Report: Michigan Democrats Fear Israel-Hamas War ‘Proxy Battles’ in 2026 Senate Primary
“I do think that if AIPAC comes in and goes negative on [El-Sayed’s] campaign, they’re going to alienate a broad swath of Arab and Muslim voters who already demonstrated in 2024 that they’re extremely frustrated with AIPAC…”
Back in April, three Democrats declared their intentions to run for the Senate seat currently held by Democrat Gary Peters, who announced in January that he would not run for a third term.
Rep. Haley Stevens, who has been in Congress since 2019, threw her hat into the ring in late April after two others jumped in:
Stevens, who lives in Birmingham, joins a Democratic race that is already getting crowded, with state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, of Royal Oak, and former Wayne County health director Dr. Abdul El-Sayed already announced, former state House Speaker Joe Tate, of Detroit, eyeing the race and state Attorney General Dana Nessel talked up by pundits as a possible candidate.
Per local reports, Stevens perhaps has the most name recognition among those on the Democrat side who have declared so far, and has manufacturing industry creds that could potentially win her a lot of support statewide.
But because she has generally taken pro-Israel stances, there is concern among party leaders in the state that it could present problems for Muslim voters who, like Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, believe the Democrat Party has abandoned them over the Israel-Hamas war:
But she may also face opposition from certain factions inside the Democratic Party, especially from younger voters and voters in the state’s Arab American and Muslim communities, who chastised Democratic former President Joe Biden’s administration for not actively opposing Israel’s counterattacks on Hamas in Gaza.
[…]
Stevens could still see some opponents try to hit her for her vocal support of Israel’s right to defend itself from aggression and the financial backing from the pro-Israel American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) she has received. Stevens, it should be noted, also urged a ceasefire in Gaza and an exchange of hostages, as well as arguing for a two-state solution to protect Palestinians and bring peace to the region.
It is the possibility of “proxy battles” playing out between pro-Israel and “pro-Palestinian” candidates in the race that has Rep. Debbie Dingell urging them not to let it get contentious:
Democrats are gearing up for another potentially brutal intraparty fight brewing in their Senate primary. And Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) is privately warning candidates and party officials that there’s a real risk it could become a costly “proxy battle” between AIPAC and the pro-Palestinian “Uncommitted” movement. “I want both of them to work to make sure it doesn’t,” Dingell told us, ostensibly referring to candidates Rep. Haley Stevens, who many Washington Democrats are backing, and Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive favorite with the backing of Bernie Sanders.
A replay?“I do think that if AIPAC comes in and goes negative on [El-Sayed’s] campaign, they’re going to alienate a broad swath of Arab and Muslim voters who already demonstrated in 2024 that they’re extremely frustrated with AIPAC coming in and dictating elections for them,” said a person involved in the race.
New: Rep. Debbie Dingell is privately warning candidates and party officials that there’s a real risk Michigan's Senate primary could become a costly “proxy battle” between AIPAC and the pro-Palestinian “Uncommitted” movement. pic.twitter.com/0bADkwaj8Z
— Adam Wren (@adamwren) May 30, 2025
Dingell has long warned Democrats to not get too comfortable over claims of Michigan being a “blue state,” as she has previously declared it to be “purple” – something seemingly confirmed in the 2024 election when Donald Trump won the presidential election but Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D) won the Senate race to replace the retiring Sen. Debbie Stabenow.
A heated, costly primary battle could hobble the eventual Democrat nominee going into the general election campaign season, providing an opening for a GOP nominee backed by President Trump to have a real shot at defying the odds in a state that hasn’t had a Republican in the United States Senate in nearly 25 years.
Will that GOP nominee be former Rep. Mike Rogers? He was the nominee in 2024, narrowly losing to Slotkin in a nailbiter.
I would like to point out that while Elissa Slotkin won her senate race against Mike Rogers she did NOT get more votes than Kamala Devi Harris in November.
