Between the lines of Dana Nessel's baffling remarks to a group of Jewish voters over the weekend is her acknowledgment that Abdul El-Sayed presents a threat to Jews, both in this country and in Israel.

And yet she still suggested Jewish Democrats have an obligation to vote for him.

In the angst-ridden address to the Michigan Democratic Jewish Caucus on Sunday, Aug. 30, Nessel didn't mention Abdul El-Sayed by name, but it was clear who and what she was talking about when she urged her audience to set aside their personal concerns, "in exchange for the opportunity to save the rest of humanity.”

As I've written, many Michigan Jews are abandoning their lifelong loyalty to the Democratic Party to support Republican Mike Rogers, a firm proponent of Israel, for Michigan's open U.S. Senate seat. They fear El-Sayed presents a threat to Israel and that his anti-Zionist rhetoric fuels rising antisemitism in this country.

Nessel addressed those fears with the ancient trope that Jews may have to suffer and die so the rest of the world can thrive. “We have a moral imperative to place the needs of the world above even our own self-interest and, yes, even our own survival,” she said. “Come November, what do your Jewish values tell you to do?”

Does such a moral imperative exist? Rabbi Aaron Starr of Temple Shaarey Zedek in Southfield, while praising Nessel as "an amazing leader," said she's got it wrong.

"I think what is good for the Jewish community is also in line with the betterment of the entire state and country," he said. "And that is to work for freedom and liberty for all. No community should have to sacrifice its safety. Period."

The attorney general cited the Purim story of Queen Esther, who risked "the comfort, safety and security and even the very future of our own people in exchange for the opportunity to save the rest of humanity.” As many have already pointed out, however, Esther risked her life to save the Jews from their enemies.

Nessel is a proud Jew and has been aggressive in calling out antisemitism. She earned praise for boycotting the state Democratic convention, saying she feared for her safety after the party's nominating conference last spring was overrun by progressive activists, many of whom are aligned with El-Sayed.

Why would she rise in seeming advocacy for someone who has not recognized Israel's right to exist as an independent Jewish state?

She apparently sees President Donald Trump as a larger threat to the world than the forces that would murder Jews and destroy Israel. And with Trump in the White House, she implies, what's the point of living anyway?

“What good is defending the historic homeland of our ancestors and demanding that candidates acknowledge its right to exist, if the planet upon which it rests is no longer inhabitable?” she asked, in reference to Trump's climate policies.

It's a weak argument to justify a Jewish vote for a man who refuses to disassociate himself from leading antisemite Hasan Piker. But no weaker than the "apology" El-Sayed offered at the convention for earlier remarks excusing the terrorist attack on Temple Israel last spring.

Rather than a sincere "I'm sorry," El-Sayed expressed regret for adding what he called "context" that the Jewish community was not yet ready to hear. Basically, he said, "I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, but I'm still right."

This election is an excruciating choice for many Jews. Do they support a candidate who covers his antipathy for them with glib double-talk, or one who aligns with a president they abhor?

They know for sure how Mike Rogers will vote in the Senate on matters of Israel's safety and combating antisemitism. Can they say for certain how Abdul El-Sayed will cast his vote?

_____

©2026 www.detroitnews.com. Visit at detroitnews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.