CORPORATISM

Industry partnerships offer new opportunities for universities amid federal funding pressures

New Cure Innovation Index analysis identifies four distinct pathways to successful university-industry collaborations, and for two, lower-ranked universities outperform top-ranked

Cure

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

image: 

Industry partnerships offer new opportunities for U.S. universities amid pressures on federal biomedical research funding.  A new Cure Innovation Index analysis identifies four distinct pathways to successful university-industry collaborations.  

view more 

Credit: Cure Innovation Index

NEW YORK, Sept. 24, 2026 — With billions of dollars in federal biomedical research support in question, universities should look to build collaborations with industry, which today provides only about 3 to 8 percent of research funding for the 243 universities ranked as the best in the U.S. for translational science by the Cure Innovation Index.  A new Cure analysis finds universities engage industry through at least four distinct partnership pathways, and on two of them, lower-ranked universities outperform the top-ranked.

Presented at the University-Industry Demonstration Partnership (UIDP) annual conference, UIDP Denver 2026, the Cure analysis revealed opportunities for institutions of all sizes and rankings. It found that bottom-decile institutions form small-business research partnerships at more than four times the rate of top-decile universities per research dollar, and earn federal entrepreneurship-training awards at more than five times the rate. A university ranked 184th on the Index runs nearly nine in 10 of its clinical trials with an industry partner, about three and a half times the rate of the top-ranked universities decile.

The analysis identified four pathways universities take to industry: scientific collaboration, industry-sponsored clinical research, small-business partnerships, and entrepreneurial training. On the first two, the expected pattern holds and top-ranked universities lead. On the second two, it reverses.

"At a time when universities are looking beyond traditional funding sources, industry partnerships represent a significant opportunity," said Seema Kumar, CEO of Cure, the premier healthcare innovation ecosystem headquartered in New York City. "What surprised us is that there isn't one blueprint for success. Some universities excel in clinical research and scientific collaboration, while others are building powerful commercialization engines through entrepreneurship and small-business partnerships. In some cases, institutions outside the traditional elite may have lessons to teach the rest of the sector."

Why This Matters Now

The FY2027 President’s Budget Request proposed cutting the National Institutes of Health by 12 percent, roughly $5 billion, and reducing the National Science Foundation by more than half, along with a 15 percent cap on NIH indirect cost rates, against the 50 to 60 percent rates most research universities negotiate. Science agencies are operating on a stopgap, with final FY2027 appropriations deferred until after the midterm elections.

Two Pathways Where the Conventional Story Holds

• Scientific Collaboration. Top-decile universities publish with industry collaborators at rates more than twice those of bottom-decile institutions (8.9 percent at top-decile universities vs. 3.5 percent at bottom-decile).
• Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research. Leading universities also attract higher levels of industry participation in clinical trials. Industry-sponsored trials account for 24.5 percent of trial activity among top-decile universities versus 19.0 percent among bottom-decile institutions. The gap is far narrower than for scientific collaboration, a first indication that industry engagement is not limited to elite institutions.

Two Pathways Where Lower-Ranked Universities Lead

• Small-Business Innovation Partnerships. A different pattern emerges through the federal Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program. Adjusted for research funding, bottom-decile universities earn STTR awards at 0.82 per $10 million, against 0.18 for top-decile institutions, a rate more than four times higher.
• Entrepreneurial Training. Data from the National Science Foundation (NSF) Innovation Corps (I-Corps) program show that while top-ranked universities are more likely to participate, lower-ranked universities earn I-Corps awards at more than five times the rate per research dollar (0.83 vs. 0.15 per $10 million).

Standout Universities Show Different Paths to Biomedical Success

While top-ranked universities often dominate traditional measures of research performance, several mid-ranked and lower-ranked universities emerged as standout performers in specific industry collaboration and commercialization pathways.

University	Index Rank	Industry co-authorship	Industry-sponsored trials	STTR awards per $10M
UC San Diego	7	11.1%	30.2% (543 trials)	0.18
University of Pennsylvania	3	8.8%	23.3% (754 trials)	0.28
University of Connecticut	99	5.6%	24.7% (81 trials)	0.64
University of Georgia	118	5.4%	not assessed*	0.66
UT Health Science Center at Tyler	184	~1.5x its decile average	86.4% (22 trials)	not reported
*Analysis requires 20 trials minimum started from 2024 through 2026.

• The Elite Research Partnership Model. The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and University of Pennsylvania (Penn) each combine strong overall performance with deep industry engagement through scientific collaboration and industry-sponsored clinical research.
• The Entrepreneurial Partnership Model. The University of Connecticut (UConn) and University of Georgia (UGA) outperform many peers in industry-facing entrepreneurial activity and small-business partnerships, showing that commercialization strength is not limited to the highest-ranked research universities.
• The Unexpected Outperformer. Perhaps the most striking example is the University of Texas Health Science Center at Tyler (UT Tyler Health Science Center). Ranked 184th overall on the Cure Innovation Index, the institution conducted nearly nine out of 10 clinical trials with an industry partner, across 13 pharmaceutical and biotech partners and concentrated in oncology and hematology. Its performance illustrates the central finding of the analysis: meaningful industry engagement can emerge far beyond the universities that traditionally dominate discussions about research excellence and innovation.

Implications for Universities and Industry

The findings suggest that pharmaceutical, biotech, and other industry organizations seeking university partners should focus less on institutional reputation alone and more on identifying strengths that match a specific objective.

“A company seeking large-scale clinical research may find its best fit at a university with an affiliated medical center, while one looking for entrepreneurial partnerships may find stronger opportunities at an institution with deep startup and technology-transfer support,” Kumar noted.

For universities, Kumar noted that the analysis offers a similar lesson: there is no single path to successful industry engagement. Institutions can build meaningful partnerships by leaning into their particular strengths rather than trying to replicate a single model.

About the Cure Innovation Index

The Cure Innovation Index, launched in April 2026, evaluates 25 indicators across three core domains: Research Capabilities, Entrepreneurial Readiness, and Market Translation. The Index ranks the top 303 academic institutions, comprised of 243 universities and 60 institutes and centers, from more than 6,000 nationwide. It provides peer-benchmarked comparisons and customized improvement recommendations.

The multi-dimensional methodology of the Index uses validated data integrated from more than a dozen federal and commercial databases. These include the NSF Higher Education Research and Development (HERD) Survey and Dimensions, an inter-linked research information system provided by Digital Science.

About Cure

Cure is the premier healthcare innovation ecosystem that provides knowledge, infrastructure, and tools to accelerate progress toward cures. Headquartered in New York City, Cure convenes all key stakeholders for innovation across its physical and digital community. The campus houses flagship event venues and is home to healthcare organizations from idea stage to public companies. Cure members gain access to premium opportunities and curated connections. In 2026, the Cure Innovation Index was published, providing unmatched visibility into how research institutions translate breakthrough science into real-world health impact. Innovate with Cure at wewillcure.com.

Cure Media Contact: index@cureexperience.com

###

---

Method of Research

Data/statistical analysis

Industry partnerships offer new opportunities for U.S. universities amid pressures on federal biomedical research funding.  A new Cure Innovation Index analysis identifies four distinct pathways to successful university-industry collaborations.  

Industry partnerships offer new opportunities for U.S. universities amid pressures on federal biomedical research funding.  A new Cure Innovation Index analysis identifies four distinct pathways to successful university-industry collaborations.  

Industry partnerships offer new opportunities for U.S. universities amid pressures on federal biomedical research funding.  A new Cure Innovation Index analysis identifies four distinct pathways to successful university-industry collaborations.  

Credit

Cure Innovation Index

Export Capitalism and Unionism in Germany

By Thomas Klikauer

August 10, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image by Shushugah, Creative Commons 4.0

Since the 1960s, Germany’s most powerful trade union – the two-million-member-strong IG Metall, or IGM – has locked its works councils, but also its members, into what Germans call the “export model.” This is not only in support of German capitalism, but also a form of system integration, whereby capitalism integrates workers into its apparatus—with the kind assistance of a trade union.

Such a union no longer challenges capitalism but asks for handouts, however meagre they may be. IGM has downgraded itself to an auxiliary of capitalism. Workers, more or less, followed suit.

Yet, threats to working relations in Germany’s metal and electrical industry have been a common feature for decades. Recently, this was cranked up by Germany’s private-jet-loving Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who seeks to end the Eight-Hour Day -a decades-old achievement of not only Germany’s working class.

Meanwhile, the export model of capitalism asphyxiates the interests of the collective and all adjacent parties – like IGM – in the international competitiveness of Germany’s industry as a whole, as well as that of individual manufacturers. Workers and the trade union become a support function of an export-led version of capitalism.

