MI Senate Frontrunner ‘Struggles’ With Israel’s Right to Exist as a Jewish State
It appears that the more incendiary El-Sayed’s rhetoric becomes, the more he rises in the polls. … It’s hard to say whether that is despite his antisemitic remarks or because of them.
Imagine being so detached from reality that you “struggle with the question of whether Israel should exist as a Jewish state.” As ludicrous as that sounds, it is apparently a serious concern for Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the current frontrunner in Michigan’s Democratic Senate Primary.
The former Wayne County health director is running for the open seat being vacated by Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, who is retiring.
SCOOP @jewishinsider via @marcrod97: "El-Sayed said he struggles with question of whether Israel should exist as a Jewish state"https://t.co/dskGtvSoCB
— Josh Kraushaar (@JoshKraushaar) May 26, 2026
Abdul El-Sayed has no problem with the 50+ Muslim countries. His personal struggle is with the one Jewish nation on this earth – he doesn’t think it should exist.
This is a US Senate candidate. pic.twitter.com/uljCg9KQ2X
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) May 27, 2026
There was a time, not so long ago, when a statement this vile would have been enough to end a political candidacy. Today, however, as antisemitic rhetoric has become increasingly normalized among wide swaths of the Democratic Party — particularly in states like Minnesota and Michigan, home to the nation’s largest Muslim populations — such remarks no longer provoke the universal condemnation they once would have.
What was once considered politically disqualifying is now often dismissed, met with silence, or worst of all, applauded.
In fact, it appears that the more incendiary El-Sayed’s rhetoric becomes, the more he rises in the polls. The candidate who until recently trailed his primary opponents, Rep. Haley Stevens (MI-11) and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, has gained momentum in the race over the last few months. It’s hard to say whether that is despite his antisemitic remarks or because of them.
El-Sayed made national headlines in March when leaked audio of his reaction to the death of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei surfaced. In the clip below, he tells supporters, “I also want to remind you guys that there are a lot of people in Dearborn who are sad today. So like, I just don’t want to comment on Khamenei at all.”
Sadly, whether it was the national attention generated by the controversy or genuine enthusiasm for his message, he began gaining ground in the polls almost immediately after the story broke. At the time, the most recent survey showed Stevens leading the field with 23% support, holding a slim one-point advantage over both El-Sayed and McMorrow.
Since then, the race has shifted dramatically. The RealClearPolitics polling average now places El-Sayed in the lead with 24.3% support, giving him a 4.5-point lead over Stevens and McMorrow, who are tied at 19.8%.
The latest individual poll of the race, conducted by Mitchell Research and released on May 11, found El-Sayed leading the field with 28% support — 10 points ahead of Stevens at 18%, and 11 points ahead of McMorrow at 17%. With the August 4 primary just two months away, he appears to have significant momentum on his side.
🚨LEAKED AUDIO FROM ABDUL EL-SAYED ON THE DEATH OF IRAN'S SUPREME LEADER:
"I also want to remind you guys that there are a lot of people in Dearborn who are sad today. So like, I just don't want to comment on Khamenei at all." pic.twitter.com/Ai6JwOw6Fm
— Senate Republicans (@NRSC) March 30, 2026
El-Sayed has held campus rallies with the far-Left, ultra-controversial streamer and influencer Hasan Piker, who is best known for saying that America deserved 9/11.
Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed defends holding campus rallies with Hasan Piker — the streamer who said 'America deserved 9/11' — and alleges 'gotcha game' when pressed on the remarks. pic.twitter.com/v5btc6hDlI
— Fox News Flash (@FoxNews_Flash) May 27, 2026
Michigan Republicans will also hold a Senate primary, but former Rep. Mike Rogers (D-MI) is widely expected to be the GOP nominee.
RealClearPolitics maintains polling averages for potential general-election matchups between Rogers and each of the three leading Democratic candidates. The Mitchell Research poll cited above found that Rogers holds a narrow lead over each of the Democratic contenders in hypothetical matchups, though El-Sayed appears to be his strongest potential opponent.
Rogers led El-Sayed by just one point, 42% to 41%, compared with leads of 42% to 39% over Stevens and 43% to 41% over McMorrow.
Democrats need a net gain of four seats to reclaim the Senate majority, making Michigan one of the party’s most important battlegrounds in 2026. A victory there is widely viewed as essential to any realistic path back to control of the chamber.
Noting that some pretty radical candidates have been winning Democratic primaries, RealClearPolitics co-founder Tom Bevan warned in a recent op-ed that the party risked losing otherwise winnable races in the general election.
