The New York Times drew sharp online mockery after a Jewish-voters letter it highlighted for Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed listed the moniker “Jack Mehoff,” a name critics say guts the story’s credibility.
A public Google Doc promoted as more than 500 Jewish leaders and voters backing El-Sayed for Senate carried the entry at No. 403 on the alphabetical roll. Washington Free Beacon reporter Jon Levine spotted it the morning of Election Day and did not hold back.
The New York Post reported that the Times first wrote about the letter on Sept. 17. El-Sayed’s campaign pushed the same list that day. By Tuesday the paper was taking heat for treating the roster as serious proof of Jewish support.
Levine put the problem in plain view on X.
Washington Free Beacon reporter Jon Levine wrote:
“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,”
The group behind the document called itself Michigan Jews for Democracy. The Times described the signers as people who identify as Jewish leaders or voters and said the letter insisted El-Sayed is “clearly the better choice for Jews.”
Hundreds of those names appear only as a first name and a last initial. That thin verification sat next to a handful of genuine public figures. Democratic Michigan Attorney General nominee Eli Savit is on the list. So are former congressmen Sander Levin and Andy Levin, a father-and-son pair.
Clergy names raised separate questions. Rabbi Chava Bahle made history in 2014 as the first rabbi to lead a Unitarian Universalist church. Rabbi Alana Alpert leads a Reconstructionist congregation that defines Judaism by culture and social values rather than traditional practice. Their credentials were called into question in the coverage that followed.
Michigan Jews for Democracy did not immediately answer requests for comment. Neither did the El-Sayed campaign.
Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander framed the piece as one of several on El-Sayed’s standing with Jewish and Democratic voters.
Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander said:
“This story from September is one of several looking at Dr. El-Sayed’s relationship with Jewish and Democratic voters. We found this letter newsworthy because of a number of the notable individuals who signed on and we confirmed that the people specifically mentioned in the story did in fact add their name. The story also highlights a letter from Jewish Democrats and Independents who came out in support of Mike Rogers.”
That defense leaves the “Jack Mehoff” line untouched. Records reviewed for the Post list someone by that name as living on the Michigan State University campus in East Lansing. The university did not immediately respond to questions. Whether the Google Doc entry is that person, a joke, or something else remains unanswered in the public record the paper relied on.
While the Times leaned on the El-Sayed letter, another group ran a different process. Michigan Jews Against Extremism organized a rival letter backing Republican Mike Rogers. As of Tuesday it listed 561 names. The group said it confirmed signatories by email and checked Michigan residency.
The contrast is hard to miss. One side published a sprawling open document that mixed real officeholders with bare initials and a punch-line moniker. The other side described basic identity and residency checks before putting names forward. The Times story nodded at the Rogers letter even as it elevated the El-Sayed roster that later became a punchline.
El-Sayed has drawn criticism for frequent attacks on Israel. During a debate he refused to say whether Iran was a bigger threat to the United States than the Jewish state. That record is why a claim of broad Jewish backing carried political weight in the first place, and why a contaminated list does real damage.
On Monday, Nov. 2, 2026, the Michigan Democrat held a rally with the artist Common at The Majestic Theater in Detroit. The campaign kept moving. The September letter, and the Times decision to treat it as newsworthy proof, stayed online for anyone to open and scroll to entry 403.
Major papers still set the frame for national readers. When they platform a supporter roll that any careful editor would flag, they tell voters the brand matters more than the vetting. Michigan’s Senate race deserved cleaner sourcing than a Google Doc that could not keep a joke name off the page.
