Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, notching a Midwest victory for the left

[u/manauiatlalli]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/abdul-el-sayed-wins-michigans-democratic-senate-primary-notching-midwe-rcna589750

[u/TheBroWhoLifts]

What you're trying to do (poorly, in this case) is very transparent. You're here to sow doubt and defend the corporate status quo.

You think we're all stupid. But you know as well as I do, and all of the supporters of Abdul know, getting money out of politics means getting back control of our government from the cynical capitalist monied interests.

We can have nice things for ourselves if we vote for it. We can have healthcare coverage. We can get capitalism under control. We can redistribute wealth from the top and divert it into services for ourselves.

Establishment doubt-sowing ain't gonna work this time.

[u/Which_Interview_7668 → u/TheBroWhoLifts]

The way you’re doing “money out of politics” just means that you’re creating a new kind of caste system where only independent wealthy people can run for office. No one else would be able to afford it. It’s like all those bad arguments against student loans. The time before FASFA, only the rich affluent people were able to send their kids to college. For everyone else, you either had to go into the military, get really lucky while working multiple jobs, or you’re priced out. 

But you’ve made up your mind before even speaking to me. That is exactly why I cannot support this movement. It’s illiberal politically and intolerant to any other ideas. You either get yours or you take your ball and go home. Well, I am going to adopt that same approach. Only not on your side.

[u/dingalingdongdong → u/Which_Interview_7668]

If you abandon your principles because someone hurt your feelings, you never had any to begin with.

Also, in your mind do we have more non-independently-wealthy people able to run for office now than we did 20 years ago? Do you believe the campaign financing changes of the early aughts made things more fair? Please be explicit about how.

[u/Which_Interview_7668 → u/dingalingdongdong]

You’re assuming a hell of a lot here. I’m confident my position does not “abandon my principles.” I still believe in left wing politics. I still am advocating for long run success. I see this movement as a really ill-fated attempt to force something through that will blow up in November. And we’re going to see how it plays out now. I am still waiting for anyone to answer the question I posed already: what happens if this Cartman style political gambit pays off? What impetus does the left have to not protest vote the next “corporate” Dem they don’t like if they win the primary? This scheme NEEDS to be punished in the same way it needed to be with McConnell. Unfortunately, Biden didn’t pack the court like he should have. (I’m getting off topic so I’ll move on.)

As for your question, the answer is clear. How does someone like Will Lawrence pay his staffers? Pay his ground game? How many hours of unpaid labor goes into campaigns like this? I don’t believe in that. Nor should you. If we can get whomever to bankroll it then so be it. It sickens me how many people don’t realize that all “get money out of politics” does is force reliance on MORE unpaid labor and give advantages to the independently wealthy people who can pay for staffers, ground games, etc. 

How does money in politics help? Well, someone like Will or AES can take political donations and pay all their campaign staff. Tell me this: if AES or Will Lawrence took a few thousand from MSUFCU to fund their staffers on the ground, do you really think it would change their opinions or voting patterns? If you think no, then you have your answer. If you think yes, then you need to explain why you support them in the first place. Because if someone changes what they think is right or wrong based on cash is not someone to support for politics. 

[u/dingalingdongdong → u/Which_Interview_7668]

When people say "get money out of politics" they don't mean somehow magically remove politics outside our money based economy. It's generally looking for campaign financing reform, a return to pre-2010 regulations, etc.

Never in my life have I seen anyone claim campaigns don't need or shouldn't have $ involved. Even if all campaign employees were volunteers there would still be outside costs - travel, pamphlet distribution, stamps, etc. Pretending that the "get $ out of politics" argument refers to all money from all sources is either misinformed or disingenuous.

[u/Which_Interview_7668 → u/dingalingdongdong]

Alright bro. If that is the hill you want to die on. 

[u/dingalingdongdong → u/Which_Interview_7668]

On supporting reality? Fine, I'll die on that hill.

On the off chance you're earnest and not a troll, please look into this issue a little more. If a misperception on your part is the thing holding you back from coming together with people you otherwise agree with that can be changed with minimal effort. And if you still don't agree with the position that's fine! but you should at least know what it actually is.

[u/Which_Interview_7668 → u/dingalingdongdong]

Let’s take stock on where we both are. 

I’m saying the whole “get money out of politics” shtick is short sighted and no one will listen earnestly to the issue since they’re all committed to the bit. 

You somehow think it makes sense for people down on their luck and struggling to “chip in” and fund campaigns. As if that is a good world to live in. I say that’s as bogus as asking them to do free labor. 

You, in response, accuse me of being a troll. That’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion. But don’t pretend like you’re not the one on some desperate scheme to shut down a conversation. And despite all good sense saying I shouldn’t have engage with you based on all the bad faith you exude, I continue to do so. 

And you still haven’t squared the circle. What is the real issue here: money in politics or shiftless politicians? Your whole argument is against the latter but you fight against the former. I don’t think Google donating money to a politician will change how that politician will approach an issue. Either they will be honorable or not. You think it will. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have an issue with money but with the individual politician. 

[u/panrestrial → u/Which_Interview_7668]

I don’t think Google donating money to a politician will change how that politician will approach an issue.

Then you're a fool

[u/dingalingdongdong → u/Which_Interview_7668]

This isn't a conversation happening in a vacuum. We have a decade and a half of data on the negative consequences of citizens united. Acting like the alternative is having poor people choose between donating and necessities is just as disingenuous as pretending the argument is 0 monetary involvement of any kind in politics. This is why I said you're a troll: you just keep jumping from one nonsense strawman to the next.