← Election Series · All senate races

Our verdict

we endorse Mike Rogers, flaws and all

Election Day is November 3. Michigan's statewide early in-person voting runs October 24 through November 1. This is the whole race — the platforms, the records, the worst claims against each man, and what the sources actually show. LiberalMind endorses Mike Rogers — with his flaws named in this piece, not hidden from it. Read the research, and decide for yourself.

How Michigan got here

This seat is open because Democratic Sen. Gary Peters — elected in 2014, re-elected in 2020 — announced in January 2025 that he would not seek a third term. It is the only open Democratic-held Senate seat in a state Donald Trump won in 2024, and it has become the most expensive Senate race in Michigan history, with more than $243 million in spending.

The Democratic nominee is Abdul El-Sayed, a physician and epidemiologist who ran Detroit's health department and then Wayne County's health department, and who lost a run for governor in 2018. He won the August 4 primary with 48.5 percent after state Sen. Mallory McMorrow withdrew in July, beating Rep. Haley Stevens — the leadership-backed, comparatively moderate candidate — in a race where pro-Israel groups spent tens of millions against him. El-Sayed carried the party's progressive wing and its anti-establishment energy into the nomination.

The Republican nominee is Mike Rogers, the former congressman (2001–2015) who chaired the House Intelligence Committee, and who was the party's 2024 Senate nominee — losing to Elissa Slotkin by about a third of a percentage point. He was the only candidate to qualify for his party's primary ballot this year, which tells you how completely the nomination was his from the start.

The raters disagree about this one, genuinely. The Cook Political Report calls it a Toss-up. Sabato's Crystal Ball moved it to Leans Democratic on September 22. Inside Elections remains at Toss-up. Recent polling averages put El-Sayed ahead by roughly five points; Republicans have not won a Senate race in Michigan since 1994. Also on the ballot are Libertarian Lydia Christensen and several minor-party candidates. A senator serves six years, votes on every federal law and budget, and confirms judges and cabinet secretaries. Michigan is choosing all of that.

Why this seat is in play

Two stories collided here. The first is Michigan itself: a state Trump carried by 1.4 points, whose auto economy runs on an integrated supply chain with Canada — roughly $80 billion a year in trade, about 36 percent of the state's exports — now living under a 50 percent tariff on some $20 billion of Canadian goods and an inflation rate above 3 percent fed by a war with Iran. The second story is the two men. El-Sayed is the most progressive nominee Michigan Democrats have ever sent into a Senate general election, running in a state that rewards moderation. Rogers is a national-security establishment Republican who spent a decade out of the state, got rich, came back, lost by a whisker — and in the final weeks of this race has publicly broken with the president who endorsed him, twice. Each man's campaign is an argument that the other is simply not from here, in one sense or another. The record is below.

Abdul El-Sayed (Democratic)

His platform: El-Sayed's campaign rests on three priorities, in his campaign's own framing: Medicare for All, getting money out of politics, and putting money back in Michiganders' pockets. On health care he is explicit and has been for years: decouple coverage from employment through a single government system. "Medicare for All would be cheaper than the current system," he told a University of Michigan rally in August. "Why? Because the whole system relies on us paying extra money into the system to pay the overhead of the health insurance system. That overhead goes away. No CEOs, no marketing budget, no army of billers — that all goes away." His published path runs in steps — make Medicare whole, add vision, dental, and hearing, then extend it to more people, starting with children — arriving at Medicare for All. He also supports abolishing ICE, ending all unconditional U.S. military aid to Israel, and breaking up corporate power. On tariffs he says there is "a logical use of some tariffs. This just ain't it," and blames the Canada tariffs for costing Michigan households thousands. Pressed on the label, he told Politico he is not a socialist: "I want to make it easier for you to make your first million rather than for Elon Musk to make a trillion. And that doesn't make me a socialist. That just makes me somebody who wants government to work for people."

The worst claims — and the record:

Claim: El-Sayed "believes America deserved 9/11" and supports the Muslim Brotherhood. Rogers's campaign has run versions of this, and Trump called El-Sayed a "jihadist" at an October 12 rally. There is no evidence for it in the record — none. El-Sayed is a physician who spent his career in American public health, and fact-checkers examining the debate attacks found these charges untethered to anything he has said or done. This is the fabricated tier, and it should be named as such: inventing a man's loyalties is not a campaign argument, and a publication that fact-checks one side's inventions must fact-check the other's.

Claim: El-Sayed's comments excused an attack on a synagogue. After a March attack on a Michigan synagogue, El-Sayed released a video condemning it — "I condemn what he did," "never a justification for attacking innocent people or houses of worship" — and also said "hurt people hurt people" about the attacker. PolitiFact's debate fact-check records both halves: the condemnation was explicit, the phrasing drew criticism as rationalization, and he apologized for the phrasing. Judge the whole statement, not either half alone.

Claim: El-Sayed flip-flopped on defunding the police. This one has a basis. He has claimed he never supported the Defund the Police movement; reporting on the primary found he had previously promoted it on Detroit Public Radio and social media. That is a record-versus-claim gap, and it is his.

Claim: His Medicare for All plan would raise taxes massively. The CBO's analysis of single-payer designs does project very large increases in federal health spending, so the direction of the attack is grounded. What it omits is El-Sayed's counter-claim — that the overhead of the current system exceeds the new taxes. Voters should know both that the federal government would become the payer of essentially all American health care, and that he says the trade is worth it. He is not hiding the ambition. The ambition is the point.