This system suffered a recent shock as the future of this “capitalism-plus-union” model is now on shaky ground. The future existence of a sizable German automotive industry is now basically out of the question. By tying its future to export capitalism, IGM is facing an existential crisis.

Convinced by the ideologues of capitalism that export capitalism would last forever, IGM is not prepared for the looming crisis of Germany’s export model, made visible by the almost daily announcements from corporate car bosses of mass redundancies and plant closures.

A quick look at the works of Karl Marx would have told IGM that capitalism constantly changes. Modern economists call this “creative destruction” – more destructive than creative. Even more interesting is the fact that the concept was popularized by none other than the German economist Joseph Schumpeter.

Yet this is not new. During the 1990s, IGM had to experience how all the other DGB trade unions – in the light of the annexation of East Germany under neoliberal capitalism – totally changed East Germany. The union’s idea of a “socially acceptable reduction” came to nothing as neoliberalism triumphed.

Nevertheless, it was a time when the corporate and media apparatus issued new hope. In the end, everything had started on a new level – so went the prevailing belief.

This was not quite so, as IGM suffered, in 2003, a bitter defeat in a labour dispute in the East German state of Saxony—Germany’s most reactionary state.

In Saxony, IGM faced a new type of manager: West German imports and newly appointed East German managers furnished with arrogance, opportunism and careerism, who saw West Germany’s established model of “social partnership” as unsuitable. Meanwhile, “social partnership” had been the prevailing model of German trade unionism for decades.

However, the internationally acclaimed “German Model” experienced, in the aftermath of Lehman Brothers, yet another escalation of the crisis of capitalism. This time, it was called the global financial crisis.

At that time, Germany’s metal companies – in particular, its auto industry – saw a drastic decline in demand. This did not challenge the prevailing ideology of an export economy inside IGM. Instead, and despite the depth and severity of the crisis, IGM carried on imagining that the crisis was short-term and cyclical rather than structural.

In its interaction with companies, IGM believed that the state would “sit out” the crisis. The foundation for all this was a so-called “crisis corporatism,” in which companies, competition and a coalition of companies with works councils would prevail. This system was further supported by a collective bargaining system based on metal-industry employers and IGM that had, since the mid-1990s, flanked the restructuring of Germany’s automotive industry.

In 2011, IGM was immensely proud of all this, celebrating its “shoulder-to-shoulder” incorporation with industry and the German government. It came with a mix of a car-scrappage scheme to encourage demand for new cars; short-time working arrangements that reduced working hours and wages (Kurzarbeit); and local agreements to support struggling companies.

At the trade union congress in the southern city of Karlsruhe around that time, the deputy boss of IGM celebrated the system of co-determination as a crucial instrument for the sustainability and resilience of companies. What he was praising was the fact that rising demand from China had propped up Germany’s auto industry in 2010. IGM’s business model of massive exports, focusing on high-priced goods, glossed over the looming structural asymmetries. Despite the rising challenge from China, the feeling of “we have been saved” prevailed.

Meanwhile, some even inside IGM started to doubt the sustainability of the export model. In key industries, radical change was becoming more and more imminent. Yet this was not the only challenge.

In October 2010, a high-level IGM apparatchik argued that the future of Germany’s car industry was linked to an “eco-social” transformation of the industry towards an environmentally sustainable economy. This, he said, meant regulation that reached beyond Germany – a transnational regulatory policy.

To achieve both, a comprehensive democratization of companies and economic decision-making was needed. The key stakeholders in this process were trade unions, works councils and workers.

These necessary changes would require overcoming the “business as usual” strategy. It meant fighting “the fossil lobby.”

Around 2010, it marked the point at which a good part of IGM itself, as well as works councils and many employees in Germany’s car industry, were part of this lobby system. In other words, the system had integrated IGM and works councils into its economic structure.

Germany’s car industry could, due to continued marketing and sales success in China, rake in significant profits. This profit-making included the core workforce in Germany’s premium manufacturers – Mercedes, Porsche, Audi, and BMW.

Worse was to come. When the EU wanted to strengthen emission standards in 2013, German carmakers, in their resistance to this, knew that not only the German government but also IGM was on their side. It was corporate lobbying with union support.

