Feed aggregator

Tuesday’s Democratic Senate primary in Michigan is shaping up as a defining moment for the Democratic Party, with a victory by Abdul El-Sayed poised to deliver one of the most significant victories yet for the Democratic Socialists of America and the party’s progressive wing.

If El-Sayed prevails, he would become one of the movement’s most prominent elected officials and could wield considerable influence in the Senate should Democrats regain control of the chamber next year. In a battleground state narrowly won by President Donald Trump in 2024, his nomination would also suggest that the party’s leftward shift has expanded well beyond coastal strongholds and into the Midwest.

Recent surveys indicate El-Sayed, the former public health director for Detroit and Wayne County, has established a sizable advantage over four-term Rep. Haley Stevens. An Emerson College poll found him leading 54% to 39%, while Mitchell Research showed a 52% to 38% edge. The RealClearPolitics polling average places him ahead by roughly 10 percentage points, and prediction markets have also made him the clear favorite.

Much of El-Sayed’s support comes from younger voters and progressive Democrats, while Stevens has maintained stronger backing among older voters and many Black voters.

El-Sayed has secured endorsements from Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, every member of the congressional “Squad,” the United Auto Workers, and organizers affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America, who have invested significant resources in the race.

Although El-Sayed has participated in DSA events and embraces many of the organization’s domestic policy priorities—including Medicare for All, universal childcare, a higher federal minimum wage, and eliminating the Senate filibuster—he has maintained that he is “not technically or practically DSA” and says he supports a regulated capitalist system rather than socialism.

That distinction has done little to quiet critics or diminish enthusiasm within the DSA, whose leaders view the Michigan contest as another test of their strategy of winning Democratic primaries and reshaping the party from within.

One of the campaign’s most contentious issues has been Israel. El-Sayed has repeatedly characterized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza as genocide, described the Israeli government as “as evil as Hamas,” called for an immediate and comprehensive arms embargo against Israel, and has declined to explicitly affirm Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. He has also argued that U.S. aid to Israel should instead be directed toward domestic priorities such as education and healthcare.

Those positions earned him the first-ever U.S. Senate endorsement from Jewish Voice for Peace Action.

Stevens, meanwhile, has received strong backing from pro-Israel organizations, including substantial independent expenditures from a super PAC affiliated with AIPAC. The heavy spending has helped make the Michigan contest the third most expensive Senate primary in U.S. history.

Many establishment Democrats and centrist independents argue that El-Sayed’s positions could prove politically damaging in a closely divided swing state. Former Rep. Cheri Bustos warned that nominating a “far-left socialist candidate” could cost Democrats another key election.

Jonathan Cowan, president of the centrist group Third Way, argued that El-Sayed would need to distance himself from the Democratic Socialists of America, affirm Israel’s right to exist, and abandon his previous support for “defund the police” policies if he hopes to defeat Republican Mike Rogers, who is running unopposed for the GOP nomination.

Stevens has also attracted endorsements from Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and the Congressional Black Caucus, all of whom argue she represents the party’s strongest option in the general election.

Polling for a potential November matchup generally shows Stevens running even with Rogers, while El-Sayed has often trailed the Republican in hypothetical head-to-head surveys.

Should El-Sayed capture both the nomination and the Senate seat—and Democrats regain control of the chamber—he would emerge as one of the most prominent national advocates for the Democratic Socialists’ agenda, including Medicare for All, wealth taxes, and an anti-Zionist foreign policy, mirroring the influence New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has built in New York.

Democratic leaders worry that such an outcome could further distance moderate voters and independents from the party. Supporters of the Democratic Socialists, however, see the Michigan primary as an opportunity to demonstrate that their movement can win not only in traditionally liberal urban centers, but also in one of the nation’s most competitive battleground states.

Michigan Democrats will decide Tuesday which vision of the party they want to carry into November.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is facing accusations of hypocrisy after his administration said its proposed city-run grocery stores may use a customer card system to prevent abuse of subsidized food prices, prompting critics to contrast the idea with Democrats’ longstanding opposition to voter ID requirements.