The flaw, plainly: El-Sayed is candid, credentialed, and running on the most expansive federal program proposed by any Senate nominee this cycle. For voters who hold the free market, limited government, and a strong American alliance with Israel as the ground they stand on, his platform is not a defect in execution. It is the thing itself: government-run health care as a first principle, open borders enforcement abolished in ICE's case, and American power treated as the problem. As in Texas, disagreement this deep is not a flaw to weigh. It is a disqualification.

Mike Rogers (Republican)

His platform: Rogers runs on manufacturing and costs: bring manufacturing back to Michigan, a "shop class in every high school," tax cuts for working families, homeownership through reduced regulation, price transparency from hospitals and insurers, and protecting Social Security and Medicare. His biography is the other half of the pitch — Army veteran, FBI special agent in Chicago taking down traffickers and corrupt politicians, fourteen years in the House culminating in the Intelligence Committee chairmanship. He vows, in his words, to "stand with President Trump to deliver on the mandate given to him by the American people." Then there is the fall of 2026, covered below.

The worst claims — and the record:

Claim: Rogers is a Florida carpetbagger. The timeline is documented in property and voter records, and neither half of the spin survives it. Rogers left Congress in 2015, sold his Michigan home, and bought properties in Maryland and Virginia. In 2022 he and his wife bought a home in Cape Coral, Florida, for about $1.6 million, claimed a Florida homestead exemption on it in 2023, and were registered to vote in Florida into 2024. They also own a home in White Lake Township, Michigan, on which they hold a Michigan principal-residence exemption; his Florida registration has been canceled and his Michigan registration is active. He is legally a Michigan resident and legally eligible. He also really did make Florida his home for years, campaign at times from that house, and tell a Michigan radio audience in November 2025, in the middle of a week of campaigning from Florida, that "my whole life is here." The claim "he's not a Michigander" is false. The question "where was he when Michigan needed representing, and why did he come back when a seat opened" is fair, and only voters can answer it.

Claim: Rogers monetized his office — "$14 million, two yachts, a McMansion in Florida." PolitiFact examined El-Sayed's debate line. The wealth growth is plausible on his own disclosures: an estimated net worth between $800,000 and $1.7 million when he left Congress in 2015, and an estimated $10.1 million to $16.9 million by 2025. The Florida house is real — 4,751 square feet, five bedrooms. The yachts were not independently verified; Rogers denied owning a yacht in Florida. So: a man who got substantially richer in the decade after public service, in the familiar Washington way, described with one flourish too many.

Claim: Rogers was "Big Pharma's champion" who took a million dollars from the industry. He did use the word "champion" — recounting, in a 2016 lobbying investigation, what opioid manufacturers said about his support for chronic-pain legislation they backed and funded. The quotation is real; its use as a self-description is a stretch PolitiFact flagged in context.

The reversals — which are not claims, but events. Rogers defended the Canada tariffs for months: "President Trump is right to put America first — and tariffs are necessary." On October 7, he released an ad holding a Canadian beer: "Here in Michigan, we know that Canada is not our enemy. We need to end this tariff war. Now." Two weeks earlier he had called for the Iran war — which he had supported at its outset — to "end quickly." The Wall Street Journal and the Detroit Free Press both describe these as breaks with Trump, and both note Rogers never names the president in either. The steelman is available and he is entitled to it: a Michigan senator who cannot hear Michigan on tariffs is not representing Michigan — our Texas piece made exactly that argument about John Cornyn, in reverse. The counter is timing: the turns came as his poll numbers fell, on the two issues hurting him most, a year after the positions he now opposes were the ones he defended. Representation, or weather-vane? The record holds both facts. Voters choose the interpretation.

The flaw, plainly: Rogers is aligned with our values on the core of the job — taxes, manufacturing, border security, entitlement protection — and his national-security experience is genuine. His flaws are the Cornyn question turned sideways: not whether he will represent Washington to Michigan, but whether he will represent anything in particular for long. A decade away, a fortune made in the revolving door, and two headline reversals in the closing month do not make him a liberal. They make him a risk of a different kind: a senator whose convictions have a polling lag.

The verdict: we endorse Mike Rogers, flaws and all

Two men. Two different flaws, again — but sharper than Texas.

El-Sayed's flaw is values. Medicare for All, abolishing ICE, ending unconditional aid to Israel: stated plainly, argued honestly, and opposite to what this publication exists to advance. He is not an option for our voters, and no amount of personal decency changes what he would vote for.

Rogers's flaw is conviction. He is not accused of anything adjudicated; the residency attack is half-true and the wealth attack is mostly true, and neither disqualifies. What we name — plainly, because an endorsement that hides the marks is worthless — is the pattern of the fall: positions held firmly until they cost him, then reversed on camera with a beer in his hand. Endorsements from this publication normally certify that a man will represent his constituents' values when it is expensive. Rogers has shown he will represent them when the polling turns. That is a real defect. It is also, in this race, the price of the endorsement — named here, paid with eyes open.

So here is the research, and the rule this publication runs on: when one option is the extremist program itself, we endorse the other — noting his flaws, not weighing them into a pass. El-Sayed's defect is the platform: government-run health care, immigration enforcement abolished, the American alliance with Israel discarded. Rogers's defect is consistency — a decade away, a fortune from the revolving door, two reversals in the closing month, and a "$14 million, two yachts" line aimed at him that is mostly true on the wealth and unverified on the yachts, from which he draws the benefit either way. Between a weather-vane standing on our ground and a man of honest conviction standing on the other side's, we endorse the weather-vane and hold him to the ground he claims. Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same. In Michigan, that means Mike Rogers. Six years of a weather-vane can be corrected at the next election. Six years of votes for government-run health care cannot be.

Sources

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Back to the Election Series