A Postindustrial columnist, farmer, and State Senate candidate analyzes the Michigan Democratic Senate primary win by Abdul El-Sayed and what it means for his party.
I do not think that this was a lurch to the left. Rather, I think that several things are going on here.
In this election, more people than ever, both Republicans and Democrats, called me to ask either for whom to vote or for a review of each candidate.
First, a couple of facts: Turnout in Michigan was around 32%. Of those, 60% voted in the Democratic primary. Which means just 10% of Michigan’s eligible voters voted for El-Sayed.
Second, because in Michigan primaries the voter chooses which ballot to use when voting, the 60% who voted in the Democratic primary were not all Democrats.
And third, El-Sayed lost 53 of Michigan’s 83 counties. It was turnout in El-Sayed’s loyal base that helped propel him to win. Turnout in the November general election will be a very different animal.
El-Sayed was simply the better candidate
Of the dozens of people who spoke with me about this election, there was 100% unanimity that El-Sayed’s opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens, was a dreadful candidate.
The complaints landed into three buckets:
1. Stevens has no policies of her own – just platitudes and talking points—a problem with the core Democratic Party in General.
2. She doesn’t answer questions because she doesn’t have an answer.
3. She blames Trump for almost everything (see her ad that says costs are high and that “It’s all Trump’s Fault!”) but then has no solutions of her own.
Abdul doesn’t make these mistakes. He is educated and polished. He looked like the adult in the room during the debates. He certainly didn’t fall into the affordability trap. Instead, El-Sayed mentioned his concrete policies. I counted 13 of them.
Voters in general are desperate for candidates with ideas and plans
Nature abhors a vacuum. Democrats currently are rudderless and don’t have a coherent plan. They should be working on one.
People are filling that vacuum with plans. It doesn’t matter if the plan is good or not.
I go back to something I heard a farmer say last year:
“If my choice is cruel, experienced and with a plan on the right, and inept, inexperienced and no plan on the left, I have to go with cruel and with a plan.”
President Trump had a very clear plan that people can still recite today from memory. Farmers are not thrilled with the President’s plan, which included tariffs and budget cuts. But at least he has a plan.
What was Kamala Harris’ plan for Agriculture and Defense?
This is the same thing that got New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani elected. He had a detailed, actionable plan:
Freeze rents; Build 200,000 rent-stabilized housing units; Repair rentals with city contractors and then bill the landlord; Build city-owned grocery stores; Deploy social workers in 100 crucial subway stations; Make buses free; Provide no-cost child care; Increase funding for hate violence programs by 800%; Raise the minimum wage to $30/hour.
He was also very clear on the taxes he would impose to pay for all of this.
El-Sayed, Progressives, and the Democratic Socialists of America are having success for the same reason. They have clear plans. They are novel and not mainstream platitudes. El-Sayed was rewarded for his 13 policy points.
This is exactly what I hear on the campaign trail. “Finally, someone with policy ideas,” and “You are the first Democrat I have ever heard talk about Defense and Agriculture.”
How did voters parse the two candidates?
The voters I heard from fell into three categories:
The first group acknowledged that El-Sayed is not electable in the general and that a vote for him nearly guarantees former GOP Rep. Mike Rogers a win. Better to have Stevens than Rogers – consequently, they would vote for Stevens. This group tended to be educated and engaged critical thinkers.
The second group liked El-Sayed, many of his policies, and his presence as a politician. Yet the word that kept coming up was “cunning.” Not trustworthy and with a hidden agenda. This group voted for Stevens not because of electability, but because El-Sayed doesn’t have America’s interests at heart, as evidenced by his comments on the death of Iran’s leader. Several voters noted that El-Sayed eagerly takes money from Palestinian and Arab groups, but shuns and won’t take money from good old American corporations.
The third group wanted Rogers to win for one of two reasons. They were voting in the Democratic primary to achieve that end. One group was Democrats and Independents who are tired of the Democrats who want to fight everything but who have no ideas. They perceived Stevens as being an annoyance in the future – talking a lot but not proposing solutions. Better to have Rogers who won’t cause unproductive trouble.
The second half of this group were Republicans. They had no interest in the Republican primary because they didn’t like either John James or Perry Johnson in particular. So why not vote in the Democratic primary and get an un-electable candidate nominated?
This wasn’t about money out of Politics, Israel, or the party lurching left
The issues that the urban political class is focused on never came up in my conversations in rural Michigan.
It was about candidate quality, trustworthiness, being committed to the United States, and having a plan.
El-Sayed revealed his bias immediately after securing the nomination
It was jarring, yet not surprising, when El-Sayed said that Rogers had committed “crimes” and would have no “safe quarter” in Michigan when he was done with him. This is inflammatory rhetoric that includes the military concept where an army refuses to accept surrender and instead simply kills all of its opponents. It is also a war crime.
For many voters, the pieces are falling into place that Abdul is inciting violence – yet with the same cunning as President Trump did with January 6th. An inflammatory comment, followed by an “Oh – but do so peacefully.”
He also doubled down on hypocrisy by criticizing Rogers’ Florida home, which many Michiganders have, while owning at least two homes in the Middle East and India.
Voters believe El-Sayed is smart and knows exactly what he is saying.
Democrats need to move from platitudes to ideas
Democrats need to be wary of falling into the trap of thinking that the country is veering hard left. It isn’t.
The Michigan US Senate seat is now Rogers’ to lose. November will be the first election where the impact of full rural registration will be felt. Nor should anyone delude themselves that the 60% who voted in the Democratic primary were all Democrats.
Voters want actionable ideas. Democrats need to do the hard work of coming up with them.
