Democrats at a Detroit rally for Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed were laughing Saturday night as former President Barack Obama delivered a series of sharp jokes aimed at President Donald Trump.
Obama took aim at Trump’s more than $900 million in White House construction projects, suggesting the president appeared “very focused on home renovations” and belonged on HGTV instead.
“What’s with the gold?” Obama asked, drawing another wave of laughter. He joked that Trump had left the White House looking “like Saddam Hussein opened a Cheesecake Factory.”
The audience, many of whom had turned out to see one of the Democratic Party’s most celebrated figures, responded enthusiastically. Yet some Democrats watching the event from home found little to celebrate.
Within traditional Democratic circles, a quiet frustration has emerged over Obama’s decision to campaign for El-Sayed. Critics believe the former president has used the party’s most valuable endorsement to elevate a candidate whose politics do not reflect their own.
Several Democrats told me they would rather see El-Sayed lose to Republican Mike Rogers, even if his defeat helped determine whether Democrats captured control of the Senate or remained in the minority.
The stakes extend beyond one Michigan Senate race. The result could help shape the coming fight over the Democratic Party’s direction and its political identity.
An El-Sayed victory could quickly fuel speculation about a 2028 presidential campaign. A loss, meanwhile, would give moderate Democrats an opportunity to argue that progressive candidates had cost the party a crucial Senate seat.
Former President Barack Obama drew laughter from the crowd while campaigning for Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed at a Detroit rally on Saturday evening.
Several Democrats told me they would prefer an El-Sayed defeat against Republican Mike Rogers, who is pictured campaigning with Donald Trump in Port Huron, Michigan, on Sunday.
Obama’s Michigan rally sparks private backlash among Democrats
Obama’s appearance was intended to put internal party tensions aside long enough to mobilize Democratic voters. Instead, it has created a fresh point of conflict, aimed at the party figure many Democrats are most reluctant to criticize.
The unease was clear in private conversations. Three moderate Democrats expressed concerns about the Detroit event but agreed to speak only off the record or without being identified, underscoring the party’s sensitivity when it comes to challenging Obama.
“I don’t think Democrats are weighing the profound implications an El-Sayed victory could have for the party’s image and its competition in the 2028 presidential primary,” one Democrat said on condition of anonymity.
A prominent Democratic adviser added: “If El-Sayed wins, he expects everyone to come to Michigan and kiss the ring. He wants to become a power broker in the Michigan primary.”
Obama did more than simply urge Michigan voters to support the Democratic nominee. He framed El-Sayed as a successor to his own political agenda, saying the candidate would “finish the job we started” on health care. Obama also praised him for “fighting for change, real change, that will get money out of politics and put money in your pocket.”
The former president acknowledged that he and El-Sayed do not agree on everything, comparing their political differences to the disagreements he sometimes has with his wife, Michelle Obama.
“That’s the kind of disagreement we want in a democracy,” Obama said.
It was an appealing message—unless, of course, those disagreements involve issues that lifelong Democrats consider far more serious than household arguments over who should load the dishwasher.
El-Sayed faces scrutiny over controversial Iran and Israel remarks
One example is El-Sayed’s refusal to identify whether Iran or Israel presents the greater threat to the United States. During a debate, he declined to choose between them, saying both countries had “proven dangerous in their own way.” To Democrats who view Israel as a key ally and Iran as an existential threat, the answer amounted to an alarming evasion from someone seeking a Senate seat.
El-Sayed has also faced questions about controversial political associations and positions. Critics say he has responded to scrutiny—including questions about alleged ties to the Muslim Brotherhood—with forceful denials and anger, making it difficult for reporters to pursue the issue further. Those claims remain disputed and have not been conclusively established.
Obama’s blessing does not supply the missing answers.
Nor does it resolve the anguish over El-Sayed’s response to the attack on Michigan’s Temple Israel. He condemned the attack but also offered the observation that ‘hurt people hurt people.’ He subsequently apologized but critics who would have expected unequivocal solidarity with innocent Jews targeted at a synagogue do not seem reassured.
‘Do we want someone [in El-Sayed] who associates with bigots and someone who cloaks himself in religion and faith as cover for his controversial views and associations to be such a significant player in the party?’ my Democrat source asked.
This was Obama putting all the good china out for a guest some Democrats would prefer not even allow through the front door.
Further, moderates who are privately appalled that he validated a political package they have spent years resisting: far-left economic prescriptions and a brand of social progressivism they consider extreme, along with a posture toward Israel they find profoundly troubling.
They also hear the former president treating their objections as the ordinary friction of a healthy coalition. They think he is helping move the boundaries of what their party considers acceptable.
Among El-Sayed’s many political gifts, perhaps his superpower is his capacity to bully and bluff reporters who deign to try to get to the bottom of his controversial associations and views.
Obama did considerably more than recommend that Michiganders vote for the Democrat. He presented El-Sayed as an heir to his own political project.
Trump’s attacks complicate Democrats’ dilemma over El-Sayed
Trump, naturally, has made a serious examination of all this more difficult. His bombastic accusations against El-Sayed give the candidate something far easier to run against than the doubts of a lifelong Democrat.
Every time Trump ups the rhetorical ante, another Democrat feels obliged to defend the nominee.
When Obama mocked Trump’s extravagant decorating tastes, Democrats could enjoy the joke together without discussing the problematic candidate standing beside the comedian. But all this momentary unity, as anti-Trump Republicans may attest, comes at a cost when the calendar ticks ahead.
Democrats have spent years asking Republicans why they tolerate conduct they privately deplore for the sake of judges, tax cuts, and political power. Michigan has presented them with an uncomfortable opportunity to answer their own question.
They can decide that Senate control outweighs their objections. But if El-Sayed wins with Obama’s help, he will arrive in Washington claiming vindication, not asking which parts of his agenda and style the moderates would like him to discard.
His progressive allies will claim a battleground breakthrough. The Democrats who swallowed their objections will be expected to choke down another heaping portion of far-left progressivism and hostility towards Israel.
Control of the Senate and the battle for the future of the Democratic Party could well rest on the outcome of a single contest in Michigan.
