On Aug. 24, controversial Democrat Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed boldly accepted an invitation to the Fox News show "Jesse Watters Primetime." It oozed confidence, but whether it was smart or strategic to play the Artful Dodger is a very different question.
In his newsletter, CNN media analyst Brian Stelter gushed over El-Sayed generating "lots of buzz and clippable content" and how he "showed a keen understanding of Fox's outrage machine." This is always amusing, as if Stelter doesn't think CNN can be characterized as operating an "outrage machine" against Trump.
Then Stelter mischaracterized the central mishap of the interview. El-Sayed was credited for "refusing to take the bait when Watters asked whether it's okay 'for a parent to slash his kid's ding-a-ling off' or whether trans athletes should compete in women's sports. Each time, he redirected toward gas and grocery prices, the war in Iran, and health care."
That's not what happened. When Watters pressed him on genital amputations for children, he insisted this decision is between a doctor and a patient, and the government should not get involved — which is a bizarre position when you're pushing for a "Medicare for All" scheme where the government controls the health care system.
When Watters kept pressing, El-Sayed asked the host, "Do you really wanna have this conversation? Are you circumcised?" What kind of oafish inquiry is that? Then he pressed: "So you should want to move on." That's not answering the question. It's an attempt to shut down the line of inquiry by getting personal.
Watters felt compelled to point out to the guy who went to an Ivy League medical school that "circumcision is different than castration." El-Sayed just repeated, "It's a problem that you think that you get to decide what happens between a parent, a doctor and a patient." That's a questionable position, since El-Sayed fervently supported COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates five years ago.
The host shifted into the scandal of boys playing in girls' sports, and that's when the Democrat started leaning into the high prices and the war, "the issues people actually care about in Michigan." Watters pointed out that the interview started with gas prices and the so-called Green New Deal.
Stelter touted similar analysis from a fellow liberal at The New York Times. Bayliss Wagner wrote El-Sayed's strategy was "to cast 'culture-war' issues as a distraction from the everyday problems Americans face, like rising costs and worries about health care."
The Left loves to play this dishonest game: "Culture wars" only start when conservatives resist the leftist crusade, and it's only a "distraction" when the Left doesn't win without a fight. They know the transgender issue was a reason Kamala Harris lost, so they want to dodge the issue.
Stelter concluded by telling readers to "beware the algorithmic distortion," with conservatives "celebrating Watters for dunking on El-Sayed and exposing Democratic 'extremism.'" They always pretend no Democrat position is extreme. Stelter added his CNN colleague Andrew Kirell "saw post after post from liberals applauding El-Sayed for showing how to handle Fox — by engaging and knowing all their tricks."
Stelter and his media colleagues are only grading El-Sayed on his tactical dodging skills around Fox "tricks." They're not examining how voters may want to know where the Democrat stands on amputations for kids, or boys in girls' sports. Candidates for office should have identifiable positions, not just dismiss "distractions."
This is the same Stelter who hailed Sen. Jon Ossoff's "art of the viral clip" for recklessly smearing White House aide Natalie Harp as Trump's new girlfriend. Why must they only judge tactics and not judge on the facts?
COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM
