Republican campaigns are increasingly making Muslims and Islam an issue in the 2026 midterms, with rhetoric aimed at candidates, community facilities and the supposed spread of Islamic law. Apparently inflation, war and healthcare were not producing enough scary campaign mailers.
Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed has become a central target. Vice President JD Vance called him ‘very, very evil’ and accused him of defending terrorism after remarks El-Sayed made following an attack on a synagogue. El-Sayed condemned the attack and later apologized for language he said could have been misconstrued.
From Michigan to Texas and Alabama
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has attacked a proposed Muslim-led development and raised allegations about sharia courts, claims disputed by developers and civil-rights organizations. In Alabama, Sen. Tommy Tuberville has warned about what he calls radical Islam as an enemy inside the country.
Republicans say they are addressing security, extremism and illegal conduct rather than targeting a faith. Critics argue the campaign language paints millions of people with the actions of extremists and turns religious identity into a political threat.
The rerun nobody requested
American politics has repeatedly discovered that minorities make convenient distractions when voters are angry about prices, wars or institutions. Gen X already watched this script after 9/11, and the remake has not gained nuance.
Candidates and policies deserve scrutiny. Entire religions do not belong on trial because an election needs a villain. If a campaign cannot distinguish a specific security concern from 5.5 million Americans practicing their faith, the problem is not a lack of toughness. It is a shortage of facts.
Facts first. Side-eye included.
DJF separates what is confirmed from what is claimed—and tells you why this particular mess is worth your time.