Alan F Jr

Tommy, thank you for asking. Let me explain why I believe Abdul El-Sayed would be a dangerous choice for the United States Senate and why I believe patriotic Democrats should oppose his candidacy. 1) Support for authoritarianism and censorship: In 2012, El-Sayed signed a statement backing Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi’s extraordinary executive powers and calling for a purge of Egypt’s media and police. This is an appalling endorsement of authoritarian measures and suppression of the press. 2) Troubling denials of Muslim Brotherhood family ties: El-Sayed categorically denied family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood despite his half-sister’s public statements describing longstanding family involvement. This glaring discrepancy raises serious questions about his candor, character, and credibility. 3) Appalling response to antisemitic terrorism: After the terrorist attack on Temple Israel synagogue in Michigan, El-Sayed invoked the attacker’s grievances against Israel and declared that “hurt people hurt people,” appearing to rationalize terrorism against innocent American Jews. He subsequently apologized under extreme duress, but his initial response revealed profoundly troubling judgment. 4) Embrace of extremist Hasan Piker: El-Sayed aggressively campaigned alongside Hasan Piker despite Piker’s notorious declaration that America deserved 9/11 and his inflammatory anti-American, antisemitic and pro-terrorist rhetoric. His willingness to elevate Piker for political advantage demonstrates a disturbing tolerance for extremism and incitement. 5) Failure to distinguish allies from adversaries: El-Sayed refused to identify Iran as a greater threat to America than Israel. His inability to draw this fundamental distinction raises grave concerns about his national-security judgment. 6) Threat to America’s global security commitments: El-Sayed opposes unconditional American military assistance to foreign countries and advocates redirecting resources toward domestic spending. This raises serious concerns about his willingness to sustain the military partnerships essential to deterring Chinese aggression against Taiwan and defending American interests alongside our allies in Europe, Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere. 7) Support for defunding the police and political backtracking: El-Sayed advocated shifting funding away from police, deleted relevant social media posts, and subsequently distanced himself from his earlier position. This raises serious questions about his public-safety judgment and political integrity. 8) Using accusations of Islamophobia to deflect legitimate scrutiny: El-Sayed has characterized questions about his documented support for Morsi and his family’s alleged Muslim Brotherhood connections as Islamophobic. Religious prejudice is unacceptable, but legitimate questions about a candidate’s political record demand honest answers. Tommy, I believe deeply in the best values of inclusion and opportunity of the modern Democratic Party. I also believe that patriotism, democratic principles, opposition to extremism, public safety, and a clear-eyed understanding of America’s national-security interests must transcend party loyalty. I am all for backing Democratic candidates with a compelling vision for our nation's future, but we Democrats will do immeasurable harm to ourselves by supporting candidates like El-Sayed who have shown themselves, in word and deed, to be unworthy of our trust. That’s what I mean when I say that Abdul El-Sayed does not represent the values of our party or our nation and that Democratic voters can (and imo should) express their commitment to Democratic and democratic values by not voting for him.