The issue arose after Mamdani was asked how the city would prevent shoppers from purchasing large quantities of discounted groceries and then reselling them for profit.

The mayor said the city’s request for proposals makes clear that the program is intended to help New Yorkers afford food—not create an opportunity for resellers to make money—and invited New York City Economic Development Corporation President Jeanny Pak to explain how the safeguards would work.

Pak said the city is considering a system similar to a library card to ensure the program serves its intended purpose.

“[W]e are looking to make sure that we target New Yorkers, whether it be a sort of a library card-esque thing, and also we manage who’s buying and that is focused on everyday New Yorkers,” Pak said.

“So, we are mindful of that, and so we’re going to make sure that we have all the things in place to ensure that that does not happen.”

The comments immediately drew comparisons from critics to voter ID laws, which Mamdani and many Democrats have opposed. In response, a spokesperson for the mayor rejected the comparison, arguing that the proposed grocery card would not function as an identification system.

“Comparisons to voter ID laws or the SAVE Act simply do not apply. This is not an identification system, nor is it a mechanism to verify who someone is, where they live, or how much they earn,” the spokesperson said.

“It is a practical inventory management tool to ensure affordable groceries remain available for the people who need them instead of being cleared off shelves for resale.”

The spokesperson said the reporter’s question centered on preventing bulk purchases for resale—not restricting shoppers based on where they live—and emphasized that the stores would remain open to everyone.

“To be absolutely clear: NYC Grocery stores will be open to everyone,” the spokesperson said.

“There will be no system to verify identity, residency, or income, and no one will be asked to show ID to shop.”

Instead, the administration said the stores could offer a voluntary customer card similar to loyalty programs used by supermarket chains. According to the mayor’s office, the card would be created by the private company operating the stores and used only to monitor purchases and discourage large-scale reselling of discounted products.

Officials added that shoppers would not need to apply through City Hall or any other government agency to obtain the card.

Critics, however, remained unconvinced.

“ID for government cheese,” Philadelphia radio host Rich Zeoli wrote.

“After all, we have to make sure no one crosses the border and if they do, the police will be called. So it’s good to see Mamdani now supports ID (just not for voting), border control, and law enforcement,” Zeoli tweeted.

Former Texas congressional candidate Nick Plumb also criticized the proposal, writing on X, “Mamdani wants to protect taxpayer funded grocery store[s] from non-NYC residents they’ll need an ID card to enter. You can[t] make this up.”

Former Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares likewise argued the policy reflected a double standard.

“So let me get this straight: Taxpayer-funded grocery store? Better show a valid ID or you can’t buy milk,” Miyares said.

“Voting for the people who decide how those taxes get spent? A valid ID is somehow ‘racist’ and ‘oppressive’. Unbelievable,” he said.

When asked whether the customer card amounted to a form of identification, the mayor’s office pointed to language in the city’s request for proposals, which states:

“The Operator(s) will create a voluntary free-to-access membership card program to monitor sales activity, and implement the discount program and any associated demand management measures. The savings card shall not be required for physical access to N.Y.C. Groceries site(s) and shall be made easily available to any individual requesting one,” the section read.

Fox News host Sean Hannity also weighed in, writing, “Make it make sense.”

New York Rep. Claudia Tenney echoed the criticism, saying, “So ID for government grocery stores to stop people abusing the system is fine, but requiring ID to vote not? Got it.”

Sen. Jim Banks, a supporter of the SAVE Act, added on X: “Democrats: Are fighting to ensure you don’t have to show an ID before voting in our elections. Also Democrats: Want you to show an ID before entering a supermarket.”

X CEO Elon Musk also commented on the controversy, writing, “Oh, the irony is too much.”

