El-Sayed Faces Backlash Over Israel Stance in Senate Debate

Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed is under fire from some Jewish Democrats and facing criticism from political experts following a debate where he declined to explicitly call Israel a U.S. ally. During a recent debate with Republican rival Mike Rogers, El-Sayed stated, “I don’t consider an ally a country that takes us to wars we don’t need to fight,” when asked to compare Israel and Iran.

Rogers had pressed El-Sayed on his stance regarding Israel, particularly after El-Sayed initially did not issue a statement marking the third anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack. El-Sayed asserted he had condemned the attack but accused Rogers of using the event for political gain.

The exchange has reignited questions about El-Sayed's alignment with Jewish Democrats, with some expressing reservations about supporting the progressive candidate due to his views on Israel. The Michigan Democratic Jewish Caucus has not formally endorsed El-Sayed. Experts suggest El-Sayed's remarks could be detrimental to his campaign.

"He, himself, has created this predicament and he now comes off as confused and inauthentic," Jeff McCall, a professor at DePauw University, told The Post, adding that El-Sayed is "failing the rhetorical challenge."

David Dulio, a political science professor at Oakland University, noted that El-Sayed's foreign policy positions are potentially further to the left than other progressive figures. He highlighted the exchange over Israel and Iran as a pivotal moment in the debate, suggesting it might influence undecided Jewish Democrats.

"Many Jewish Democrats in Michigan have been skeptical of El-Sayed and have expressed uncertainty about his candidacy," Dulio said. "They were likely listening for a question like this to help them make up their minds." Dulio predicted that El-Sayed's comments could cause a "wobble" in his campaign, potentially benefiting Rogers, who might leverage the debate clips in future advertisements.

Former GOP Rep. Peter Meijer criticized El-Sayed's response, calling the question "dumb" and a "ridiculous hypothetical." Meijer argued that while the question might have been poorly framed, El-Sayed could have provided a more direct answer regarding the countries' relationships with the U.S. Meijer also questioned whether El-Sayed's reluctance stemmed from political strategy or a deeper issue, stating, "At a certain point, it goes from either this is political malpractice at best, or he [El-Sayed] can’t, or he won’t because of something deeper — and that’s far more troubling."

In the lead-up to the debate, a Republican Jewish Coalition ad featured Michigan Jewish Democrats who stated they would "never vote for Abdul El-Sayed," citing his perceived leniency towards those responsible for the Oct. 7 attacks. Another voter recalled El-Sayed's comment that "hurt people, hurt people" in the context of a Michigan synagogue attack, interpreting it as tacit permission for further violence.

During the debate, El-Sayed also reiterated his opposition to U.S. taxpayer funding for weapons to foreign countries, including Israel, and stated he would not support U.S. involvement in a war with Iran. Rogers, conversely, affirmed Israel's right to self-defense and advocated for continued U.S. support for the nation.

McCall suggested that given El-Sayed's past statements, it is unlikely he would alter his rhetoric sufficiently to satisfy supporters of Israel. An unidentified Democratic insider indicated that outreach to Jewish Democrats remains a focus for El-Sayed's campaign, aiming to connect with those open to his candidacy.