A wave of Republican attacks against two Muslim Democrats has ended with one of the most prominent right-wing commentators in the country endorsing Abdul El-Sayed for Senate.

Tucker Carlson wrote in his newsletter on Friday that El-Sayed’s opponent, Mike Rogers, was unfit for office and defended him over his past criticism of the war on terror.

The Michigan Democrat emerged from this past week after a wave of attacks were hurled at him and Zohran Mamdani, the first elected Muslim mayor of New York, around the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Both men were the subject of intense focus from media organizations on the right and even some mainstream outlets as the two faced differing but related accusations of anti-American sentiment impossible to separate from their Muslim faith.

all 76 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 93 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (29 children)

If you've been following rightwing media watch for a minute, this should be obvious to you.

And to the three comments yeeting the baby, just stfu.

This move from Tucker is about Tucker. You may, and rightfully should, despise Tucker Carlson. But you should not underestimate Tucker Carlson. Tucker Carlson has always, and I do mean always (for practical purposes) has one of the best reads of the direction of travel in national politics. He was one of the first to get on the America First wagon, and saw the potential Trump represented in national politics in 2015. They understood this because they had the ability to read the room with regard to the latent frustration people had with both Republicans and Democrats in that time period.

Tucker sees where the motion is and anyone who isn't a totally ley read of politics has known that Mike Rodgers is an extremely poor opponent to be going up against El Sayed. Tucker doesn't want to be on the wrong side of a losing election. Simple as.

This gives Tucker access and to be on the side of motion. America First and MAGA are shifting. Myself and others have been making this point for a while. Hogs don't lead. Pay attention to the first movers. Trump's base will move on to where the first movers go. Owens, Carlson, Fuentes, pay attention to where these actors go and you'll know where things are heading.

This is Tucker setting up for a 2028 run. It has almost nothing to do with El Sayed other than not being tethered to a floundering brand. They're setting themselves up to be the savior of MAGA in 2028.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Good read on Carlson. He's politically very powerful just due to his political compass being so accurate about the current direction things are moving.

    He's fake as fuck and will go the direction the wind is blowing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Well maybe we could agree that the shit pigeon has improved his political compass substantially over time.

    I mean the guy used to wear a bowtie on live TV. But this goes to support your second statement:

    He’s fake as fuck and will go the direction the wind is blowing.

    Absolutely. But nothing about being a fake as fuck fraud stops them in their pursuit of power.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Exactly, all of the current "issues" have gone rotten for the republicans. Support for israel, the Iran war, the economy, and even ICE/immigration have all become losing issues for them. This is Carlsen trying to launder his image and move away from the "MAGA brand," to either run in 2028 or so he can lend his support to Vance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    ☝️ this.

    He's going to pull a "no true Scotsman" America First thing. Whatever this administration did, that wasn't America First™. Whatever it is Tucker is offering is real America First™, and mark it, as Ive instructed many a hater to do: Candice Owens will be his running mate.

    JD Vance is a political wet fart and everyone has known it for all of time. Fucking Jeb Bush has more motion than JD Vance does. Establishment Republicans see this as an opportunity to reassert control of the party, but that too will fail.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    In the 80s, it was called "family values". In the 90s, they were against "political correctness". In the 00s, "national security". 10s, "Tea Party". Now? Fucking everything. Now they're throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks.

    Does this mean that most people aren't falling for it anymore, or does it just mean that something will stick, lather rinse repeat?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    There's always something that will stick. Unfortunately, the things that seem to always stick are anti-LGBTQIA+ and anti-foreigner. The 80s were very anti-gay with the AIDS scare and (lack of) response, crackdowns, anti-sodomy laws, etc. The 90s continued that, and added on some extra anti-black since they were becoming quite prominent in sports and popular culture. The 00's added on a nice thick layer of anti-muslim because I guess all brown people were responsible for 9/11 or something? Then the 10's got some more anti-black with Obama and George Floyd, and the 20's with queer/trans people.

    Going back we had more cycles like this:

    • 1900-1915: Irish people
    • 1915-1920: + German people
    • 1920-1930: + Jewish people
    • 1930-1945: + German and Asian people
    • 1945-1950: + Russian people
    • 1950-1970: + Asian (Korea/Vietnam) people
    • 1970-1980: + Black people
    • 1980-1990: + Gay people
    • 1990-2000: + Black people (again)
    • 2000-2010: + Arab people
    • 2010-2020: + Black people (again), queer people (again)
    • 2020-present: All of the above, and somehow also white people too?
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Has their ever been a journalist elected president before? Seems like an odd career change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Is Tucker a journalist? I suppose he is. I guess I kinda forget that. I guess to me he's less of a journalist in my mind, and more of a political operative. Sure, they nominally do journalism, but ultimately they are and always have been a political agent. Their motives are rhetorical, not explicitly and certainly not solely to educate, but to convince.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (14 children)

    Tucker Carlson has a documented history of downplaying Russian aggression, echoing Kremlin talking points, and securing a high-profile interview with Vladimir Putin.

    Key Milestones

    • Dismissing the War: Shortly before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Carlson characterized the escalating conflict merely as a "border issue" and called Ukraine a "puppet of Washington".
    • The Moscow Interview: In February 2024, Carlson traveled to Moscow and became the first Western media figure to interview Vladimir Putin since the 2022 invasion.
    • The History Lecture: During the two-hour interview, Putin spent a lengthy portion delivering an unchallenged historical monologue regarding Russia's claims to Ukraine, which Carlson later stated left him "shocked" and "baffled".
    • The Aftermath and Reception: Critics, including former U.S. officials, labeled the interview a propaganda tool, while Russian state media heavily amplified Carlson's visit to combat narratives of international isolation.

    Everyone reading this should remember the account names promoting this candidate as they are likely Russian bots

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago* (12 children)

    If you read the comment as promoting Tucker Carlson, you lack the ability to read. Choosing to not understand your opponent leaves you vulnerable to them. You represent a vulnerability to our collective ability to stop fascism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    This logic is how Trump (the previous Kremlin choice) was elected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago* (10 children)

    This logic is how Trump (the previous Kremlin choice) was elected.

    I agree. By refusing to, and failing to understand Trump, and why what Trump was doing was working (or to even acknowledge it was working), Liberals, and Democrats more broadly, set us up for this era of fascism we're in. Its the fault of those who refused to understand their opponents that these easily beatable buffoons have become pillars of the modern political landscape.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    Trump won because of election interference from Russia.

    Key Evidence and Methods of Russian election interference:

    • Cyber Hacking: Russian military intelligence (the GRU) hacked the computer networks of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and key campaign officials like John Podesta, subsequently releasing stolen data via outlets like WikiLeaks, DCLeaks, and Guccifer 2.0. [1, 2]
    • Social Media Disinformation: The St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency (IRA) used hundreds of fake social media personas, bot networks, and purchased advertisements to amplify divisive political and social issues, masquerading as U.S. citizens to sway public discourse. [1, 2]
    • Targeting Election Infrastructure: Russian cyber actors scanned and probed state voter registration databases and election systems across multiple states ahead of the 2016 election, though vote tallies were not altered. [1, 2]
    • Criminal Indictments: Federal grand juries indicted dozens of Russian nationals and military intelligence officers for computer hacking, identity theft, and conspiracy against the United States. [1, 2]

    Official Findings

    • Intelligence Community Assessments: Concluded that the Russian leadership developed a clear preference for Donald Trump and aimed to denigrate Hillary Clinton while undermining public faith in the American democratic process. [1, 2]
    • Bipartisan Senate Findings: Confirmed the extensive nature of these foreign cyber and influence operations, noting coordination between online Russian fronts and active distribution channels
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (8 children)

    AI sloppo.

    And also "Democrats can never be failures, they can only be failed".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 month ago* (8 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (7 children)

    Yes yes yes. Every one who doesn't agree with with you is a Russian op.

    We shouldn't try to understand our opponents or why their messages seem to resonate with audiences. No, we instead require "Trump bad" as the first test to ensure loyalty to the brand, then ensure the counter party is pure enough in their support for Israel and blue no matter who.

    Surely simply demanding loyalty to a brand which has been objectively disloyal to its voters won't, yet again blow up in Democrats faces.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 month ago (7 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    I mean do you think you are actually convincing any one with these absurd accusations (other than maybe yourself, by shrinking and shrinking the circular nature of your own thinking).

    You basically have a toddler level analysis of 2016, and are accusing anyone who has a mature thought as being an "obvious russian bot". That only works on people who also are decrepit, toddler level thinkers.

    So if you've gotten down this far into this thread, dear reader, I ask you to consider who you think @UsernameHere@lemmy.world 's rhetoric to operate on. Like, who is it that we think this user is trying to convince with their words? Its obviously not us. And if they aren't arguing to convince us, who is it they are trying to operate on?