Just two years later, the horror of Volkswagen’s diesel scandal – corporate criminality – hit all those hard who still believed in the sheer goodness of capitalism and corporations. Even though IGM was – and is – part of VW’s supervisory board as part of Germany’s much-championed system of codetermination, nobody had “officially” noticed anything about VW’s dirty tricks. None of the hundreds of works council members at VW knew anything – or so it seemed.

As a belated reaction to this, IGM issued a strategy paper in 2015 under the title “Car and Climate – How Germany Gets On,” predicting that the transition from petrol to electric motors would come faster than previously thought.

IGM painted the spectre of hundreds of thousands of Tesla cars in Germany on the wall. Still, according to another IGM functionary, Germany’s automotive industry had a chance to create the best environmental technologies around the car, gaining a superior position in international competition.

By 2018, Germany’s car industry had gradually moved into a crisis as sales of petrol cars decreased while electric cars, by 2025, made up a quarter of all new cars sold worldwide. German carmakers had missed the boat as their beloved export model slipped deeper into crisis.

By 2026, the geopolitical situation (Russia’s war against Ukraine) and the world economic situation (the yellow monster in the White House recently doubting the “Lying King”) had started to change German industry completely.

The era of cheap fossil energy and open world markets had become a thing of the past. IGM’s export model lost its foundations as its leading industry – the automotive industry – skidded deeper into a structural crisis.

Its market in China caved in as Trump’s tariff capriciousness started to bite. Both developments were made worse by a significant gap in innovation in battery technology, software development, and manufacturing, which accelerated the crisis.

Almost all German manufacturers reported substantial overcapacity. Meanwhile, many German car factories became less and less profitable – a key criterion under capitalism. The production of small cars became too expensive.

Adding to that was the elimination of entire supply chains, enforced by the unstoppable transition from petrol engines to electric engines.

All of this had a direct impact on IGM membership. The marked decline in membership, registering about four percent in 2025, is likely to continue in 2026. The already agreed and announced mass layoffs, as well as adjacent plans to relocate manufacturing, are clear indicators of this.

What makes all this worse is that IGM’s practiced pattern of corporatism – the leading ideology at least since 2009 – no longer offers solutions to the current crisis. It no longer works. Instead of securing employment, cutting working hours, factory closures, and massive job cuts are now the order of the day.

At the same time, roughnecks in Tesla’s macho management have, so far, successfully managed to keep IGM out of its Gigafactory. It does not look good for IGM.

The concept of a counterforce is based on the idea that factory-based operational strength in existing companies, and the resulting – at least potential – ability to challenge corporate management, results in “eye-to-eye” negotiations with management within a consensus-oriented collective bargaining model.

Yet IGM’s traditional opponent – Gesamtmetall – has elected as its executive director someone from a company that is not part of Germany’s collective bargaining structure. This collective bargaining structure used to be the stronghold of Germany’s social partnership model, which IGM desperately wants to maintain. Meanwhile, capital is actively working on the destruction of the system.

Worse, there is virtually no automaker left in which union density is at 90% – as used to be the case in the past.

If one looks inside today’s IGM apparatus, one gets the feeling of a mixture of despair and perplexity. As it has been rehearsed for decades, IGM continues to call on the government – the neoliberal-reactionary Merz government – and, of course, on capital to please be nice. 

Meanwhile, even IGM is starting to realize that its influence is in steep decline, as IGM’s traditional partner – the social-democratic SPD – becomes weaker and weaker. The SPD is no longer the party of 35% to 45% of voter support. Instead, it has been downgraded to a 10%-party, reaching merely 12% in the Sonntagsfrage (for which party would you vote if next Sunday were election day?) in early August 2026.

In the end, it will be seen whether or not IGM will stick to its export model, spiced up by the ideology of social partnership, or whether IGM will show the will and the ability to engage in larger protests against the austerity policies of the current government, as well as the massive job cuts planned by Germany’s auto bosses.

Things might well heat up in Germany’s car industry – and this is not only because of global warming, with Germany forecast to register temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) during next week’s heatwave.Email

Thomas Klikauer

Thomas Klikauer has over 800 publications (including 12 books) and writes regularly for BraveNewEurope (Western Europe), the Barricades (Eastern Europe), Buzzflash (USA), Counterpunch (USA), Countercurrents (India), Tikkun (USA), and ZNet (USA). One of his books is on Managerialism (2013).

