The Democrats furiously turning on Obama after Abdul El-Sayed rally in Michigan… as party leakers reveal the dirty secret now being whispered about former president: MARK HALPERIN

At a campaign rally for Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Detroit on Saturday evening, President Barack Obama had Democrats rolling in the aisles.

President Donald Trump ‘seems very focused on home renovations. He should be on HGTV,’ Obama said, poking fun at Trump’s over $900 million worth of White House construction projects.

‘What’s with the gold?’ the 44th president gagged. ‘He’s got the White House looking like Saddam Hussein opened a Cheesecake Factory.’

The crowd, many of whom undoubtably showed up to catch a glimpse of one of the era’s great politicians, roared in approval – but not all Democrats watching from home were laughing.

The dirty little secret whispered about in traditional party circles is that many Democrats are furious at Obama for campaigning with El-Sayed, gifting the Blue tribe’s top imprimatur to a man who, they think, does not represent their values.

More than a few Democrats I have spoken to say they’d prefer that El-Sayed fall short in his race against Republican Mike Rogers, even if the seat makes the difference between winning control of the upper chamber and remaining in the minority.

It is no overstatement to say that a looming battle for the heart and soul of the Democratic party depends, more than anything else, on whether El-Sayed wins or loses this race.

If he wins, it is easy to see him running for president in 2028. If he loses, the moderate wing of the party will tell their socialist and progressive counterparts that they cost them a pivotal seat.

Obama’s appearance was supposed to settle the family argument for long enough to get everyone to the polls. Instead, it has given some Democrats a new grievance, directed at the one person in their party that many are the least comfortable criticizing.

In a testament to the reluctance in the party to cross Obama, I spoke to three moderate Democrats, all of whom expressed misgivings with his Detroit rally privately but would only speak to me off the record or without using their names publicly.

One of those Democrats told me on condition anonymity: ‘I don’t think Democrats are considering the profound consequences of an El-Sayed win to how the party looks and competes in the 2028 president primary.’

‘If El-Sayed wins he expects everyone to come to Michigan and kiss the ring. He wants to be a power broker in the Michigan primary,’ the prominent Democrat adviser continued.

Obama did considerably more than recommend that Michiganders vote for the Democrat. He presented El-Sayed as an heir to his own political project, saying he would ‘finish the job we started’ on health care and he praised El-Sayed for ‘fighting for change, real change, that will get money out of politics and put money in your pocket.’

The former president also made light of his differences with El-Sayed, noting that his wife Michelle does not agree with him on everything, either.

‘That’s the kind of disagreement we want in a democracy,’ he said.

Charming. Unless you happen to believe, as many lifelong Democrats do, that their ‘disagreements’ involve matters rather more consequential than whose turn it is to load the dishwasher.

Consider El-Sayed’s refusal to say whether Iran or Israel poses a greater threat to the United States. Pressed during a debate, he declined to choose, saying both had ‘proven dangerous in their own way.’ For Democrats who regard Israel as an ally and Iran as an existential adversary, that is an extraordinary evasion by a prospective senator.

Among El-Sayed’s many political gifts, perhaps his superpower is his capacity to bully and bluff reporters who deign to try to get to the bottom of his controversial associations and views. His blanket denials about an affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood have not been pierced or tested because he uses anger to deflect and intimidate the follow-ups that would be necessary.

Obama’s blessing does not supply the missing answers.

Nor does it resolve the anguish over El-Sayed’s response to the attack on Michigan’s Temple Israel. He condemned the attack but also offered the observation that ‘hurt people hurt people.’ He subsequently apologized but critics who would have expected unequivocal solidarity with innocent Jews targeted at a synagogue do not seem reassured.

‘Do we want someone [in El-Sayed] who associates with bigots and someone who cloaks himself in religion and faith as cover for his controversial views and associations to be such a significant player in the party?’ my Democrat source asked. 

This was Obama putting all the good china out for a guest some Democrats would prefer not even allow through the front door.

Further, moderates who are privately appalled that he validated a political package they have spent years resisting: far-left economic prescriptions and a brand of social progressivism they consider extreme, along with a posture toward Israel they find profoundly troubling.

They also hear the former president treating their objections as the ordinary friction of a healthy coalition. They think he is helping move the boundaries of what their party considers acceptable.

Trump, naturally, has made a serious examination of all this more difficult. His bombastic accusations against El-Sayed give the candidate something far easier to run against than the doubts of a lifelong Democrat.

Every time Trump ups the rhetorical ante, another Democrat feels obliged to defend the nominee.

When Obama mocked Trump’s extravagant decorating tastes, Democrats could enjoy the joke together without discussing the problematic candidate standing beside the comedian. But all this momentary unity, as anti-Trump Republicans may attest, comes at a cost when the calendar ticks ahead.

Democrats have spent years asking Republicans why they tolerate conduct they privately deplore for the sake of judges, tax cuts, and political power. Michigan has presented them with an uncomfortable opportunity to answer their own question.

They can decide that Senate control outweighs their objections. But if El-Sayed wins with Obama’s help, he will arrive in Washington claiming vindication, not asking which parts of his agenda and style the moderates would like him to discard.

His progressive allies will claim a battleground breakthrough. The Democrats who swallowed their objections will be expected to choke down another heaping portion of far-left progressivism and hostility towards Israel.

Control of the Senate and the battle for the future of the Democratic Party could well rest on the outcome of a single contest in Michigan.