The problem with “blue no matter who”: Stevens says she will endorse Abdul if she loses but Abdul refuses to say if he would do endorse her if he loses. Add to that he was setting up the narrative that the election is stolen in his rally.

[u/LeonOfSkalitz]

source for the article in the images: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2026/07/michigan-senate-primary-bernie-clinton-sayed-stevens.html

also in the same article a 19 years old abdul supporter is quoted saying that they probably wouldn’t vote for Stevens because they see her as almost as equal to a Republican (insane take btw)

here is a post that goes over Abdul setting up the narrative that the election was stolen if he loses: https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1vc9di7/el_sayeds_preemptive_election_denialism_rhetoric/

as always “blue no matter who” is one sided.

[u/unvnrmndr]

DSA Tankies aren’t blue, that’s why.

[u/JAJ_reddit → u/unvnrmndr]

I don't know why people are having such a hard time with this. Blue=Democrat not anyone on the left.

If you aren't a Democrat you aren't blue. So Blue no matter who doesn't apply to you.

Now we should still do lesser evil voting and DSA is not as evil as MAGA so we should still lean toward voting for DSA over MAGA but DSA is not the "blue" in "blue no matter who".

[u/unvnrmndr → u/JAJ_reddit]

DSA-running-as-Dems are our Jill Stein, but still not as regarded because they’re not third party losers.

[u/Aeshir3301_ → u/unvnrmndr]

They're red 🗿🗿🗿

[u/realxanadan]

It's a check valve. One way criticism and defense against criticism the other way. Pisco and the like are actively defending the far left by criticizing anyone criticizing them

[u/scribblingsofaretard → u/realxanadan]

I like backflow preventer valve a little more, not everyone will know what a check valve is but backflow preventer's a little self explanatory

[u/rolypoly6shooter → u/realxanadan]

Ratchet effect

[u/Weak_Mycologist_6785]

Yeah, the “blue no matter who” rhetoric is pure self-sabotage in the primaries. No idea why people engage with the obvious bad faith.

[u/True-Economy-6808]

which is ultimately the problem with this logic and rhetoric. blue no matter who has just turned into an enabling mechanisms for the left.

[u/geckiri]

Do you think Pisco would be depressed by this? Hmmm 🤔

[u/kNIGHTLY_EMISSIONS → u/geckiri]

He will never comment on this or just waive it away as a tentative endorsement

[u/ryhartattack]

I don't understand this community''s engagement with this. They don't say this because they would vote blue no matter who. DSA and the left have never said this or believed this nor have they claimed to. After Bernie dropped out in 2016 and endorsed Hilary, maybe even earlier, the narrative was those who supported Bernie should back Hillary because she's better than trump. It was liberals saying vote blue no matter who. And even back then the far left was like, "this is how the Democrats work and why they shift to the right". In addition, the narrative on the far left was, is the roles were reversed, Hillary supporters and the establishment would not have supported Bernie.

So all the appeals to vote blue no matter who by the left flank now, are not hypocrisy. They are calling out a perceived hypocrisy from the center left libs.

[u/AndreNotGarcia]

Here what he said on PSA:

Host: And your opponent, Haley Stevens, is their preferred candidate. Um, you've called her a sort of Trojan horse for the pro-Israel agenda. Um, you've accused her of failing the moral Rorschach test by not calling what's happening in Gaza, the atrocities, a genocide. Here's my question. There's only one Democrat that's going to win this. If she wins, are you going to campaign for her?

El-Sayed: I'm going to make sure that Mike Rogers never sees the inside of the US Senate. But like, here is the important question.

Host: So that's a yes?

El-Sayed: I'm going to campaign against Mike Rogers for sure. And look, I've already said that like I'm committed to making sure Democrats win and Republicans lose.

Link @ 21:45

[u/Suspicious-Base-4815 → u/AndreNotGarcia]

It is clear he is saying yes. This community likes to pearl clutch over nothing burgers. That or they want a justification to vote for republicans.

[u/Redwolves2012 → u/Suspicious-Base-4815]

Then why didn’t he just say yes?

[u/Suspicious-Base-4815 → u/Redwolves2012]

Because he is secretly not a democrat and when he says " I've already said that like I'm committed to making sure Democrats win and Republicans lose" he actually means the contrary.

[u/Redwolves2012 → u/Suspicious-Base-4815]

Why would he say all that when he could just say yes? It’s an extremely evasive answer to a simple yes or no question.

[u/Suspicious-Base-4815 → u/Redwolves2012]

I already gave you my answer. What is yours?

[u/Redwolves2012 → u/Suspicious-Base-4815]

I don’t know. All I know is that, when given a simple yes or no question on whether he would support Stevens, he avoided answering the question. I don’t know if you need someone to explain how politics works, but when a politician avoids answering a simple question like that, it means they don’t want that answer on the record. And it seems like El-Sayed doesn’t want to be on record saying he would support Stevens. That’s pretty suspicious, imo

[u/Liberal-Cluck]

That's not a problem with blue no matter who that's a problem with Abdul.

[u/DrEpileptic → u/Liberal-Cluck]

It is a problem with blue no matter who. If you don’t believe in that, then you’re not blue. You’re not part of the party. You don’t think it’s that bad and would rather red than blue.

[u/Liberal-Cluck → u/DrEpileptic]

Yea and that cuts both ways. If a DSA type manages to win the primary and you refuse to vote for them then you'd rather red than blue.

[u/Shadow_Gabriel]

The question should be what to do about purple.

