Key Takeaways From the Michigan Senate Debate Between El-Sayed and Rogers

Two leading candidates in the Michigan Senate race faced off in their first televised debate, with less than a month to go before the US midterm elections.

The hour-long debate on Thursday was a microcosm of just how tense this tight race has become.

Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed, the former Wayne County health director, repeatedly sought to paint his Republican opponent Mike Rogers as a yacht-owning millionaire out of touch with ordinary voters.

Rogers, a former US congressman, countered by accusing El-Sayed of being soft on "terrorism" and sympathetic to foreign countries.

El-Sayed, who was born in Michigan, has faced repeated Islamophobic attacks on the campaign trail. Republican President Donald Trump has labeled him a "radical, terrorist-sympathizing" candidate with a "Jihadist" past. If elected, El-Sayed would become the first Muslim member of the US Senate.

The two candidates spent much of their time on stage talking over each other, trading sharp jabs.

"He cannot condemn a terrorist act that happened in our country, in the state of Michigan. He cannot condemn —," Rogers began, referring to an attack on a synagogue in March.

"I did condemn it," El-Sayed said, cutting him off. "No, you didn't," Rogers replied, and El-Sayed shot back: "You're lying. You're lying."

The Michigan Senate race is seen as pivotal to defending Republican control of the US Senate. Democrats are seeking to flip both chambers of Congress, but changing control of the Senate will be a harder prospect since only a third of the 100 seats are up for election on November 3.

Moderator Rick Albin at times struggled to keep the debate on track as tensions rose.

"We have dozens of questions to get to. You can't argue all of this with fourteen different responses, so work with me," Albin told the two candidates at one point.

Here are the key takeaways from the evening debate.

Rogers hints El-Sayed has ties to a 'terror watch list'

The intensity of the debate was underscored by the sheer number of personal attacks the two candidates leveled at each other.

But Rogers repeatedly pushed a series of allegations that appeared to swirl around El-Sayed's Muslim identity.

Asked about healthcare, Rogers said El-Sayed "has taken money from individuals in his campaign who openly support Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda".

Later, asked about his stance on Flock camera surveillance, Rogers argued such technology has helped catch suspected terrorists. He then suggested El-Sayed's concerns about the cameras were suspicious.

"Why does that bother you?" Rogers asked El-Sayed. "Well, if you have somebody in your family who might be on a terror watch list..."

El-Sayed cut in, seemingly challenging Rogers to finish his thought.

"You're going to say I'm a — go ahead and say it," El-Sayed said. "You've been tiptoeing around it the whole time. Say it. Say it. Say it."

Muslim and Arab candidates in the US routinely face Islamophobic attacks on the campaign trail, with accusations of supporting "terrorism" and Islamism.

Both agree on ending the Iran war

There were issues, however, where the two candidates found common ground.

Both Rogers and El-Sayed agreed the US-Israeli war against Iran should end, but they held opposing views on Washington's relationship with Israel and its role in the conflict.

El-Sayed said high gas prices and inflation were caused directly by the Iran war, and blamed the Trump administration for Iran's decision to close the Strait of Hormuz, a key trade route.

"This is what happens when you start wars you should never have gotten into," El-Sayed said. "We have effectively taught the Iranian regime that they can choke off the Strait of Hormuz, and now we are living in that reality."

Rogers agreed that "we need [the war] to end", but he also justified the conflict, saying Iran's uranium enrichment program had been "set back twenty years", echoing a talking point often pushed by the White House.

The Trump administration argues the war was necessary to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon, a goal Tehran has long denied.

Rogers's stance led El-Sayed to accuse him of "cheerleading" for the war and the Trump administration.

Rogers backs continued aid to Israel, El-Sayed calls for an end

As part of the debate over US foreign policy, the candidates were also questioned on their views of the US-Israel alliance.

The country is considered the largest overall recipient of US aid since World War II. From the start of Israel's war on Gaza in October 2023 through September 2025, experts estimate Israel received nearly $21.7bn in military aid.

El-Sayed has publicly called for an end to aid to Israel, and he has repeatedly denounced the conflict in Gaza as a genocide, in line with assessments by UN experts and human rights monitors.

During the debate, he said he wanted American taxpayers' money spent on domestic issues like education and healthcare, not aid to Israel.

"He wants unconditional support for a foreign government," El-Sayed said of Rogers. "I want unconditional support for our kids in schools, unconditional support for healthcare, childcare."

He also blamed Israel for US military action in Iran. "I don't want to be dragged into a war by Israel, and I don't want a war with Iran," El-Sayed said.

Rogers, meanwhile, has joined most of his Republican colleagues in continuing to support aid to Israel. He argued the country has "a right to self-defense in a very tough neighborhood".

"Is there anything Israel could do to lose your support?" the moderator asked.

"Listen, if they talk about using nuclear weapons, they would certainly lose my support," Rogers replied.

Rogers says immigration crackdown 'inappropriate'

Another hot-button issue in the debate was Trump's immigration crackdown.

The Republican leader has pledged the largest mass deportation effort in US history, and his campaign has raised human rights concerns.

Asked how they would approach the crackdown, both Rogers and El-Sayed agreed on reducing the militarized nature of the operation.

In several cities, including nearby Minneapolis, Minnesota, immigration authorities have been accused of racial profiling and excessive force against immigrants and protesters, as well as violating their due process rights.

Multiple fatal shootings have occurred during immigration enforcement operations, including the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in January.

Rogers said he would not support such confrontational operations, but he repeated Trump's claim that the raids are removing dangerous criminals from the streets.

"I think the public efforts in Minnesota are probably inappropriate," Rogers said. "You always want to go in quietly, get the bad guys, leave the neighborhood with fewer problems. So, to me, that's something they could have done differently."

He later claimed that under Trump, the country has seen "the largest drop in murders ever recorded".

El-Sayed, meanwhile, has previously expressed support for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a key agency in Trump's deportation campaign. He defended that position on the debate stage.

"ICE right now is not about immigration enforcement. ICE is about terrorizing our streets," he said.

Candidates clash over trade war with Canada and tariffs

Donald Trump's trade war with Canada, felt acutely in neighboring Michigan, was another major topic of conversation.

El-Sayed portrayed Rogers as an uncritical supporter of Trump and his tariffs, and tied him to past free trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which paved the way for companies to move manufacturing out of the US.

"You did that. That was your policy. NAFTA, that was your policy," El-Sayed said.

Rogers sought to distance himself from the current trade war but expressed support for a deal with Canada that would ease some of Ottawa's tariffs on US goods.

"I'd like to see the deal get done," Rogers said, adding that Canada's high tariffs on US goods "should be removed".

Both candidates tried to balance criticizing the economic impact of the trade war with quantifying their support for more selective tariffs, favored by some industries and unions as a way to protect domestic jobs.