He compared the Democrats’ current position to that of the Republicans in 2010:
The 2010 midterm did indeed turn out to be a banner year for the GOP: a pickup of 63 seats in the House of Representatives and a gain of six seats in the U.S. Senate. However, Republicans fell short of taking back the Senate Majority, in part because they lost two winnable races by nominating problematic candidates: Sharron Angle, who ran a subpar campaign and fell to Harry Reid by 41,424 votes, and Christine O’Donnell, who lost the special election to replace Joe Biden in Delaware and aired an ad infamously claiming, “I am not a witch.”
Democrats will soon find out whether rewarding candidates who traffic in ideological extremism during the primary season translates into success — or failure — when the general electorate has its say.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
It’s ok. I struggle with this putz’s right to exist.
Lay a fair amount of the blame on Henry Ford himself,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Middle_Eastern_people_in_Metro_Detroit
Another Mooslime loser.
I don’t if you follow my drift
Democrats are making anti-semitism great again.
So are many Republicans.
Fringe, click-baiting “Republicans,” with no influence or control over the Party’s leadership or apparatus. Huge difference.
Well, the Democrars had to start somewhere, too. I wouldn’t be so quck to dismiss the concern. Long-term planning, perseverance and money however perverse has paid of big time and the current Democratic party is rapidly becoming a tool.of Jew hate. I see no reason that is not possible on the right.
The right doesn’t buy into the left’s/Dhimmi-crats’ utterly contrived and fact-averse “colonial”/”oppressor-victim” ideology and framework. Further, conservatives/GOP don’t welcome Islamofascism and Muslim supremacism into the GOP tent. Dhimmi-crats have done so, enthusiastically.
I see a few “conservative” nuts, such as Massie and his ilk, alleging, against objective facts and evidence, that Israel has drawn the U.S. into middle eastern wars, against the U.S. national interest. Most conservatives recognize that claim as the utter bunk that it is. There will always be a few idiots who buy into fallacious and bigoted claims. But, Jew-hate and anti-Israel vilification are core elements of the communist/Islamofascist/Muslim supremacist political platform and ethos. Not so, with respect to conservatives/GOP.
You must not talk to many Republicans 40 and under.
I don’t; there are few where I live. But, you have talked to a few, so, that handful qualifies as allegedly being representative of millions of young Republicans, at-large, apparently.
You’re making hugely presumptive generalizations, based on your extremely limited, subjective, anecdotal experience. That’s conjecture, not rigorous, fact-based analysis.
The Dhimmi-crats have welcomed unabashed Muslim and non-Muslim Jew-haters and Israel-vilifiers into the highest levels of their wretched Party’s leadership. Show me where that’s happening, in the GOP.
Under 40 demographic is definitely less interested than prior generations in supporting US military adventures abroad. They question the rationale for alliances entered into decades ago which may or may not be a net benefit to the USA today. While one of those alliances is Israel, the call for review/reordering of US Foreign Policy isn’t ‘antisemitism’.
There’s no room for tribalism in the GoP. The notion of group identity being prioritized above individual merit (or lack) is repugnant to almost all folks in the center/right coalition. IOW no discrimination and no thumb on the scale. Not to provide favor or disfavor for any group identity/tribe. The leftists can keep their diversity olympics.
And such people are not truly Republicans in the first place.
Name the republican office holders or those running for office that are anti-semites? Only one I can think of is Massie. As for democrats I would say at least 1/4 to 1/3 of their office holders or those running are anti-semites. The figure would be probably closer to 40% of those identifying as democrats. And none of them are shy about it at all.
I’m starting a fund to ship this anti-American Islamist a-hole back to the third world shithole of his choice, where he can live with “his people…and goats”.
Who’s in?
The post-WW I Mandate system produced no fewer than 14 now independent countries. And certain people question the legitimacy of the existence of only one of these countries – Israel.
A coincidence that Israel happens to be the only Jewish state resulting from the Mandate system? I think not!
Google AI’s response to my query is curious. Here’s what is says about the countries derived from the “Class A” (former Turkish territories in the ME) Mandates:
Iraq: Placed under British mandate; gained independence in 1932.
Lebanon: Placed under French mandate; gained independence in 1943.
Syria: Placed under French mandate; gained independence in 1946.
Transjordan (now Jordan): Created and placed under British mandate; gained independence in 1946.
Palestine: Placed under British administration; following the end of the mandate, the region was partitioned and the State of Israel was created in 1948.
