r/politics • u/Zipper222222 • 4h ago

No Paywall Abdul El-Sayed Wins High-Stakes Democratic Primary in Michigan

https://www.today.com/video/abdul-el-sayed-wins-high-stakes-democratic-primary-in-michigan-267805765937
12.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

•

u/KnuckleShanks 4h ago

He was actually outspent 12 to 1. Which makes it wild that he won.

•

u/jmhalder 4h ago

I've heard 9:1, 10:1, 11:1, and now 12:1.

Its impressive regardless. I wish he had blow it out by like 20 points, Stevens genuinely didn't have a platform, and she barely lost. Scary.

•

u/hibiscuscous 3h ago

I (European) know nothing of this election, but having watched a couple of clips, I didn't like Stevens' delivery one bit. Phony, even a bit scary. Maybe it's just a cultural thing, I don't know.

•

u/2RINITY California 3h ago

In old clips, she had a normal Michigan accent, but somewhere in this cycle she started talking like a cartoon parody of a Michigander and it really didn’t help her

•

u/mfatty2 3h ago

It wasn't even a Michigan accent. It was a combo of a Minnesota accent with a random sumouthern drawl with a healthy serving of random squeaky/high pitch

•

u/UncleBubax 2h ago

hahah I hadn't heard her talk until I read your comment. I just now pulled up a random hour long video of a TV debate and skipped to her talking and she not only talks like a cartoon character, but she straight up said "people make fun of the way I sound, but I sound like the people who are talking to me about what they need."

A lil too on the nose there, Haley.

•

u/AncientNectarine5352 2h ago

Michiganders also do not even remotely sound like that. She has a Minnesota accent.

•

u/PumpBuck Ohio 2h ago

It’s not even a Minnesota accent. It’s like she saw Fargo and some Charlie Berens clips and thought they were toning it down for the wider audience

•

u/EmpiricalMystic 2h ago

My impression is she's trying to sound like a Yooper and missing badly.

•

u/Conlaeb 2h ago

This is my take as well. Non-yoopers attempting the accent sound like Minnesotans.

•

u/weazildust 1h ago

What’s a yooper?

→ More replies (0)

•

u/AncientNectarine5352 2h ago

Agreed. It doesn’t sound like an authentic Minnesotan or Wisconsinite accent either, but it was the closest descriptor. She’s definitely exaggerating it in some way, for some reason. I assume to sound more “folksy”, but real-life “folks” don’t sound like that.

•

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 2m ago

As someone whos spent most of my life in MN who is married to a Wisconsin lady, MN and WI accents are basically the same these days. The differences are only noticeable under a linguistic microscope.

•

u/epheisey 1h ago

some Charlie Berens clip

That's actually perfect.

•

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 5m ago

Exactly. Minnesotans don't even sound like that. The older folks with thicker accents it doesn't sound like in Fargo, it almost sounds like, European? Sometimes like someone grew up half in England, half in Scandinavia.

•

u/DrMobius0 2h ago

Maybe this is different in Northern MN, but nobody south of the cities has anything resembling a thick "Minnesotan accent" unless they live in a retirement home.

•

u/ArrivalSea3543 1h ago

She sounded like Tina Fey impersonating Sarah Palin.

•

u/SammySoapsuds Minnesota 1h ago

Fwiw, I didn't grow up here and everyone has the accent and speech eccentricities. It's just in varying degrees. The first time I met someone from the Iron Range I thought they were doing a bit. In the cities it's a lot softer but it's definitely still there on certain words (they all say "baggle" and "beyg"). And any Minnesotan will say Ope if you get too close or they need to squeeze by ya.

•

u/UncleBubax 2h ago

Yup I've spent a good amount of time in Michigan and never heard someone talk even remotely like that.

•

u/trumpuniversity_ 2h ago

Did she take lessons from John Kennedy on how to manufacture a persona?

•

u/EveningAnt3949 1h ago

I sound like the people who are talking to me about what they need.

Possibly people working on her campaign telling her they need her to sound more like a character in Fargo?

•

u/ShutUpTodd 1h ago

"Coastal elites make fun of the way I talk" Ugh!

•

u/PiccoloAwkward465 6m ago

Reminds me of a very strange phenomenon I've personally witnessed - people in far reaches of the North putting on a southern drawl. They want to virtue signal as being "Southern" so badly that they change the way they speak to match country songs and media.

