Famed American philosopher “Iron” Mike Tyson popularized a pair of aphorisms about life, culture, and human nature: “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face,” and “Social media made y’all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it.”
Both are about getting punched in the face. (Like all great thinkers, Tyson writes about what he knows.) Intriguingly, he’s not the first philosopher who was inspired by violence.
Plato was a student of Socrates and a teacher of Aristotle. (This means, of course, that Socrates and Aristotle had a platonic relationship, but that’s neither here nor there.) Just like Iron Mike, Plato was a fighter — a wrestler. And just like pro wrestlers today, he used a stage name.
“Plato” is derived from the Greek word platon, which means broad or wide. According to ancient sources, his actual name was Aristocles; “Plato” was a nickname his wrestling coach gave him.
So maybe quoting Mike Tyson isn’t far-fetched.
In Plato’s allegory of the charioteer, our spiritual journey is compared to humans trying to steer unruly horses — “tug[ging] the reigns so violently” to keep ‘em in line.
Because sometimes a punch in the face is necessary.
One more boxing aphorism: “Styles make fights.” It’s why Muhammad Ali beat George Foreman, George Foreman beat Joe Frazier, and Joe Frazier beat Muhammad Ali: Not all matchups are favorable to all styles.
Everyone has flaws. Certain styles — and certain people — are tailor-made to exploit an opponent’s weaknesses.
This brings us to the Michigan Senate race between Republican Mike Rogers and Democrat Abdul El-Sayed. It’s the most-watched, most-discussed, most-debated race of the 2026 midterms.
That’s exactly why it’s so important: The PR momentum won’t be limited to Michigan. This race is a national story, and it’s being covered as such; a powerful, compelling GOP message will spill over to all the other races, too.
And in razor-thin elections, it could give Republicans the winning edge.
But the opposite is also true: If the Dems dominate the Michigan PR war — and successfully reframe Abdul El-Sayed as a civil rights trailblazer like Barack Obama, sanitize his radical platform, and recategorize legitimate questions about his ties to the Muslim Brotherhood as “Islamophobia,” the donkeys are in the driver’s seat. There’ll be spillover in Texas, Ohio, Maine, Minnesota, and everywhere else.
Those racist Republicans are lying again! Just like they lied about El-Sayed!
When Vivek Ramaswamy went all-in with the “mom” ad, it opened a new PR line for the Dems to exploit: Republicans are desperate, cruel liars, stooping to unimaginable lows.
So far, those attacks are specific to Ramaswamy. (Specific enough to imperil his chances.) The DNC’s PR strategy is to tar-and-feather the rest of the elephants, too.
But they need at least one more high-profile domino to fall, or the allegation won’t go national. That’s why they’re pushing so hard in Michigan.
“They lied about poor Amy Acton. They lied about poor Abdul El-Sayed. So of course they’re lying about [insert name here]!”
This is a clever PR strategy, because it completely shields DSA-linked candidates from scrutiny. Questioning their ties to socialism, communism, Wokeism, and jihadist groups is now off-limits.
Why, it’s (gasp) Islamophobic!
“Islamophobic” has been the media’s go-to buzzword, especially since President Donald Trump and ex-President Barack Obama held dueling Michigan campaign events:
New York Times: In Islamophobic Rant, Trump Seeks to Stir Republican Base in Michigan
MS NOW: Trump, GOP Spread Falsehoods About El-Sayed in Latest Brush With Islamophobia
Al Jazeera: Trump Dials Up Islamophobia Against Abdul El-Sayed at Michigan Senate Rally
CNN: What Republicans Mean When They Ask Abdul El-Sayed to ‘Disavow’ the Muslim Brotherhood
Newsweek: Why Are Muslim Candidates Still Being Treated as Suspects?
Detroit News: Bernie Sanders Sees ‘Racist Campaign’ Against Abdul El-Sayed
NBC News: Trump Leans Into Islamophobic Rhetoric at Michigan Rally
The New Arab: Donald Trump Ramps Up Islamophobic Attacks on Abdul El-Sayed
Newser: To Fire Up Michigan Base, Trump Leans Into Islamophobia
The Journal: Could Islamophobia Cost Abdul El-Sayed the Race for the US Senate?
