Outrageous

Abdouche is the dr of. Bullshit justthenews.com/politics-pol…

This poll is a heavily weighted poll by democrats, they’re scammers!!!!! Vote suppression polls need to be illegal. Your point that these “have to be off” is a reasonable skepticism. Polls of this type have known issues: low response rates, heavy weighting/modeling of likely voters, and occasional house effects. Michigan has been competitive and hard to poll accurately in recent cycles. The race is still close enough that turnout, late movement, or modeling errors could change the outcome. Election Day is November 3.

These polls are designed to piss people off! #VoteRedForTheMidterms2026

He’s a pussy boy

What? The @dccc is corruption! A price is coming!!!!

These are suppression polls, they’re designed to reduce the Republican vote, next they will add a new Mike rogers to confuse voters

Abdul El-Sayed’s public statements and record on Sharia center on personal religious practice, opposition to bans targeting it, and denials that he wants it imposed as U.S. law. Five clear areas where traditional (classical) Sharia law conflicts with American law, constitutional principles, and cultural norms: 1. Freedom of speech and criticism of religion
Traditional Sharia criminalizes blasphemy (insulting Islam or Muhammad) and often treats criticism of core Islamic doctrines as punishable, sometimes by death. The U.S. First Amendment protects speech that criticizes any religion, including Islam, as a core liberty. Apostasy (leaving Islam) is also capital in classical Sharia, which clashes with free exercise of religion. 2. Equal legal rights for women
Classical Sharia assigns different rights and obligations by sex: unequal inheritance shares, reduced evidentiary weight for women’s testimony in many cases, male guardianship requirements, easier divorce for men, and allowance of polygyny. U.S. law (Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and related statutes) requires equal treatment under the law regardless of sex. 3. Equal status for non-Muslims and freedom of religion
Classical Sharia frameworks (including the dhimmi system in historical practice) place non-Muslims in a subordinate legal and social position under Islamic rule; full religious freedom to leave Islam or proselytize against it is not recognized. The U.S. Constitution prohibits an established religion, guarantees free exercise to all faiths, and treats citizens equally without regard to religion. 4. Hudud criminal punishments
Traditional Sharia includes fixed corporal and capital penalties such as amputation for certain thefts, flogging or stoning for adultery/zina, and death for apostasy or certain other offenses. These conflict with the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment and with modern U.S. due-process and evidentiary standards. 5. Criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct
Classical Islamic jurisprudence treats male same-sex acts as a serious offense (often under zina or related categories), with severe traditional penalties. This conflicts with contemporary U.S. law, which recognizes same-sex marriage (Obergefell), provides anti-discrimination protections in many jurisdictions, and does not criminalize private consensual adult sexual conduct. These points reflect mainstream classical fiqh across major schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) rather than every modern or reformist interpretation. Many Muslims in the West support limited or contextual applications and do not advocate full imposition of traditional Sharia criminal or personal-status rules in the U.S. The conflicts arise specifically where traditional Sharia is treated as binding public law rather than private religious guidance.

Abdul El-Sayed’s public statements and record on Sharia center on personal religious practice, opposition to bans targeting it, and denials that he wants it imposed as U.S. law. Five clear areas where traditional (classical) Sharia law conflicts with American law, constitutional principles, and cultural norms: 1. Freedom of speech and criticism of religion
Traditional Sharia criminalizes blasphemy (insulting Islam or Muhammad) and often treats criticism of core Islamic doctrines as punishable, sometimes by death. The U.S. First Amendment protects speech that criticizes any religion, including Islam, as a core liberty. Apostasy (leaving Islam) is also capital in classical Sharia, which clashes with free exercise of religion. 2. Equal legal rights for women
Classical Sharia assigns different rights and obligations by sex: unequal inheritance shares, reduced evidentiary weight for women’s testimony in many cases, male guardianship requirements, easier divorce for men, and allowance of polygyny. U.S. law (Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and related statutes) requires equal treatment under the law regardless of sex. 3. Equal status for non-Muslims and freedom of religion
Classical Sharia frameworks (including the dhimmi system in historical practice) place non-Muslims in a subordinate legal and social position under Islamic rule; full religious freedom to leave Islam or proselytize against it is not recognized. The U.S. Constitution prohibits an established religion, guarantees free exercise to all faiths, and treats citizens equally without regard to religion. 4. Hudud criminal punishments
Traditional Sharia includes fixed corporal and capital penalties such as amputation for certain thefts, flogging or stoning for adultery/zina, and death for apostasy or certain other offenses. These conflict with the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment and with modern U.S. due-process and evidentiary standards. 5. Criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct
Classical Islamic jurisprudence treats male same-sex acts as a serious offense (often under zina or related categories), with severe traditional penalties. This conflicts with contemporary U.S. law, which recognizes same-sex marriage (Obergefell), provides anti-discrimination protections in many jurisdictions, and does not criminalize private consensual adult sexual conduct. These points reflect mainstream classical fiqh across major schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) rather than every modern or reformist interpretation. Many Muslims in the West support limited or contextual applications and do not advocate full imposition of traditional Sharia criminal or personal-status rules in the U.S. The conflicts arise specifically where traditional Sharia is treated as binding public law rather than private religious guidance.

Wait for the GOP’s closing arguments!

NO HE DOES NOT! Democrats had gone past dirty tricks in Alaska, voter trickery breaks the vow of government to its people. The whole democratic party needs an anemia! VOTERED

Abdouche knows hate!

We agree!! Different reasons but we agree!

The Alaskan scandal should help every republican

Push poll!

Yes they do, democrat women have penises

Democrats push poll, the internal polls show GOP up in gov race

I voted already

Republicans don’t listen to polls anymore, we stop in 2016

Add 4 points to the Republicans