So she should shut her damn mouth. pic.twitter.com/ZPRnfjpUJU
— Candidly Tiff (@tify330) March 7, 2025
Rogers also announced his candidacy last month, the first among what could also be a growing field on the Republican side:
Mr. Rogers is so far the only Republican to enter the 2026 race, though Representative Bill Huizenga, who has served in Congress since 2011, is expected to run. On Monday, Mr. Huizenga went further in teasing a bid, writing on X that he was “encouraged by the outreach and calls I have received” and would “continue to talk with voters and ask them who they believe is the best candidate for Republicans to nominate and elect to serve Michigan in the U.S. Senate.”
Other possible contenders include Tudor Dixon, who lost the Michigan governor’s race to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2022, and Kevin Rinke, who lost to Ms. Dixon in that race’s Republican primary.
Make sure to put these primaries on your “ones to watch” list.
-Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter/X.-
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Sounds like some good blue-on-blue conflict. White woke vs. non-white woke to see who has the best anti-West hate-credentials. Dems have put themselves in an interesting and self-destructive corner.
Sorry to go off on a tangent but why by all that’s holy did the Republican Party allow the media to get away with using blue for the Democrats and Red for the Republicans. Red is obviously the appropriate color for Marxists. Was this their ultimate projection?
They used to alternate them; one election Republicans would be blue and Democrats red, the next it would be the opposite. In 2000 it happened to be the Republicans’ turn to be red, but with all the publicity of the extended post-election fight those maps stayed in the public’s mind, and the colors used became ingrained. From then on the news industry has used those colors consistently.
It was fall out from the 2000 election “controversy”
Before 2000 they switch red and blue back and forth each election for the maps they used to show election results. Red was the Republicans in 2000 and it turned into a shorthand for multiple weeks after the election. Some of them probably were very glad to tie red to Republicans rather that the communists that the Democrat part had become.
The Marxists are trying to dissociate from the stigma AND place that stigma on their opponents –much the way the party of slavery has tarred the Republicans and the right with their crime.
The current pravda, as the leftist Milhouse demonstrates, is that the colors switched back and forth each election.
For example, when they first assigned colors, in 76, Republicans were blue but then, in 80, they switched it up, and Republicans were blue.
After that they changed it again, in 84 and Republicans were blue.
See?
Debbie Dingell is privately warning candidates about the “pro-Palestinian uncommitted movement.”
Nice oxymoron, moron.
Not an oxymoron. The “Uncommitted” movement is indeed pro-“Palestinian” and antisemitic.
“Uncommitted” doesn’t mean uncommitted on the issue, it means uncommitted to the party.
I wonder what the American voters would think about it.
They are American. The constitution says so.
Time to buy popcorn in bulk.
Time to stir this up and force Dems to take position that half of Democrats won’t support. Help break them apart for good.
“that has Rep. Debbie Dingell urging them not to let it get contentious”
Right. Democrats will be who they are first and last. Maybe the Muslims will get angry and move to Libya.
I’m tired of the decades-long efforts by leftists and Dhimmi-crats to peddle, propagate and legitimize manifestly contrived and fallacious propaganda mythologies of grievance and victimhood on behalf of the Arab invaders from Arabia (dishonestly re-branded as “Palestinians.”
These people are belligerent, genocidal, supremacist, intolerant and fascistic religious fanatics, like so many of their Muslim co-religionists, worldwide.
Here’s a novel idea — Michigan Dhimmi-crat politicians should concentrate on domestic concerns, rather than advocating on behalf of Arab terrorists halfway across the globe.
Exchange of hostages? Hostages are people you hold captive in order to deter someone from attacking you or extort things from them. By what stretch of the imagination does that included convicted terrorists sentenced to a term of imprisonment for murder, attempted murder and similar crimes?
A possible Muslim senator from Michigan backed by fake Jew and unrepentant bourgeoisie and marxist Bernie Sanders. Whatever could go wrong.
Regarding a two state solution, it has already been tried. The so called “Palestinians” had all of Gaza since 2005. They could have made it green and profitable. Instead they made war on Israel. They are not good neighbors.