The New York Times published a list of supposed "Jewish leaders" in Michigan, claiming more than 500 of them support Abdul El-Sayed for the Senate. But it seems The New York Times was hoodwinked and didn't do a lot of vetting on this story, as many of the names on the list are raising eyebrows and questions.
Now, the story originally ran September 17, but it seems we're just catching on to some of the signatories, including one with the name "Jack Mehoff," which is a crude joke.
Yesterday the NYT published a list of what was alleged to be over 500 Michigan “Jewish leaders” supporting El-Sayed. The point of doing so was to paint a narrative that he has strong Jewish support in MI.
— AG (@AGHamilton29) November 3, 2026
But did the NYT do any vetting to the list?
A quick skim and you notice… pic.twitter.com/iB1rMS1XYt
Here's more from the original article:
A group of Jewish voters in Michigan is urging support for Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the state’s Democratic nominee for Senate, in an open letter that acknowledges concerns among some Jewish voters about his candidacy and his criticism of Israel.
The letter, signed by more than 500 people who identify as Jewish leaders or voters in the state, says that the election of Dr. El-Sayed, a staunch critic of Israel, is “clearly the better choice for Jews” compared with his Republican opponent, former Representative Mike Rogers.
“Some of us are enthusiastic supporters of El-Sayed,” the letter, published on Wednesday, reads. “Some of us have reservations: There are disagreements with El-Sayed on important issues, including aspects of his approach to Israel and the language used by some of his allies. These concerns remain serious for many of us, and we will vote for El-Sayed.”
"Mehoff" appears at 403 in the Google Doc.
Dozens of names have only a first name and a last initial, making it impossible to verify who they are, if they are Jewish, or if they are Jewish leaders of any kind.
A list of Jews For Abdul with “Jack Mehoff” is possibly the most accurate relic of this entire election season to save for future generations of historians
— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) November 3, 2026
What a time to be alive.
Looking for Hugh Jass pic.twitter.com/fugtD0LoTS
— Alan Cole (@AlanMCole) November 3, 2026
It's literally a Simpsons episode.
The NYT hyping the endorsement of Jack Mehoff, beloved Michigan Jewish leader, is the perfect capstone to this election. https://t.co/fI9aN3ZuwM
— Jarvis (@jarvis_best) November 3, 2026
It really is.
I'll say it again if the New York Times is your main source of media information, you are the most misled audience in the entire country https://t.co/myP7nprlQs
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) November 3, 2026
This is very true.
The New York Times will openly and without shame publish a list of “Jews for Abdul” which includes the name “Jack Mehoff” and then completely ignore that this fatally compromises the whole story and just power through it
— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) November 3, 2026
Don’t even see a correction anywhere to this piece —… pic.twitter.com/uI8zB7Y964
As of right now, more than a month and a half after publishing the story, The New York Times hasn't issued any sort of statement, correction, or retraction.