MARQUETTE, Mich. — Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic U.S. Senate nominee in Michigan, signaled Thursday that he would question Israel’s status as an ally of the United States no matter who wins Israel’s elections later this month.

Asked during an interview with MS NOW whether his objections were to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government or to the state of Israel itself, El-Sayed suggested his opposition went further than current leadership.

“I mean, I think we’ve got to get serious, right?” he responded. “Netanyahu is one part of it, but the Israeli military has done heinous things, like heinous things, full war crimes, genocide. So I think we got to just get serious about whether or not we as a country should be subsidizing that government.”

He said he supports “equal rights to peace, dignity, and self-determination” for both “Jewish Israelis and Palestinians,” before pointing to Israel’s lobbying of the U.S. to join the war with Iran.

“But right now, that government has done terrible things with our money in their name, they pulled us into a war we had no business fighting,” he added. “So, to me, an ally is somebody who cares about you and you care about them. I don’t think they care about us. That’s what I’ve seen.”

When pressed on the matter — whether the ouster of Netanyahu would change his views — El-Sayed deferred to after the Israelis selected their next leader.

“Let’s see who the next prime minister is,” he said in an interview with MS NOW, before arguing that “structurally, there are a lot of issues with that ostensible allyship.”

Netanyahu’s main challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, a former chief of the Israeli military, leads a centrist party called Yashar, which translates to “Straight” in English. He has indicated a greater willingness than Netanyahu to more fully engage with the Trump administration on its various regional diplomatic initiatives in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria. Like most other Israeli opposition leaders, Eisenkot has said he would continue an aggressive military posture against militant groups all across the Middle East.

He has positioned his party as a home for voters who are concerned about the direction Netanyahu and his far right and religious coalition is leading Israel. His platform attacks issues where Netanyahu is vulnerable, such as calling for an official investigation into the Oct. 7 attacks, which Netanyahu has resisted. Eisenkot has rejected a Palestinian state in the near term but has pledged to curb settler violence and restrain some settlement expansion in the West Bank.

The International Court of Justice is currently hearing a case brought by South Africa that accuses Israeli forces of genocide. Israel vehemently has rejected the accusation, saying it is based on “biased and false claims.” Israel has said it does what it can to protect civilians and has accused Hamas of using civilians as human shields.

El-Sayed made the remarks after the third stop of his “It shouldn’t be this hard” bus tour — during which he was joined by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. — with less than three weeks until Election Day in one of the nation’s most competitive Senate races. He faces former Republican Rep. Mike Rogers for the seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, and the outcome could help determine which party controls the Senate for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s term.

El-Sayed’s views on Israel have become a flashpoint in the race, and he has struggled to win over some Jewish Democrats who are wary of his positions and rhetoric. El-Sayed has said he doesn’t support additional U.S. aid to Israel and doesn’t believe Israel should exist as a Jewish state. During last week’s debate, he wouldn’t say whether Israel or Iran posed the larger threat to the U.S., calling it a “ridiculous question.”

Asked by MS NOW on Thursday whether he would consider Israel to be a U.S. ally and whether the ousting of Netanyahu would change his position on the U.S.-Israel relationship, El-Sayed questioned how much of a friend Israel is, citing the impacts of the Iran war.

“They use us to go and fight a war we have no business fighting,” he said. “We’re paying more in gas. We’re paying more in groceries so that they could help to clear the air to try and annex southern Lebanon. How is that helping? What kind of allies? I’m just saying, like, what kind of ally is that?”

During another part of the interview, El-Sayed said Israeli leadership “just use” the U.S.

“Allies are supposed to care about you implicitly, not just use you. The government of Israel has done nothing but use us,” he said. “They use us for our tax dollars. They use us to run cover at the United Nations. They use us to run cover at the [International Criminal Court] and [International Court of Justice] for their war crimes.”

The Oct. 27 vote will be Israel’s first national election since the Hamas-led attacks of Oct. 7. Netanyahu, who has served as prime minister for more than 18 years across three stints, is seeking another term.

El-Sayed said he would wait to see who wins, but he sounded skeptical.

