4 min read
30
Linkedin
Threads
Facebook
X
Forty.
That is the number drawing attention as Americans prepare for the November 3 midterm elections.
Forty Muslim candidates running as Democrats.
But before anyone assumes that all Muslim candidates are Democrats—or that all 40 are seeking seats in Congress—the actual numbers deserve examination.
An October 20 investigation by Muslim Network TV identified 51 Muslim candidates competing across approximately 23 states.
Forty are Democrats. Four are Republicans. Four are seeking nonpartisan offices. Two are independents, and one is running with the Green Party.
Eleven are competing for congressional seats. The remaining 40 are seeking state, county, local, or judicial offices.
The concentration within the Democratic Party raises a legitimate political question:
Why are so many Muslim American candidates choosing the Democratic Party, and what could their growing political participation mean for public policy?
This Is Not a Coincidence. It Is Political Organization by the Party.
Political coalitions do not develop overnight.
Churches organize. Labor unions organize. Business organizations organize. Advocacy groups recruit candidates, endorse campaigns, and mobilize voters.
Muslim American civic organizations are doing the same and are using the Democratic Party as a ship.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations and Emgage have supported registration drives, political education, candidate endorsements, and voter outreach.
In August, CAIR reported identifying 228 Muslim elected officials and judges nationwide, serving across 26 states.
Its October 28 survey found that 72% of its Muslim respondents planned to support Democrats in their state elections, compared with 2–6% supporting Republicans.
Muslim American political participation is expanding intentionally, and the Democratic Party currently attracts a substantial portion of that activity.
Are Iran, Qatar, and Yemen Trying to Buy Political Influence in America?
There is another issue that deserves serious national attention.
Foreign governments have attempted to influence American politics, and Iran's activities are not merely theoretical.
In August 2024, the FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warned that Iran was attempting to interfere in American elections through cyber operations and efforts to exploit political divisions.
In 2026, the threat evolved further.
On October 8, OpenAI reported disrupting an Iran-origin influence operation called Bogus Bylines.
The operation used seven fabricated journalist identities to place or syndicate nearly 100 articles across online publications around the world.
The articles and social-media activity frequently concerned the U.S.–Iran conflict, with some content addressing American politics.
Think about what that means: foreign operators created fictional journalists, published political commentary under false identities, and placed their messages before audiences who did not know who was really speaking.
Qatar and the Money Behind Media Misinformation Messaging
Iran is not the only foreign government whose influence activities deserve scrutiny.
Qatar has built an extensive lobbying and public-relations operation in Washington.
A September 2025 investigation by the Quincy Institute found that Qatar had spent nearly $250 million on 88 firms registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act since 2016.
Its efforts have targeted government officials, policy institutions, and American media.
Investigative reporting also documented Qatari-funded consultants seeking relationships with conservative media figures, including outreach that helped arrange Tucker Carlson's interview with Qatar's prime minister.
Carlson, Candace Owens, and their networks have denied receiving payments from Qatar. But public documentation of lobbying activity says something different, and many voices speculate that they were secretly paid to follow foreign instructions.
Why Democrats Could Be Accepting Money
President Trump's administration dramatically reduced foreign assistance and ended USAID's operations as a separate administrator of aid programs.
According to a September 2026 Government Accountability Office report, approximately 6,780 of USAID's 7,510 awards were terminated between January 2025 and March 2026.
Those figures demonstrate the enormous scale of the restructuring.
They also raise legitimate questions about how government funds were previously monitored.
However, the termination of foreign-aid programs does not establish that USAID money was secretly being transferred to Democratic campaigns, Iranian operatives, or American media organizations as political payoffs.
But several widely circulated allegations about media funding were traced to ordinary government purchases of news and research subscriptions.
The proper demand is not to assume corruption. Americans should demand financial records, independent audits, and accountability wherever misconduct is actually discovered.
What Should America Do to Prevent Islamic Operators in Government?
Federal law already prohibits foreign nationals, including foreign governments, from contributing directly or indirectly to American political campaigns.
It also prohibits foreign nationals from directing campaign decisions.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act requires many people working on behalf of foreign principals to disclose their relationships and activities.
Those safeguards must be fully enforced and should include other layers.
If an American politician knowingly accepts prohibited foreign campaign money, investigators should follow the financial trail, and the politician should be removed from office if there is evidence of a connection.
If a foreign government finances covert propaganda, the public deserves to know who organized it, how the content was distributed, and whether American institutions were compromised.
If a lobbying organization conceals its foreign principal, that relationship deserves investigation.
Foreign political interference is a national-security issue. It must never be ignored because investigating it might help remove a politician from office and expose a political organization to public shame.
The Real Question Before November 3
The republic must never surrender its Constitution to religious authoritarianism—whether that authoritarianism claims to speak for Islam, Christianity, or any other faith.
But we need to understand that our Constitution was designed with Judeo-Christian values, which are completely opposite to Muslim theological beliefs. Christianity is based on love, opportunity, forgiveness, morality, and justice, while Muslims base their beliefs on taqiyya. They are allowed to fake their thoughts and desires as long as they achieve their mission. They don't forgive; they punish. Their morality involves covering a woman's face to bring her shame and submission. If anyone sins, such as by being gay or being unfaithful to a husband, they are simply killed, and if someone steals, their hand will be chopped off. That is completely outside our understanding of human rights. It is not compatible, and even if they say yes to you, it is pure taqiyya used to lie to you.
The presence of Muslims wearing their own clothing is simply foreign interference because they don't even adapt to the country where they want to participate in an election. Why do Americans have to adapt to them? Those are fair questions.
For that reason, vote on November 3rd if you want to allow that or not.
The concerning part is: What is the limit of a party to practice this? Legislation should be created to set a very low limit on participation by people who are incompatible with Christian beliefs. What do you think?