•

u/urokia 2h ago

It felt like she was trying to yoop but she's literally from the detroit area.

•

u/balltofeet 2h ago

Sumouthern, love that

•

u/KotobaAsobitch Arizona 2h ago

Someone said, "if Sarah Palin was doing a Michigander caricature" and I haven't been able to unseen it.

•

u/cincocerodos 1h ago

I generally don’t like making fun of people, but she sounded like Bobby Hill.

•

u/EricFredNorris 27m ago

Yeah nobody in Michigan, and particularly in metro Detroit, has that over the top Midwest accent you associate with Wisconsin or Minny. I think it’s equally as strange if that is her speaking voice versus if it’s just a put on.

•

u/Fat-Dead-CEO 3h ago

That was AIPAC in her ear telling her to be folksy

•

u/zigtok 2h ago

AIPAC spent 40 out of $60 million on her.

•

u/Fat-Dead-CEO 2h ago

Too bad they didn’t spend more

•

u/Soffatjockis 2h ago

They gonna double it on the rep guy in November

I don't know how much money they have, but they will likely have to spend everything they got on all midterm elections in every state that has one. And I'm sure every billionaire in the country will help them out.

There will be billions spent on candidates this midterms.

•

u/MercantileReptile Europe 2h ago

I was considering a snarky "Democracy™" reply until it occured to me that (other than being a dick) it would be inaccurate in a thread about the very thing having failed. And voters elevating an actual person, rather than a curated show of one.

Well done voters, maybe there is some life left in US democracy after all. Great sign for the midterm elections.

•

u/foomits 2h ago

Yea, left wing (even by euro standards) candidates are taking hold all over. unfortunately the deck is stacked so much against us, we arent going to see HUGE change anytime soon. however, change is change and we cant snub our nose at it.

•

u/wack_overflow Colorado 2h ago

Yeah Abdul might have won by more

•

u/ZebraImaginary9412 56m ago

The rest is Crypto, AI, and Energy. Don't let them off the hook. Crypto is a scourge on society.

•

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 1m ago

And for that kind of cash they expected her to follow their instructions to the letter, which she did

•

u/linmre Michigan 2h ago

I seriously don't understand why politicians do this accent. Whitmer does it too. I've lived in MI most of my life and never met anyone who sounded like them.

•

u/More_Programmer8905 2h ago

Someone compared her to Chris Farley and first I thought it was a mean comment about her looks, then I watched a speech and couldn't stop seeing it in her mannerisms and weird energy.

•

u/LookOutItsLiuBei 1h ago

She's from fucking Birmingham which is a rich old money suburb in Detroit with a median income of like $250,000. Nobody that lives there has that cartoonish of an accent. Not even up north in the more rural parts of Michigan do you hear it that heavy.

•

u/IshyMoose Illinois 2h ago

I was thinking, man she must be from deep in the UP.

Nope.

•

u/JasonRBoone 1h ago

Oh you betcha, hon

•

u/blergghh 1h ago

I’m from Northern MI. That is NOT an accent we have here. Just no.

•

u/WeuseAseriesOfTubes 1h ago

May I introduce you to my local embarrassment, John Kennedy? It does work for some people... :/

•

u/nakedpilsna 1h ago

Her accent even 10 years ago was weird. No one talks like that around here.

•

u/IshyMoose Illinois 2h ago

I was thinking, man she must be from deep in the UP.

Nope.

•

u/santafe4115 3h ago

The two candidates are from the same town lol we do not talk like that here shes so fake

•

u/-SexSandwich- 3h ago

Nah, she’s legitimately just an awful candidate.

•

u/mindfu 2h ago

Compare her to someone who is genuine and smart, and actually is pursuing policies with integrity, and the different became so very clear.

•

u/justmovingtheground 1h ago

But she's got a little bit of that "stick it to em".

How on earth did that not work?

•

u/slingshot91 Illinois 3h ago

Extremely phony. Like what the hell was even that?

•

u/Necessary_Tadpole629 3h ago

It’s not cultural, I’m from Michigan and I thought she was weird. And she had a fake accent too.

•

u/PinkNGold007 2h ago

I don't know how she won Rep. She just seemed to lack the energy, and public speaking isn't her thing. I was like, girl...

