It was a jam-packed week of political debates in Michigan. We’re covering the gubernatorial, U.S. Senate, 7th Congressional District, and secretary of state debates today. Biggest takeaway: Each debate offered insight into how the candidates want voters to evaluate them. Let’s dig in.
Michigan Gubernatorial Debate
Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and her Republican opponent, Congressman John James (R-MI 10), used questions on foreign policy and energy to argue who should be held responsible for Michigan’s problems and who has the authority to fix them.
When talking about federal policy, like tariffs or the war with Iran, Benson repeatedly tried to connect James to President Donald Trump. All the while, James pointed to instances that showed his willingness to stand up to the president.
On the subject of affordability, Benson said she would suspend Michigan’s gas tax, a stance she hasn’t previously taken publicly. She also proposed negotiating a sub-national trade agreement with Canada that could exempt Michigan from tariffs. James challenged whether a state has the authority to make such an agreement, given federal control over international trade policy.
When discussing data centers, Benson said she supported a statewide moratorium while additional protections are being considered. James said he also supported a moratorium, but would support local communities’ choices to welcome or reject data centers.
When pressed on how that would count as a moratorium, he said “it’s a moratorium on Lansing and not the people.”
The exchanges highlighted two different arguments.
Benson sought to connect James to the Trump administration’s policies, while James questioned the feasibility of some of Benson’s proposals and emphasized his own disagreements with the president.
U.S. Senate Debate
Former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers and his Democratic opponent Abdul El-Sayed had a particularly heated debate.
WOOD-TV’s Rick Albin had to repeatedly chime in, telling both candidates to keep their responses short in order to stay on time. At one point, Albin said, “I’d like to be a part of the debate, too.”
Throughout the debate, Rogers launched personal attacks on El-Sayed. El-Sayed’s response: Rogers was distracting voters from economic concerns, like gas and grocery prices, and repeatedly flip-flopping on positions.
This debate highlighted the significant differences between the candidates’ stances on Iran, Israel, surveillance and federal spending, but the confrontations became so disruptive Albin had to repeatedly ask candidates to answer the questions.
There were two obvious competing campaign messages: Rogers wants voters to scrutinize El-Sayed’s associations and judgment, while El-Sayed wants them focused on economic conditions and Rogers’s political record.
7th Congressional District Debate
Republican U.S. Representative Tom Barrett and Democrat Will Lawrence met for their first debate Tuesday. Each candidate spent the debate trying to turn each other’s record into a liability.
Barrett kept referring to Lawrence’s past social media statements, particularly his previous support for defunding the police, to use his opponent’s past to discredit his current political positions.
After the debate, Lawrence told WKAR’s Andrew Roth, “I'm somebody who thinks out loud.” He added, "I've spent my share of time thinking out loud, like lots of millennials on the internet. I'm not afraid to change my mind and live and learn. And I've answered for those comments."
Lawrence has said he now supports funding police alongside community violence intervention and mental health programs. Barrett, however, questioned whether Lawrence’s change in position was genuine.
During the debate, Lawrence pressed Barrett on his voting record, specifically on policies that affected tariff rates, healthcare subsidies, data centers and artificial intelligence. All the while repeatedly connecting his opponent’s voting record to the current presidential administration’s policies.
Barrett defended his tariff-related vote and argued that AI regulation should have a strong federal framework, while allowing states and local governments to add certain protections.
You can see this in action when they debated affordability and federal policy.
The 7th district includes strongly Democratic communities, around Lansing and Michigan State University, as well as strongly Republican areas, such as Howell, meaning neither candidate can rely exclusively on voters in their party's strongest communities.
That makes the candidates’ contrasting arguments particularly relevant: Barrett is asking voters to consider Lawrence’s past statements, while Lawrence is asking them to consider Barrett’s recent decisions in Congress.
With control of the U.S. House potentially coming down to a handful of competitive districts, the arguments these candidates make about one another could have consequences beyond mid-Michigan.
Secretary of State Debate
Democratic Lieutenant Governor Garlin Gilchrist and Republican Macomb County Clerk Anthony Forlini covered a lot of topics, but their sharpest disagreement concerned election integrity and denialism.
Gilchrist accused Forlini of accommodating election deniers and warned that amplifying election conspiracies could place additional pressure on local election officials.
Gilchrist specifically criticized Forlini’s decision to hire a January 6 protester to help recruit and train election workers. Forlini defended the hiring decision as an example of including people with differing opinions, while distancing himself from the employee’s public views.
Forlini argued addressing election security concerns was important. He also noted that Gilchrist had questioned the results of the 2017 election for Detroit city clerk, which Gilchrist lost.
As Michigan Public’s Etai Smotrich-Barr reports, “Gilchrist sought a partial recount in the 2017 race, which found errors with the way ballots were processed and stored but confirmed Gilchrist’s loss. After the recount, Gilchrist conceded the election.”
That distinction matters.
Requesting a recount through an established election process isn't the same as denying a verified election result.
The exchange also revealed different approaches to public distrust. Forlini emphasized addressing concerns from voters who question election procedures, while Gilchrist warned that giving credence to unsupported claims can undermine confidence in elections.
Because Michigan's Secretary of State oversees statewide elections, that disagreement illuminates how each candidate says they would approach the office.
What do these debates show?
All four debates highlighted the different issues, records and responsibilities that these candidates want voters to consider.
The gubernatorial race is asking: Who is responsible for Michigan’s problems and political independence?
The U.S. Senate race is asking: Do personal associations outweigh policy proposals?
The 7th Congressional District race is questioning: Which past matters more–publicly available statements or congressional voting records?
The Secretary of State debate is asking: Which approach to election integrity and maintaining public trust matters more?
All different races and responsibilities, but with a common thread: the candidates are trying to shape not only how voters see their opponents, but which issues and records voters consider most important.
Throughout all four, candidates aren’t just competing over the answers to questions on how they would perform in office, but also over which questions voters should be asking in the first place.
More election resources
Debate summaries
Fact-checking the debates
Until next week,
Kalloli Bhatt, Digital Content Producer
_______________________
More Political News
- Why mailing a ballot close to Election Day may get it rejected for a late postmark
- Michigan traffic stops are leading to deportations. This law is a big reason why
- US House speaker, law enforcement groups lend support to Barrett in tight reelection race
- MSU backs lawsuit challenging Trump administration over international student work restrictions
- Charlotte teachers negotiate over grievance resolution procedures
- What the Vote?: Affordability crisis hits home for young voter
- 'Medicare for All' message attracts midterm voters buckling under medical bills
- Nessel reassures Michiganders of voting security
_______________________
IJP On the Road
_______________________
Today’s newsletter was written and produced by Kalloli Bhatt, and edited by Michelle Keller and Rebecca Williams.
