AIPAC-Linked Super PAC Drops $2.3 Million Into Michigan Senate Race, Intensifying Debate Over Israel and Outside Influence

 

LANSING, Mich. — A major pro-Israel political action committee has entered Michigan's Democratic U.S. Senate primary with a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign supporting U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, injecting new energy into one of the race's most contentious issues: Israel, foreign policy, and the role of outside money in elections.

According to campaign filings, the United Democracy Project (UDP), the super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has reserved approximately $2.33 million in television and digital advertising across Michigan to boost Stevens' Senate campaign.

The ad buy includes more than $2.2 million in airtime reservations across the Detroit, Flint, Grand Rapids, and Traverse City markets, along with additional spending on CNN, MNOW, and satellite television networks.

Interestingly, the advertisements make no mention of Israel or Middle East policy. Instead, they highlight Stevens' work supporting Michigan's auto industry, protecting manufacturing jobs, and fighting against cuts to Medicare. One portion of the ad features former President Barack Obama praising Stevens' efforts to help save auto jobs during the industry crisis.

Nevertheless, the source of the spending has reignited a political debate that has become increasingly important in Democratic politics, particularly in Michigan, home to one of the nation's largest Arab American populations and a significant Jewish community.

Stevens' chief Democratic rival, former gubernatorial candidate and public health expert Abdul El-Sayed, wasted little time criticizing the move.

"A super PAC focused on sending our taxpayer dollars abroad is coming in to try and buy the race for a candidate who is going to do their bidding," El-Sayed said.

He argued that voters should focus on domestic priorities such as healthcare, education, roads, and bridges rather than organizations advocating for foreign policy interests.

"If you want your money spent on your health care in Michigan, your schools in Michigan, your roads and bridges in Michigan, then it'd be worth rethinking whether or not you're going to pay attention to what United Democracy Project and AIPAC think you should do," he said.

The spending also places a spotlight on the differing positions of the Democratic field.

Stevens has long been viewed as one of the more openly pro-Israel Democrats in Michigan's congressional delegation. While she has expressed concern about civilian casualties in Gaza and supported humanitarian assistance, she has consistently backed the U.S.-Israel alliance and military support for Israel.

El-Sayed, by contrast, has emerged as one of the state's most outspoken critics of Israeli policy. His calls for significant changes in U.S. policy toward Israel have earned him strong support among many progressives, younger voters, and Arab Americans who have been deeply critical of Israel's conduct during the Gaza war.

State Sen. Mallory McMorrow has attempted to occupy a middle ground between the two candidates. McMorrow has voiced support for Israel's right to exist and defend itself and has condemned antisemitism, while also expressing concerns about civilian suffering in Gaza. At the same time, she has sought to distance herself from outside political spending, arguing that Michigan voters—not national organizations and super PACs—should determine the outcome of the Senate race.

That position has allowed McMorrow to appeal to some Democrats uncomfortable with both El-Sayed's sharp criticism of Israel and the growing influence of outside groups such as AIPAC in Democratic primaries.

The issue has become particularly sensitive within progressive Democratic circles.

For years, AIPAC was largely viewed as a mainstream bipartisan lobbying organization. Today, however, it has become a lightning rod among many progressives who view the group's spending as an attempt to suppress criticism of Israel within the Democratic Party.

At the same time, many Jewish Democrats in Metro Detroit find themselves navigating a complicated political landscape. Some strongly support Israel's existence and security while also opposing the policies of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Others worry that increasingly hostile rhetoric toward Israel risks alienating Jewish voters who remain committed to a two-state solution but reject accusations that Israel's very existence is illegitimate.

Political observers say those tensions could create challenges regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination.

If Stevens secures the nomination with significant support from AIPAC-affiliated spending, some progressive voters could become disillusioned and choose not to participate in the general election. Conversely, if El-Sayed captures the nomination, some moderate Democrats and pro-Israel voters could find themselves weighing whether to support Republican candidate Mike Rogers or abstain from the race altogether.

McMorrow's supporters argue that her candidacy offers a potential bridge between those factions, though whether that message can gain traction in an increasingly polarized political environment remains to be seen.

What is clear is that the Michigan Senate race is evolving into more than a contest between individual candidates. It has become a broader battle over the Democratic Party's future, the influence of outside money, America's relationship with Israel, and the priorities voters want their next senator to pursue.

With millions of dollars already being spent and national political organizations increasingly focused on Michigan, those debates are likely to intensify in the months ahead as voters decide who will advance to the general election and potentially represent Michigan in the United States Senate for years to come.

Donald Trump Is Holding the Gordie Howe Bridge Hostage While Michigan Waits

For years Michigan residents, Canadian neighbors, businesses, truckers, and taxpayers have watched the Gordie Howe International Bridge rise over the Detroit River. The massive $5 billion project was billed as a game-changing piece of infrastructure that would strengthen trade, create jobs, reduce congestion, and connect two nations more efficiently than ever before.

Today, the bridge is essentially complete.

And yet it remains closed.

Why?

Increasingly, critics point to one man: President Donald Trump.

The Gordie Howe International Bridge was expected to open in the spring of 2026. Construction is largely finished. Border facilities are in place. Local leaders on both sides of the border say they are ready. Businesses are ready. Residents are ready. Detroit is ready. Windsor is ready.

The only thing missing is the political green light.

Instead of celebrating a once-in-a-generation infrastructure achievement, Michigan finds itself trapped in another episode of political brinkmanship.

Trump has openly suggested that the bridge's opening could be delayed until the United States receives what he considers adequate compensation for its role in the project. The bridge has effectively become a bargaining chip in broader negotiations between Washington and Ottawa.

That may make for dramatic political theater. It makes terrible public policy.

The bridge was never intended to be a hostage in an international negotiation. It was intended to serve the public.

Every day the bridge sits unused represents lost economic opportunity. Businesses that planned around the new crossing continue waiting. Truck traffic remains concentrated at existing crossings. Communities on both sides of the border are denied the benefits they were promised years ago.

The delay is especially frustrating because Canadian taxpayers largely financed the bridge's construction, with the expectation that toll revenues would eventually repay the costs. Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens has publicly warned against forcing Canada into a bad deal simply to satisfy Trump's demands.

Meanwhile, Michigan Democrats have accused Trump and Republicans of "playing political games" with a project that should already be serving the public. Whether one agrees with that characterization or not, the reality remains that no firm opening date has been announced despite repeated expectations that the bridge would be operational by now.

This is not merely a local issue.

The Detroit-Windsor corridor handles hundreds of billions of dollars in trade. It is one of the most important commercial crossings in North America. Auto manufacturing, agriculture, logistics, and countless other industries depend on smooth movement between the United States and Canada.

When politics delays infrastructure, workers pay the price.

Small businesses pay the price.

Consumers pay the price.

Michigan pays the price.

Trump's supporters argue that he is protecting American interests and negotiating from a position of strength. They point to his "America First" agenda and insist that the delay is part of a broader strategy to secure favorable terms for the United States.

But there is a difference between tough negotiation and unnecessary obstruction.

A completed bridge that sits empty benefits nobody.

The Gordie Howe International Bridge was supposed to symbolize cooperation between two longtime allies. Instead, it has become another example of how political disputes can derail practical solutions.

