Considering AIPAC et al spent $60 million on Stevens’ race, while El-Sayed’s campaign raised and spent only $3.5 million by comparison, I’m going to say the fact that Abdul still won does in fact constitute a blowout. FU AIPAC.
They didn't even come close to out-spending their opponents and still won, that means people are seeing through the bullshit, and that's great news. Maybe it means the general population isn't hopeless, 🤞
I would (foolishly) hope that it also teaches Democrats that they don't need to fall for the trap of "I need to suckle on the Billionaire money udders or I can't win an election! I want to do right by people but I have to think about my funding!!"
Of course they won't learn, but it would be nice...
It certainly helped considering he only won by a single point, either that or the fake Obama endorsement, or maybe even Republicans voting in the primary.
That’s a really salient point. A good reminder that no matter what size the war chest, bad policy is bad policy, and by sticking to a plan to make people’s lives better, it’s possible to win.
The same goes for anywhere an establishment dem beat the more left candidate in the primary. Maga republicans cannot be allowed to win or hold seats, and that means supporting whoever wins the primary against them.
In this case, that could be strategic voting. We in Michigan can vote for either the blue or the red primary (no party commitment ahead of time), but it has to be consistent the whole way down.
James was clearly going to win, so the strategic option for team red was to vote for whichever blue candidate they'd rather face in the general for this more competitive race.
It purchased, your children's humanity here in America and the bombs to be dropped on brown people overseas. AIPAC isn't finished. Not by a long shot. Expect some false flag and/or escalation of the genicide in Palestine.
An endorsement is just a press release expressing support. El-Sayed won the primary selection for the party's voting line. I don't know what Michigan's rules are for changing candidates, but those are two different things.
And all the people who would object to El-Sayed's win have announced their support.
It's a Blue Wave year and Rogers is going to be running pretty much the same rhetorical playbook as Haley Stevens. If El-Sayed can't beat Rogers, Stevens was going to get trounced even harder. But the momentum is with the liberal establishment, especially as guys like Rogers are going to be campaigning amid more terror attacks by ICE agents and abysmal economic news thanks to the crumbling supply chains.
Any other year, maybe you'd be right. We'd have another Slotkin clone winning the primary and going on to face her GOP-aligned Atlantic Council doppleganger in the general. This year, I would not bet against El-Sayed given even odds. He shrugged off a 30:1 funding disadvantage and now the Dems need him if they have any hope of a Senate Majority.
22 Comments
crusa187@lemmy.ml · 74 pts · 3d
Considering AIPAC et al spent $60 million on Stevens’ race, while El-Sayed’s campaign raised and spent only $3.5 million by comparison, I’m going to say the fact that Abdul still won does in fact constitute a blowout. FU AIPAC.
_stranger_@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 3d
They didn't even come close to out-spending their opponents and still won, that means people are seeing through the bullshit, and that's great news. Maybe it means the general population isn't hopeless, 🤞
Asafum@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 3d
I would (foolishly) hope that it also teaches Democrats that they don't need to fall for the trap of "I need to suckle on the Billionaire money udders or I can't win an election! I want to do right by people but I have to think about my funding!!"
Of course they won't learn, but it would be nice...
ryathal@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 3d
Money doesn't guarantee wins, but the establishment Democrats are still holding on to that theory.
kurwa@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
It certainly helped considering he only won by a single point, either that or the fake Obama endorsement, or maybe even Republicans voting in the primary.
dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 3d
That’s a really salient point. A good reminder that no matter what size the war chest, bad policy is bad policy, and by sticking to a plan to make people’s lives better, it’s possible to win.
gwheel@lemmy.zip · 15 pts · 3d
The same goes for anywhere an establishment dem beat the more left candidate in the primary. Maga republicans cannot be allowed to win or hold seats, and that means supporting whoever wins the primary against them.
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 3d
I have hope that our governor will stay blue though.
1.5million voted blue vs 800ish thousand.
airbreather@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
In this case, that could be strategic voting. We in Michigan can vote for either the blue or the red primary (no party commitment ahead of time), but it has to be consistent the whole way down.
James was clearly going to win, so the strategic option for team red was to vote for whichever blue candidate they'd rather face in the general for this more competitive race.
Ascrod@midwest.social · 7 pts · 2d
Vote blue no matter who UnLeSs ThEy'Re SoCiaLiSt
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 3d
Oh wow, that's a nail biter. The polls were way off. I have to wonder what else that $30M AIPAC funding was purchasing.
NatakuNox@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 3d
It purchased, your children's humanity here in America and the bombs to be dropped on brown people overseas. AIPAC isn't finished. Not by a long shot. Expect some false flag and/or escalation of the genicide in Palestine.
Zirconium@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3d
Correct me if I am wrong but I'm hoping the Democratic party can't pull their endorsement like they did for Omar Fateh. https://sahanjournal.com/democracy-politics/dfl-revokes-omar-fateh-endorsement-minneapolis-mayor-race/
Zaktor@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 3d
An endorsement is just a press release expressing support. El-Sayed won the primary selection for the party's voting line. I don't know what Michigan's rules are for changing candidates, but those are two different things.
And all the people who would object to El-Sayed's win have announced their support.
Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 3d
I don't think he's going to be able to beat Mike Rogers
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz · 33 pts · 3d
I look forward to you being proved resoundingly wrong!
Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3d
The whole political internet thinks he's going to win so I'm kinda here all by myself
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 3d
It's a Blue Wave year and Rogers is going to be running pretty much the same rhetorical playbook as Haley Stevens. If El-Sayed can't beat Rogers, Stevens was going to get trounced even harder. But the momentum is with the liberal establishment, especially as guys like Rogers are going to be campaigning amid more terror attacks by ICE agents and abysmal economic news thanks to the crumbling supply chains.
Any other year, maybe you'd be right. We'd have another Slotkin clone winning the primary and going on to face her GOP-aligned Atlantic Council doppleganger in the general. This year, I would not bet against El-Sayed given even odds. He shrugged off a 30:1 funding disadvantage and now the Dems need him if they have any hope of a Senate Majority.
mrmisses@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 3d
Why what is Rogers running on that is so good for Michigan/the US?
Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 3d
Not a thing, he's a detriment to Michigan and the US
superglue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 2d
Possibly, but I don't think Stevens would win either.
Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Which is the problem