Skip to main content
Back to brief

Politics · October 22, 2026

The El-Sayed Jihad Smears Are Letting the Left Off the Hook

Part of: Michigan Senate: El-Sayed vs. Rogers →
7 sources →

The final Michigan U.S. Senate debate between Republican Mike Rogers and Democrat Abdul El-Sayed took place on October 22, 2026, just 12 days before the election. The high-stakes event covered key issues including the economy, healthcare, immigration, and the war with Iran. The debate turned personal as Rogers questioned El-Sayed’s loyalties and past associations, while El-Sayed characterized Rogers as a surrogate for Donald Trump and criticized his support for past foreign interventions. The race remains highly competitive, with both major presidential candidates scheduled to rally in the state shortly after the debate.

Read the original coverage

Reported across the spectrum

  • The final debate between Mike Rogers and Abdul El-Sayed took place on Wednesday, October 22, 2026.
  • The debate occurred less than two weeks before Election Day in a competitive Michigan Senate race.
  • Major topics included the economy, healthcare, Iran, and immigration.
  • Rogers accused El-Sayed of having an 'extreme ideology' and questioned his national security stances.
  • El-Sayed tied Rogers to Donald Trump’s policies and influence.
  • Trump and Obama are both scheduled to hold rallies in Michigan in the days following the debate.

Reported by only some outlets

  • Rogers specifically questioned if El-Sayed was 'for America' or 'terrorist groups overseas'.
  • Rogers cited a 2012 letter allegedly signed by El-Sayed regarding the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
  • El-Sayed alleged that Rogers’ support for war in Iran has directly contributed to high gas and grocery prices.
  • Rogers accused El-Sayed of deleting past material related to 'defunding the police'.
  • El-Sayed advocated for 'Medicare for All' during the debate.
  • El-Sayed invoked the U.S. Constitution's religious freedom protections in response to Rogers' attacks.

CadNews does not determine absolute truth or endorse political viewpoints. It compares publicly available reporting, identifies shared facts, highlights framing differences, and flags uncertainty.