Record outside spending for Stevens a sign of larger fight
My son’s 14-year-old friends had go-karts on their brains as we pulled into High Caliber for some birthday party fun when one of them uncorked this question:
“What’s up with this Haley Stevens?”
Was he responding to my joke about detouring to the Lansing Center to watch the Bernie Sanders rally instead?
“The U.S. Senate candidate? Why do you ask?”
He looked back at me with a bit of an agitated look.
“Her ads are literally on ALL OF THE TIME. I’m so sick of them.”
That’s what $52 million will get you. A blanket of paid media that’s so thick even teenage boys are talking about it.
To blow this out a bit more, consider this:
– Haley Stevens’s campaign has only spent $1.18 million in TV ads this primary season. That’s 1/50th of the amount promoting her at this point.
– Her chief opponent, Abdul El-Sayed, and a political action committee spending on his behalf have spent about $4.5 million in paid media, less than 1/10th of money spent on Stevens.
– Mallory McMorrow, who dropped out of the race a couple of weeks ago because she couldn’t keep up with the astronomical spending, combined with a PAC supporting her for about $9 million in TV ads.
– In short, take what pro-El-Sayed and pro-McMorrow interests have spent, multiply it by four, and you’ll about equal the pro-Stevens spending.
So, who are these PACs? This United Democracy Project? A Stronger Michigan? Fight for Michigan? Center Forward? United to Win? Center for Democratic Priorities?
Incredibly, they’re not required to disclose their funders, but the Associated Press reported this weekend that at least $30 million of it is coming from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel lobbying group that ABSOLUTELY doesn’t want someone who openly talks about “genocide” in the Gaza Strip in the U.S. Senate.
All of the other pro-Stevens messages being shared in the ads – checking President Donald Trump, standing up to ICE, being an effective member of Congress – may all be true.
But the core of this spending, the reason we’re seeing a likely record amount of outside money being spent on a Democratic U.S Senate primary, is that one candidate is openly campaigning to end U.S. government support for Israel and the other is not.
Israel remains at war with Hamas in Gaza and continues military operations against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.
Like U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, El-Sayed is the type of rabble rouser who could presumably gin up more public discontent against Israel going forward.
Stevens, meanwhile, is a vocal supporter of Israel. This position alone, though, isn’t going to win her the Democratic primary. Not in 2026.
An AP-NORC poll from June 11-17 found that 58% of Democrats believe the United States is too supportive of the Israelis in their conflict with the Palestinians.
That’s why if you’re looking for Stevens’s backing of Israel and its fight against Muslim militants in this avalanche of TV spending, you won’t find it.
But, ironically, that’s why you’re seeing the ads.
If members of the Democratic establishment aren’t nervous about all of this, they should be. If El-Sayed and his strong cadre of progressives like Will Lawrence and Donovan McKinney in Detroit are successful, will AIPAC involve itself in November’s general election in support of Republican Mike Rogers in the fall?
If as much as $50 million in outside interests feel this strongly about El-Sayed this summer, what is stopping them from spending in support of another pro-Israel politician in Rogers?
And if this type of money is going to the Republican, what does this mean for Democrats down ballot? Does this hurt Jocelyn Benson? The chances of the Democrats retaining the state Senate or taking over the state House?
There’s more at stake with these seemingly endless commercials in support of Haley Stevens. It’s one battle in a much larger war.
Literally.
