Fighting between Michigan Democrats returns to the headlines (AP)
Haley Stevens had agreed to campaign with Abdul El-Sayed and Jim Clyburn at a campaign event on Sunday. It was intended to help El-Sayed with Jewish and Black voters. Tonight we don't know where that stands because Stevens, after agreeing, in a ploy right out of AIPAC's playbook, conditioned her appearance on the expectation that El-Sayed would apologize for an ad by "Rebellion PAC" that linked American support for Israel to high American grocery prices, a preposterous blame-Israel-first claim distanced from reality and reeking of antisemitism. Stevens demanded also that El-Sayed take down campaign ads featuring Tucker Carlson.
El-Sayed, never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity to be humble, reflective and not antisemitic, responded not on the merits (typical), but rather by accusing Stevens of relitigating their primary race. One report has it that El-Sayed told Stevens not to show up at the rally Sunday.
El-Sayed said his campaign was not responsible for the Rebellion Pac ad. Of course, he did not condemn it, that would go against his iconoclastic personality instincts. El-Sayed seems to undergo fierce internal struggles whenever faced with agonizing moral first impressions such as whether the firebombing murder of an 80-something Holocaust survivor is a condemnable act and the victim worthy of his empathy or whether it must first be tangled with the 100-year history of enmity between Muslims and Jews in the Middle East. El-Sayed's instinctive first impression was to go with tangle. He later apologized.
As for Stevens, she is a witting or unwitting tool of AIPAC's tactics: a last-minute demand intent on scuttling an agreement to heal and defeat the Republican. AIPAC pored millions into the primary for Stevens, which she nearly won, and this AIPAC upping of the ante, first enlisting Stevens' Jewish Democratic AIPAC donor fiance to condemn El-Sayed for ANY criticism of Israel and say that his conscience compelled him to vote for the MAGA candidate and now, this accept-with-demands rally, is designed to paint El-Sayed into a corner.
AIPAC has studied El-Sayed for months and knows his weak spots, his aversion to apology, his lack of humility, his penchant for confrontation when avoidable, and they are probing those weak spots to elicit reactions that will dissuade Jews from voting for him. It's a dirty AIPAC trick and, of course, El-Sayed is falling for it. Sunday's off-on-on-?-? rally is three days before the election.
I have wrestled with predictions in this race. The polls say that El-Sayed will win, but I don't understand where El-Sayed's support comes from. Is it Democrats generally? That seems belied by the El-Sayed-Stevens contretemps. Is it particular constituencies within the Democratic bloc. What, such as Blacks and Jews? Is it Independents, cross-over Republicans? Earlier this week I just said fuck it, I don't know anything about Michigan voters, the only evidence I have is the polls, ergo El-Sayed will win.
But now this. And now my recollection that the primary polls were not just wrong they were really, most-sincerely wrong and El-Sayed escaped by the skin of his teeth. So now I am giving in to my doubts and predicting that El-Sayed will lose, an entirely avoidable result. I also predict that Mary Peltola in Alaska will lose too, and if those two predictions come, regrettably, true, the Senate is exceedingly likely to be lost as well. This needn't have been. Michigan and Alaska are own goals by Democratic candidates that have a self-sabotaging death wish. My predictions are just my feelings and my feelings are as often wrong as right.