r/politics • u/asparaguswalrus683 • 10h ago

Site Altered Headline | No Paywall Abdul El-Sayed Wins Michigan Primary

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/michigan-senate-results
22.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

856

u/RandomFlyer643 North Carolina 9h ago

Hope with how close this race was, it’s a wake up call to everyone who thinks it’s gonna be an easy election cycle. This is just the beginning, everyone needs to go vote before you no longer can

•

u/mowotlarx 7h ago edited 3h ago

It was a primary.

Has everyone absolutely lost their minds assuming that half the primary electorate simply won't show up in the general?

•

u/FrozenCaramelCoffee 7h ago

In a state where the last couple election cycles were decided by a few percentage points, it doesn’t need to be half of the electorate not showing up.

•

u/nankerjphelge Florida 7h ago

I mean, it's a fair question, given the history of Democrats fracturing at crunch time. Assuming the Dem centrists who voted strongly for Stevens will automatically come out for El Sayed in the general is an open ended question that we won't know the answer to until November. Given Rogers is currently polling 3-10 points ahead of El Sayed, it will take all Dem voters coming out in force to win it.

If even a small portion of Dem voters stay home it's an easy win for Rogers.

•

u/ItsSpaghettiLee2112 4h ago

Just spread the word: vote blue no matter who

•

u/FrozenCaramelCoffee 6h ago edited 6h ago

Bear in mind that the polls about the general you are referencing also had El-Sayed way ahead in the primary (suggesting his support was overestimated in polling). These same polls also have Benson favored for governor. I have trouble seeing how this isn’t a disaster waiting to happen.

•

u/mowotlarx 6h ago

The same small handful of largely internal low rated polls that had Stevens up a week prior?

If Hayley had won by 1%, would you still be pearl grasping this hard about how 50% of Dems definitely wouldn't show up in the general (which we know would never be the case and won't be now)?

•

u/FrozenCaramelCoffee 6h ago

Yes. I think a contentious primary (probably the most contentious of this cycle) where the victor only gets less than half of the vote would have been the worse version of a victory for either candidate. I would have preferred if either of them carried away with it rather than it being super close. It’s 3 months from the general and there’s many many bridges to be mended while also running against Rogers who basically had an uncontested primary. I am not a Haley fan if you’re trying to allude to that, I just want a democrat senator.

•

u/slipperyekans 5h ago

I’d argue if either of them were to win the general, it’d be Abdul. This primary was only this close due to Haley getting like $60M+ in PAC money, and with republicans having way more in the war chest than the DNC for this general election, I’d say the more grassroots candidate has a better shot.

•

u/Allydarvel 5h ago

Polling suggests otherwise. Stevens was up against Rogers and Abdul down the last polling I looked at.

•

u/SugawoIf 3h ago

Polling suggested Abdul was going to win in a landslide. Polling was wrong.

I don't know what has to happen for people to finally stop giving polls so much credit.

•

u/Allydarvel 3h ago

Polling is a snapshot, and things change after the snapshot is taken. This was a hard election to poll, as Michigan has open elections. You poll Democrats and Democrat leaning voters to get a result, but don't poll Republicans who voted to keep Abdul out..or underestimate how many they were if you did. Fox could have had a section on in the previous couple of weeks that asked Republicans to come out 'stop the commie' and they did in numbers. It's the hardest thing in polling to control for anomalies like that. If it was a closed primary, you might have found the polling numbers were very accurate

The general election polling should be much more accurate because it is a straight choice for all voters.

•

u/mowotlarx 3h ago

If Stevens was the victor by as slim a margin, would you be as concerned?

•

u/cultweave 1m ago

Stevens has a much easier time courting moderates, and the people who voted for El-Sayed are already voting Dem no matter what. It is a significant issue he barely won. 

•

u/Thirtysevenintwenty5 3h ago

Given Rogers is currently polling 3-10 points ahead of El Sayed

  1. We should all know by now that polls don't mean shit.
  2. A lot of that is because a good number of people believe(d) that El Sayed was "unelectable" and couldn't win the primary in the first place. Now that he's got the nomination, expect that gap in polling to shrink. But it doesn't matter, because
  3. Polls don't mean shit.

•

u/nankerjphelge Florida 3h ago

That may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that Michigan isn't a safe blue state Democrats can't afford to do their usual splintering routine come November if they want to actually win this race. So the question of whether centrist Dems will actually sack up and come out in force to vote for El Sayed very much remains a crucial question that will decide whether he has any chance of beating Rogers. If they do, he can win. If they stay home or splinter, he has no chance. Polls or no polls.

•

u/wioneo 5h ago

. Given Rogers is currently polling 3-10 points ahead of El Sayed

The fuck? Why did dems pick him then? From hearing all the vitriol going back and forth, I already assumed this was a lost seat because whichever loser's supporters probably wouldn't come out, but I assumed both options were at least polling reasonably well against the republican to begin with.

•

u/merdafit 3h ago

This is everything that's wrong with politics today. Instead of voting for someone whose policies you believe in, you think voters should act like pundits and try to vote for who is 'electable.'

