess, but I don’t think he’s a good bet to beat Rogers, even if the betting markets now have him as the favorite. I might put some money down on Rogers at the 60-40 odds now in play.
“I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general.”
Never do that. Never think that you know that the terrible person on the other side will not be embraced by tons of people for emotional reasons and they can’t possibly win.
If you make the mistake of crossing lines, vote for the most nearly aligned to yourself person you can. Never vote for the greater evil.
— martin
This^^^.
Oddly enough, the best example I ever saw of this came from Al Gore many years ago. A reporter asked him which Republican he hoped would win a primary. In answer, he said (paraphrasing but close): “I once believed, back in the 70s, that if the GOP would just nominate Ronald Reagan, we would have the race won. Looking back at that, I don’t try to guess which Republican would be best for us.”
“What is it about lefty politicians, that they seem to be so allergic to working a regular job? They have to be regulating or messing with other people’s lives, right from the start.” TommyJay
Pigs always congregate at the feeding trough.
“Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties,” in an August 10, 1824, letter to Major Henry Lee.. He argued that one faction fears and distrusts the people, while the other identifies with and trusts them as the depository of public interests.”
Note that “fear and distrust” inevitably leads to a desire for control.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. Robert Heinlein
Viktor Frankl (Nazi concentration camp survivor) wrote in “Man’s Search for Meaning” that, there are two races of men in this world, but only these two—the “race” of the decent man and the “race” of the indecent man. Both are found everywhere; they penetrate into all groups of society. No group consists entirely of decent or indecent people.”
I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general.
______
That’s an argument we had back in the 1970s. Most of my conservative friends took that view; I never did. To me, the question “What if he wins” was compelling. But I was in the minority.
The essential campaign position of the Dems in the midterms is that they will fight Trump. That’s it.
The Dem candidate for the House in Omaha entire platform is that she’s “a pissed off mom who will fight Trump.”
TommyJay:
I can tell you that this guy didn’t want to do the hard work that is required to be a practicing doctor. Early morning rounds or surgery. Telephone calls at night. The lives and well being of people directly in your hands.
He’s too elite to bother with real work.
Tommy Jay:
I second Cornead’s comments. And if I were twenty again, I would not apply to medical school. You want to be a federal employee? Become an MD.
It will be interesting seeing my “normal” democratic friends parsing this.
Dezis
@neo: I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general.
Flashback to Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” in 2008, wherein Rush recommended Republicans crossover to vote for Hillary in the primaries to weaken Obama’s lead and thereby prevent a clean primary win.
IMO El-Sayed will be a weaker Dem candidate, but I would never recommend an Operation Chaos vote on account of the risks neo describes.
@CICERO: And if I were twenty again, I would not apply to medical school. You want to be a federal employee? Become an MD.
Totally get that. Doctors receive a lot of perks in our society and they work hard to deserve them.
However, at least from Obamacare onward, likely earlier, being a doctor looks more like being a slave in a gilded cage than a master of one’s own fate.
On the polls, it may be important to note that his win was marginal in spite of polls putting him far ahead.
My impression is that some doctors still do very well, but larger numbers have little choice (due to how insurance works, both health and malpractice) but to become hospital employees, losing independence and higher income potential.
— FOAF
I disagree with Jefferson on this wise: I fear and distrust the government, the people, and myself. That is, I want everyone checked by somebody else, because I recognize that the Fall of Man is not negotiable. Nobody is entirely trustworthy with power, individually or in mass.
If Barack Obama had an ideological son, he would look like Abdul El-Sayed.
“I’ve read that some Republicans are crossing over to vote in the primaries for the most radical Democrats in the race, thinking that person will be easier to beat in the general.”
Dumb. Really dumb. El Sayed’s defeat is the most urgently-needed result from the 2026 election. It would have been better if Democrats had taken care of it themselves, but alas.
If El Sayed can win a statewide race in a state that Trump won twice, its going to teach Democrats that they can win state and national elections with out-and-proud anti-Semite communists. You had better believe that will curb any appetite that the Democratic Party establishment has to tamp down its own socialist insurgency.
Given Trump’s approval rating and the lack of prospects for any improvement in that category, the chances that the next president will bea Democrat are quite high. El Sayed’s race may well determine whether that Democrat is a radical progressive, or something much worse.
Mike Rogers – a nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
And – a note to everyone blathering on about “voter fraud.” I gather that the commentariat here skews older. That’s fine, but I strongly suspect that many of you are out of touch with what’s going on in the younger generations.
I’m not saying that voter fraud doesn’t happen, or isn’t an issue, but it’s also a distraction and a universal excuse to ignore what’s happening in front of our eyes.
Obama won two elections by much larger margins than Trump did in 2024 and 2016. If you think that his 10 and 8 million votes margins in 2008 and 2012 were because of voter fraud, you’re deluding yourself. It is absolutely conceivable that El Sayed, AOC, Bernie, or any number of radical DSA types could win a national election or even reek havoc in Congress or state governments, and it wouldn’t be because of voter fraud.
For a big chunk of the electorate, their only adult memories of politics have come during three successive shambolic excrement show administrations in Trump 45, Biden and Trump 47. And now, Mr. “Drain the Swamp” has become the swampiest swamp thing of all. (Did you see that he’s now charging 6-figures for “preferential” access to his Truth Social posts?)
You tell these folks that socialism is bad, and their reply is “worse than this?”
The current leadership of the country, and the right in particular, has utterly failed to provide a positive vision of government that works and I fear we’re going to pay a horrible, horrible price for that. And, no, it won’t be because of voter fraud. It will be because a significant chunk of Americans are actually beginning to believe that socialism might be better than what the right has been able to provide.
CC™-R found another hook on which to hang his usual rant about The Great Orange Whale.
Today’s hook is you are all too old to understand the youts. Those poor folk (youts) who have it worse than you did when you were their age.
CC™-R (Bauxite) must have not lived through the last third of the last century, in a sentient fashion anyway.
Moderate Democrats Prepare for ‘War’ Against an Ascendant Left
It just seems to be the muslim plan. As it always has been. Team with the radical left to win and acquire power then discard them when they have it.
R. Cook. See Hamtramck. The LDBTQ folks felt betrayed. (Stifles loud laughter yet again.)
Once again we see the red-green alliance at work. Which is basically “we hate the West, we hate America, we hate Israel”.
And we see Communists taking over the Democrat party.
Somehow the Dems can purge their squishes and the GOP “can’t”…
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL BELIEF driving the young into socialism is the constant indoctrination, by media and education and their cohort, that our primary problem is wealth inequality. Ergo, the solution is socialism which will redistribute the wealth.
I encountered this claim in a local philosophy meetup (we’re reading Karl Jaspers). This older Millennial declared inequality his greatest worry.
More widely, my sister follows Robert Reich’s commentaries. He was the Labor Secretary under Clinton, and since then at UC-Berkeley. Here stats instructor Aaron Brown identifies this falsehood and explains why it false in 10 minutes, “Robert Reich’s deceptive data” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAO7u10zGqE
The key? Cherry picking extreme data, not the representative facts.
But the book “The Myth of Inequality” dispatches this claim as literally false.
For example, the common frame of 17X (or more) ratio of wealthy to poor is false. But economists Gramm, Ekelund, and John Early find that sensible reorganization means only a 5 to 1 disparity — ie, the equivalent of a Northern European nation that these socialists tout as exemplars we need to emulate,
John Early efficiently runs through the data in their book, here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzLykjB6dyc
Early, a mathematical economist, served as assistant director at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
His case needs to be heard and taught widely. The young are too naive not to benefit from it.