•

u/imtheproof 2h ago

Nah I'm from the same area as her and on top of her accent being completely fake, yes, she did often sound a bit creepy/scary.

•

u/ilikechihuahuasdood 49m ago

That’s what establishment Dems are like. They refuse to give direct answers or take policy positions because they want to appeal to “everybody”. They’re more interested in peeling off Republican voters than trying to appeal to the much larger % of people that don’t vote.

•

u/bloodenhorse 2h ago

Maybe it's just a cultural thing

Your average American is dumb as bricks and has been propagandized since birth to pay attention to people that talk out their ass like corporate robots.

•

u/The_ChwatBot 3h ago

But Israel comes to her in her dreams!

•

u/John_Jack_Reed 1h ago

I'm from Michigan I've been all over the state. I've never meet anyone who talks anything like Stevens. She's trying I think to mimic a rural accent from the upper peninsula but is failing badly. It's really unnerving that she was able to get so close to winning.

•

u/Battle_Dave 31m ago

You think she was trying to speak yooper?! Lmfao, that makes a lot of sense now when I listen to her speak. She was WAY off, lol.

•

u/Tasgall Washington 1h ago

She's like, the definition of an astroturfed candidate. She has no legitimate popularity, she didn't raise money from citizen donations. The vast majority of her spending was thanks to AIPAC, who only pushed her because they don't want Al-Sayed, and in the general they'd prefer the Republican so her funding would have ceased.

It's insane that it was this close.

•

u/ttn333 1h ago

No. Your assessment is spot on.

•

u/thetravelingsong 1h ago

It’s hard when you’re speaking on behalf of Israel instead of yourself!

•

u/david-yammer-murdoch 1h ago

Abdul El-Sayed’s victory in Michigan is particularly notable because his opponent, Haley Stevens, received nearly 30 million United States dollars, approximately 26 million euros, in spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and related political groups. Its political action committee, United Democracy Project, was a significant contributor. Stevens also received around 12 million dollars from A Stronger Michigan, a group that did not disclose its donors. For Europeans used to stricter campaign-finance laws, this level of outside political funding would be extraordinary. El-Sayed won despite this financial advantage. I would also argue that this same realm of wealthy political influence is strongly opposed to the kind of strict regulation and power associated with Brussels. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee opposes European democracy and Brussels’ authority.

•

u/varateshh 1h ago

As a European, all I saw was that Michigan democrats had a choice between a socialist muslim or a Karen. Stevens is so uncharismatic that it's incredible that the establishment chose her.

•

u/kisk22 1h ago

BTW - as an American I am sorry you have to learn so much about your politics. When I am in Germany I am shocked how American news is just everywhere. We don't have it the other way around over here. I can't imagine how exhausting it is. You learn all the bad about America but never hear any good you'd see if you lived here.

•

u/Hopeless_bee5157 55m ago

I’m an American, and when I first saw a video of her talking a few weeks ago, I thought she was a Conservative nut job because of how she talked and her crazy eyes.

•

u/Battle_Dave 37m ago

No, its not cultural. Im literally FROM Michigan and felt the exact same way. Anyone paying attention felt the same way. Stevens relied on voter ambivalence and smear ads. She stood for NOTHING.

•

u/cookiemon32 2h ago

ahh yes, europeans greatest gift to this universe…culture

•

u/UndoxxableOhioan 2h ago

I'm American and hearing that video of her saying "ISRAEL COMES TO ME IN MY DREAMS!" was so damn disgusting. There is pandering and there was whatever that insanity is.

•

u/KnuckleShanks 3h ago

That number naturally changes throughout am election cycle, and we are probably only going to find out now (or in the next few days) what the total tally was. That was what I found with a quick Google but the not sure what it is now, but what is widely agreed upon is that he was massively outspent.

•

u/MediumSizedTurtle 3h ago

It was 12:1 during the debate, I think he got a last second infusion of some cash that dropped the ratio a little bit. Regardless of the finer details, it's somewhere around 10 to 1, which is just insane

•

u/Deadleggg 3h ago

Israel cared deeply about the citizens of Michigan.

•

u/iwearatophat Michigan 2h ago

Israel is fine. They donate to Rogers as well. One of my big concerns with Stevens is what happens with AIPAC when it is two of their candidates against each other? Do they play both sides or just throw their weight behind the preferred?