Vox: The Hate [Islamophobia] That Goes Ignored
Yet again, it’s a clever (albeit obvious) PR strategy: If you can dismiss all criticisms as racist or Islamophobic, you never have to address ‘em. Instead, each allegation is (further) proof that your opponent is the bad guy — and not you.
“Mike Rogers keeps bringing up the Muslim Brotherhood! Wow, what a racist!”
But there’s a good chance the Dems will get away with it, because styles make fights. Mike Rogers is a 63-year-old white Christian dude. Donald Trump is an 80-year-old white Christian dude.
In a matchup against Barack Obama and Abdul El-Sayed over Islamophobia, that’s the wrong style.
Yet there’s someone on the GOP’s bench whose style is 100% tailor-made to counter Obama and El-Sayed’s tactics. From his faith to his name to his occupation, he’s perfect. You couldn’t ask for a better option.
If you believe in the divine plan, then perhaps he was put on planet Earth for this moment.
His name is Mehmet Cengiz Oz, and he’s the Muslim son of Turkish immigrants. Better known as “Dr. Oz,” he’s the most famous Muslim doctor in America.
And unlike “Doctor” El-Sayed, Dr. Oz is a real, actual doctor: He’s been legally licensed, fully credentialed, completed his residency, popularized life-saving treatments, and was the professor of surgery at Columbia University.
He’s also a MAGA Republican who serves in the Trump administration — and presumably would be willing to help GOP candidates. (Hint, hint, Mike Rogers.)
The contrast is irresistible: Oz and El-Sayed are both second-generation Muslims with funny-sounding names. Both ran for the Senate. Both highlighted their medical expertise.
This makes Dr. Oz the GOP’s best weapon to brand El-Sayed as too radical, too dangerous, too jihadist, and too un-American.
Because what will Obama and El-Sayed do? Attack Dr. Oz for being “Islamophobic”?
Well, yeah. If a Jewish Republican like Stephen Miller can be attacked for “weaponizing antisemitism” — or told he should “go back to 1930’s Germany” — then Dr. Oz will ABSOLUTELY be attacked as an Islamophobe, a race-traitor, and an Uncle Tom. It’ll be nasty and ugly.
But for our PR purposes, that’s gold. We want ‘em to overreach, overreact, and overextend.
Because it’ll be all over the blogosphere. And all over social media — because people have gotten used to posting gross, disrespectful things without getting punched in the face.
El-Sayed and his supporters can’t resist making it personal. Because, for them, it is!
But that’s not going to sway ANY undecideds. Instead of discrediting Dr. Oz, it’ll make El-Sayed’s side look angry, intolerant, and uncomfortably extreme.
If he’s this intolerant of other Muslims, what does he think of Christians and Jews?
The Democrats are expecting to be attacked by white Christians — like Trump and Rogers. They’re expecting pushback from Jewish Democrats. What they’re not expecting is getting dissected, exposed, and eviscerated by a Muslim doctor.
(A real doctor, too — not a make-believe one.)
The Dems’ Islamophobia defense won’t work. It’s the exact wrong style for Dr. Oz’s attack.
And it’ll hit ‘em like an overhand right.
Because everyone has a plan ‘til they’re punched in the face. But after that, it’s every man for himself.
That’s the story we need to tell, because it leads audiences where we want to take them. And just like Plato (a.k.a. the Mike Tyson of his day) noted, “Those who tell the stories rule society.”
This is why Dr. Oz needs to be Mike Rogers’ storyteller.
The irony is that Dr. Oz shares a name with a mythical kingdom located somewhere over the rainbow, and in the movie, the Wizard of Oz was a fraud. His con game collapsed when the curtain was pulled.
But our Oz is real. Their “doctor” is a fraud.
And he’s the GOP’s secret weapon to win Michigan.