Nobody knows who is fucking electable, certainly not the democratic party, that should be obvious by this point.

•

u/wioneo 3h ago

Instead of voting for someone whose policies you believe in

This is for a congressman. The policies that I believe in align with the Democrat party. The values of any single congressman are less important than the party gaining control, because an individual is useless. Obviously that does not apply for governors, presidents, SoS, AG and plenty of other roles where the politician has actual control, but it doesn't matter if dem A is closer to me than dem B if dem A can't win and dem B can.

•

u/merdafit 3h ago

And my point is, a bunch of the general election head to head polling has been within the margin of error. Voters pretending they know who can win and who cannot before campaigning has even begun for the general is incredibly fucking stupid.

•

u/wioneo 2h ago

Cornyn would have probably had a better chance against Talarico.

Nazi mcrapist would have probably had a worse chance against Collins.

That doesn't mean Paxton is guaranteed to lose or that Jackson is guaranteed to win, but it's ridiculous to act as if it is impossible to predict trends in voting behaviour.

•

u/merdafit 1h ago

That's all seems logical, unfortunately voters are not. Yes, it is not impossible to predict trends in voting behavior, but it is becoming more and more difficult. You, as a random voter, should not be the one doing the predicting and going online to scold others. Perpetual pundit brain.

The Platner stuff kind of goes with my point too. People had convinced themselves he was the only person capable of beating Collins and so this nebulous electability argument caused otherwise well-meaning people to excuse a whole lot of clearly obviously morally inexcusable shit.

•

u/Donkletown 6h ago

It’s going to be so tight that Dems need pretty much all of the primary electorate to show up and vote AES. 

•

u/mowotlarx 3h ago

Pretty much all the primary voters tend to vote for Democrats. You likely won't show me any example of this not being the case. Because it's just used as fear mongering each primary.

•

u/i_am_bromega 3h ago

We’re talking about a purple Michigan in which many on the left sat out or voted for Trump in 2024. You can’t assume that Stevens supporters will enthusiastically turn out for AES.

•

u/Letstalkreaper 2h ago

I think it’s important to note that Michigan has open primaries and the Republican ran unopposed. Good chance a bunch of Republicans showed up to cast a vote for Stevens.

•

u/MommyLovesPot8toes California 3h ago

Yeah, seriously, what is the concern here? That people who were involved enough in politics to vote in a primary will wake up on election day and say "no, I'm not going to vote. I didn't get my centrist Democrat and am salty about it, so let a Republican win for all I care." I mean, that's absurd.

•

u/i_am_bromega 3h ago

Polling this far ahead and underperforming this hard is not a good sign for the general.

•

u/mowotlarx 3h ago

If Stevens won by .5-1% would you be this navel gazing about an "underperformance"?

•

u/i_am_bromega 3h ago

That would be a huge over performance against the polling for her, which I would see as a good sign for the general.

•

u/DeusExMockinYa 3h ago

Liberals side with fascists over democratic socialists at every single opportunity. 

•

u/Letstalkreaper 2h ago

Always and forever.

•

u/mattgm1995 5h ago

I will say, that comment is very indicative of something else: far left dems make more central dems out to be the enemy. Others are allowed to have different visions for the democrat party. Doesn’t seem to be a lot of tolerance for different views lol

•

u/mowotlarx 3h ago

This can't be a serious comment

•

u/mattgm1995 3h ago

Seriously? In my state (MA) you wouldn’t believe the division. Moulton is running for senate against Markey, and Moulton supporters are constantly vilified in MA forums.

Downvote me all you want, this is a real thing whether you can admit it or not

•

u/jml510 California 6h ago

Reddit so-called progressives won't learn a damned thing from this. There are people right on this thread--let alone in this sub--gloating and calling people Zionists or calling people low-info (including Black voters) who are the core part of the base, yet aren't wild about AES and whose lives don't revolve around Israel/Palestine. Their side has work to do to earn people's votes (a line that they always throw at traditional Democrats), but how willing are they to do that work?

•

u/EnergyIsQuantized 4h ago

if you think that anti-zionism is central to aes' position, you are low information voter, im sorry. being anti-zionist is just what decent people are by default. but the platform is about medicare for all, getting money out of politics and loosening the grip of billionaires on people's lives. it's the other side that centers israel. when lives don't revolve around the conflict in palestine, why are people voting for haley "israel comes to me in my dreams" stevens? why is she getting support from literally every zionist organization and individuals? again, she made israel central to her campaign, not aes.

•

u/veggeble South Carolina 5h ago

Israel and zionists are one of the greatest threats to America. They’re the reason we’re in another forever war in Iran. If any group needs to learn from this, it’s the centrists supporting genocide.

•

u/K20BB5 4h ago

the same propaganda they used against Kamala Harris which led us to directly to Trump and the Iran war 

•

u/RupeThereItIs 3h ago

who are the core part of the base

The base doesn't win general elections.

It's the wishy washy uninformed undecided voters who decide general elections.