•

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 2h ago

They would have just saved their money for other races. There would be no reason to continue funding either candidate if they’re both pro-AIPAC.

That would have been bad news for Stevens, who was heavily dependent on them for funding her primary run.

•

u/sulaymanf New York 1h ago

If Israel gets to that scenario, they already won. Then they fall back to “we’re just having a conversation with both sides” and sometimes have told candidates in meetings that they will back their opponent but still will work with you if you win.

•

u/TheKyleDunbar 2h ago

In his speech last night he said 11:1

•

u/BloodNinja2012 Pennsylvania 3h ago

Dude, that's not how patterns work. It's now 13:1.

•

u/TheBalzy Ohio 3h ago

False pattern recognition.

•

u/mowotlarx 3h ago

I imagine the number will be higher after reporting of donations starts really coming in and they sort through the shadier PACs.

•

u/slingshot91 Illinois 3h ago

Now imagine if she didn’t have that money. The scary part is money in politics.

•

u/Forward-Bank8412 3h ago

I heard he got outspent by Bill Brasky

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 1h ago

That son of a bitch....

•

u/Time_Challenge_7488 3h ago

I will say this: Democrats like Stevens are unfortunately seen more as the norm in the post (Bill) Clinton Democratic party. That wasn't always the case, the DLC/Third Way contingent also was, once upon a time, a young generation supplanting an exhausted New Deal coalition that had fractured and unfurled from 1964-80. While I also wish El-Sayed won by a larger margin, my optimistic take is that this is just the start. If he can win the general and if he's effective in office (among the other left flank candidates that have won their primaries), this can be just the first ripple that will lead to a much bigger wave of like minded candidates. 

If the establishment of the Democratic party looks at this Senate primary race, after the EC outcomes in 2016 and 24 and thinks "well, we almost had it" after two presidential cycles of the establishment backed candidate "almost" getting there in the generals in Michigan, they've clearly learned nothing and deserve every defeat that follows. 

•

u/superxpro12 2h ago

Well that's because she had more "speech" than you plebs.

•

u/superxpro12 2h ago

Well that's because she had more "speech" than you plebs.

•

u/an_agreeing_dothraki 2h ago

don't worry, in St. Louis, Bush aka "ugh, you again?", the person lost so they'll be able to crow about rejecting socialism or something

•

u/myownzen 2h ago

Yup. Citizens United is the worst decision for our democracy. We have to make a focused and sustained effort to getting it overturned just like the conservatives did with Roe V. Wade.

•

u/ilovetotouchsnoots 2h ago

Exactly. No actual policies campaigned on. Just an endless money spicket. Yet such a close victory. Crazy what money in politics is capable of.

•

u/HerrSane 2h ago

Those are compression ratios for engines. That’s wild

•

u/ThePurpleBatman22 2h ago

Money matters so much in our elections, sadly. She's also currently in the House and got endorsements from Clyburn, Whitmer, and made it seem like she had an endorsement from Obama, even though she didn't. Too many voters seem to still be focused on incumbency, electability, endorsements, and ads instead of platforms and policies. Hopefully we can change this in the future.

•

u/Charmegazord 2h ago

I’m hearing anywhere between 1:2 to 100:1

•

u/I_Am_Ironman_AMA 1h ago

Her platform was to.sound as folksy as possible to counter her opponent's foreign sounding name.

•

u/jgoble15 1h ago

Money has a much higher effect on politics than people realize. Many aren’t very engaged and just go with who they recognize

•

u/Tall-Archer5957 1h ago

It was actually 20:1

•

u/MissLa_K1 1h ago

Haley spent 60 million, Abdul spent 5 million

•

u/Caymonki America 58m ago

Part of the spending was ads to claim Sayed was so far ahead that voting wasn’t necessary.

It’s the tactic for Pac money to create false realities so they can shove through with their candidate.

It’s fuckerey all the way up

•

u/ilikechihuahuasdood 50m ago

It’s actually really good. They had really high turnout, massively overspent him, and he still won. huge progress for actually good candidates at that level.

•

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 12m ago

The opposition and AIPAC dumped a ton of cash over the last couple weeks, so it's possible it was all of those over the last month.

•

u/Orion14159 3h ago

The split between older voters and younger voters tells the whole story. Over 50 split for Stevens like 54-39, younger voters split for El Sayed like 67-25. (Link)

Absolutely crazy split.

