In a column for Al Jazeera, the author argues that Abdul El-Sayed’s victory in the Michigan Senate race proves Muslim Americans do not have to sacrifice their faith to succeed in American politics. The author, a Muslim American from Michigan with a personal connection to El-Sayed, describes the win as a moment of genuine joy, a stark contrast to the usual relief felt when a less-preferred candidate loses. El-Sayed, a physician and former Detroit health director, defeated Republican Mike Rogers to become the first Muslim ever elected to the United States Senate, a milestone that resonated deeply with the author’s community.
A Candidate from Within, Not an Outsider Courting Votes
The author’s conviction in El-Sayed’s authenticity stems from a long-standing relationship that predates his political campaigns. “Like many in Michigan’s Muslim community, I knew of Abdul long before he became a fixture in national headlines, from his 2018 gubernatorial campaign to his Friday sermons in local mosques,” the author writes. He recounts attending a Ramadan town hall where El-Sayed pledged to fight for all Michiganders, a promise he consistently demonstrated through actions, such as attending local funerals and personally responding to community messages, even during the final, exhausting days of the campaign.
Both attended the University of Michigan, where El-Sayed once helped lead the Muslim Students’ Association. The author notes that El-Sayed’s connection to the community was not a calculated political tactic; he was already part of it. “Muslim Americans are often asked to celebrate any politician who occasionally says ‘salaam’ or appears in a mosque before Election Day. Abdul was not an outsider to our community coming to court us. He belonged to it,” the author explains.
Facing a Wave of Hostility and AIPAC Spending
The campaign was not without significant challenges. El-Sayed faced immense hostility, including repeated mockery of his name by President Donald Trump. His opponents and some voters insinuated that his faith alone made him suspect, recycling unsubstantiated allegations. The author highlights the role of a powerful lobbying group in this effort. “The American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC’s) affiliated super PAC spent roughly $30m in Michigan’s Democratic primary, an extraordinary investment to defeat someone who openly opposed US support for Israel’s genocide and apartheid,” the piece states.
When critics weaponized his name, he shifted the conversation to kitchen-table issues like groceries, housing, and healthcare. When confronted about his opposition to genocide, he challenged the idea that desiring children to live without bombs was a hateful stance. He refused to accept the notion that a Muslim must renounce his community or Palestine to hold public office. His readiness to push back struck a chord with voters, who felt they had at last found a representative prepared to challenge biased media narratives and racist assumptions.
A Victory That Shatters a Convenient Lie
The author notes El-Sayed’s victory speech, which began with the words his opponents had tried to weaponize: “My name is Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed.” This moment was electric because his Muslim identity had survived a nationwide effort to make it disqualifying.
The author also contextualizes the win within a broader wave of Muslim political representation. He brings up New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York, following which doubters claimed that a Muslim candidate vocal about Palestine could only secure victory in a liberal urban center, not a state that Trump won in 2024.
Scrutiny Remains, but the Substance of the Campaign Endures
The author makes it clear that the celebration does not mean suspending all judgment. The author frames the vote as a pragmatic choice for change, a departure from what he calls the familiar, dispiriting bargain of voting mainly to stop someone worse.
The author emphasizes the importance of the campaign’s substance over symbolic victory alone.