The people of Michigan do not need another political stunt.

They need the bridge opened.

The truck drivers waiting in line at existing crossings do not care about political leverage.

The businesses planning shipments do not care about partisan talking points.

The families hoping to visit friends and relatives across the border do not care about negotiation tactics.

They care about results.

After years of construction, billions of dollars in investment, and countless promises, the public deserves better than endless delays and political gamesmanship.

The bridge is built.

The infrastructure is ready.

The communities are ready.

The only question remaining is whether Donald Trump is willing to stop using the Gordie Howe International Bridge as a bargaining chip and finally allow it to fulfill the purpose for which it was built.

M

Complaint Alleges Rep. John James Used Taxpayer-Funded Ads Beyond Congressional District

A formal complaint filed with a U.S. House committee alleges that U.S. Rep. John James, R-Mich., improperly used taxpayer-funded communications to reach audiences outside his congressional district while preparing a campaign for Michigan governor.

The complaint was submitted May 27 to the House Committee on House Administration by Carl Berry, former police chief of Plymouth, who resides in Michigan's 6th Congressional District, represented by Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell.

According to the complaint, Berry received a YouTube advertisement paid for by James' congressional office despite not living within Michigan's 10th Congressional District, which James represents. Berry argues that the communication violated House rules governing taxpayer-funded member communications, commonly known as franking.

Members of Congress are permitted to use official funds for communications intended to inform constituents about legislative activities, government services, and other official business. House guidelines state that unsolicited mass communications should primarily serve constituents within the member's district and that efforts should be made to minimize distribution outside district boundaries.

The complaint cites records from Google's advertising transparency database showing that one version of a YouTube advertisement sponsored by James' congressional office ran throughout the Detroit Designated Market Area between May 18 and June 1. That media market includes portions of several congressional districts beyond the 10th District, including the 6th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 13th districts.

Screenshots included with the complaint allegedly show two separate advertising campaigns. One campaign was reportedly targeted exclusively to Michigan's 10th Congressional District, while another broader campaign reached viewers throughout the Detroit metropolitan area.

According to the complaint, the district-specific advertisement cost between $4,000 and $4,500 and reached as many as 250,000 viewers. The broader regional campaign allegedly cost between $6,000 and $7,000 and reached up to 450,000 viewers.

Berry argues that the existence of a district-specific advertising option demonstrates that James' office had the technical capability to limit communications to constituents but chose to expand the audience beyond district boundaries.

The House Communications Standards Manual states that unsolicited mass communications "must serve the district in which the Member represents" and "to the greatest extent possible, shall not be targeted outside of the Member's district." For digital advertising and other communications not tied to specific mailing addresses, the manual further requires that "best efforts must be made to ensure the communication is distributed to as few individuals outside the district as possible."

The complaint asks the committee to investigate whether James' congressional office violated House rules governing official communications and the use of taxpayer funds.

James, who is widely viewed as a potential Republican candidate for Michigan governor in 2026, has not publicly responded to the allegations. The House Committee on House Administration has not announced whether it will open a formal investigation.

The complaint comes as scrutiny increases nationwide over the use of taxpayer-funded communications by elected officials who are simultaneously pursuing higher office. While congressional offices routinely use digital advertising to communicate with constituents, House rules prohibit the use of official resources for campaign purposes.

No findings have been made regarding the allegations, and the complaint represents claims made by the complainant that have not been adjudicated by the House committee.

Former Fox 2 Anchor Taryn Asher's Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Faces Questions as Legal Battle Begins

 

Former Fox 2 Detroit anchor Taryn Asher has filed a federal lawsuit against her former employer, alleging gender discrimination and retaliation, but the case is already drawing scrutiny over whether the claims will ultimately withstand legal and factual examination.

Asher, a longtime Detroit television personality and Emmy Award-winning journalist, alleges that male coworkers received professional opportunities, scheduling accommodations and other advantages that were not extended to her. She further claims that after raising concerns about what she viewed as unequal treatment, station management retaliated against her and eventually removed her from the workplace.

However, the lawsuit presents only one side of the dispute, and many of the allegations remain unproven. Fox Television Stations and Fox 2 Detroit have not publicly responded in detail to the claims, and no court has determined whether discrimination actually occurred.

According to the complaint, Asher was placed on leave while management investigated allegations regarding her workplace conduct. Asher denies wrongdoing and argues that male employees accused of misconduct were treated more favorably.

Employment law experts note that workplace discrimination lawsuits often involve subjective perceptions of fairness that can be difficult to prove in court. Simply believing coworkers received better opportunities is generally not enough to establish unlawful discrimination. Plaintiffs typically must demonstrate a clear pattern of unequal treatment tied directly to gender and supported by evidence.

The case may also raise questions about whether management's actions were motivated by discrimination or by concerns unrelated to gender. If Fox can demonstrate legitimate business reasons for its decisions, Asher could face a significant challenge in convincing a jury that discrimination was the primary factor.

The lawsuit arrives at a time when allegations of workplace bias frequently generate public attention before all of the facts become known. Critics of such claims argue that disagreements over assignments, scheduling and workplace discipline do not automatically constitute discrimination and that employers retain broad authority to manage personnel decisions.

Asher's filing has generated discussion throughout Michigan's media industry, but legal analysts caution against drawing conclusions before evidence is presented. Internal communications, performance records, witness testimony and disciplinary documentation are likely to play a central role in determining whether the allegations have merit.

For now, the lawsuit remains a series of accusations rather than established facts. Asher will bear the burden of proving her claims in federal court, while Fox will have the opportunity to challenge those allegations and present its own explanation for the events described in the complaint.

The case is expected to proceed through the federal court system, where both sides will have the opportunity to present evidence and arguments before a judge or jury.

No trial date has been announced.

Questions Mount Over John James' Use of Taxpayer-Funded Advertising Amid Michigan Governor Bid

LANSING, Mich. — Michigan Congressman and gubernatorial candidate John James is facing renewed scrutiny after a formal complaint alleged he used taxpayer-funded congressional advertising to reach voters far outside the district he was elected to represent, raising questions about whether public resources were used to support a statewide political campaign.

The complaint, highlighted Monday by the campaign of Republican gubernatorial candidate Mike Cox, alleges that James' congressional office spent taxpayer funds on YouTube advertisements targeting viewers throughout the Detroit media market, including residents in multiple congressional districts that James does not represent.

According to the complaint, the advertising campaign extended well beyond Michigan's 10th Congressional District and may have been designed to bolster James' statewide name recognition as he pursues the governor's office.

The allegations have intensified criticism surrounding James' handling of legislation commonly referred to by opponents as the "Kill Switch" issue. Critics contend James previously voted in favor of legislation they argue could have paved the way for vehicle-monitoring technology mandates before later attempting to publicly distance himself from the issue.

The Cox campaign accused James of using taxpayer-funded communications to rehabilitate his image on the controversial matter.

"Michigan families work too hard to have their tax dollars turned into John James' personal campaign slush fund," Cox said in a statement announcing the complaint.