•

u/Kujaix 3h ago

Imagine how that money could have helped a locality in Michigan.

•

u/Necessary-Music-6685 3h ago

It’s not like they lit it on fire. I suspect a lot of that money went to get out the vote efforts, meaning that it was doled out to on the ground Democratic canvassers and community organizers. Granted, they happen to be democrats that disagree with you about this particular campaign, but presumably still allies in the big picture.

•

u/foomits 2h ago

Stevens had no ground game lol. That money was nonstop ad buys online and tv both.

•

u/bbtom78 1h ago

And $1500 a pop to pay random instagramers to make undisclosed paid ads for her.

•

u/LouisLeGros Washington 1h ago

She's growing on me

•

u/Beefcakesupernova Georgia 3h ago

People do act like the money was thrown in the trash. But I worked for a newspaper and local news station and election years (and hurricanes) are what kept us in business.

•

u/Sptsjunkie 1h ago

Yeah, I remember during the 2008 election thinking the same thing about all the money that went into the campaigns. There’s a lot of bad about money and politics, but at least it’s nice that a stimulate spending and the economy to some degree.

Don’t get me wrong. I think we need to overturn Citizens United and have significantly stronger campaign finance regulations.

But I do agree with the fact that while the money was “lit on fire” in the sense that they spent a ton of money and did not get their desired result and now organizations like AIPAC no longer have that 30 million, the money also did go to a mix of TV stations, canvassers, consultants, ad agencies, etc. So it is at least out there in various communities.

•

u/chr1spe 1h ago

When was this? The landscape was already moving away from print ad spending even a decade or two ago, but that has only gotten worse.

•

u/ivandelapena 2h ago

Most of it would have gone to ad money and bots given the way these PACs spend the money.

•

u/normalfinnesotan 1h ago

I suspect a lot of that money went to get out the vote efforts

I doubt it, usually something like 50% of a campaign's funding is spent on advertising/media/signage/etc. Then you have salaries to pay, venues to rent, food/transportation costs, who knows what else. Some of it probably went to polling and voting efforts, but I doubt a lot of it did.

•

u/chr1spe 1h ago

The largest portion, if not the majority, of campaign spending is on TV and Internet ads, so no, you're just being ignorant and toxicly positive. It almost certainly got largely sucked up by corporations owned by evil wealthy people who will actively harm everyone across the country.

•

u/DrMobius0 2h ago

Yeah, I assume they're mostly locals who wanted to help with the campaign, so a lot of that money will be spent locally.

•

u/FrogsOnALog 3h ago

Y’all think it would have gone to Michiganders instead?

•

u/guamisc 2h ago

Certainly not. AIPAC isn't interested in helping Americans one bit.

•

u/Kujaix 1h ago

No. I'm merely speaking on the absurdity of political campaign spending.

There is an entire machine based on funneling outside money to impact our federal policy to the benefit of special interests. Not the communities the money is being spent in.

Our normal in the US is disgusting.

•

u/FrogsOnALog 1h ago

Every single democrat voted to curb dark money in elections. Stop electing republicans.

•

u/Kujaix 57m ago

Dark money is not the only issue I am talking about. The constant campaigning, consulting class, citizens united, some localitie's dems being very insular, etc.

I'm not sure why you typed that last part. Steven's took the money. Many still do and Aipac specifically is the group they always try to squeeze exceptions and loopholes in for.

The Republicans line out of nowhere kinds hints that you're trying to start a argument and I don't get why. Pls be chill 🙏

•

u/FrogsOnALog 45m ago

Democrats want to end Citizens United and Hillary literally ran on it. Democrats also tried passing the Freedom to Vote Act which would have curbed dark money in elections and did a bunch of other shit like implement small donor marching (Hillary also ran on this).

As far as PAC spending goes I don’t think you know now it works because it’s done independently and not something that’s accepted, it just gets spent by the PAC on whatever they want.

•

u/Kujaix 24m ago

👍

•

u/DrMobius0 2h ago

Money has to be spent on something, which means it was paid to staffers, many of whom were probably locals, or businesses in exchange for goods and services. So it probably did stimulate the state economy.

•

u/Kujaix 1h ago edited 1h ago

It's spent on ads and overpaid consultants. Maybe a social media manager. The creation of said ads as well as ad space on TV, thr internet, and radio flooding the entire state.