Progressive Abdul El-Sayed clinches historic Democratic nomination for Michigan Senate

Matthew Chapman
August 5, 2026

 10:00AM ET

RAW ST0RY


L - Haley Stevens (Credit Haley Steven for Senate and Abdul El-Sayed (Christopher J. Dean / Shutterstock.com)

In a huge win for the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, Abdul El-Sayed won the nomination for Senate in Michigan on Wednesday morning.

El-Sayed, a former professor of epidemiology and director of the Detroit Health Department, is projected to defeat Congresswoman Haley Stevens, according to NBC News and CNN.

El-Sayed will run to succeed retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, meaning Democrats are defending a seat they currently hold in a state Trump narrowly won in 2024.

The result follows a long and contentious campaign that sought to decide the direction of the Democratic Party on a number of issues, ranging from health care to international relations with Israel.

El-Sayed is now set to face off in the November general election against former Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, who has himself faced a number of controversies, including allegations that he secretly lives in Florida.

Democrats Line Up Behind Abdul El-Sayed as He Clinches US Senate Nomination in Michigan

“I’m all in for Abdul,” said US Sen. Chris Murphy.


US Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed speaks during a press conference in Detroit, Michigan on August 5, 2026.
(Photo by Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Aug 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Democrats from across the ideological spectrum lined up behind Abdul El-Sayed on Wednesday after he clinched the party’s nomination for a US Senate seat in Michigan.

Shortly after The Associated Press projected El-Sayed as the victor in the closely watched primary, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) released a joint statement supporting the newly minted nominee.

“Abdul El-Sayed has run an energetic campaign that inspired thousands of Michiganders across the state, with a clear focus on lowering costs and standing up for working families,” they said. “Democrats are united by a common purpose: putting a check on [President] Donald Trump by defeating his Republican enablers and taking back the Senate.”

Schumer and Gillibrand also took a shot at El-Sayed’s Republican rival, Mike Rogers, whom they described as “a rubber stamp for Donald Trump, backing the same reckless agenda that has driven up costs for working families, imposed chaotic tariffs that have hurt Michigan’s auto industry, and put special interests ahead of the people of Michigan.”

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), El-Sayed’s top rival for the Democratic nomination, conceded the race on Wednesday morning and offered “my full support as we work to defeat Mike Rogers this November.”

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who had endorsed Stevens, also threw her support behind El-Sayed and all other Michigan Democratic candidates.

“They’ve got my support as we fight like hell together to win in November,” said Whitmer. “Together, let’s stop MAGA Republicans so we can get to work and deliver results for the people of Michigan.”

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said he was “excited” to see El-Sayed win the primary.

“Voters will have a clear choice in Michigan now,” said Murphy. “A corporate-owned Trump loyalist or a doctor who will stand up for the little guy and will hold Trump and the corporations to account. I’m all in for Abdul.”

Beth Miller, political director at Jewish Voice for Peace Action, hailed El-Sayed’s victory as a “political earthquake,” given that it came after the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spent an estimated $30 million trying to defeat him.

“Voters in one of the most consequential states for the 2028 Presidential race have just sent a clear message,” said Miller. “They want candidates who will fight for working families at home while unapologetically speaking out for Palestinian freedom. This cycle, AIPAC is being relegated to the dustbin of history.”

According to a Wednesday report from Semafor, Michigan Democrats have already begun pivoting toward the general election campaign by planning negative attacks on GOP rival Rogers as a tool of moneyed interests and labeling him “the biggest name in corruption.”

During a Wednesday morning victory speech, El-Sayed accused Rogers of spending 14 years in Congress with the sole goal of “figuring out how to cash out the day he left.”



“Mike Rogers is a guy who wants to put a data center in your backyard so he can make himself feel a little more manly by making an AI video,” said El-Sayed. “Mike Rogers is a guy who will do anything Blue Cross Blue Shield wants him to do, including raise your rates... Mike Rogers is a guy who has never shied away from a corporation he could do a favor for.”

El-Sayed Challenges ‘Corporate Sellout’ and ‘Coward’ Mike Rogers to Five Debates

The Michigan Democrat called his Republican opponent “a guy who spent 14 years in Congress with one goal: to figure out how to cash out the day he left,” and promised to send him back to Florida in November.


