You can spin him to be whatever you like, he himself does, but I have never in well over a hundred hours of listening to him heard him explain his project this way. The way he explains his project is: You need to meet the masses "where they're at," which means participating no just in bourgeoise government but supporting and running candidates in bourgeoisie parties in order to try to use it as a platform for socialism (I view this as ridiculous) and to promote progressive policy so that Americans can understand that a society can be run in a more pro-social way and thereby be more functional rather than less, as they had been misled (I think this is fair enough).

You can say that Lenin was wrong or irrelevant, but to say he was in agreement with Hasan's strategy when he, like Marx, strongly opposed participating in bourgeois parties in favor of running socialist candidates under a socialist party, is incorrect.

Hasan has a little bit of a Waiting for Godot problem where he wants an electorally viable socialist party to already exist before he's willing to admit that voting for whatever kamalabot the dems put forward is counterproductive, when making such concessions is detrimental to the formation of an opposition party because it's literally the most fundamental point of the dem's anti-domestic-left strategy to maintain the duopoly by extracting those concessions.