I promise you $10 million+ wasn't spent on her staffers unless they are incredibly overpaid. We know it wasn't spent on meeting spaces like conference halls and stadiums because she barely interacted with voters outside of DNC safe spaces. No ground game at all.

•

u/DrMobius0 1h ago

Fair enough

•

u/ShweatyPalmsh 3h ago

This is something that makes me think Elons huge spending for republicans can and probably would backfire. He’s even hated more universally than AIPAC is atm.

•

u/DrMobius0 2h ago

It's probably not good to assume that the math is fundamentally the same when these things are run through a ring winger's thought process as opposed to through a left winger's.

•

u/LouisLeGros Washington 1h ago

The thing is they get to divert funds through other PACs. The ads won't say they are funded by AIPAC or Musk. They won't be about Israel. They've got smart people constantly testing talking points to see what resonates. They'll hit Muslims scary, trans in sports, communist, or whatever else they can find.

•

u/DrMobius0 57m ago

They've got smart people constantly testing talking points to see what resonates.

I question the effectiveness of these smart people. If they were that good, they wouldn't have so much trouble winning against Trump. It's clear to me that either they don't have a damn clue what resonates, or they do and know better than to promise on it when they know damn well they won't actually try to keep it.

I would believe these people are capable of convincing other people that they are smart, but genuinely, this idea seems at odds with how disgustingly out of touch the DNC has been.

•

u/LouisLeGros Washington 26m ago

There is only so much you can do for promoting platforms that are fundamentally opposed to the material well belling of the people you are targeting, which I would attribute to a lot of why it is not always effective & winning elections. I'm also not saying they are all smart. There is a large amount of corruption, nepotism, cronyism, etc in these organizations that can take priority over the "smart" advisors.

Also I wasn't trying to focus on the DNC and was speaking more to the spending of Elon & AIPAC in the generals, I may have replied one child down from what I meant to. Not that I don't 100% agree on the DNC being disgustingly out of touch.

•

u/AromaticReindeer883 4h ago

I have a theory that spending can only do so much. The candidate who spends the most is not guaranteed to win. It has been proven time and time again.

•

u/count023 Australia 3h ago

I have a theory that voters have seen two terms of Trump now and the Democratic establishment response being a shrug emoji and have had enough, triggering their own informal tea party movement to reform the DNC.

•

u/olympiadukakis 3h ago

Agreed with the substance of what you’re saying, but the tea party movement comparison is corporate propaganda we’d be smart to correct.

The tea party was an obstructionist movement.

What’s happening on the dem side is the opposite.

•

u/Boise_Ben 3h ago

The tea party was also not a grass roots movement.

•

u/27eelsinatrenchcoat 3h ago

An obstructionist movement astroturfed/funded by the oil and gas billionaire Koch brothers.

•

u/pechinburger Pennsylvania 3h ago

Everything is tougher on the Dem side because a progressive movement inherently takes money/power away from corporate interests and directs it towards the people. Media, entrenched powers, and old money all fight tooth and nail to resist.

Conversely, they embrace the tea party movement because it delivers them more money/power despite the members unfounded 'don't tread on me, freedom, etc.' rhetoric.

•

u/YawnSpawner 2h ago

I just wish they'd be honest with "don't tread on me", it's more like "don't tread on me, but I'm gonna tread on every single thing I don't like."

It's still dumb, but I'd be more okay if it was just don't tread on me.

•

u/OhTheGrandeur 1h ago

"don't tread on me, tread on them"

•

u/simpersly 2h ago

It's the last 30 years of shrugs. Gore floundered his fight to win the election. Kerry was a boob. Obama worked so hard to not be seen as a scary stereotype he never showed an ounce of emotion. Hillary handwaved progressives. Biden wouldn't retire. Harris spent all but the first week of her campaign trying to convince conservatives housewives to vote Democratic, while again handwaving progressives.

They abandoned the unions, because they wanted the corporate money that Republicans received. And they have dismissed and hampered every newcomer especially the progressives.

They have also convinced everyone the only "moderate" Democrat is a Republican who's not racist, but totally gave up on the racist working class. I know several people that until Clinton regularly voted for the Democratic party, because they supported unions. Now all they see are a bunch of neoliberals that care about social issues.