Abdul El-Sayed, the winner of Michigan’s Democratic US Senate primary, speaks during a press conference in front of the Spirit of Detroit statue on August 5, 2026.
(Photo by Finn Gomez/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
Aug 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

After winning Michigan’s Democratic primary contest for US Senate, Abdul El-Sayed wasted no time on Wednesday, challenging the Republican nominee, former Congressman Mike Rogers, to five debates before the November general election.

“Mike,” El-Sayed said at a podium while speaking with reporters on Wednesday morning, “I know you’re gonna say no ‘cause you’re a coward: Five debates, all right?”



Progressives Aim to Defeat AIPAC Cash, Democratic Establishment in Michigan and Missouri Primaries


Democrats Line Up Behind Abdul El-Sayed as He Clinches US Senate Nomination in Michigan

“If you’re willing to stand with me and have a conversation—you and I both know that you will wither in front of your own crimes. But Imma make sure Michiganders know about them,” he continued. “By the time we’re done, you are not gonna have safe quarter from people holding you accountable to what you’ve done for them here in Michigan. We will send you back to Florida where you belong.”




Ripping Rogers as a “corporate sellout,” El-Sayed said that he is “a guy who spent 14 years in Congress with one goal: to figure out how to cash out the day he left. And guess what he did: As soon as he left Congress, after having taken corporate check after corporate check after corporate check, to empower the corporations to pick your pockets, he went and he cashed out.”

“Not in Michigan—no, winters are too cold for him,” he added, eliciting chuckles from the crowd. “He’s got thin skin, after all. He went to Florida. So, Mike, if you wanna be a Florida man, go be a Florida man.”

Rogers‚ who was unopposed in Tuesday’s GOP primary, worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation before entering politics, first at the state level and then representing Michigan’s 8th District in Congress from 2001-15. In comments to Fox News late Tuesday, the Republican cited his time fighting “terrorism” in the FBI and falsely claimed that El-Sayed believes “America deserved 9/11.”

“This is really about the heart and soul of our country,” Rogers said of the race just minutes after El-Sayed, a son of Egyptian immigrants, declared victory over Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens. “I have never seen someone so radical, so extreme, get nominated by a political party... The Democrat party is lost to this hardcore socialist attitude.”



The Democratic Socialists of America did not endorse El-Sayed, but his victory is part of a wave of recent primary wins by progressive congressional candidates, from New York and Pennsylvania to Colorado. The trend continued in other closely watched Michigan races on Tuesday, with William Lawrence winning in the 7th Congressional District and Donavan McKinney in the 13th District.

Like other victorious progressives, El-Sayed ran on a platform prioritizing working-class people; a former public health official, he especially focused on the fight for Medicare for All. Bridge Michigan reported Wednesday that “El-Sayed has said he doesn’t consider himself a democratic socialist and rejects the notion that his views are extreme in today’s political climate.”

“In an era where our premiums are quickly pricing people out, I think being for Medicare for All is… the moderate position,” El-Sayed previously told the outlet. In an era where President Donald Trump “is weaponizing” US immigration and Customs Enforcement “against the Constitution itself,” he added, “I think abolishing ICE is a moderate position.”

While key party leaders nationwide have often backed establishment candidates over progressives in recent primaries, including El-Sayed v. Stevens, Democrats in Michigan and across the country are already rallying behind the victor, with even the congresswoman he defeated showing her support on Wednesday.

“Mike Rogers represents everything people hate about politics: He sold Michiganders out to the corporate special interests cutting him checks, abandoned Michigan for a Florida mansion, and got rich advising the industries he regulated in Congress,” Michigan Democratic Party spokesperson Joey Hannum said in a statement after the primary election.

“As Trump’s approval rating plummets to record lows, Rogers is still pledging to rubber stamp his toxic agenda, mocking Michiganders’ concerns about rising costs, and saying he would focus on ‘shielding’ the Trump administration and billionaires like Elon Musk from accountability, rather than stand up for working families,” Hannum said. “Michigan Democrats will hold Rogers accountable for his corruption, expose his price-hiking agenda, and defeat him a second time this November.”

Historic 'earthquake' shakes Dems after 'death star' fails to thwart progressive: analyst

Nicole Charky-Chami
August 5, 2026 

RAW STORY


Abdul El-Sayed, winner of Michigan U.S, Democratic primary, is escorted out following a press conference in Detroit, Michigan, on August 5, 2026. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

Abdul El-Sayed's victory in Michigan's Democratic Senate primary has become an "earthquake for the Democratic Party old guard," an analyst reported Wednesday.

Investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein detailed in his Substack how the historic upset was something Democrats hadn't seen since the rise of former President Barack Obama.

"The irony here is that Obama actually won the 2008 presidential primary by less than El-Sayed — just half a percent of the popular vote," Klippenstein explained.

"This is a massive defeat for the Democratic Party old guard and an affirmation that the new crop of outsider, renegade candidates are the people’s choice," Klippenstein wrote.

This has stunned the party's leadership.

"Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer — basically the entire Democratic establishment endorsed Haley Stevens, a textbook party stooge. For her to still lose is a repudiation and humiliation of not just Stevens but the entire political death star behind her," Klippenstein wrote.

He added that the win should be a sign of where the party will head next.

"But the real story here is bigger than El-Sayed," Klippenstein wrote. "It’s that voters were not swayed by an avalanche of big money and big people. Instead, they hoisted a bigger finger than we’ve seen since Barack Obama’s own primary upset in 2008, when he defeated party leader-approved Hillary Clinton. Any media outlet that doesn’t acknowledge that is on the side of big money and big people."

Abdul El-Sayed Triumphs Over Haley Stevens in $60M Loss for AIPAC, Corporations

The result represents a seismic win for the growing progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

By Sharon Zhang , 

Truthout

August 5, 2026

Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed addresses supporters in Detroit, Michigan, on August 4, 2026.Jeff Kowalsky / AFP via Getty Images

Former public health official Abdul El-Sayed has achieved a dominant win in Michigan’s Democratic primary for U.S. Senate on Tuesday, winning by a narrow margin over Rep. Haley Stevens in a ground-shaking triumph over the $60 million spent by AIPAC and corporations to oppose him.

With over 95 percent of the vote counted, El-Sayed had 48.5 percent of the vote, compared to Stevens’s 47.5 percent. Mallory McMorrow, who dropped out of the race, received 4 percent of the vote. AP called the race on Wednesday morning.

The race represents the latest major win for the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which is increasingly defining itself through viewpoints like ending military aid to Israel, opposing data center construction, and abolishing ICE — all stances that El-Sayed has taken.

El-Sayed will face off in the general election against Republican Mike Rogers, who ran uncontested in his primary. Rogers is a former FBI agent and House representative who has the backing of President Donald Trump.

El-Sayed delivered a late night speech when he was leading Stevens by several points but the race had not yet been called. In his remarks, he struck a triumphant tone, praising his supporters for helping to beat the odds and focusing on uniting Democrats for the race ahead. He criticized Rogers for his ties to Big Pharma and his relationship with Trump.

“However we might feel about the campaign we’ve just come through, I want you to understand that it pales in comparison to the cynicism, it pales in comparison to the corporatism, in comparison to the lies that Mike Rogers and Donald Trump are going to tell,” he said. “There is so much more that unites us, however much we might disagree with our Democratic opponent.”

Stevens conceded on Wednesday, issuing a statement congratulating El-Sayed and saying that she would back him in the race.

“Donald Trump and Mike Rogers want us to come out of this primary tired and divided, so their billionaire backers can come in and let multimillionaire Mike Rogers walk away with this Senate seat,” she said. “I’m not going to let that happen.”

El-Sayed centered his platform on getting money out of politics and backing Medicare for All. Through his campaign, he has balanced his policy wonkishness on the latter issue with what supporters saw as a charismatic personality that has elevated him to star status on the national level. His supporters were enthusiastic and high in number, with about 10,000 volunteers knocking on doors and making calls for the former Wayne County health director in this campaign.

“We all knew they were going to spend their money. We didn’t know they were going to spend $70 million of their money. We didn’t know that they were going to outspend us $11 to $1,” said El-Sayed. “And yet we’re still standing.”

While the primary result is a win for progressives within the party, it also marks a loss of seismic proportions for the establishment wing and the lobbyists who back them.

AIPAC, through an affiliated super PAC, poured over $30 million into backing Stevens and opposing El-Sayed — a record amount of spending for the pro-Israel group in a single race.

This was a formula that worked for Stevens in the past; Stevens originally won her House seat with $4.2 million in backing from AIPAC, which was targeting former Rep. Andy Levin for his support of a two-state solution in Israel and Palestine.