The complaint further alleges that James' congressional office spent more taxpayer money reaching voters across the broader Detroit media market than communicating directly with constituents inside his own district. If proven, such activity could raise questions about whether official congressional communications were being used primarily for constituent outreach or for broader political purposes.

Campaign finance and congressional ethics rules generally prohibit the use of taxpayer-funded resources for campaign activity. While members of Congress routinely communicate with constituents using official funds, critics argue that communications timed alongside a statewide campaign can create the appearance of political self-promotion, particularly when advertisements reach audiences outside a member's district.

Adding to the controversy are claims that James' congressional office used taxpayer-funded advertising to promote his opposition to policies connected to the so-called "Kill Switch" debate after critics had already begun attacking his voting record on the issue.

The Cox campaign characterized the advertisements as an attempt to repair political damage while shifting the cost to taxpayers.

The allegations arrive at a critical moment for James, whose gubernatorial campaign has already faced questions about fundraising, campaign organization, and his record in Congress. A former U.S. Senate candidate who lost two statewide races before winning election to Congress, James entered the governor's race with significant name recognition but also substantial political baggage from previous campaigns.

At the center of the latest controversy is a broader question that voters may ultimately decide: whether taxpayer-funded communications were used to inform constituents or to strengthen a statewide political campaign.

As of Monday, no public ruling had been issued regarding the complaint, and James' campaign had not announced any reimbursement of taxpayer funds related to the advertisements in question.

The controversy ensures that questions surrounding James' use of public resources—and his handling of the "Kill Switch" issue—are likely to remain a focal point in Michigan's increasingly competitive gubernatorial race.

Former Detroit Sportscaster Brad Galli Launches Independent Digital Sports Show

 Former WXYZ-TV sports director Brad Galli has launched a new independent sports media venture following his departure from the Detroit television station after more than 15 years on the air.

Galli announced Monday the debut of The Brad Galli Show, a digital-first sports program that will focus on professional, collegiate, and high school athletics across Michigan. The show will be distributed through social media platforms and feature interviews, behind-the-scenes coverage, feature stories, and analysis.

The launch comes just months after Galli revealed he would be leaving WXYZ, where he served as one of Detroit's most recognizable sports broadcasters. At the time, Galli told viewers he planned to remain active in sports media and would soon unveil his next project.

According to a press release, the new venture is designed to provide more flexibility than traditional television news, allowing for longer interviews, more in-depth storytelling, and more frequent content updates.

"I am excited to take fans closer to the action, consistently providing content that gets people up close with their favorite players, coaches, and prominent figures in the state of Michigan and beyond," Galli said in a statement. "We're going to be meeting fans on digital media platforms that allow us to provide greater access, more conversations, and more storytelling than ever before."

The show officially launched June 1 and marks a growing trend among veteran television journalists and broadcasters who are transitioning to independent digital media platforms to reach audiences directly.

Galli's program will cover a wide range of sports topics, from Detroit's professional teams to college athletics and high school sports, with an emphasis on long-form content and direct engagement with viewers.

Questions Grow Over Outside Influence in Michigan Senate Race as Pro-Israel Group Quietly Boosts Haley Stevens

 

A growing controversy surrounding U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens’ Democratic Senate campaign is fueling accusations that powerful outside political organizations are attempting to quietly shape Michigan’s Senate primary while avoiding full public scrutiny.

At the center of the storm is the growing role of pro-Israel political networks and affiliated donors tied to Stevens’ campaign fundraising operation.

According to an analysis by The Detroit News, a substantial portion of Stevens’ donor base appears connected to fundraising channels associated with major pro-Israel political interests, even though many of those organizations do not prominently appear in campaign branding or public messaging.

Critics say the strategy reflects a modern political playbook increasingly common in Washington: use legally separate PACs, donor networks, bundled contributions, and affiliated fundraising operations to maximize political influence while minimizing public visibility.

The issue is not necessarily whether laws were broken.

The issue is whether voters are being fully informed about who is attempting to buy influence in one of the nation’s most important Senate races.

Stevens has long positioned herself as one of the Democratic Party’s strongest pro-Israel voices in Congress. That alignment has made her a favored candidate among influential pro-Israel political organizations and donor circles that have aggressively intervened in Democratic primaries nationwide.

Those groups have spent millions in recent election cycles targeting progressive Democrats viewed as insufficiently supportive of Israel or critical of Israeli government policy.

Now, many Michigan Democrats are beginning to ask whether outside political money is attempting to override the priorities of local voters.

The controversy intensified after reports revealed fundraising operations connected to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, were helping elevate Stevens’ candidacy while simultaneously attacking progressive Democratic rivals.

For critics, the situation exposes what they view as one of the most corrosive realities in modern American politics: wealthy special-interest groups can flood elections with money while operating through complex financial structures that average voters rarely understand.

The result is a system where influence can be quietly purchased without voters fully realizing who is behind the campaign machinery until after ballots are cast.

Progressives argue this is exactly how modern political influence works.

Rather than direct, obvious corruption, today’s system often revolves around layered PAC structures, strategic donor bundling, coordinated independent expenditures, and disclosure timelines designed to keep controversial financial relationships out of headlines during the most critical stages of an election.

Legally, campaigns can claim separation.

Politically, the networks still function with remarkable efficiency.

That growing frustration is especially pronounced among Democratic voters angry over the war in Gaza and increasingly skeptical of large pro-Israel lobbying organizations exerting influence over Democratic primaries.

Michigan has become one of the clearest battlegrounds in that larger Democratic civil war.

Stevens’ critics argue her campaign is becoming a case study in how outside influence groups attempt to reshape Democratic politics from the top down, using money and institutional power to marginalize grassroots candidates.

Supporters of Stevens reject those criticisms, arguing that pro-Israel voters and advocacy organizations have every right to support candidates who reflect their views.

But opponents counter that the real issue is transparency.

Voters deserve to know who is financing campaigns, who is coordinating political pressure, and whether outside interests are attempting to dominate local elections through carefully engineered loopholes.

The controversy also reflects a broader national concern about the explosion of PAC money after the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which opened the floodgates for unlimited outside political spending.

Since then, both parties have increasingly relied on networks of wealthy donors, super PACs, nonprofit organizations, and issue-based political groups capable of pouring enormous sums into elections with limited immediate disclosure requirements.

Critics argue the Stevens controversy is not an isolated incident.

They argue it is the system functioning exactly as Washington designed it.

And for many frustrated Michigan voters, that may be the most alarming part of all.

🚨Breaking News: Duggan Ends Independent Run for Michigan Governor Amid Political Headwinds

 

DETROIT — Former Mike Duggan announced Thursday that he is ending his independent campaign for Michigan governor, withdrawing from a race that once promised to test whether a nonpartisan message could gain traction in an increasingly polarized political climate.

Duggan, who served 12 years as mayor of Detroit, revealed the decision in a lengthy letter to supporters, citing deteriorating political conditions for independent candidates, declining poll numbers and fundraising disadvantages against the Democratic and Republican parties.

“I got into this race to try to change our politics, not to be a spoiler,” Duggan wrote. “But we’re behind in both. It’s just not right to ask our volunteers, faith leaders, unions, elected officials and donors to continue in a campaign that, in my heart, I no longer feel good about our chances to win.”

