Post

“An almost perfectly executed invisible pander” “An ALMOST perfectly executed inivisible pander” “An almost PERFECTLY executed invisible pander” “An almost perfectly executed INVISIBLE PANDER” “An almost perfectly EXECUTED invisible pander” “An ALmost perfectly EXecuted inVISible PANder” 😵‍💫😵‍💫😵‍💫

off rip the misuse of code switching lets me know I'm in for a ride. "fire breathing" "positions that are nevertheless insane". wear your bias more on your sleeve why don't you, yeesh.

This kind of article is only gonna end up hurting her if she’s the nominee. Democrats will need the Muslim American vote in that state to win the general election. This was a big reason they lost MI in the ‘24 election.

They're not trying to win. They literally don't care if the Republican wins, as long as the progressive doesn't. That is their primary goal--keep progressives from power.

Sounds like the guy who wrote this is trying to divide Michigan Dems. Sounds kinda like Fox News. Try to show (or create) a division within the group. Try to get those on one side of the fake divide to not support the primary winner who's on the supposed other side in November Don't fall for it

I mean, it was written by a conservative who works for the Manhattan Institute. That said, it sounds strangely similar to the way Steven’s has talked about El-Sayed.

He was born in the same town she was! He grew up in Michigan! He went to UMich, while the white lady went to college in DC. And if you think Muslims have some kind of advantage in the Dem party, let me tell you about the reception Mamdani got.

What the hell?! Why are they being racist?! If Steven’s is so great they should stick to policy not claim ppl only support Abdul because of his identity.

The idea that democrats are so woke their doing “reverse racism” against white candidates is so absurd. The level of Islamophobia I’ve seen in this primary alone should be enough to shake anyone of that belief, but it’s useful to attack the left so they’ll never stop repeating it.

Honestly giving this more thought it’s a textbook example of “to someone used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” People are pissed that being white is not automatically giving this woman an advantage and their interpreting that as the brown guy having an unfair advantage.

Yeah but do it without any preface. Just read the quote and ask if they agree. If no ask why X powerful establishment dem said it, etc. Enough of the polite bullshit get these people on the record before they know they’re crossing Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer. Then just revel in the sputtering.

Whatever she is, she seems stunningly uncharismatic. Her whole campaign seems to be that she’s more legitimately “Michigan”, whatever that means if it isn’t a backdoor way to say, “hey ya’ll, I’m white, he’s Muslim”. That’d seem like hyperbole, but it’s exactly what this fucking article does.

Centrists and conservatives are neighbors and sometimes tend to each other's gardens. If your house is ever being fumigated, you go stay at your neighbor's house, the one who owes you for tending to his azaleas.

"...she has a tough task: How to convey to Michigan Democrats that Mr. El-Sayed is a poor fit to represent them in the Senate without pointing specifically to his background and policy positions?" What an absolutely bizarre thing to say.

His background, as in experience and education, and his policy positions are exactly the two things MOST relevant to his fitness to represent Michiganers in the Senate. But I think we can deduce that when the author said "background", she means "race", which is a weird thing to conflate with policy.

Only a mediocre white man could come up with drivel this outstanding. And I’m a bit of an experienced mediocre white man. Sometimes I wonder what happened to people like this to end up this way. I think it must have started with their mothers saying that the were special.

This sounds astonishingly like something Lee Atwater or Roger Stone would put together as a way to cripple a Democratic candidate. Republicans must really want to run against El Sayed and not Stevens.

I know that this is entirely just "wsj gutter racism" but it's fucking mind boggling that Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, whose big claims to fame is RUNNING HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, an act that is inherently saying "the system is more helpful than not and can be made better still" is being called "fringy".

Hilarious from a guy who is neither a Michangder nor a Democrat. Dude used to right conservative opinion pieces, and wrote a book about how Gen X needs to save America from millenials with their internet and avocado toast and hula hoops.

Stevens and El-Sayed were born in the same town, literally within a mile or two of each other. I wonder why the newspaper thinks one is a real American and one isn't.

This is blatantly trying to create a wedge in the Dems to try to get liberal women to vote for Haley even though she hates most of them. Women have been rightfully expanding their footprint in the dem caucus for years and this one just happens to be pretty shitty on a lot of very big issues.

I'm not voting for Abdul because he's a man, I'm voting for him because he's the better candidate. As far as I'm concerned Stevens ability to lie and scheme against Dr. El Sayed says more about her than anything else. It doesn't help that she's a very cringe person.

They’re both from fucking Michigan. They were born in as far as I can tell the same hospital about a year apart and went to public schools 5 miles from each other. This shit is pathetic.

Just to be clear: he's saying that the Dem voters who support Abdul are doing so *only* bc he's "different"? Not bc he like actually supports progressive causes like universal health care? What a fundamental error in reading the electorate. His brain is cooked by the pundit take factory.

Your semi-regular reminder that the WSJ opinion section is Always Wrong but it is useful to know the things it has decided to be Always Wrong about.

Even worse "How to convey to Michigan Democrats that Mr. El-Sayed is a poor fit to represent them in the Senate without pointing specifically to his background and policy positions? One way is to signal to voters that you’re one of them and he isn’t. Do it invisibly. Try to be seamless. "

WSJ showing their deep knowledge of internal Democrstic party dynamics. I’m so goddam tired of the idea that a party can represent multiple groups of people (granted the Dems could do a MUCH better job of it) being scoffed at as “identity Olympics”

When their alternative is “no you should crush everyone into the most mediocre white bread Christian mold and anyone who can’t be pounded into the hole we have designated for them is not treated as a true citizen anymore.” Piss off with that.

Hey, Rupert Murdoch paper: It's at least theoretically possibly that taking genocide money, fascist money, and pedophile money is more of a disadvantage for Stevens than being white.

This is appalling but not surprising. The whole "Real American" concept is another way of saying "White". Heard this in 2008. Back then it didn't work. It's past time for it to fail again.

Haley Stevens never shuts up about being a Michigander. Yes, she resides here. That’s a requirement for the office. What has she done in 20 years in congress that isn’t an auto bailout or funding Israel’s military?

To someone whose worldview is inherently hierarchical, equality seems like inverting the hierarchy. They can't conceive of people being treated (approximately) equally. It's a subtle variation on "to those accustomed to supremacy, equality feels like oppression."

Sometimes I feel pretentious correcting people on my title (still in an appropriate setting), but one of my main motivations is that I absolutely will not allow bad actors to rob me of it. I earned it and you're gonna fucking use it.

If Stevens being a Michiganer is the headline point...is the implication that certain opponents, perhaps Muslim opponents, are not? Sounds like a brand new line of reasoning in American politics 🫪