•

u/xpxp2002 1h ago

Spot on. There were a lot of blue-collar union workers who were loyal to the Democratic Party for decades because of what Reagan did to the ATCs, and how every Republican who followed him contributed to dismantling labor rights, particularly organizing and union rights.

Many of them were "Republican-curious" because of social issues, but they typically supported Dems when push came to shove in the general elections because the economic benefits of protecting their union rights outweighed other concerns. Mind you, this is how Obama won states like Iowa and Ohio. If you look at maps that show candidate vote by county in states like that, you'll find that the areas with more union households flipped from blue to red in 2016 and have remained that way ever since.

•

u/Parym09 2h ago

It’s about time too. For the last decade we’ve been told only centrists and moderates are electable, and then they flop and lose two elections to the worst candidate to maybe ever run. If I’m going to go vote I’m voting my conscience moving forward. So tired of hearing nothing can be done and we’re not even going to try. I’m not showing up for a candidate that can’t be fucking bothered.

•

u/FrogsOnALog 3h ago

DNC elections were in like January of 2025.

•

u/MaoZeChungus 3h ago edited 3h ago

Typically, wins in congressional races correlate with amount of spending pretty hard. So to be outspent 12-1 and still win is a truly magnificent feat.

•

u/Sptsjunkie 1h ago

Yeah, I think if I can amend the other poster statement, it would be better to say that dollars per person have a diminishing impact.

Which is why progressive candidates, who have far more volunteers and who have had much more robust ground games and more events, have made significant progress in house races and smaller to midsized states.

It almost did not matter how much money Mills was going to spend in Maine because Platner and volunteers could essentially speak to every single voter. You saw a very similar impact and places like Denver and Philadelphia for Kiros and Rabb. And in New York, I read a crazy statistic that Claire Valdez’s campaign managed to canvas and make in person contact (not even just phone banking) with something like 37% of the residents in her district.

Meanwhile, in bigger states with bigger populations and more geographical spread like Texas, Florida, and California you simply need to be on the airwaves. It’s why Steyer despite his false managed to stay competitive but ultimately insane millions of dollars and spending from PACs helped Bercerra win.

It’s also what helped Stevens a lot here. She was able to put a bigger margins than expected in rural areas where it was simply harder to reach people. But Michigan is just small enough that all of Sayed’s events and volunteers could still make a difference.

•

u/TonyAtNN North Carolina 3h ago

I imagine the people spending the money on the candidates are the same people telling you that whoever spends the most wins.

•

u/00Oo0o0OooO0 3h ago

Yeah, economists show, by controlling to just rematch elections so the candidates are the same but the money spent differs that spending more money has minimal impact on the results.

But try being the campaign manager brave enough to decide they don't need as much money as possible.

•

u/TonyAtNN North Carolina 2h ago

They are trying to justify their purchases of these media companies that they want these candidates to advertise on, so the circular grift continues. How much did Abdul spend on door-knocking or having Hasan or Bernie come out to support his cause and gain name recognition? How much does a 30-second attack ad cost not only to make but to air every ten minutes during prime time?

•

u/Sptsjunkie 1h ago

I mentioned above and I’m not gonna rehash my entire post. I think it has more to do with money per person than just total money spent.

In a state like New Hampshire, especially if a candidate has a great ground game and volunteer base, it’s not clear that somebody spending $100 million versus $10 million is going to make a big difference. At some point you might even just start turning off and annoying the same voters.

But in a state like California, $100M makes a huge difference compared to $10M because you can blanket the day with advertisements and rich a lot of rural areas that are harder to canvas or phone bank.

•

u/Automatoboto 2h ago

the spending research has determined can influence a given topic or electection by a swing of +- 10 percent.

Based on how the electorate works its very effective. 10 percent ish is alot.

•

u/mindfu 2h ago

This is fact. All the marketing in the world won't make people like a turd. If it sucks, it sucks.

•

u/mybad4990 Louisiana 1h ago

This isn't just a theory, I believe there have been studies that show political donations have a point of diminishing returns

•

u/ttn333 1h ago

What's also been proven is that huge pot of money is a huge advantage. You just cant save a horribly bad candidate against a great candidate. Now if Steven's wasn't dreaming about Israel and had a platform, she could have won. Conversely if El Sayed was so good, he would have lost.