Duggan launched his independent bid in December 2024 after leaving office as Detroit mayor, arguing that Michigan voters were frustrated with partisan conflict in Lansing. At the time, he positioned himself as a candidate focused on pragmatic problem-solving rather than party ideology.

“I’m not running to be the Democrats’ governor or the Republicans’ governor. I’m running to be your governor,” Duggan said when he announced his campaign.

Throughout the campaign, Duggan traveled across Michigan holding town halls that brought together Democrats, Republicans and independents, often emphasizing economic development, public safety and urban revitalization as examples of his governing approach in Detroit.

But in his withdrawal letter, Duggan said the national political environment shifted dramatically this spring, particularly as tensions surrounding President Donald Trump and rising gas prices intensified voter anger and strengthened Democratic momentum statewide.

Duggan specifically pointed to a Democratic victory in a May 5 special election for a state Senate seat in Saginaw County as evidence of changing political winds.

He also acknowledged the steep financial realities facing independent campaigns. While Duggan said Michigan donors strongly supported his effort, he noted that modern gubernatorial races rely heavily on national party fundraising networks — resources he said independent candidates currently lack.

“Our internal polling showed the intense anger over gas prices and Iran was boosting Democrats in every office nationally,” Duggan wrote.

The former mayor said recent polling showed him trailing the Democratic nominee by 11 points. While he maintained that such deficits can be overcome, he said the combination of lagging fundraising and slipping poll numbers ultimately convinced him the path to victory had narrowed too far.

Duggan’s departure reshapes Michigan’s 2026 governor’s race just months before the Aug. 4 primary election.

On the Democratic side, candidates include Jocelyn Benson, Chris Swanson and Kim Thomas.

Republican contenders include John James, Mike Cox, businessman Perry Johnson and state Sen. Aric Nesbitt.

Despite ending his campaign, Duggan said he remains hopeful his effort demonstrated a growing appetite among Michigan voters for alternatives to traditional partisan politics.

“More than 1.6 million Michigan voters are today looking for a Governor candidate serious about reducing the toxic partisan politics,” Duggan wrote. “If the candidates on the ballot this year take that message to heart and truly reach out to those voters, we will have accomplished something important.”

Michigan Governor Race Rocked by Signature Failures as Two Candidates Face Removal From Ballot

 

The race for governor in Michigan took a dramatic turn this week after state election officials recommended that two gubernatorial candidates be disqualified from the August primary ballot over invalid petition signatures.

According to a report released Wednesday by Michigan’s Bureau of Elections, Democratic candidate Kim Thomas and Republican candidate Ralph Rebandt failed to submit the minimum number of valid signatures required to qualify for the Aug. 4 primary election.

The findings now place both campaigns in jeopardy and could significantly reshape the political landscape heading into one of Michigan’s most closely watched gubernatorial races in years.

State law requires gubernatorial candidates to submit at least 15,000 valid signatures from registered voters, including at least 100 signatures from voters in half of Michigan’s congressional districts.

Election officials said the problems uncovered during random signature sampling were severe enough to recommend both candidates be removed from the ballot entirely.

For Thomas, the numbers were staggering. Bureau staff reportedly found only 60 valid signatures in a random sample of 750 signatures reviewed. To pass the threshold for ballot qualification, at least 626 valid signatures were required from that sample. Thomas had submitted nearly 18,000 signatures overall, but the sample review suggested a catastrophic invalidation rate.

Rebandt’s campaign fared better but still fell short. Election staff determined only 533 signatures in his 750-signature sample were valid, below the required 618 needed for qualification. Rebandt submitted more than 18,000 signatures statewide.

The recommendations are not final yet. The Michigan Board of State Canvassers is scheduled to meet May 28 in Lansing to determine whether it will formally adopt the Bureau of Elections’ recommendations and disqualify the candidates from the ballot.

The controversy immediately reignited concerns about Michigan’s petition process, which has been plagued in recent election cycles by fraudulent circulators, invalid signatures, and major ballot access scandals. Michigan voters may remember the chaos surrounding the 2022 gubernatorial race, when several high-profile Republican candidates were removed from the ballot after investigations uncovered widespread forged petition signatures tied to professional circulators.

This latest controversy, however, affects candidates from both parties — a development likely to intensify scrutiny over how campaigns collect, verify, and submit nominating petitions.

Meanwhile, several other gubernatorial candidates survived challenges to their signatures.

On the Republican side, John James and Perry Johnson successfully cleared signature challenges and were deemed to have sufficient valid petitions.

Other candidates who passed review included Jocelyn Benson, Chris Swanson, Aric Nesbitt, and former Attorney General Mike Cox.

If the Board of State Canvassers upholds the recommendations next week, the Democratic primary field would narrow to Benson and Swanson, while the Republican field would consist of James, Johnson, Cox, and Nesbitt.

The disqualifications would mark a devastating blow to both Thomas and Rebandt, whose campaigns now face a rapidly shrinking path forward as Michigan’s election season accelerates toward the August primary.

Michigan GOP Governor’s Race Rocked by Petition Signature Challenges

 

John James.                   Perry Johnson 

LANSING, Mich. — Michigan’s Republican gubernatorial race is once again facing scrutiny over petition signatures after formal challenges were filed against two of the party’s leading candidates, John James and Perry Johnson, alleging forged signatures, duplicate entries, circulator fraud, and widespread petition irregularities.

The complaints filed with the Michigan Bureau of Elections have revived memories of the massive 2022 petition fraud scandal that removed several Republican gubernatorial hopefuls from the ballot, including Johnson.

Candidates for governor in Michigan are required to submit at least 15,000 valid signatures to qualify for the August primary ballot. Both James and Johnson reportedly turned in significantly more than the minimum threshold, but state election officials are now reviewing random samples of the submitted petitions to determine whether enough valid signatures remain.

A challenge filed by the pro-James super PAC Mission Michigan alleges Johnson’s campaign submitted petitions containing “duplicate signatures, signature errors, obvious forgeries, numerous jurisdictional issues,” and signatures gathered by circulators allegedly tied to prior fraudulent petition activity.

According to the complaint, more than 14,200 signatures connected to Johnson should be invalidated. The filing argues that if the questioned signatures are removed, Johnson could fall roughly 450 signatures below the required threshold needed to appear on the ballot.

The complaint further alleges more than 6,000 signatures should be thrown out due to alleged circulator fraud, while another 4,500 signatures allegedly came from addresses that did not match voter registration records. The filing also claims at least two circulators connected to Johnson’s campaign had previously appeared on Bureau of Elections fraud-related lists.

Johnson, who owns a registrar firm and has publicly referred to himself as a “quality guru,” previously defended his campaign’s petition process.

“I’m the quality guru, so I better get quality petitions,” Johnson said while submitting signatures in April.

Meanwhile, a separate challenge against James’ campaign was signed by metro Detroit conservative activist Glenn Clark, a Johnson supporter, and alleges “extensive irregularities” in James’ petitions.

The complaint against James alleges signatures from deceased individuals, duplicate signatures, apparent forgeries, fraudulent circulators, and “numerous address and jurisdictional issues.” The filing also accuses James’ operation of engaging in what it described as “roundtabling fraud,” a practice in which circulators allegedly pass petitions among multiple individuals to create variations in handwriting styles.

