Jewish Dem tells El-Sayed his Gaza ‘genocide’ claim may be ‘disqualifying’

BS BULLETIN:

Scott Galloway confronted Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed over calling Israel’s conduct in Gaza a “genocide.”
Galloway said he considers the description inaccurate and asked whether El-Sayed understood why some Jewish voters could find it “disqualifying.”
El-Sayed refused to abandon the label, arguing that waiting for an even greater death toll would defeat the purpose of identifying genocide before it progresses.

Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed faced a blunt challenge over his description of Israel’s conduct in Gaza as “genocide” — and he didn’t back away.

During an appearance on Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov’s “Raging Moderates” podcast, Galloway told El-Sayed that he considers the label both inaccurate and deeply troubling.

“As a Jew, I find it entirely unfair and not accurate to describe what’s happening in Israel as a genocide,” Galloway said before citing historical genocides and arguing that Israel’s conduct in Gaza does not meet that definition.

Abdul is running to represent Palestine. He’s the Michigan last candidate in the race. pic.twitter.com/bPTSzyIMeu

— Democrats For Mike Rogers (@DemsForMike) September 23, 2026

Then he put the political question directly to El-Sayed.

“Do you understand why Jews such as myself find your description of what’s happening in Israel and in Gaza as a genocide disqualifying?”

El-Sayed said he understood the argument but pushed back, pointing to civilian deaths, destruction of hospitals and schools, displacement and statements by Israeli officials as evidence supporting his position.

The two continued sparring over the meaning and consequences of the word.

Galloway argued that “the word does have meaning” and said using it to describe Israel can contribute to hostility toward Jews who support the country.

El-Sayed responded with a question of his own.

“Do we have to wait until more people get killed? Like, how many people do we say is enough to then call it a genocide?”

He then explained why he continues using the term.

“Because the whole point of calling it that is to stop it from happening in the first place,” El-Sayed said.

He also rejected Galloway’s concern that accusing one group of genocide could be used to rationalize violence against that group, saying that “calling something a genocide does not justify a genocide.”

The disagreement is particularly significant because El-Sayed is no longer fighting for the Democratic nomination. He won it and is now the party’s nominee for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat.

His position on Israel has remained one of the defining differences between him and more establishment Democrats. El-Sayed has repeatedly described Israel’s military campaign in Gaza as genocide, while Israel rejects that characterization. The dispute over that label extends beyond the campaign: legal experts, governments and human-rights organizations have reached differing conclusions over whether Israel’s conduct meets the legal definition of genocide.

El-Sayed showed little interest in finding softer language for the general election.

“Neither you nor I are scholars on genocide,” he told Galloway, pointing instead to scholars who have applied the term to Gaza.

On this one, the disagreement wasn’t hiding between the lines.

MY QUICK TAKE:

This is the conversation Democrats usually try very hard not to have out loud.

Galloway didn’t ask El-Sayed to finesse his position or find a more comfortable campaign formulation. He told him exactly why the word lands the way it does with him — and El-Sayed essentially answered: I hear you, and I’m still using it.

Whatever else you think about the exchange, nobody left wondering where either man stands.