    One could say that they are looking to split off "liberals" from the rest of the left with this kind of rhetoric. In this sense, they act as a "wrecker" to any kind of populist, leftist movement. Scratch a "russian bad" liberal, and how deep will we have to go to find a zionist apologist, a blue MAGA't, someone promoting the least viable, most reprehensible instincts of the Democratic party?

    It does beg the question doesn't it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    Seems like you’re implying that Lemvotes somehow disproves the existence of bots and brigading lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    you’re implying

    I'm implying that you are a toddler brained Liberal who's analysis is narrowly focused in a kind of maladaptive reactionary analysis that can't seem to get further than "Trump bad. Trump Russia. Peepee tape."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (2 children)

    I've not offered an iota of conjecture about Tuckers role with Russia you oblivious illterate. Develop some reading comprehension.

    You don't have the mental faculties to comprehend that understanding someone, their motivations, the strategy doesn't mean you agree with them.

    That makes you illiterate to understanding what it takes to oppose people like Tucker. You are so baby brained you can't understand words or what they mean. Its something we excuse children for but not full grown adults.

    You have obligation to understand those you disagree with, because you can't offer a resistance to them if you don't understand them or how they operate. And this pervasive baby brained thinking on the part of liberals is half of why were in this mess. Your all so used to just being consumers, to having everything chewed up and spit into your brain by Rachel Maddow or Ezra Klein, your actual critical thinking skills are anemic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Tucker Carlson has always, and I do mean always (for practical purposes) has one of the best reads of the direction of travel in national politics. He was one of the first to get on the America First wagon, and saw the potential Trump represented in national politics in 2015. They understood this because they had the ability to read the room with regard to the latent frustration people had with **both** Republicans and Democrats in that time period.

    Tucker Carlson propagates Kremlin propaganda that has been used to shape American politics.

    I point out that the only reason he has “the best reads of the direction of travel in national politics” is because the Kremlin has actively been shaping national politics using propagandist like Tucker.

    The only thing Tucker is reading is Kremlin talking points and you are trying to claim otherwise.

    You are trying to claim Tucker’s Kremlin propaganda to is not Kremlin propaganda but instead it is “the best reads of the direction of travel in national politics” and to convince others in this thread that we should not be put off by the Kremlins support for this candidate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago

    Are you like, actually intellectually disabled?

    Because I'll be nicer if you are. At least then your idiocy would make sense.

    I'm not making any claims about Tuckers relationship with anyone shit for brains. Use your fucking eye balls and rub them on the screen. Use them to take the lights emitted by the screen and convert them to letters and then words in your mind.

    Stop arguing with your imagination of what I'm saying.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • This is what a victim of propaganda looks like.

    This is exactly the response they were hoping you would have to this. You ate up the whole thing. All they had to do was say one stupid thing about how much they love this guy they hate and want to fail, now you are aggressively driven to throw out the baby and hold onto the bathwater. You see how that works entirely in their favor, right?

    Nobody is immune to propaganda.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 1 month ago

    Desperate to stay relevant.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Who gives a fuck about what Fucker Carlson has to say? His opinion should mean nothing to anyone with an IQ above room temperature. Stop giving him oxygen. He is likely just trying to find a new wedge, a new angle. There is not an ounce of good faith in this man's body.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago*

    enough of the right is hungry enough for an opinion that still validates their identity and positionality, I wouldn't expect Tucker to go away any time soon. there is too much appetite for grift on the right. if Tucker went away, another would slip into that void to fill that gap. the real problem here is that Tucker is actually pretty good at what they do, and in-spite of several institutional attempts to cancel them, they've managed to survive.

    They, unlike Trump in 2016, aren't dependent on national media to bring them oxygen. A 2016 Trump could have been stopped if media would have just ignored them. Since that time, media has changed. This generation have their own media enterprise in a media landscape largely not beholden to any kind of outside interests. A self fullfilling windbag. Owens, Fuentes, Carlson, they don't rely on outside financing and have a pretty fair degree of capture of their audiences.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    Exactly. This is some sort of move from him in order to find relevance with his own audience. Some new scandal he’s trying to create.

    It’s all some game he’s playing, no doubt. Some weird gambit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    One sec, I'll go ask my neighbor whose car has a decal of Carlson's pouty little face on it what he thinks about this.

    ::: Just kidding, I don't speak with them. :::

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago

    Ew, no one wants your opinion, Cucker

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago

    Can we stop pretending mainstream media isn't on the right?

