A Muslim Governor?

**Canadian Visitor** · May-14-17, 07:59 AM

Don't know what this fellow's chances are, but in this weekend's Globe and Mail; a profile of a would-be governor of Michigan.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle34966598/

**jcole** · May-14-17, 08:42 AM

Shouldn't we be paying more attention to this: "earning a doctorate from Oxford and a medical degree from Columbia and becoming the health director of Detroit" than his religion?

**313WX** · May-14-17, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by jcole

Shouldn't we be paying more attention to this: "earning a doctorate from Oxford and a medical degree from Columbia and becoming the health director of Detroit" than his religion?

No. We should be paying more attention to his views on policies.

For example, look at how far electing a JD/MBA from a top public university who ran a computer software manufacturer into the ground as Chairman simply because people thought he was "One Tough Nerd" got many folks in this state...

**emu steve** · May-14-17, 09:08 AM

I'm not too familiar with the inside baseball with the MI Dems, but I'd assume Mark Bernstein would be a big favorite.

Correct?

**313WX** · May-14-17, 09:49 AM

So apparently, Abdul El-Sayed held a Q&A on Reddit recently where users asked him relatively tough questions.

Getting beyond the tired platitudes, this is what I gather about his positions:

*He was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

*He supports Single-Payer Healthcare [[or at least a Public Option) and will try to push for a Public Insurance program in Michigan.

*He's Pro-Choice

*He doesn't support the EM law and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to reverse the revenue-sharing cuts under Engler's and Snyder's administrations.

*He will push to provide student loan credits to Michigan students.

*He doesn't support RTW and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to make Michigan a "Sanctuary State."

*He supports the legalization of Marijuana.

Also, his campaign manager [[Max Glass) worked for Tulsi Gabbard, a Bernie Sanders favorite [[and a favorite of mine!).

**Honky Tonk** · May-14-17, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

No. We should be paying more attention to his views on policies.

For example, look at how far electing a JD/MBA from a top public university who ran a computer software manufacturer into the ground as Chairman simply because people thought he was "One Tough Nerd" got many folks in this state...

Good point, 313WX, you don't want anyone in office who'll appoint a moron like Darnell Earley to a position where he signs anything put in front of him.

**Honky Tonk** · May-14-17, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

So apparently, Abdul El-Sayed held a Q&A on Reddit recently where users asked him relatively tough questions.

Getting beyond the tired platitudes, this is what I gather about his positions:

*He was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

*He supports Single-Payer Healthcare [[or at least a Public Option) and will try to push for a Public Insurance program in Michigan.

*He's Pro-Choice

*He doesn't support the EM law and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to reverse the revenue-sharing cuts under Engler's and Snyder's administrations.

*He will push to provide student loan credits to Michigan students.

*He doesn't support RTW and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to make Michigan a "Sanctuary State."

*He supports the legalization of Marijuana.

Also, his campaign manager [[Max Glass) worked for Tulsi Gabbard, a Bernie Sanders favorite [[and a favorite of mine!).

What could go wrong?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.daily...dvertisements/

**jcole** · May-14-17, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

So apparently, Abdul El-Sayed held a Q&A on Reddit recently where users asked him relatively tough questions.

Getting beyond the tired platitudes, this is what I gather about his positions:

*He was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

*He supports Single-Payer Healthcare [[or at least a Public Option) and will try to push for a Public Insurance program in Michigan.

*He's Pro-Choice

*He doesn't support the EM law and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to reverse the revenue-sharing cuts under Engler's and Snyder's administrations.

*He will push to provide student loan credits to Michigan students.

*He doesn't support RTW and will push to repeal it.

*He will push to make Michigan a "Sanctuary State."

*He supports the legalization of Marijuana.

Also, his campaign manager [[Max Glass) worked for Tulsi Gabbard, a Bernie Sanders favorite [[and a favorite of mine!).

Mostly sounds like a very good choice.

**jcole** · May-14-17, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by 313WX

No. We should be paying more attention to his views on policies.

For example, look at how far electing a JD/MBA from a top public university who ran a computer software manufacturer into the ground as Chairman simply because people thought he was "One Tough Nerd" got many folks in this state...

I agree with your point, but I still say his religion is one of the last things we ought to be paying attention to. There is nothing wrong with paying attention to his education background ahead of his religion.

**313WX** · May-14-17, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by jcole

Mostly sounds like a very good choice.