The challenge specifically alleges campaign political director Tyler Foti engaged in circulator fraud and claims at least 600 signatures in the reviewed sample showed evidence of potential roundtabling activity.

One allegation included in the filing claims a petition sheet contained the signature of a voter who died in 2022, years before James announced his gubernatorial campaign. The complaint also states multiple voters signed affidavits claiming they never signed James petitions.

James’ campaign rejected the allegations and called the challenge politically motivated.

Campaign manager Jackson Gross dismissed the complaint as “not serious” and accused Johnson allies of attempting to “manufacture distractions.”

Both campaigns have insisted they conducted internal quality control and verification procedures before submitting signatures. James previously stated his campaign performed multiple validation exercises to ensure it remained well above the 15,000-signature requirement.

The Michigan Bureau of Elections is expected to complete its statistical review of the petitions before presenting recommendations to the bipartisan Michigan Board of State Canvassers later this month. The board is scheduled to meet May 28 to determine whether candidates qualify for the August primary ballot.

The renewed controversy highlights lingering concerns over Michigan’s petition system after the unprecedented 2022 fraud scandal, when forged signatures submitted by professional circulators resulted in five Republican gubernatorial candidates being removed from the ballot. Johnson was among those disqualified in that election cycle.

Sources: Michigan Bureau of Elections filings, Michigan Board of State Canvassers complaint filings, voter affidavits submitted with petition challenges, campaign statements.

Video: Dearborn Heights Mayor Takes Direct Action on Reckless Teen Driver

 

In a move that underscores a growing zero-tolerance approach to dangerous driving, Dearborn Heights Mayor, Mo Baydoun is sending a clear message to residents: reckless behavior on neighborhood streets will not be ignored.

According to the mayor, a 17-year-old driver was recently caught speeding through a residential area in Dearborn Heights—not only exceeding safe speeds but also veering onto neighbors’ lawns, putting both property and lives at risk. The incident quickly escalated from a traffic violation to a serious public safety concern.

Rather than handling the situation from a distance, Baydoun took the unusual step of going directly to the teen’s home. There, he contacted the driver’s father by phone and laid out the consequences in clear terms. The vehicle involved—a Range Rover—would be impounded, and the teen is expected to face a misdemeanor reckless driving charge.

The mayor’s hands-on response reflects a broader initiative by his administration to crack down on reckless driving, particularly in residential neighborhoods where children, families, and pedestrians are most vulnerable. Officials say the goal is not just punishment, but prevention—sending a message that dangerous driving will carry immediate and tangible consequences.

Reckless driving has become an increasing concern in many suburban communities, where quiet streets are often disrupted by speeding vehicles and risky behavior. By intervening directly, Baydoun is attempting to shift that culture and reinforce accountability at both the driver and family level.

“This is about protecting our neighborhoods,” the mayor has emphasized. “We will not tolerate behavior that puts our residents at risk.”

As enforcement efforts intensify in Dearborn Heights, city leaders hope this case serves as a warning—and a turning point—in curbing reckless driving before it leads to tragedy.

Cox Calls for Investigation, Transparency Into Benson’s Ties to Southern Poverty Law Center

LIVONIA, Mich. — April 27, 2026 — Former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox is calling for an investigation and expanded public disclosure regarding Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and her past affiliation with the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Cox, who previously served as attorney general and spent more than two decades as a prosecutor, announced Monday that he has filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking records of communications between Benson, the Michigan Department of State, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, often referred to as the SPLC.

The request, according to Cox, seeks emails, internal communications, and other records connected to Benson’s tenure on the organization’s board. Cox also urged Benson to voluntarily release additional materials beyond the scope of the request, including notes, calendars, and other documentation tied to her time with the group.

Cox’s call comes amid claims that the SPLC is facing a federal indictment tied to alleged financial misconduct, including accusations of fraud, false statements, and money laundering. He pointed to the overlap between the timeframe referenced in the alleged indictment and Benson’s service on the organization’s board as a basis for further scrutiny.

“As a former attorney general, I know the difference between political noise and serious public corruption concerns. This is serious,” Cox said in a statement. “This federal indictment raises obvious questions: What did Jocelyn Benson know? When did she know it? And did her relationship with SPLC continue into her work as Michigan Secretary of State?”

Cox added that, in his view, full transparency is necessary to address public concerns.

“The public deserves full transparency into her time on the board and her time running Michigan’s elections,” he said. “If there is nothing to hide, release the records.”

Benson’s office has not yet publicly responded to Cox’s request or the allegations referenced in his statement.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit known for tracking hate groups and litigating civil rights cases, has not issued a public statement addressing the claims of a federal indictment referenced by Cox.

As of Monday, no independent confirmation of the alleged indictment had been immediately verified through publicly available federal court records.

The situation remains developing.

Cox Campaign Accuses John James of Deceptive Fundraising Texts in Michigan Governor’s Race

 

LANSING, Mich. — A new political flashpoint has erupted in Michigan’s already heated gubernatorial race, as the campaign of former Attorney General Mike Cox is accusing Republican rival John James of misleading voters through a controversial fundraising text message.

The dispute centers on a mass text sent to Michigan voters claiming to support efforts to “hold Michigan for Trump,” while promoting a so-called “10X impact” on donations. The message suggested that small contributions would be multiplied — for example, a $10 donation becoming $100 — and directed recipients to a fundraising link.

Cox’s campaign alleges that the message is deceptive, arguing that there is no actual donation-matching program in place and that funds raised through the link are directed solely to James’ campaign — not to any broader effort tied to former President Donald Trump or national party operations.

“This is not just misleading — it’s a bait-and-switch,” Cox allies said in statements posted online. “Voters are being led to believe their money is going toward a coordinated effort tied to President Trump, when in reality it appears to benefit only one campaign.”

Dispute Over “10X Impact” Claims

At the center of the controversy is the use of “matching” language — a common but tightly scrutinized tactic in political fundraising. According to guidance previously circulated by Trump-aligned fundraising committees and the Republican National Committee, campaigns are discouraged from using language that implies donations will be multiplied unless such programs are clearly defined and legitimate.

Cox’s campaign points to those guidelines, arguing that the “10X impact” messaging violates both the spirit and, potentially, the rules governing political fundraising solicitations tied to Trump’s name and likeness.

Screenshots shared by Cox’s team also show that the donation page linked in the text appears to route contributions directly to John James’ campaign, with no visible indication of a matching fund or broader allocation.

No Public Confirmation From Trump

Another key point of contention is the absence of any public endorsement or authorization from Trump or his affiliated committees for the fundraising effort described in the text.

Cox’s campaign argues that invoking Trump in the solicitation — without clear authorization or financial participation — creates a false impression of coordination.

“There has been no notice, no confirmation, and no evidence that President Trump or his team is involved in this,” Cox supporters claim. “That makes the message even more problematic.”

James Campaign Yet to Respond

As of now, the James campaign has not issued a detailed public response to the allegations. It remains unclear whether the campaign will dispute the claims, clarify the “10X impact” language, or defend the fundraising approach as standard political marketing.