“I’m not hearing any commitment to Palestinian self-determination from anybody. I’m not hearing any commitment to ending the, like, the policy when it comes to settlements. I’m not hearing any remorse for the utter, like, annihilation of Gaza. So let’s see, right? Let’s see,” he said.

“I think right now, structurally, there are a lot of issues with that ostensible allyship. And I think the American public needs to have a conversation about it,” he added. “Like — and here’s the problem, right — too often the American public thinks one thing, right? You look at poll and poll, poll after poll after poll after poll. You all have reported on it, and then American politicians say something else. Why? And I think we should be asking, like, why?”

He continued, “Why is it that American politicians aren’t having the same conversation as the American public? I’m trying to have the conversation with the American public.”

Asked what his message is to Jewish Democrats who are on the fence about supporting him, El-Sayed turned the question back on the Rogers campaign.

“If you are committed to religious pluralism, take a look at the race that they’re running, and ask yourself if that helps anybody who is a religious minority in this country,” he said.

“If you’re committed to reproductive rights, if you’re committed to democracy itself, there is one candidate on the ballot who’s committed to those things,” he added. “Now, we may have differences when it comes to Israel, but the things that you notice are a lot bigger. I’m committed to the safety and security of the Jewish community like I’m committed to the safety and security of all of our communities.”

If elected, El-Sayed would be the first Muslim senator in American history. He said he is “committed to making sure that no matter how you pray, you’ve got a place here in America.”

“Nobody can tell you what you can or can’t do because of your faith. I know what it’s like to be discriminated against for how I pray, just turn on the TV,” he added. “And so I think the things that unite us are so much bigger than the things that divide us. But when it comes to a conversation about foreign policy, we might disagree. But I hope that the things that bring us  together are bigger than the things that divide us.”

Rogers has tried to capitalize on the hesitancy of some Jewish Democrats who are wary of El-Sayed.

“What the polls aren’t picking up is our effort in the Democrat Jewish community,” Rogers said last week at a campaign stop in Sterling Heights, a Detroit suburb. “There’s about 100,000. Those numbers are swelling up. It’s huge for us. The numbers are growing every day, even after last night, lots of calls, they want to get in and be a part of it. You’re never going to see that in a poll.”

Felicia Schwartz contributed to this report.

The post El-Sayed says a Netanyahu loss may not change his view of Israel appeared first on MS NOW.

STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich. — On the eve of the first debate in Michigan’s marquee Senate race, Mike Rogers released an ad saying “we need to end this tariff war now.”

Two days later, he toured a manufacturing facility to tout the benefits it had seen from President Donald Trump’s tariff policy. That night, at a barn party in Highland, he was asked whether the tariffs on Canada had been a net positive or a net negative for Michigan.

“I think overall positive,” he responded.

The mixed messages capture the tightrope that Rogers, the Republican nominee for Michigan’s open Senate seat, has walked when it comes to Trump. In this battleground state, the president is a complicated figure, and some of his policies have proved unpopular.

Rogers, for his part, has argued that his approach to Trump is determined on a case-by-case basis. “If it’s good for Michigan, I’ll be fighting for it. If it’s bad for Michigan, I’ll be working with the president and my friends in the Senate to say we’ve got to change whatever that might be,” he told reporters outside the barn party.

It’s an approach shaped by Michigan’s purple politics. In 2024, Trump carried the state by 1.4 percentage points. That same year, Rogers lost his Senate race to then-Rep. Elissa Slotkin by 0.34 percentage points.

Trump’s standing in the state has been underwater since then. The president’s approval rating among likely Michigan voters is about 42%, according to a poll conducted by Mitchell Research & Communications for local television stations.

That’s what makes a possible Trump visit so tricky for Rogers.

Last week, Trump told reporters, “I’m going to Michigan in about a week and a half.” Days later, asked about a presidential visit, Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., said to “possibly keep the 25th open.” No visit has been formally announced.

Trump may show up. Rogers may not.

In the spin room after last week’s debate, MS NOW asked Rogers whether he wanted Trump to campaign in Michigan and whether he would appear with him. He answered only the first question.