I tend to agree.

My only concern is that he seems to be backed heavily by the DNC and the Soros foundation, which suggests he may already be compromised by corporate / monied interests. He also seems really good at speaking on platitudes versus principles [[like Obama and Hillary), which I'm not a fan of either.

**jcole** · May-14-17, 10:28 AM

And your problem with this is what? Lack of body shaming and photoshopped bodies on the subway?
If he was a Christian, would this be seen as a problem?

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

What could go wrong?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.daily...dvertisements/

**Junjie** · May-14-17, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

What could go wrong?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.daily...dvertisements/

So what are you trying to imply? The story you linked just says that they wanted to stop running ads with "unrealistically proportioned" women on the sides of public transit vehicles. Of course, your link is to a propaganda outlet, so they deliberately lied and described it as "bans sexy women in advertisements." But is there a real problem here, or just the made up one in the headline? And what does this have to do with the candidate for governor?

"Transport for London’s new advertising policy, which does not include all images of people in their underwear or swimming gear, is only expected to affect a handful of the 12,000 adverts a year which run across the network, including at bus shelters and on-street sites. It means controversial adverts like Protein World’s “Are you beach body ready?” poster, which provoked a huge backlash when it appeared last year, would no longer be allowed.

The weight-loss ad, which featured a bikini-clad model, sparked a protest in Hyde Park as well as a petition on Change.org with more than 70,000 signatures, although it was not banned by the Advertising Standards Authority."

**Jimaz** · May-14-17, 10:43 AM

313WX, you beat me to it. In response to your former post I was about to ask "Yeah, but what's the downside?"

Then you posted this:

Originally Posted by 313WX

...My only concern is that he seems to be backed heavily by the DNC and the Soros foundation, which suggests he may already be compromised by corporate / monied interests. He also seems really good at speaking on platitudes versus principles [[like Obama and Hillary), which I'm not a fan of either.

That by itself wouldn't be a problem except it raises the valid question of trustworthiness.

We need to hold politicians to their promises somehow. Something more immediate than the threat to vote them out after their damage is done.

Maybe we can use something like a contract penalty clause where they're free to renege on their campaign promises but only if when they do, there's a price they'd have to pay, like, say, forfeiting some large cash deposit or something.

I'm just trying to think outside the box.

**emu steve** · May-14-17, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by jcole

Shouldn't we be paying more attention to this: "earning a doctorate from Oxford and a medical degree from Columbia and becoming the health director of Detroit" than his religion?

I've followed politics for decades and the voters do not elect politicians based on their resume.

What I mean is that the electorate doesn't elect candidates the way a company would hire someone.

If we elected candidates based on academic degrees, for example, we could have Rachel Maddow as the first female president of the U.S. [George W. Bush would not have been elected.]

She has a bachelor's degree from Stanford and a Ph.D. from Oxford. Something a lot of recent presidents don't have, e.g., Trump, Bush, Reagan, etc.

I believe Reagan's educational background was pretty weak vis-a-vis Carter, Clinton, Obama, etc.

**jcole** · May-14-17, 12:16 PM

As I stated above, I believe we should pay attention to resume above religion. We are a country of free worship, are we not; or is it just wishful thinking anymore?

Originally Posted by emu steve

I've followed politics for decades and the voters do not elect politicians based on their resume.

What I mean is that the electorate doesn't elect candidates the way a company would hire someone.

If we elected candidates based on academic degrees, for example, we could have Rachel Maddow as the first female president of the U.S. [George W. Bush would not have been elected.]

She has a bachelor's degree from Stanford and a Ph.D. from Oxford. Something a lot of recent presidents don't have, e.g., Trump, Bush, Reagan, etc.

I believe Reagan's educational background was pretty weak vis-a-vis Carter, Clinton, Obama, etc.

**Scottathew** · May-14-17, 06:29 PM

I don't care if a politician is a Muslim or Christian.

**night-timer** · May-14-17, 07:18 PM

Anyone who thinks his religion will not affect his policies is probably wrong.

**ABetterDetroit** · May-14-17, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

So apparently, Abdul El-Sayed held a Q&A on Reddit recently where users asked him relatively tough questions.

*He will push to reverse the revenue-sharing cuts under Engler's and Snyder's administrations.

You're kidding right?