Why does it not mention that Transjordan and Palestine were originally a single mandatory territory, “Palestine”? The mandate for Palestine (promised to the Jews) originally included Transjordan, but the British exercised an option to split Palestine into more than one territory. (Similar shuffling of Mandate territories in Africa has such slightly more granular descriptions. Why skimp when describing the Mandate for Palestine?) They eventually transferred control of Transjordan to their friends, the Hashemites (Arabs & Muslims). Palestine was seized by the Jews to become Israel after the representatives of the Arabs in Palestine rejected two partition proposals (the second even more advantageous to them than the first), making it clear they had no intention of sharing the territory with the Jews.
Why no mention that Transjordan had originally been part of Palestine (later, Israel)? To conceal the fact that the “two state” partition of “Palestine” into Arab and Jewish countries was effected decades ago?
And what does it mean where it stays Palestine was “partitioned”? Is it referring to the partition into “Palestine” and “Transjordan”? If so, why didn’t it just say so? I think it doesn’t say so to obfuscate that fact.
No, it refers to the proposed partition that the Arabs rejected so it never happened.
An important point is that Jews bought land in the mandate from Turkish landlords and settled it. They didn’t just traipse in and squat on it. They owned it.
there are 57 muslim states where you are a second class citizen if your not a muslim. Of those 22 are arabs. 1 Jewish state with something like a 20% muslim population that is granted full rights. In fact they have more rights than Jews since muslim males aren’t required to serve in the military,
“El-Sayed said he struggles with question of whether Israel should exist as a Jewish state”
He doesn’t struggle with it, he said that because he doesn’t want to admit the truth that, as a Muslim, he hates Israel and wants it destroyed.
Does he have a similar “struggle” with the Islamic Republic of Iran?
Or, does this Islamofascist/Muslim supremacist “struggle” with the concept of any of the 50-plus, other Islamic states/Muslim-majority countries/enclaves, outside of Arabia/Saudi Arabia, where Muslims achieved dominance and control through their 1,400-plus years of “conquest colonialism” — violent invasions and subjugation of non-Muslims’ countries and lands?
As I understand it the Koran states that the nation of Israel should never exist again. Now that it does it confounds the supremacy of this man’s beliefs and he struggles with that.
I find it bizarre that Abdul El-Sayed feels the need to go to great lengths to discuss the governmental structure of Israel. I thought that he is running for the US Senate to deal with American problems. His mind and passion certainly seems to be somewhere else. That is not a good indication for the citizens of Michigan.
Too bad he doesn’t have trouble breathing. For nowz
I expect nothing less from Michigan. Between the muslim infestation and “DEE-troit”‘s high black population, a Jew hater will be in the lead.
In the democrat primary, yes. But Michigan voted for Trump three times in a row, even if it was stolen in 2020.
It will all hinge on turnout.
Let’s talk more about this.
Muslims have control of 50-plus Islamic states or Muslim-majority countries/enclaves, worldwide, with control of every single one of those states/countries/enclaves — with the exception of Arabia/Saudi Arabia –having been achieved by 1,400-plus years of relentless and violent Islamic “conquest colonialism,” achieved by Muslims’ invasions of non-Muslim lands and countries, and by force of arms.
Yet, Jews, whose forebears were living in the Kingdom of Israel, and, the Roman provinces of Judaea and Syria Palaestina, for millennia before “Submission’s” founding, aren’t allowed to live in their ancestral homeland. This from the perpetually bloviating “land acknowledgment” and allegedly “pro-indigenous” leftists/Dhimmi-crats.
The leftists are in a blind TDS rage. They will vote for anyone who opposes Trump, simply to validate their own illusions. It’s madness.
When I flew for Pan Am, one of the flights I flew regularly was Frankfort Germany to Detroit MI. In Frankfort the muslims would drop their hajibs and the men and women would act like normal infidels. The hotel had porno channels that I didn’t see in other hotels and the parking lot was full of Ferraris and Lambo rentals. They were total hypocrites. They are a cancer in our country and they are spreading. If this monster is elected and they continue to spread in the blue states, I can certainly see another civil war coming. Islam is death to America!
his rise is predicated on the twin towers having been taken as permanent hostages and what is to ,,hopefully in their eyes/agenda…more to follow
BTW,, this has gone PAST TDS
that was soooo yesterday for this group
it is the self acknowledgment that their strategies are working
“It’s hard to say whether that is despite his antisemitic remarks or because of them..”
No, it’s not.
(Time to leave.)
Israel consists of 8,000 square miles. The four Arab countries that surround Israel consist of 500,000 square miles. To put this into perspective, these four neighbors combined are 60 times larger than Israel.
El-Sayed struggles with why they don’t have all the land and Israel none. Why should the Jews have any land anyway? Huh?
The only “struggle” involves playing with words so as to appear main stream Democrat. He’s a Jew hater, big time!
Leave a Comment