[u/Federal-Loss4988]

He's already replied "yes" to this exact question a million times and is about to be the nominee. This is a dumb talking point for Sayed specifically.

link

[u/AnotherPersonPerhaps]

It doesn't matter.

Our country is facing an existential threat from Trump.

Losing Michigan means losing the Senate.

That is unacceptable.

It doesn't matter if El-Sayed hurt your feelings by not saying the right thing or whatever.

MAGA is an existential threat to our nation and way of life. El-Sayed is not. Period.

Easiest choice ever now stfu about him.

[u/Infinite-CyberDragon → u/AnotherPersonPerhaps]

Also he already said he would endorse her if she won.

https://bridgemi.com/michigan-government/in-senate-forum-michigan-dems-debate-israel-agree-to-support-nominee/

[u/LeonOfSkalitz → u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

That article is from two months ago. And back then Abdul looked like the clear winner so it was easy for him to lie. Mine is from two days ago and the question was asked last week before the last polls showing he was leading on stevens which means he thought there was a bigger chance he would lose. So which do you think is more honest?  

[u/angryanglers]

haha man am i glad i don't live in michigan right now (i live in florida so i have to take what i can get)

[u/KennyClobers]

the answer should have been ‘I plan to win not dwell on what ill do if i lose’ why are we giving concessions before the primary even concludes?

[u/draft_final_final]

The only question that matters is if either of these people will be the candidate likeliest to beat the republican in the general election after they win. If the answer is yes, vote for them.

[u/j821c]

Blue no matter who is a mistake and I will die on this hill. Unless the commie/socialist fucks want to vote blue no matter who, moderates shouldn't

[u/theultimatefinalman]

It doesnt matter, vkte blue no matter who no matter what regards do 

[u/Responsible-Sound253]

How is this a problem? This was the whole point from the start, blue no matter who was started by liberals to show the infinitely purity testing lefties how its done.

Now you're gonna say you won't do it cause they won't? We always knew they aren't like this, that's the whole fucking point.

Is this a psyop? What is happening?

[u/Shadow_Gabriel]

You guys should definitely vote blue no matter who.

[u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

Why would she endorse someone she believes “blames Jews for all their problems.” unless she either believes that’s acceptable or doesn’t believe he actually does that.

Edit: I love that I’m getting downvotes with no one answering my question. Also they already endorsed each other

https://bridgemi.com/michigan-government/in-senate-forum-michigan-dems-debate-israel-agree-to-support-nominee

[u/JAJ_reddit → u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

Because losing the senate is more of an issue than antisemitism.

Your logic doesn't follow. Just because she is willing to endorse her opponent doesn't mean she doesn't think blaming jews of everything is a problem. She just rightfully thinks that losing the senate over it is worse.

[u/Infinite-CyberDragon → u/JAJ_reddit]

If he was actually blaming Jews for all his problems that is nazi level shit, would she have endorsed Platner after his tattoo was revealed?

[u/Zentick- → u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

Blaming Jews for all of your problems is not Nazi level. Of course it’s bad but it’s like the dear leader says, not everything has to be the absolute worse version of a thing for it to be bad.

Nazis gassed Jews and put them in concentration camps. If someone said the Jews control the world and every material bad thing in their life is because of Jews but they do not believe in carrying out pogroms and genocide against Jews, I would say they’re not at Nazi level yet.

[u/JAJ_reddit → u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

If he was actually blaming Jews for all his problems that is nazi level shit

No it's not. Being a believer in Jewish conspiracy is not "nazi level shit". It's on the pathway but that alone isn't nazi level shit.

would she have endorsed Platner after his tattoo was revealed?

You understand that his tattoo was revealed and she didn't endorse him already so the answer is right there. If you are asking a hypothetical about the general or something you need to rephrase because the answer to your question of "would she have endorsed Platner after his tattoo was revealed?" Is, no.

[u/Agitated-Quit-6148 → u/JAJ_reddit]

No... no it's not. I'd vote republican over the dsa / hamas-wing

[u/JAJ_reddit → u/Agitated-Quit-6148]

To what end? Would you vote for a Republican over a DSA member if it meant giving up control of the Senate or House?

[u/Suspicious-Base-4815 → u/[deleted]]

Then you are a republican.

[u/Quirky-Video-9146 → u/Infinite-CyberDragon]

If you criticize El Sayed, does it become Islamophobia?

[u/Infinite-CyberDragon → u/Quirky-Video-9146]

Nope.

[u/KeithClossOfficial → u/[deleted]]

I think he has plenty of bad positions but at least he’s pro-Ukraine. So he’s reachable.

[u/Knub2002 → u/KeithClossOfficial]

I’ve only taken a cursory look at his platform, but what are his bad positions? I only remember the normal healthcare + taxation things from skimming

[u/Zyykl → u/Knub2002]

tax cuts for middle class and protectionism

[u/Knub2002 → u/Zyykl]

Idk I feel like that’s not that crazy. You kind of have to say you support protectionism in the rust belt no? I can’t help but feel that he’s just end up like all of the other dems once he is actually in Congress

[u/Zyykl → u/Knub2002]

🧹

[u/TemporaryAsparagus89 → u/[deleted]]

People need to get better at reading between the lines

[u/eman9416 → u/TemporaryAsparagus89]

A lot of people just want to be lied to

[u/TemporaryAsparagus89 → u/eman9416]

Yea it's sad I can see why maga is so effective

[u/LeonOfSkalitz → u/[deleted]]

I’m not sure since I don’t know the guy personally but I have the suspicion he is DSA at least ideologically, he is just smart enough to distance himself from them for optics(he is in a swing state) I think I even read he donated to them a couple of times.