“Yes, he’d be welcome — I’d love to have him talk to those people and get them fired up,” Rogers said, after crediting tariffs with helping cherry farmers and automakers and praising Trump’s no-tax-on-tips policy.

When he was pressed on whether he would appear alongside Trump, Rogers moved on to the next question. He attended a rally with the president in July.

Even Rogers’ supporters are split on whether Trump should come.

Bob Hoffman, the farmer who hosted the barn party on his property, said a Trump visit wouldn’t help.

“[Trump’s] approval rating is so low, Mike Rogers has to, I believe, emphasize that he represents the state of Michigan first, and maybe the Republican Party second,” Hoffman said. He wants Rogers to separate himself from the president on tariffs, fuel costs and immigration.

Linda Brandis, a 66-year-old resident of Commerce Township, sees it differently. She described Rogers as “cautious” in his relationship with the president and “his own man.” But on whether the two should campaign together, she said “it always helps.”

“There is nothing like a Trump rally. It is just pure love,” Brandis said. “So yeah, I think it can’t hurt.”

Abdul El-Sayed, Rogers’ Democratic opponent, agrees that Trump should come. He just thinks it will help him, not Rogers.

El-Sayed’s “it shouldn’t be this hard” bus tour took him to Escanaba, in the conservative Upper Peninsula, where he taunted the president at a town hall.

“Donald is thinking about coming to Michigan,” he told the crowd. “Donald is going to come and remind everybody that Donald is on the ballot. Donald, come. Tell everybody in Michigan that you are on the ballot. Your s––– tariff war is on the ballot. Your dumbass war with Iran is on the ballot. Your Medicaid cuts are on the ballot.”

Rogers, meanwhile, has picked his spots to break with Trump. At the debate, Rogers said that efforts from Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Minnesota this year were “probably not appropriate.” During that crackdown, federal agents killed two civilians. A day after the debate, at the barn party, Rogers said he disagreed with Trump’s deal to obtain diesel from Russia.

But for every step away from Trump, Rogers has taken another back toward him.

The day after the debate, Trump slammed El-Sayed on Truth Social, referring to him by his middle name, Mohamed, and labeling him “a Jihadist lunatic who hates our Country.” Democrats accused the president of using Islamophobic language against El-Sayed, who would be the first Muslim member of the Senate if elected.

Asked by MS NOW if the rhetoric had gone too far, Rogers stopped short of criticizing it.

“I can’t pick the guy’s middle name — that’s his legal middle name,” he said. “My argument is maybe his middle name, we should change it to ‘that big-government socialist.’”

Pressed further, he said, “I won’t speak for the president,” then pivoted to his efforts to court Muslim voters.

It wasn’t the first time Rogers had given Trump the benefit of the doubt.

This summer, after Trump gave a speech on election integrity, Rogers wrote on X that he was “thankful for President Trump’s commitment to transparency.” That was a notable statement from Rogers. He is a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and he strongly pushed back on Trump’s false claims of election fraud after the 2020 election.

The change of tune reflects a basic reality for Rogers. When he left Congress in 2015, Trump had not yet launched his first presidential campaign. Now, Trump is the face of the Republican Party.

Outside the barn party, Rogers was asked by MS NOW what had changed most since he was last in Washington. He didn’t mention Trump. Instead, he cited the cybersecurity experience he had gained and the increased partisanship in Washington.

When he was pressed on Trump, he got back on the tightrope by contrasting himself with Michigan’s two Democratic senators.

“I think we can go back and have a conversation with the president about what Michigan needs — right now, we don’t have that,” Rogers said. “We have two people that get up every morning and stab them in the eye, and can’t wait to do it.”

“My argument is, why don’t we send one person back to say, ‘hey, Mr. President, this is bad for us, this is really good for us, can you do this?” he added. “We don’t have that now. We haven’t had it in over a quarter century. So my argument is, this is the chance.”

Then he looked past Trump altogether.

“We only — he’s going to be there two years, and then he’s gone,” Rogers said. “This is a six-year term.”

Peggy Helman contributed to this report.

The post ‘He’s going to be there 2 years, and then he’s gone’: Mike Rogers’ Trump tightrope appeared first on MS NOW.