Political analysts note that aggressive digital fundraising tactics — including urgent language, countdown timers, and matching claims — have become increasingly common across both parties. However, they also warn that such tactics can blur ethical lines if not clearly explained to donors.

Broader Implications in Tight Race

The controversy comes at a critical moment in the Michigan governor’s race, where fundraising and grassroots support are key indicators of campaign strength. Accusations of deceptive practices could carry political risk, particularly among core Republican voters who prioritize transparency and alignment with Trump.

Cox’s campaign is leaning into the issue, framing it as a matter of trust.

“If you received this text, you should know exactly where your money is going,” a campaign-aligned message stated. “Voters deserve honesty — not gimmicks.”

Whether the dispute gains traction with voters — or fades as another flashpoint in a contentious primary — may depend on how quickly and clearly the James campaign responds.

Michigan Gubernatorial Candidates Clash Over Data Centers as Absences Take Center Stage

 

LANSING, Mich. — What was intended to be a policy-focused forum on data centers quickly turned into a broader referendum on candidate accountability, as several high-profile contenders — most notably John James — skipped a key event hosted by the Michigan Press Association.

While multiple Republican candidates and one Democrat appeared to outline detailed positions on the future of data centers in Michigan, the absence of top-tier names left a noticeable void — and drew pointed criticism from both attendees and political observers.

Republicans Outline Competing Visions

Former Attorney General Mike Cox stressed local control, arguing communities should decide whether to allow data centers but only if developers meet strict requirements, including generating their own energy to avoid burdening residents and businesses.

Businessman Perry Johnson emerged as one of the most policy-focused voices, framing the issue around Michigan’s economic future. He warned that rising energy costs are already “unbearable” and proposed limiting rate increases to inflation while requiring developers to invest in infrastructure.

Johnson also raised concerns about transparency involving Democratic frontrunner Jocelyn Benson, drawing attention to potential conflicts tied to a proposed data center project connected to her husband’s business dealings.

Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt took a hard line against taxpayer subsidies, arguing Michigan should stop handing out incentives to large tech companies and instead prioritize infrastructure and tax relief.

Swanson, Rebandt Offer Contrasting Views

Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson, the lone Democrat present, criticized the rollout of data center projects, arguing residents have been excluded from decision-making and calling for a structured, transparent zoning approach.

Pastor Ralph Rebandt opposed data centers outright, citing environmental risks and a history of failed corporate subsidy deals.

John James Absence Draws Sharper Criticism

But the most pointed criticism of the day centered on who wasn’t in the room.

John James — long viewed as a Republican frontrunner — did not attend, citing obligations in Washington. However, his absence is increasingly being framed by critics as part of a broader pattern rather than a one-off scheduling conflict.

Opponents argue James has been largely missing in action during key moments of the gubernatorial race, avoiding direct engagement in forums and debates where voters expect candidates to defend their positions.

That criticism is compounded by scrutiny over his record in Congress, where detractors point to missed votes and limited visibility during critical legislative periods. For a candidate seeking to lead the state, critics argue, the perception of inconsistency — both in Lansing and Washington — raises legitimate questions about accessibility and accountability.

In a race where many voters remain undecided, the contrast was difficult to ignore: candidates on stage answering questions in real time, while one of the most recognizable names in the field was absent from the discussion entirely.

Supporters of James maintain that his congressional duties require his attention and note his past electoral strength. But politically, the optics of skipping a major statewide forum — particularly on a defining issue like data centers — handed his opponents an opportunity to question whether he is willing to show up when it matters most.

Other Key Absences

James was not alone. Benson and independent candidate Mike Duggan also did not attend, further fueling criticism that some of the race’s biggest names are avoiding unscripted, policy-driven settings.

Race Remains Wide Open

The forum came amid shifting dynamics in the race, including the withdrawal of former House Speaker Tom Leonard and tightening polling in the Republican primary, where Johnson has been gaining momentum.

With Michigan’s governorship historically alternating between parties and a three-way general election likely, the stakes are high — and so is voter scrutiny.

More Than Policy — A Test of Presence

While data centers remain a critical policy issue — touching on energy, infrastructure, and economic development — Thursday’s forum underscored something equally important to voters: who is willing to show up, take questions, and be held accountable.

For candidates who attended, it was an opportunity to lead the conversation. For those who didn’t, especially James, it may raise a more fundamental question that could follow them through the campaign:

If you’re not in the room now, will you be there when it counts?

Michigan Demands Answers After Antrim County Clerk Accused of Improperly Altering Voter Records

 

ANTRIM COUNTY, Mich. — State election officials are investigating whether the Antrim County clerk improperly canceled or altered voter registrations, raising new concerns about election administration in a county that has remained under intense scrutiny since the 2020 presidential election.

According to the Michigan Bureau of Elections, Clerk Victoria Bishop may have taken actions that exceeded her legal authority by issuing voter cancellation notices and modifying records in the state’s Qualified Voter File, commonly known as the QVF.

In a formal letter sent earlier this month, Bureau Director Jonathan Brater stated that the agency had received reports from voters and local officials about “concerning activity” tied to Bishop’s office. A subsequent review of the QVF revealed what officials described as “sufficient irregularities” to warrant further investigation.

Allegations of Improper Cancellations

At the center of the dispute is whether Bishop improperly targeted voters who had not participated in recent elections. State officials say evidence suggests cancellation or confirmation notices were sent to individuals who missed one or two major election cycles.

Under Michigan law, however, voter registrations cannot be canceled solely for failing to vote.

The Bureau also alleges that Bishop may have:

• Changed voter statuses in the QVF to “Cancel” or “Reject” without proper authorization

• Failed to independently verify voter information before taking action

• Acted without delegation from city or township clerks, who are legally responsible for maintaining voter rolls

State officials emphasized that county clerks do not have unilateral authority to conduct voter maintenance or directly alter registration statuses in the statewide system.

Bishop Defends “Corrective Audit”

Bishop, a Republican elected in 2024, has defended her actions, describing them as part of a “corrective audit” aimed at improving the accuracy of voter rolls.

She argues that sending notices to voters was intended to prompt verification and ensure outdated registrations—such as those belonging to deceased individuals or people who have moved—are addressed. Bishop has also said that maintaining accurate voter rolls is essential to restoring public confidence in elections.

In public statements, she has framed her actions as a response to what she describes as past administrative failures, particularly during the 2020 election cycle.

Bishop is married to Randy Bishop, a conservative talk radio personality often known as “Trucker Randy,” who has publicly promoted claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

Potential Legal Consequences

The Bureau of Elections has ordered Bishop to provide a detailed explanation of her actions, including a list of affected voters and justification for any changes made in the QVF.

Failure to comply could carry serious consequences. State officials noted that:

• Election duties could be reassigned or removed

• Violations of lawful directives may result in misdemeanor charges

Michigan has previously taken similar action against local clerks accused of violating election law, including temporarily stripping authority in high-profile cases.

Antrim County’s Ongoing Election Spotlight

This latest controversy unfolds in Antrim County, a northern Michigan community that became nationally known following the 2020 election. At that time, a reporting error briefly showed incorrect presidential results due to a tabulator update issue, which was later corrected.

Despite the correction, the incident fueled widespread claims of election fraud and placed the county at the center of ongoing political and legal debates about election integrity.

