There’s No Time for Centrists to Be Doomers About El-Sayed’s Victory

Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary winner, Abdul El-Sayed, has secured victory over Rep. Haley Stevens, capturing the nomination after a razor-thin margin of victory. Stevens’ campaign, backed by formidable financial support totaling $62 million, including a significant portion from the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), provided her with a nine-to-one spending advantage over El-Sayed.

Following the announcement of El-Sayed’s triumph, Rep. Stevens unequivocally endorsed her opponent. State Senator Mallory McMorrow, who withdrew from the race earlier in the year, also threw her backing behind El-Sayed despite the "brutal" primary competition. The focus now shifts to whether moderate Democrats and pundits will adopt a unifying stance, rallying behind the winning candidate to ensure a Senate majority.

However, there appears to be a prevailing reluctance among centrists to fully embrace El-Sayed, instead opting to downplay the potential for defeat in a bid to preserve their own reputations. Critics like Jon Chait and Matt Yglesias have been vocal in their skepticism of El-Sayed's prospects in the general election, attributing his success to his insurgent campaign and dismissing his chances of winning on Election Day.

Chait specifically questioned the commitment of El-Sayed supporters to accept a higher risk of loss for electing a progressive candidate, while Yglesias downplayed El-Sayed's candidacy, warning of underperformance compared to polling fundamentals. Meanwhile, Neera Tanden, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, took to X (formerly Twitter) with a controversial critique of El-Sayed's campaign, alleging a "serious sexism" problem and labelling him a toxic misogynist.

Tanden's accusations were rooted in a perception of the campaign's tactics, drawing parallels between El-Sayed's advisors and previous failed presidential candidate Graham Platner. El-Sayed's supporters, though, remain steadfast in their belief that the moderate establishment's opposition is rooted in a desire to maintain control over the Democratic Party's narrative and financial interests, rather than genuine concerns about his electability.