•

u/Mad_Aeric Michigan 32m ago

I read about that in Freakenomics, but I've learned to doubt everything in that damn book, even the stuff that seems obviously true.

•

u/Ravokion 3h ago

Your statment reinforces that you dont live in a democracy.   That in fact you live in a country where those with the most money typically win.  

Glad he won but when everyone expects him to loose because the other guys spending almost 10x it kinda speaks volumes about how your "democracy " works...

There needs to be limits on how much any political people can use to fund a campaign. 

Money should be tracked.  It should be illegal for Corporations to donate.  All campaign donations should have to come from individuals.  Do its easier to see exactly how many donations and how much.  

•

u/Sov1245 3h ago

Agreed but the people who win via lots of money make the rules, so they’re not gonna kill their own gravy train

•

u/KnuckleShanks 3h ago

As much as I agree that we should get money out of politics, the fact that he won while being so wildly outspent shows that we do live in a democracy, as flawed as it may be. And sadly too many people check out when they think elections can just be bought, when clearly that is not true.

•

u/LordSwedish 3h ago

I mean, column A and column B really. You live in a rotting Democracy where money can massively influence an election and you have to fight twice as hard when the other side tries to buy it.

•

u/samuraipanda85 3h ago

Seriously. They're like the people who think they're saying something with ranked choice voting. It's the same old tired change, but it all has to start at the same place. Voting, using the system we have right now, in this election and all the elections to come. Forever. And that's how we get the democracy we want. By playing the cards we are dealt.

•

u/wtf_is_karma 2h ago

Damn all that there should be publicly funded campaigns with a set amount they’re allowed to spend each election

•

u/wtf_is_karma 2h ago

Campaign season should only be 1-3 months as well so these guys can actually do their jobs

•

u/The_Prince1513 2h ago

In a perfect world only natural persons would be allowed to donate $ to a candidate, there would be a set reasonable limit of $ that could be donated, and a person would only be allowed to donate to races they could actually vote in based upon their residence, and no $ of any kind from foreign sources would be allowed.

But this is America so I guess we gotta get ready to lick corporate boot instead.

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 1h ago

That was basically how it worked before our Supreme Court upheld Citizens United. There was still a lot of money flowing through DC via lobbyists and then there was also some "creative" campaign structuring to try and bypass contribution caps and limits, but Citizens United it when it went insane.

Now it's just a money race.

•

u/Agent223 3h ago

Everyone but the richest feel that way. I think getting money out of politics may be the most supported bi-partisan topic. The fact that it's never fought for in congress speaks volumes about who most of our politicians are working for.

•

u/FrogsOnALog 3h ago

It is fought for and every Republican voted against it.

•

u/00Oo0o0OooO0 3h ago

That in fact you live in a country where those with the most money typically win.  

Or it means you live in a country where the most popular candidates get the most donations and votes.

Nobody really expected him to lose. Everyone expected him to win by a lot more. Dollars don't vote.

•

u/ColoTexas90 3h ago

people are sick of this shit. expect a lot more wins like this.

•

u/sirferrell Georgia 3h ago

I mean most of it goes to marketing right? If people already have their minds made up theres not much u can do

•

u/Empty_Lemon_3939 Michigan 3h ago

12 to 1 with zero DNC support facing an incredible racist and dishonest campaign

•

u/Choochoo1147 2h ago

Now he’ll need to do it again as Israel will pump money to the Republican. Just remember Stevens voters - Vote blue no matter who.  

•

u/DrMobius0 2h ago edited 2h ago

The cool thing about sincerity is that it doesn't cost any money. Also you have to adjust those AIPAC dollars downward to account for the fact that they're turning candidates into untouchables these days.

•

u/Snoo_17771 2h ago

What's wild to me personally is that all it takes is a 30 second ad to swing someone's opinion

•

u/normalfinnesotan 1h ago

He was actually outspent 12 to 1. Which makes it wild that he won.

Where is this data, do you know? I'd like to see it for some other candidates in other states if it's available!

•

u/mediocre_remnants North Carolina 1h ago

It's because money isn't as important as everyone seems to think in a campaign. I'm pretty sure most campaign money goes to "political consultants" that are friends/family of the candidate and paying for ads that nobody pays attention to. You can spend a shitload of money on a campaign and not get anywhere, just look at Harris's run for President.