Few are as angry at Snyder's failures as much as myself but c'mon it is not necessary to spew lies to win next year. Nobody ever slashed revenue-sharing funds like Jenny. She took it to an entirely new level.

Politics has turned into so much rah, rah, "the other team sucks and my team is the best!" that you can end up with absolute garbage. Just look at last November for the proof.

If either party wants to win the Governor next year it's up for grabs. Go with a solid, honest, well spoken qualified candidate that has minimal baggage. With the stench going on currently it would be a slam dunk.

**Zacha341** · May-14-17, 09:29 PM

It would depend - and has been dependent and problematic for some on many levels!

Historically where we've had politicians beyond nominally Christian, questions have arisen re. how their, um, 'active' faith, shall we say, would influence their policy, etc.

Originally Posted by jcole

And your problem with this is what? Lack of body shaming and photoshopped bodies on the subway?

If he was a Christian, would this be seen as a problem?

**313WX** · May-15-17, 03:16 AM

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

Few are as angry at Snyder's failures as much as myself but c'mon it is not necessary to spew lies to win next year. Nobody ever slashed revenue-sharing funds like Jenny. She took it to an entirely new level.

Nice try.

The revenue cuts under Granholm were already put into motion before Engler left office, although you are correct that Granholm did nothing to reverse them [[and no, I'm not a fan of Blue-Dog Democrat and Hillary supporter Jenny from the block either).

But of course Snyder worsened things [[made it even harder for municipalities to generate revenue and restore the revenue-sharing cuts) by instituting additional tax cuts that the state could not afford.

**Zacha341** · May-15-17, 03:22 AM

For me it would depend on what derivation or interpretation of Islam or Christianity. The outworking of that could be beyond nuanced, depending on that as we see in current practice in parts of the middle east today.

Within the derivations or distortions of Islam, for example [[in current practice today), there REMAIN inconsistencies and variations relative to women having access to education and industry both culturally and politically.

So El-Sayed seems to be moderate to progressive as he campaigns. Well ok, but I am not surprised he was questioned.

Just as was such going back for example to Jimmy Carter who considered himself devoutly 'Christian'! Relative to what was to be HIS policy and world view going forth.

Originally Posted by 48307

I don't care if a politician is a Muslim or Christian.

**lpg** · May-15-17, 08:59 AM

He will push to make Michigan a "Sanctuary State" ? What about the poor here that are marginalized now ? How about helping them first.

**Scottathew** · May-15-17, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

For me it would depend on what derivation or interpretation of Islam or Christianity. The outworking of that could be beyond nuanced, depending on that as we see in current practice in parts of the middle east today.

Within the derivations or distortions of Islam, for example [[in current practice today), there REMAIN inconsistencies and variations relative to women having access to education and industry both culturally and politically.

So El-Sayed seems to be moderate to progressive as he campaigns. Well ok, but I am not surprised he was questioned.

Just as was such going back for example to Jimmy Carter who considered himself devoutly 'Christian'! Relative to what was to be HIS policy and world view going forth.

What if a person was a part of Christianity that had no issues with going into Iraq for no actual real reasons, taking over the country, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians?

**Jason** · May-15-17, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by lpg

He will push to make Michigan a "Sanctuary State" ? What about the poor here that are marginalized now ? How about helping them first.

Pedro witnesses a murder and has critical information about it. He goes to the police and tells them what he saw. Because of the circumstances, the police think that Pedro is an illegal immigrant. Should the police:

A. Take his information, then grill him about his immigration status, eventually resulting in his deportation.

B. Thank him for his help, and let him be on his way.

If someone thinks that the police should do option B, then they support sanctuary cities.

The sanctuary city policies [[and each place has different policies) mostly revolve around allowing illegal immigrants to interact with the government and other groups for non-immigration related matters in such a way that they don't have to fear deportation. The immigration-related authorities are left to deal with immigration issues.

**1953** · May-15-17, 02:41 PM

I like Snyder and the EM law, and do not support sanctuary city/state laws, repealing RTW, and the legalization of marijuana. Also, I think religion is fair game when it comes to judging someone, as its reflective of what they believe. I would say we need to find ways to boost municipal revenue, and I also really like balanced budgets / paying down liabilities.

So, no, I would not vote for this gentleman for governor. I also, obviously, would not vote for Mr. Sanders for President, though I thought his apparently personal passion for the things he believes in was somewhat refreshing in the last campaign.

1953