QUESTION 1): Does an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) endorsement help or hurt a particular candidate in the August 4 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate?
ANSWER 1): It certainly doesn’t seem to be hurting U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI 11) right now, or in her previous runs for Congress. An AIPAC endorsement typically comes with a certain amount of cash, and Stevens has received significant financial backing from AIPAC and its network. In the 2022 election cycle, AIPAC bundled over $940,000 for her Congressional re-election campaign, and reported donations and bundled funds have continued to grow into her 2026 Senate run. She describes herself as a “proud pro-Israel Democrat” and an unwavering “Zionist.” She has opposed calls to label Israel’s military response in Gaza a genocide and has criticized the United Nations for what she characterizes as biased targeting of Israel.
Needless to say, Stevens’s close ties to AIPAC have made her a frequent target for progressive and Arab American activists, particularly supporters of Abdul El-Sayed, one of Stevens’s Democratic primary opponents. For example, during the Michigan Democrats’ spring endorsement convention on April 19, pro-Palestinian delegates heckled Stevens and chanted “shame on you” during her speech, while cheering El-Sayed.
In her 2026 U.S. Senate race, Stevens faces primary opponents — both El-Sayed and state Senator Mallory McMorrow — who have sworn off AIPAC donations and criticized U.S. policy in Gaza, further highlighting Stevens’s pro-Israel positioning as a key dividing line in the state. However, McMorrow in the last few years has taken money from AIPAC as well as donors who have contributed to AIPAC, drawing scorn from El-Sayed for trying to have it “both ways” by straddling the combustible issue.
Some Democratic activists see AIPAC as the kiss of death, even if a particular candidate isn’t a progressive Democrat. True, the impact of being beholden to AIPAC can be quite negative in some special elections around the country, but special elections are not regular primary elections. The Aug. 4 Michigan Democratic primary is just that — a PRIMARY where all registered voters can cast ballots. There’s scant evidence that being pro-Palestinian or anti-Zionist yields much campaign cash to candidates, but t
The difficulty for Democrats is that their party is polarized between Zionists and pro-Palestine/anti-Semites. August 4 will be a test of whether older, more mainstream Democrats will turn out in force to vote for Stevens, as opposed to far fewer, younger, pro-Palestinian delegates with skimpier wallets at the 4/19 conclave.
Plus, Stevens just picked up endorsements from former U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow and ex-Governor Jennifer Granholm, and Stevens is in the midst of a month-long $6 million media blitz fueled at least partly by AIPAC money.
Of course, we should keep in mind that Arab-Americans and/or Muslims (they’re not necessarily the same) make up only about 4% of Michigan’s population at most, although the percentage of such voters in a Democratic primary is much higher. Whatever it is, that’s just a fraction of the electorate, be it primary or general. However, it’s probably twice as big as the Jewish population, and El-Sayed is the best retail politician in the bunch.
All that said, will AIPAC or the Jews vs. Arab/Muslim divide really be a determining factor in what happens Aug. 4, or will other issues take precedence?
************************************************


Those who are familiar with the “Uncommitted” movement from 2024 realize that the movement was not monolithic. For every Arab-American or Muslim-American that joined that movement in 2024 there was at least an equal number of activists that opposed the Biden administration policy in the Middle East and openly opposed Kamala Harris in her presidential run in 2024 for her slavish support of Israel.
Should Stevens receive the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination, they will be hundreds of thousands of Michigan Democrats who either will vote for Mike Rogers or not cast a ballot for either in November.
Republicans, therefore should want to see Haley Stevens receive the Democratic Party nomination. Many feel Abdul Elsayed as the preferred opponent as nominee – but the problem is that Democrtas as well as Republicans are beginning to perceive Elsayed as the most honest candidate in the race.
Haley Stevens’ imprudent ongoing pro-Israel rants (e.g. “I see Israel in my dreams”) that are being uploaded to YouTube – and have been for the last several years – are annoying most grassroots Democrats. As are her massive acceptance of political action committee donations from corporate big business interests.
Mallory McMorrow may be the best candidate the Democratic Party leadership can hope for to win the nomination for U.S. Senate – but in recent weeks even she has taken hits in the media for her reported wealth and failure to satisfy water bill obligations.
Recent polling shows that the Democratic U.S. Senate race is a three-way dead heat – but against Mike Rogers as the presumptive GOP nominee, all three Democratic Party candidates are falling behind Rogers. Mike Rogers is the one bright spot Michigan GOP leaders can tout as someone who is running a decent campaign.
The April 19th, 2026 Democratic party state convention in Detroit should have been a wake-up call to the Democratic Party leadership that foolishly supports Haley Stevens in her bid for the U.S. Senate nomination. An unheard-of 7,000 state convention delegates appeared – primarily youth and minority members – and they booed and heckled Stevens unmercifully.
The Arab-American News has also reported that Rep. Stevens’ local Congressional office has been targeted by demonstrators. In short, she is a highly controversial candidate largely perceived by grassroots Democrats as being captive to pro-Israel and corporate interests who have purchased influence via PAC donations she has cheerfully accepted.
Rep. Stevens has risen the AIPAC wave to success in her U.S. House bids – but now that is boomeranging against her – it is time for Haley to “pay the piper”.