|
August 9, 2026
Key Developments and What We're Discussing Today:
- The general election is not a referendum on Dr. Abdul El-Sayed. It is a choice between El-Sayed and a Trump yes-man, a choice between Democratic and Republican control of the Senate.
- If you have not become numb to Donald Trump and the threat he poses to our democracy, if you agree that these are the most consequential midterms of our lifetime, consider whether we'd be better off with one out of 100 senators with whom you disagree but with a Democratic majority running a Democratic agenda you share or whether you think the country would be better off with two more years of a GOP-controlled Senate and a pristine Democratic minority.
- If all I knew about El-Sayed was the caricature some have made of him, I'd be alarmed. I strongly disagree with some of his policies and rhetoric. But he is not antisemitic. Some of his views on Israel have been misrepresented. His criticism of AIPAC did not cross the line. His comments on the Temple Israel attack comprised four minutes, not four words. More below.
- El-Sayed was almost immediately endorsed by both of his primary opponents, Haley Stevens and Mallory McMorrow; by Michigan's outgoing senator, Gary Peters; and by Elissa Slotkin, Michigan's soon-to-be senior senator and highest-ranking Jewish official. They know Mike Rogers. They understand the stakes of this election. Do we?
No matter who you supported in the Michigan primary, you can support my work by chipping in via credit card (you do not need a PayPal account), Zelle (contact me for info), Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (last four digits, 9479), or check.
Friends,
Dr. Abdul El-Sayed is the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan. If you're looking for an unequivocal defense of everything El-Sayed has said or done, you're reading the wrong newsletter.
If you're looking for reassurance that we shouldn't be concerned about where he stands on certain issues that are important to us, you're reading the wrong newsletter.
But you're also reading the wrong newsletter if you're looking for someone to confirm your biases against El-Sayed and to tell you that everything you've heard about him is true.
Emotions are running high. We all need to get back to basics.
The November election is the most important midterm election in our lifetimes. The Republican Congress has failed to live up to its constitutional responsibility to serve as a check on the Executive Branch.
Nearly every week, Trump engages in behavior that would result in impeachment and conviction if committed by any president prior to 2016. The GOP Congress looks the other way, and we have become numb to the corruption and authoritarianism that should outrage us.
The November election is not a referendum on Abdul El-Sayed. It is a choice between a Democratic majority in the Senate that will honor its constitutional obligation to serve as a check on the Executive Branch and a Republican majority in the Senate that will do nothing to prevent Trump from subverting our democracy. It is a choice between El-Sayed and former Rep. Mike Rogers, the Republican nominee for Senate.
It is not a choice between a Democratic Socialist and a Republican. El-Sayed is neither endorsed by nor a member of DSA. He considers himself a capitalist.
In his endorsement of El-Sayed, retiring Michigan Sen. Gary Peters said that the stakes could not be higher this November, and that Mike Rogers "would be a rubber stamp for Donald Trump."
Either we understand the stakes of this election or we don't. Either we care about winning back the Senate or we don't. Democrats don't have a ton of states to spare. Putting aside for a moment our views about El-Sayed, the question is whether we'd prefer a Democratic Senate majority comprising El-Sayed as one of 100 senators and at least 50 Democrats or a Republican Senate majority without him.
Both of El-Sayed's primary opponents, Rep. Haley Stevens and State Sen. Mallory McMorrow, immediately endorsed El-Sayed. Michigan's soon-to-be senior senator, Elissa Slotkin, the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in Michigan, immediately endorsed El-Sayed.
If you supported Stevens or McMorrow, or if you supported Slotkin when she ran against Trump yes-man Mike Rogers two years ago, ask yourself why you are not supporting El-Sayed and what you know that Stevens, McMorrow, Peters, and Slotkin don't know. Part of the answer might be that they know Mike Rogers.
If we criticized people in Michigan for staying home in 2024 and not voting for Harris because they disagreed with her on Israel, then how can we sit on the sidelines in 2026 and risk another bad outcome for the country, two more years of Republican control of the Senate? (In 2024, El-Sayed urged his followers to vote for Harris despite significant disagreements with Harris.)
We could hope to run the table on all the other contested Senate races and win a Senate majority without Michigan (which would mean going all-in for Troy Jackson in Maine and still cutting it close), but given the stakes in this election, do we want to take that chance in the name of ideological purity?
The bottom line, as Paul Waldman writes, is that "moderate Democrats have a choice to make--do they want to help their party win, or do they want to whine about the left?"
But what about El-Sayed? I have never met him. But Dana Milbank has, and he writes that he was prepared to dislike El-Sayed. Then he came to Michigan and spoke to him.
At a minimum, we owe it to ourselves to learn more about El-Sayed before rushing to believe what some say about him.
