Reports examine Muslim community fears over closing campaign rhetoric

Reports published by Inkstick and The New Arab on November 3 examine Muslim community fears over rhetoric in the closing days of the U.S. midterm campaigns. The outlets draw on separate interviews in Michigan and Texas and with political communication specialists.

In Michigan, Mohammed Mawla, identified by The New Arab as a Dearborn Heights school board member, linked attacks on Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed to his Arab and Muslim background. He told reporter Brooke Anderson that he had also received threats connected to his own background and feared for ordinary residents' safety.

Wa'el Alzayat, an adviser to the Muslim voter-outreach organization Emgage, told The New Arab that campaign ads could inflame existing prejudice and misinformation. Mawla also said the attacks could motivate voters to participate.

In Texas, Sameeha Rizvi, a civic engagement coordinator for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told Inkstick she fears political language spreading hostility could deepen divisions and contribute to threats against Muslim communities.

Inkstick's report by Tyler Hicks connects attacks on El-Sayed with religious language used by political and religious figures when discussing the Iran war. University at Buffalo professor Jacob Neiheisel discussed how fear-based messaging might appeal to parts of the Republican electorate, while questioning whether it reflects a coordinated strategy. Political consultant Max Burns also questioned the coherence of the White House's messaging.