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago

    They noticed the response to Dick Cheney supporting Kamala and how significantly it benefited them and are now doing it on their own. Note how El-Sayed himself has essentially nothing to do with any of this story other Carlson putting his name in his mouth.

    This is propaganda, if this made you question the validity of El-Sayed then it worked on you.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago

    Hot damn this is a braindead comments section worthy of youtube lmao.

    Reminds me of when people were all talking about Epstein being a Russian asset despite the fact that all of his handler contacts were Israeli lmao

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Tucker will rebrand as an “influencer “ for the left.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    That's like getting an endorsement from a glioblastoma.

  • source
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Didn’t even get to predict our lefties would start decrying his campaign. I gotta start getting up earlier.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -22 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Tucker Carlson the Russia asset? At least we know who the Kremlin wants to get elected.

    This is how you get Fetterman, Sinema, Machin part 2

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    Without reading the article, I predict this candidate is one of our execrable third-way quasi-democrats. The rats have identified the future winning party and are now attempting to curry favor with them, hoping the populist uprising that continues to elect actual progressives can get their wings clipped a little bit.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -27 points 1 month ago (19 children)

    That's disappointing, El-Sayed seemed promising.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    I get the sense that Tucker Carlson holds a significant influence over your opinions of other people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    He's on the Russian payroll. It could mean Russia wants El-Sayed in office.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    If you RTFA you might draw the conclusion that it’s due to Carlson being rabidly against the Iran war, in a case of stopped clock syndrome.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    You know who else is Rabidly against the Iran war? Iran, Russia, North Korea and China…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Russia's heavily benefiting from the Iran war lol. Why would they want it to end? 1) It drives up energy prices and they still sell some oil and gas (even if their own gas stations run dry from time to time, making money to support the war is a priority). 2) It depletes the US's stockpiles, which could otherwise be used to help Ukraine if the dems were to take both houses in the midterms. 3) It's causing financial pain to much of the west.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    No. It’s discrediting propaganda. This was the exact response they wanted you to have. They are actively trying to sabotage and co-opt in geoups to discredit their opposition. Not a single fucking conservative was ever going to vote for El-Sayed, but now they’ve just indoctrinated who knows how many “progressives” (reactionaries) to disavow a credible candidate due to an entirely different and antithetical political entity talking about them.

    You see it, right? It’s not subtle.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    It doesn't mean AES recognizes his endorsement

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    No, but it means something is up if Carlson supports him. It could mean Russia wants him in office.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    It's just as likely reverse psychology from Carlson as anything, e.g. "People who might vote for this guy hate me so I'll endorse him to hurt his chances."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Its possible, but a bank shot like that is not what I think is happening. There is no real value in the bank shot for Tucker. And I don't think this hurts El Sayed.

    What this does is further isolate mainstream media from their influence on politics. Its mainstream media who are opposing El Sayed, not DSA/ the left. As long as DSA/leftists types don't take the self sabotage bait, there is no real political hegemony that can stand against El Sayed at this point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    That's also possible. I don't live in Michigan, but if I did I'd still vote for El-Sayed, I just don't like Carlson supporting him because I don't trust Carlson as far as I could sling a Freightliner.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Its called "Republicans shit the bed even harder" the second go round. Literally everything in America is worse than its ever been and its a direct consequence of the policies of Trumpism. There's no messaging your way out of that, just like there was no way for Biden to message their way out of things getting continuously worse under their leadership as well.

    Trump and Republicanism are radioactive cancer right now is the signal this is sending.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    This is the same braindead tribalist reasoning MAGAts use to determine who to give their support. "Well this guy seems good, but the person I hate likes him, so that means I gotta hate him too."

    Stop it. You're better than this. Think critically, and stop letting your opinion be swayed by dimwits like Tucker Carlson.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I'd still vote for him if I lived in Michigan. I just worry what Carlson's support might mean.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    I imagine it just means he's hungry for attention, and he figured endorsing a progressive Democrat might gin up some controversy for him.

    Sorry if I came at you kinda hot there; my nerves are running pretty high as we approach election day.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    If this is an earnest statement then the whole situation says nothing about El-Sayed and it says a whole lot about Tucker Carlson’s desperation.

    If it’s a ploy, which it definitely is, the fact that you are interpreting it the way you are seems like that would be entirely the point of this angle of propaganda. There is no way they didn’t know that your specific interpretation was going to be the exact reaction they would be fomenting with this. They know who Carlson is, we all do. This is all pretty obvious staging. If so, congrats, it worked perfectly on you. No one is immune to propaganda.

  • source
  • parent