Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) decided to inflame intraparty tensions last Friday by accusing the Democratic establishment of failing to invest equitably in progressive and diverse candidates, including Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed.

“The DSCC should take note because it is shameful that we are not seeing an equitable investment in progressive and diverse candidates like Abdul El-Sayed, like [Democratic Florida Senate candidate] Angie Nixon, like [Democratic Mississippi Senate candidate] Scott Colom,” Pressley said, while praising Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) for donating $1 million to El-Sayed’s campaign.

It was great that AOC donated that money from her ample fundraising stash, currently sitting at $37 million. Pressley could’ve praised her generosity, and that would’ve been wonderful. Heck, she could’ve celebrated the remarkable full-party press to get El-Sayed elected.

Instead, she chose to manufacture an ideological grievance that doesn’t square with the extraordinary resources the party is already committing to his election.

To wit:

• Is there any more establishment figure than Sen. Chuck Schumer? His Senate Majority PAC has spent $35M and counting on the race.
• DSCC Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has been unequivocal in her support, saying, “He’s a great candidate. He’s going to win, and we are all united.”
• I’ve seen reports of $14 million to $16 million in DSCC spending commitments, though I haven’t been able to independently verify those figures. But top Democratic strategist Guy Cecil says the DSCC and Senate Majority PAC are spending more than $50 million combined in Michigan.
• Such hated “establishment” figures as former Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Barack Obama are campaigning for him.

That’s a remarkable amount of institutional support for a candidate who defeated the party’s more moderate wing in the primary. So what, exactly, is Pressley complaining about?

Yes, it would be nice to see more money spent in places like Florida and Mississippi, where Democrats have outside opportunities to expand the Senate map. But those are reach seats, and every dollar spent defending Michigan is a dollar unavailable elsewhere.Furthermore, El-Sayed is one of only two Democratic Senate nominees—the other being Maine’s Troy Jackson, whose race has been a clusterfuck—underperforming the cycle’s strong Democratic lean.

According to Nate Silver’s models, El-Sayed leads Republican Mike Rogers 48.5% to 45.1%. Meanwhile, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson enjoys a much more comfortable 50.4% to 42.4% advantage.

That’s a significant gap between two Democrats running statewide in the same political environment.There are undoubtedly multiple factors at play, but it’s hardly unreasonable to wonder whether El-Sayed’s leftist politics are somewhat out of sync with a closely divided purple state that President Donald Trump won two out of the last three presidential elections.

Perhaps a more mainstream nominee would have required less spending to defend this seat, freeing up resources for those opportunities in Florida and Mississippi. Or maybe Michigan was always fated to be a fierce and closely fought battleground, no matter who the nominee. We can’t know for sure, nor does it matter much now. The state’s Democratic primary electorate made their choice, and the Democratic establishment has opened its wallet and is working hard to elect that choice.

And that’s what makes Pressley’s attack so frustrating.

El-Sayed would be a great addition to the Senate. Almost everyone in our party is united in working to make that happen.

If El-Sayed comes up short in November, it won’t be because the Democratic establishment refused to invest time, money, and political capital in his campaign.

It would be nice if Pressley acknowledged that.

Markos Moulitsas is founder and editor of the blogging website Daily Kos and author of three books.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos