When Representative Haley Stevens of Michigan was asked on Thursday during a Democratic primary debate for Senate what it meant that she had accepted campaign contributions from donors to AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group, she spoke 160 words without coming remotely close to answering the question.
Instead, Ms. Stevens said her campaign was “a love letter to our state,” called for campaign finance reform and highlighted her endorsements from several high-profile former Democratic politicians from the state. She did not mention Israel or her support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
One of her rivals, Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, jumped in.
“You’re also just not answering the question,” said Dr. El-Sayed, a progressive former public health official, who suggested that money from AIPAC donors helped elect lawmakers in Washington who would keep sending American military aid to Israel.
Ultimately, he argued, such campaign money “buys $3.5 billion sent to a foreign military that can be used here to give classes here, to provide health care here, to build schools here. That’s where our money should be used.”
The exchange over AIPAC and American foreign policy toward Israel was the sharpest in a 60-minute debate that illustrated how drastically the politics of Israel have shifted within the Democratic Party. Nearly three-quarters of Democratic supporters now oppose military aid to Israel, a recent New York Times/Siena poll found, up from 45 percent three years ago. Sixty percent said they were more sympathetic to Palestinians than Israelis.
Before Israel’s devastation of Gaza, which it has carried out in response to the Hamas-led attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, it was relatively safe politically for mainstream Democrats to declare their support for the longtime U.S. ally. Now Democrats who are backed by pro-Israel groups and donors are tiptoeing around the subject — and in Ms. Haley’s case, avoiding discussion of it on a debate stage.
AIPAC, which has become toxic in Democratic primary politics, has not sent campaign money directly to Ms. Stevens or to other Democratic primary candidates this year. Instead, its donors have funneled money to preferred candidates and funded shadowy super PACs that have spent millions on Democratic primary contests in other states.
The question to Ms. Stevens followed a report on Thursday by The Detroit News that found that 31 percent of donors to Ms. Stevens’s Senate campaign had also given to AIPAC, a percentage far higher than during her previous two House bids. AIPAC’s fund-raising website has a page through which donors can give directly to Ms. Stevens.
The third Democrat in the Senate primary race, Mallory McMorrow, a state senator who is trying to position herself between Dr. El-Sayed’s left-wing politics and Ms. Stevens’s establishment-friendly moderation, said that she would have joined with 40 other Democratic senators who backed a resolution to ban U.S. arms sales to Israel.
Ms. Stevens would have opposed that resolution, an aide, Caitlin Legacki, said after the debate.
The three Michigan Democrats are vying to fill the seat being vacated by the retiring Senator Gary Peters, a two-term Democrat. It is expected to be among the most expensive and hard-fought general elections in the country this fall.
The debate on Thursday afternoon was held at the Mackinac Policy Conference, an annual gathering of Michigan business executives, political figures and local journalists on a car-free resort island off the state’s Upper Peninsula.
For the most part, the candidates’ onstage appearance was an agreeable discussion about how they would resist President Trump and why Michiganders should reject former Representative Mike Rogers, who is running unopposed in the Republican primary race for Senate.
Ms. Stevens, a four-term House member, repeatedly stressed her love for her state — “Michigan fires me up,” she said at one point, before reciting facts about how many counties the state contained (83) and where it ranked in terms of population (10th).
In all, Ms. Stevens said the word “Michigan” 49 times during the debate, according to a graphic on social media posted by Jonathan Oosting, a reporter for the news outlet Bridge Michigan. Ms. McMorrow was the runner-up with 23 mentions, while Dr. El-Sayed said it four times.
Dr. El-Sayed also leaned into a populist message during the debate, calling for a 7 percent tax on the wealth of billionaires and saying he backed a single-payer health care system.
Ms. McMorrow sought a middle path, arguing that she would be a more practical progressive.
“People can’t afford to wait for a revolution that may never come,” Ms. McMorrow said in response to a question about health care costs. “People who are rationing their insulin right now can’t afford to wait for ‘Medicare for all’ when we have options on the table right now.”
Dr. El-Sayed responded: “Revolution is definitely not coming if we’re not fighting for it.”
Katie Glueck contributed reporting.
Reid J. Epstein is a Times reporter covering campaigns and elections from Washington.
The post A Democrat’s Dodge on AIPAC Points to the Party’s Tensions Over Israel appeared first on New York Times.