[Video below.] Former Vice President Mike Pence is urging President Donald Trump to abandon diplomacy and authorize additional military strikes against Iran, saying the time has come to “unleash” American forces to eliminate the country’s remaining nuclear capabilities and allow Israel to complete the mission.

During an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” host Bill Hemmer referenced a recent Fox News poll showing that 48% of respondents believe the United States will ultimately reach no agreement with Iran.

“I want to ask you about Iran. We had a Fox poll that came out about two weeks ago. We asked the question on the ultimate outcome with Iran. The U.S. will reach what good deal, bad deal or no deal. And 48% said no deal. What’s your view?” Hemmer asked.

Pence responded by expressing confidence in Trump’s approach while warning that Iran should view the current situation with concern.

“Well, I have more confidence in President Trump than that. I think the Iranians should be very wary at this moment. Look, I strongly supported the president’s decision to use military force last year. And this year, striking Iran, really for the first time in 47 years, after they voted for continuous war against the United States and the West all those years. But honestly, I think the president, after that first month where our military did a brilliant job taking down 13,000 military sites. I think the president has tried to create room for diplomacy. He’s done that again over this weekend, even as we’re marshaling military assets across the region.”

Pence argued that diplomatic efforts have run their course and said the administration should now shift its focus to military action.

“But I honestly think that the time has come for the president of the United States to unleash the armed forces of the United States, strike the remaining nuclear facilities in Iran, take down and degrade their ability to project force not only in the strait, but across the region. Look, one does not make peace with one’s enemy. One makes peace with one’s defeated enemy. And given their posture and their attitudes and even denying that negotiations are happening, I have every confidence that there will come a moment where my old running mate has had enough, and we ought to turn loose so you can. Right. US military in the world.”

Pence concluded by praising Trump’s leadership style and his previous decision to order military action against Iran, while arguing that the campaign should now be completed with the help of Israel.

“The president I served with is a man of action. He leads from the front. I don’t think you can understate the significance of his decision last year to strike around directly for the first time in the history of our relationship with the regime. In Tehran, unleashing our armed forces in operation at was historic. But now we’ve got to let our armed forces and our ally, Israel, finish the job, and I believe we can.”

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

A federal judge has temporarily blocked key parts of a New York law that sought to prohibit federal immigration officers from wearing face masks and require them to display visible identification while conducting official operations, ruling that the state likely lacks the authority to regulate how federal agents perform their duties.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino of the Northern District of New York issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of those provisions as the lawsuit challenging the law moves through the courts.

In her decision, D’Agostino concluded that the challenged sections are likely unconstitutional because they intrude on federal law enforcement authority. The ruling applies to operations conducted by agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

The judge wrote that establishing policies governing the conduct of federal officers is exclusively the responsibility of the federal government, meaning New York cannot impose its own requirements on federal agents carrying out official responsibilities.

“New York cannot impose its own uniform requirements on federal agents simply because it disagrees with how the Federal Government is exercising its authority,” the ruling stated.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James criticized the court’s decision and said they are exploring their next legal steps.

“While the court enjoined enforcement of New York’s mask ban, we stand firm in our belief that masked agents do not make New York safer and our offices are reviewing all legal options at this time,” the pair said in a joint statement.

Although D’Agostino blocked the mask and identification provisions, she declined to halt another section of the law that prohibits local law enforcement agencies in New York from participating in certain federal immigration enforcement efforts through 287(g) agreements.

According to the ruling, federal law makes participation in those immigration partnerships voluntary, allowing states to decide whether local agencies will cooperate.

“The State’s refusal to cooperate in the immigration context—a possibility contemplated by the relevant federal statutes—does not constitute discrimination against the federal government,” the ruling stated.

Hochul and James praised that portion of the decision, arguing that local police resources should remain focused on community policing rather than federal immigration enforcement.

“As we have said from the start, New York’s ban on 287(g) agreements is legal and will keep our communities safe. Local law enforcement should be focused on local matters, and New York taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for any collaboration with ICE,” their statement read.

{Matzav.com}