But this support comes as AIPAC and support for Israel has become poisonous among large swaths of the electorate, three years into Israel’s genocide in Gaza and nearly six months into a historically unpopular U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran. Polls have repeatedly found that Democratic voters and many independents say that the U.S. should decrease or end aid to Israel, as voters grow increasingly weary of the U.S.’s backing of the apartheid state.

Support for Israel has become a central issue in many primaries, and Stevens is one of Congress’s loudest backers of Israel. Her campaign in particular was plagued by a speech she once gave in which she said: “Israel comes to me in my dreams.” Last week, she additionally faced criticism for a bigoted comment in which she accused El-Sayed of wanting to “blame all of your problems on Jewish Americans,” seemingly in reference to the Muslim candidate’s opposition to funding Israel.

Stevens also got major infusions from corporate-backed PACs, which poured over $30 million into supporting her campaign. Her campaign’s corporate ties ran deep, as reports found ties between her consultants and tech and AI firms like Palantir.

Meanwhile, Stevens had the backing of establishment figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who quietly lined up behind her. Some Democratic Stevens backers, like Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Michigan), have even suggested that they won’t back El-Sayed in the general election.

Democratic Michigan voters also expressed support for another progressive candidate on Tuesday in the MI-07 district, which encompasses Lansing.

Voters have chosen progressive activist William Lawrence, a co-founder of the Sunrise Movement backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), in the district’s Democratic primary. Lawrence has also carved a space for himself as progressive figure, condemning Israel for committing a genocide and endorsing progressive priorities like Medicare for All.

Lawrence decisively won with 44 percent of the vote, 15 points over the next candidate. The district is currently represented by a Republican, Rep. Tom Barrett, but is the former seat of Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin.

Ranting Trump smears 'Communist loser' after progressive's narrow win

Alexander Willis
August 5, 2026 

RAW STORY


U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Michigan, U.S., July 27, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci

President Donald Trump is already lashing out at presumptive Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed after his apparent electoral victory in Michigan.

Trump slammed the victor and his competitor, U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, in angry Truth Social Post Wednesday morning in which he argued the El-Sayed's win would actually benefit Republicans come November.

“Great news for the Republican Party," Trump wrote. "El-Sayed, a Communist loser who hates Jews and Israel, is the projected winner in his race with the Socialist.

“As usual, the Polls were way off on this one. She was not expected to do nearly as well as she did. Now, the Dumocrats crazy policies will only get worse!”

El-Sayed is the projected winner of Tuesday’s Democratic primary election in his bid for Senate, his victory representing the latest win for the progressive wing of the party.

Moments earlier, Trump warned that El-Sayed had a “real shot” of defeating former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), citing unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud in Michigan.

“The Radical Left Socialist has a real shot, and don’t discount all of those fake mail-in ballots that will ‘surprisingly’ show up at the last moment,” Trump wrote in a previous social media post.

Trump panics over progressive Dem’s 'real shot' at taking down MAGA ex-rep: ‘Get ready’

Alexander Willis
August 5, 2026

RAW STORY

U.S. President Donald Trump arrives at Los Angeles International Airport, in California, U.S., August 4, 2026. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

President Donald Trump issued a call to Michigan voters Wednesday to support former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) in the upcoming general election following the strong performance of Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, whom the president warned had “a real shot” at defeating the Republican.

In Trump’s plea, he also predicted, without evidence, that the upcoming general election in Michigan would see a surge of “fake mail-in ballots” for El-Sayed.

“Wayne County (Detroit) in Michigan is one of the most corrupt voting areas in the United States, if not the World. It is strictly Third World! Miracles happen in Wayne County, including more votes being cast than there are voters, by a lot,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

“Therefore, the Communist, who is not liked in Detroit, is potentially in ‘Vote Counter’ trouble. The Radical Left Socialist has a real shot, and don’t discount all of those fake mail-in ballots that will ‘surprisingly’ show up at the last moment. Get ready for another Rigged Election. In November we must VOTE FOR MIKE ROGERS, and make Michigan TOO BIG TO RIG.”

Trump has long made false claims regarding systemic election fraud, despite evidence repeatedly proving said claims to be false.

While some media outlets have yet to call the race, NBC News and Decision Desk have both called the race for El-Sayed.

Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that Mike Rogers is a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, not a senator.