An attack ad tying grocery prices to U.S. aid for Israel just turned a Michigan Senate race into a test of how far campaigns will go to channel voter anger into blame.
Story Highlights
- A Rebellion PAC ad links high grocery costs to U.S. aid for Israel and “killing Palestinians.”
- Jewish organizations condemned the message as scapegoating and misinformation.
- Abdul El-Sayed’s campaign disavowed the ad and said it was not authorized.
- The video racked up millions of views, magnifying the backlash before fact checks caught up.
What the Michigan Ad Shows and Claims
Rebellion PAC released an online video on October 26 that shows a couple shopping for food and saying they must set aside seven dollars “for killing Palestinians.” The ad cites four billion dollars in yearly U.S. aid to Israel, and says new spending adds up to about one hundred sixty-one dollars per person for bombing Gaza. It ties that money to shoppers’ struggles to buy basics like eggs and bananas.
Cenk Uygur, who co-founded Rebellion PAC, promoted the spot and argued that American families suffer because leaders back Israel’s wars. He linked the message to Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers, accusing him of serving Israel “unconditionally” rather than Michigan voters. The ad’s disclaimer says it was not authorized by any candidate and was an independent expenditure, a key legal point in campaign finance rules.
How Leaders and Groups Responded
Major Jewish organizations condemned the video. The Anti-Defamation League’s chief called it scapegoating the Jewish state. The American Jewish Committee said Americans need real answers on prices, not blame placed on support for Israel. Former U.S. ambassador Dan Shapiro said people can oppose aid on moral or policy grounds without claiming that it sets grocery prices. These reactions focused on the ad’s cause-and-effect claim about costs.
Abdul El-Sayed’s campaign rejected the video and stated there was no evidence he created, approved, or knew about it before release. Jewish Insider and the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported the disavowal and the lack of proof of campaign authorization. That distinction matters because independent political groups may legally spend money without coordinating with a campaign. Still, the controversy pressed into the race and dominated headlines.
Why This Hits a Nerve With Voters
Michigan voters are anxious about high prices, health costs, and global conflicts. The ad blends those fears into one simple story about who is to blame. That is why it spread so fast and drew such sharp pushback. The Times of Israel said it gained more than five million views, building a large audience before deeper budget context, or any corrections, reached many people who watched it. Speed beats nuance online.
Both parties often tap anger to win elections. But using a family’s grocery bill to tie a foreign ally to “killing Palestinians” crosses into a fraught space where critics hear old tropes about disloyalty and money. Supporters of the ad call it fair criticism of spending priorities during war. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidance says criticism of Israel, when like that of any other nation, is not antisemitic. Context and wording matter.
What Is True, What Is Missing, and What Comes Next
U.S. aid to Israel exists, and lawmakers approved extra funds after the Gaza war escalated. But food inflation comes from many forces, including supply chains, energy, and interest rates. The ad does not show how a per-person aid figure changes banana prices this week. Newsrooms report no production files, draft scripts, or detailed budget math from the ad makers that would prove a direct link to checkout costs. That gap weakens the causal claim.
The left-wing ad in Michigan backing Abdul El-Sayed leans right into classic antisemitic tropes by incoherently tying U.S. aid to Israel directly to grocery prices. pic.twitter.com/0dQfxwP4Zi
— Scott Jennings Show (@JenningsShow) October 27, 2026
Voters on the right and left share a growing view that elites play politics while families fall behind. This fight feeds that belief. One side sees a reckless message that invites hate. The other sees a raw pushback against endless foreign spending while stores get pricier. As ballots near, the question is whether outrage over the ad moves votes, or whether most people tune out and keep hunting for leaders who fix real prices, not feelings.
Sources:
pjmedia.com, pbs.org, jta.org, timesofisrael.com, jewishinsider.com, religionnews.com, ms.now, yahoo.com