For example, you might have heard that his response to the attack on Temple Israel was, "hurt people hurt people." He did say that. If that's all he said, if he dismissed the attack with those four words, it would be beyond the pale and completely unacceptable. But that's not all he said. I urge you to watch the full four minutes.
El-Sayed criticized AIPAC, which spent $30 million to defeat him. Can't imagine why he'd be angry about that.
Dov Waxman, a professor of Israel Studies at UCLA, explains that "El-Sayed’s criticism of AIPAC and his opponent’s willingness to accept AIPAC’s support was legitimate, and his rhetoric did not cross the line into antisemitism."
Waxman noted that El-Sayed "publicly criticized other PACs, not just AIPAC’s, as well as the outsized role of corporate spending in election campaigns and the political influence that comes from that spending." AIPAC will throw good money after bad and support Rogers against El-Sayed.
Some claim El-Sayed focuses solely on Israel. What about other countries? A reporter asked him about this. Watch the full two minutes (you won't like the first part).
If you watched the video, you heard him call Israel's conduct in Gaza genocide. So do 39% of Jewish Americans. That doesn't mean he or they are right. It does mean that unless we are prepared to label nearly 40% of Jewish Americans as anti-Israel or antisemitic, we should not tag El-Sayed with those labels.
Unlike some on the far left, El-Sayed, writes David Remnick, "denounces the October 7th massacre."
What matters more than the terminology El-Sayed uses to describe Israel's conduct in Gaza in response to that massacre is what he thinks the next steps should be.
El-Sayed told Remnick, "I believe in a process that offers a free Palestinian people the equal rights to peace, dignity, and self-determination that a free Jewish Israeli people ought to have. And then I will support whatever the outcome is that a free Palestinian people and a free Jewish Israeli people decide is the right outcome. If that’s two states, great, I’m for it. If it’s one state, I’m for that. If it’s this 'land for all' model, or twenty-three states, or whatever it is that they decide."
Read the interview. He might not be your ideal candidate. He's not mine. You might not agree with all of his views on Israel. Neither do I. But you should at least seriously consider Jay Michaelson's argument that El-Sayed might be right about the future of Israelis and Palestinians.
If you're a single-issue Israel voter and you think that Republicans are better for Israel, consider that Rogers is a yes-man for Trump and that Israeli confidence in Trump has collapsed.
We should not be surprised. As Michel Koplow explained, on the isolationist right that is ascendant in the Republican Party, the issue is not what Israel does but what Israel is: a "small country that is allegedly manipulating American foreign policy...into doing things that are not in American interests."
We will be better off with El-Sayed in the Senate than with Mike Rogers in the Senate. Some of us would have preferred Haley Stevens. Some of us would have preferred Mallory McMorrow. Those ships have sailed.
Still unsure? Let's let the man himself, Donald Trump, have the last word on this race and its importance.
Corrections. I'm entitled to my own opinions but not to my own facts, so I appreciate it when readers bring errors to my attention. In last week's newsletter, I meant to write that most of us do agree that Turkey committed genocide against the Armenians.
In Case You Missed It:
- Nadav Tamir urges us to stop blaming Israel's deterioration in its world standing on bad hasbara, antisemitism, Qatari money, progressives, Muslim immigrants, or self-hating Jews. It might be something else.
- Democrats forced Senate candidate Graham Platner to step down following credible allegations of sexual assault. Despite allegations from his ex-wife that Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) "scalded her chest and stomach by throwing hot water from a skillet at her body; held a gun to her head; pushed her against a wall and hit her head; and fractured their daughter’s collarbone and bruised her shoulder," Republicans are either supporting him or saying nothing.
Meme of the Week. From yours truly, on Twitter and Bluesky.
Joke of the Week. From yours truly, on Twitter and Bluesky.
Social Media of the Week. Tom Malinowski and Paul Rudnick.
Thread of the Week. Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL).
Video Clip of the Week. Why Obama Wore the Tan Suit--the untold story.
Vintage Music Clip of the Week. Junior Wells--Hoodoo Man Blues.
The Fine Print. Read the fine print before you reply or send me anything.
This is the newsletter even Republicans have to read. If someone forwarded this newsletter to you, your luck continues. You can subscribe and get it in your inbox every Sunday for free. Just click here.
I hope you enjoyed today's newsletter. It takes time to write and costs money to send. You are on this list because you are smart, good-looking, and generous. If you'd like to support my work, click here and fill in the amount of your choice. You don't need a PayPal account. If you see something that says "Save your info and create a PayPal account," click the button to the right and it will go away. Or you can use Zelle, (contact me for info), Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (last four digits, 9479), or send a check.
Unless stated otherwise, my views do not necessarily reflect the views of any candidates or organizations I support or am associated with.
| 