Bishop campaigned on addressing those concerns, pledging to clean up voter rolls and strengthen confidence in the system. Her election reflected continued skepticism among some voters about the accuracy of election administration.

What Comes Next

The Bureau’s investigation is ongoing, and Bishop faces a deadline to respond with documentation and explanations of her actions. The outcome could determine whether the issue remains an administrative dispute or escalates into formal legal proceedings.

As Michigan prepares for upcoming elections, the case underscores the tension between efforts to ensure voter roll accuracy and the legal safeguards designed to protect voter access.

Tom Leonard Ends Michigan Gubernatorial Bid, Citing Principles and Path Forward

 

Former state House Speaker Tom Leonard announced Thursday that he is withdrawing from the race for governor, saying the decision came after months of reflection on the direction of the campaign and the standards he was unwilling to compromise.

In a statement, Leonard said his campaign had spent the past 10 months traveling across Michigan, meeting voters, and promoting what he described as “bold, positive leadership focused on real solutions.” He credited family members, staff, and supporters for sustaining the effort, expressing gratitude for their time, energy, and encouragement.

“This wasn’t an easy decision,” Leonard said, adding that the move followed “an honest look at the path forward” as the race evolved.

Leonard emphasized that continuing in the contest would have required changes to his campaign approach and personal values, which he said he was unwilling to make. “I’m not willing to compromise who I am or how I believe this campaign should be run in order to win,” he said.

The withdrawal comes as the gubernatorial race in Michigan continues to take shape ahead of the November election, with candidates across both major parties working to consolidate support and define their platforms. Political observers note that departures at this stage can shift the dynamics of a competitive primary field.

Despite ending his bid, Leonard indicated he plans to remain active in public policy and advocacy. “While this chapter is closing, we are not going anywhere when it comes to fighting for the issues that matter,” he said.

Leonard also called for unity moving forward, urging voters and leaders to focus on shared priorities as the election approaches.

No immediate endorsement of another candidate was announced.

Michigan Democrats Nominate Eli Savit for Attorney General Amid Party Tensions

 

Eli Savit Facebook 

DETROIT MICHIGAN — Michigan Democrats on Sunday selected Eli Savit as their nominee for attorney general, choosing the Washtenaw County prosecutor over Karen McDonald at a contentious party convention in Detroit that also reflected broader political tensions within the party.

Savit’s nomination comes at a time when Democrats in Michigan and nationally have faced criticism and accusations from some opponents and commentators over alleged tolerance of antisemitic rhetoric tied to protests and divisions over U.S. policy in the Middle East. His selection, however, also underscores the complexity of those claims, as Savit himself is Jewish and has been an active figure within Democratic legal and political circles.

The endorsement was decided at the Michigan Democratic Party convention at Huntington Place, where more than 7,200 delegates gathered to vote on candidates for statewide offices ahead of the November election.

Savit will now face Republican nominee Doug Lloyd, setting up a general election contest between two longtime prosecutors with sharply different views on the role of the attorney general’s office.

“We’re on the front line right now,” Savit told delegates following his nomination. “We’re facing challenges from Washington, D.C. We’re facing challenges from the corrupting influence of money in our politics. But what you see reflected on this stage is a hopeful vision for the future.”

Lloyd criticized Savit shortly after the nomination was announced, arguing that his policies reflect a politically driven approach to prosecution.

“Michigan deserves something different,” Lloyd said. “A legal system grounded in fairness, consistency, and respect for the rule of law.”

Savit’s supporters pointed to his record as Washtenaw County prosecutor, including his stances on criminal justice reform and environmental issues. Some delegates also emphasized his independence from corporate and utility-backed funding as a key reason for their support.

The convention itself highlighted ongoing divisions within the Democratic Party, particularly around issues related to campus protests, foreign policy, and internal messaging. Critics have used those divisions to accuse Democrats of failing to adequately address antisemitism in certain activist spaces, while party leaders and many members have rejected those claims and pointed to the diversity within their ranks.

Savit’s nomination places him at the center of that broader political debate as the campaign moves into the general election phase.

In other action, Democrats also nominated Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist II as their candidate for secretary of state, as the party looks to present a unified ticket in November.

Chaos and Division Mark Michigan Democratic Convention as Key Endorsements Emerge

 

DETROIT  What was intended to showcase party unity ahead of a critical election year instead exposed deep divisions within the Michigan Democratic Party, as thousands of delegates gathered in Detroit for a chaotic and at times contentious endorsement convention.

More than 7,200 delegates packed the Huntington Place convention center Sunday, a record turnout that underscored both high engagement and rising tensions within the party. By the end of a turbulent day marked by delays, boos, and internal clashes, Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist II secured the party’s nomination for secretary of state, while Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit won the endorsement for attorney general.

Both candidates are now expected to appear on the November ballot as the party’s official nominees.

Disruptions and Delays

The convention was plagued by logistical issues from the start. Credentialing errors delayed voting for hours, sparking frustration among delegates who shouted from the convention floor and demanded the process move forward.

Voting, originally scheduled for earlier in the day, did not begin until late afternoon. Some delegates were unable to cast ballots electronically, forcing long lines and further aggravating an already tense atmosphere.

Party Chair Curtis Hertel Jr. attempted to reassure attendees, promising that all properly registered delegates would be allowed to vote. Still, the delays contributed to a sense of disorganization that critics quickly seized upon.

Boos Signal Party Divisions

Tensions were not limited to logistics. Political divisions within the party surfaced repeatedly, most visibly during speeches.

U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens was met with sustained boos during her Senate campaign remarks, highlighting a growing divide between establishment Democrats and progressive activists. Stevens attempted to calm the crowd, telling delegates, “Democrats, I love you, even when we disagree,” but the reaction underscored the challenges ahead in unifying the party.

Progressive favorite Abdul El-Sayed drew strong support from activists, with chants of his name echoing through the hall. His calls for sweeping reforms, including Medicare for All and the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reflected the energy of the party’s left flank.

High-Stakes Endorsements

Despite the turmoil, the convention produced decisive outcomes in key races.

Gilchrist, who has served alongside Gov. Gretchen Whitmer for nearly two terms, secured the secretary of state endorsement after abandoning a gubernatorial bid earlier this year. Though he lacks direct experience overseeing elections, supporters argued he would defend voting rights and modernize state systems.

Savit’s victory over Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald came despite strong backing for McDonald from major labor unions. Savit, known for progressive reforms such as eliminating cash bail in certain cases, is expected to face scrutiny from conservatives in the general election.

Contentious Regent Race

One of the most divisive contests involved the University of Michigan Board of Regents. Civil rights attorney Amir Makled defeated incumbent Jordan Acker in a race shaped heavily by controversy over the university’s handling of pro-Palestinian protests.

The contest became a flashpoint for broader ideological battles within the party, with activists criticizing Acker while Makled faced scrutiny over past social media activity. The outcome reflected the growing influence of activist-driven issues in party politics.

A Party at a Crossroads

The convention also served as a platform for national figures, including Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Andy Beshear, all of whom addressed delegates ahead of potential future campaigns.

Whitmer, speaking to the crowd, acknowledged challenges at the national level and urged Democrats to remain focused on upcoming elections.

