Vice President JD Vance pointed out a simple fact about Michigan's Democratic Senate nominee: Abdul El-Sayed once argued that criticisms of Sharia law were "rooted in white supremacy." El-Sayed's response wasn't to clarify his position on Sharia. It was to go after Vance's wife.
"So do we think JD is taking Usha with him back in time to meet Papaw, or no…" El-Sayed posted on social media, referencing Vance's Hindu wife, Usha Vance, and Vance's Appalachian upbringing.
That's what Michigan's Democratic Senate candidate offers when asked about Sharia law — a crack about whether a white Appalachian grandfather would have approved of his grandson's interracial marriage. As reported by Breitbart's Amy Furr, this isn't even the first time El-Sayed has gone there.
You can watch El-Sayed's vile remarks about Usha Vance's sexual preferences
Vance's original comments were straightforward. "El-Sayed, this guy running for senate in Michigan, he once argued not too long ago that criticisms of Sharia law were rooted in white supremacy," the Vice President said. A factual statement about a public position El-Sayed has taken.
El-Sayed doubled down in a subsequent interview. "He's painting this picture of going back in time to talk to his Papaw, about me. Now why is he pointing to me?" El-Sayed said. Then he pivoted to this: "And my question to him is simply why is it… how do you look your parents-in-law in the eye and say that somehow they're less American than you are."
Notice what's missing from every single one of El-Sayed's responses. Any mention of Sharia law. Any clarification of his position. Any direct answer to whether he opposes a legal framework that is fundamentally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. He was asked about Sharia. He answered with Usha.
El-Sayed's own campaign has confirmed that he follows Sharia law in his personal life, a fact tied to comments he made as far back as 2009. Nobody is questioning his right to personal religious practice. The question Vance raised — and that El-Sayed keeps dodging — is whether a man running for the United States Senate believes that criticism of Sharia law is inherently racist. That's a policy question. It has a yes or no answer.
Instead of providing one, El-Sayed has now twice attacked the Vice President's interracial marriage. The strategic logic is transparent: make the conversation about race so you don't have to make it about religion. Frame Vance as a bigot so nobody notices you won't answer a basic question about constitutional governance.
An AARP survey has the race virtually tied between El-Sayed and Republican nominee Mike Rogers. Michigan voters are apparently going to have to decide whether a candidate who repeatedly deflects policy questions by attacking his opponent's spouse is the kind of senator they want.
The Sharia question hasn't gone away. El-Sayed has had two public opportunities to answer it clearly. Both times he chose to talk about Vance's wife instead.
When the deflection is louder than the denial, the denial was never coming.
