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.