Still, the events of the weekend highlighted a party grappling with internal disagreements over policy, messaging, and leadership direction.

Looking Ahead

By the convention’s close, party leaders emphasized unity, with Gilchrist declaring, “Our unity is our strength.” But the visible fractures—ranging from ideological disputes to organizational missteps—suggest that achieving that unity may prove difficult.

With high-stakes races looming in November, the Michigan Democratic Party now faces the challenge of consolidating its base while navigating the divisions laid bare in Detroit.

Divisions deepen among Democrats in Michigan’s pivotal Senate race

 

 A closely watched U.S. Senate race in Michigan is exposing deep divisions within the Democratic Party as candidates debate ideology, electability and key policy issues ahead of the August primary.

Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive candidate aligned with the policies of Bernie Sanders, is pushing back against concerns from party leaders who fear his nomination could jeopardize Democrats’ chances in November. El-Sayed argues that bold positions — not moderation — win elections, pointing to the victories of Donald Trump as evidence.

The open Senate seat is considered critical to control of the chamber. Republicans are rallying behind former Rep. Mike Rogers, with outside groups planning major spending in the state.

Within the Democratic primary, El-Sayed faces Rep. Haley Stevens and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow. Stevens is viewed by party insiders as the most electable, while McMorrow is positioning herself as a bridge between moderates and progressives.

The race has highlighted sharp disagreements on policy. El-Sayed supports abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement and backs Medicare for All, while his opponents favor more incremental reforms. Campaign financing has also become a flashpoint, with El-Sayed rejecting AIPAC and corporate PAC money and criticizing his rivals for accepting it.

Tensions have escalated as candidates question each other’s consistency and leadership. El-Sayed has accused party leaders of lacking “courage,” while McMorrow has countered that his campaign relies more on rhetoric than practical solutions.

Foreign policy — particularly the Israel-Hamas conflict — has emerged as one of the most divisive issues. El-Sayed has been sharply critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza and U.S. support for the country. Stevens has rejected claims that Israel’s actions constitute genocide, while McMorrow has expressed concern over potential war crimes and called for a resolution to the conflict.

The candidates have also clashed over campaign tactics. Stevens and McMorrow criticized El-Sayed for appearing with political commentator Hasan Piker, citing past controversial remarks. El-Sayed defended the appearances as part of engaging with diverse viewpoints.

The primary reflects a broader debate within the Democratic Party: whether to nominate a candidate who energizes the progressive base or one seen as more competitive with swing voters in a battleground state.

Some voters remain divided. While younger and more progressive voters are drawn to El-Sayed’s platform, others worry his positions could alienate moderates in a general election.

With control of the Senate potentially at stake, the outcome in Michigan could have national implications.

Streisand Effect Reshapes Michigan Senate Primary as Abdul El-Sayed Surges

 

Detroit, MI — A new Emerson College Polling survey is shaking up Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, showing Abdul El-Sayed surging into a statistical tie for first place — a dramatic shift in a race that had looked far more settled just months ago.

According to the April poll, El-Sayed now commands 24% support, up sharply from 16% in January, putting him neck-and-neck with Mallory McMorrow, who also sits at 24%. Meanwhile, Haley Stevens has slipped to 13%, marking a notable decline in her standing.

The “Streisand Effect” in Play

The sudden rise of El-Sayed is being linked by some analysts to the Streisand effect — the idea that attempts to suppress or attack a candidate can unintentionally boost their visibility. Increased attention, whether positive or negative, appears to have expanded El-Sayed’s reach among voters who may not have previously been engaged.

Dominating Younger Voters

One of the most striking findings in the poll is El-Sayed’s overwhelming support among younger voters. Among those under 40, he leads by a wide margin:

• El-Sayed: 35%

• Nearest competitor: 18%

This 17-point advantage suggests a strong generational divide in the race, with younger voters gravitating toward his message and campaign style.

A Wide-Open Race

Despite the movement at the top, the race remains far from decided. A significant 36% of voters are still undecided, leaving ample room for shifts in momentum as the campaign progresses.

That large undecided bloc could ultimately determine whether El-Sayed’s surge is a temporary spike or the beginning of a sustained lead.

What It Means Going Forward

The numbers point to a Democratic primary that is increasingly fluid:

• El-Sayed is gaining traction and visibility

• McMorrow remains firmly competitive at the top

• Stevens faces pressure to regain lost ground

• A large share of voters are still up for grabs

With months to go, the Michigan Senate race is shaping up to be one of the most unpredictable and closely watched primaries in the country.

Rising Waters Put Cheboygan on Edge as Dam Reaches ‘Ready’ Evacuation Phase

 

CHEBOYGAN, Mich. — A growing flood threat in Northern Michigan has pushed the Cheboygan Dam into the “Ready” phase of its emergency evacuation protocol, signaling heightened concern for residents as water levels continue to rise at a dangerous pace.

Officials confirmed early Monday morning that water behind the dam has climbed to within 12 inches of the top — a critical threshold that triggers the first stage of the region’s “Ready, Set, Go” evacuation framework. At this stage, residents living between the dam and Lake Huron are being urged to prepare for a possible evacuation.

A Situation Intensified by Weather

The surge in water levels is being driven by a combination of heavy spring rainfall and rapid snowmelt following a record-setting March snowfall. Additional rain in the forecast threatens to worsen conditions in the coming days, increasing the likelihood that the situation could escalate quickly.

Governor Gretchen Whitmer has already declared a state of emergency for the area, activating Michigan’s State Emergency Operations Center to coordinate response efforts and allocate resources where needed.

What “Ready” Means for Residents

Under the current “Ready” phase, authorities are not yet ordering evacuations — but they are making it clear that residents should be prepared to move at a moment’s notice. Emergency officials are advising people to:

• Pack essential items, including medications and important documents

• Secure outdoor belongings and move valuables to higher ground

• Avoid riverbanks and flood-prone areas

• Monitor official updates and alerts closely

If conditions worsen, the situation will move into the “Set” phase — when evacuation becomes more imminent — followed by the “Go” phase, which would trigger mandatory evacuations and possible road closures.

Emergency Measures Already Underway

Crews have been working around the clock to mitigate the risk. Thousands of sandbags have been deployed to control water flow, while large pumps are actively diverting water around the dam. Additionally, a timber debris screen has been removed from one of the dam’s gates to increase water capacity and relieve pressure on the structure.

As a precaution, the U.S. 23 bascule bridge in the area has been closed due to safety concerns tied to the rising water levels.

Officials Urge Calm — and Accuracy

Cheboygan County Sheriff Todd Ross has emphasized the importance of relying on verified information, warning residents not to spread rumors or misinformation about the situation. While current projections suggest limited residential impact even if water overtops the dam, officials acknowledge that certain areas — particularly parts of the west side near the river — could see localized flooding affecting businesses and nearby streets.

A Community on Alert

For now, Cheboygan remains in a tense holding pattern — not yet evacuating, but no longer in the clear. The coming days will be critical as weather conditions and water levels determine whether the situation stabilizes or escalates into a full-scale emergency.

Residents are being told to stay vigilant, stay informed, and most importantly — be ready.