2026-07-28T04:00:57-04:00 / 福克斯新闻频道
埃尔-赛义德拒绝为令本党愤怒的言论道歉,而黑利·史蒂文斯则就其30万美元的额外收入向他发难
作者:亚历克·舍梅尔 福克斯新闻
发布于2026年7月28日美国东部时间凌晨4:00
密歇根民主党人指责阿卜杜勒·埃尔-赛义德发表“极具性别歧视的攻击言论”
众议员希拉里·斯科尔滕指责密歇根州联邦参议员候选人阿卜杜勒·埃尔-赛义德对包括众议员黑利·史蒂文斯和州长格雷琴·惠特默在内的女性民主党议员发表性别歧视言论。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/44fcd5e3-a36f-425b-9c18-842a5283ec88
收听本文
8 分钟
周一晚间,密歇根州这场激烈的参议院辩论中,民主党左翼阵营与建制派阵营的交锋正式登上舞台。
此次辩论距两人8月4日的初选对决仅一周时间,两位候选人都利用最后一次正面交锋,强化各自的竞选论点,争论谁最能代表密歇根州,并在11月3日的大选中击败共和党候选人、前众议员迈克·罗杰斯。
在周一晚间民主党阵营的交锋中,埃尔-赛义德坚称自己“插在长矛上的食人魔”言论并无不妥,拒绝道歉,但澄清该言论并非专门针对史蒂文斯,而是针对国会中的另一位温和派民主党人。与此同时,埃尔-赛义德还重申了对支持史蒂文斯的亲以色列团体和企业捐款的攻击,同时他也拒绝了部分人给他贴上的“社会主义者”标签,称自己“只是一个理解资本主义运作方式的资本主义者”。
另一方面,史蒂文斯质疑埃尔-赛义德拒绝披露完整纳税申报表是在“隐瞒什么”,这一攻击延续了本月初两人首次一对一辩论时的论调。她还表示,埃尔-赛义德的言论、额外收入以及全国政治野心,都可能成为大选期间的软肋,影响他对阵罗杰斯、争取两人正在角逐的联邦参议员席位的胜算。
摇摆州民调显示左翼面临困境,舒默支持的候选人凭借关键选民群体占据优势
即将退休的密歇根州联邦参议员加里·彼得斯(民主党)此前已放弃在这场高风险的民主党参议院初选中的中立立场,转而支持众议员黑利·史蒂文斯(图左)。正如政党领袖们正合力阻止进步派对手阿卜杜勒·埃尔-赛义德(图右)获得提名一样。(美联社照片/克里斯汀·诺曼)
埃尔-赛义德确认“食人魔”指的是费特曼,拒绝道歉
当主持人追问他是否对此前引发本党反弹的“插在长矛上的食人魔”言论感到后悔时,埃尔-赛义德为该言论的核心内容辩护,并澄清该言论针对的是宾夕法尼亚州联邦参议员约翰·费特曼,而非外界猜测的史蒂文斯。
“我当时指的是一个叫约翰·费特曼的人,”埃尔-赛义德说,他指责这位宾夕法尼亚州民主党人凭借一套价值观当选,随后“彻底将这些价值观抛诸脑后”。
埃尔-赛义德并未为这个比喻道歉或收回。相反,他辩称自己此前曾为史蒂文斯打抱不平,包括她在密歇根州民主党代表大会上被喝倒彩之后。
记者手记:共和党主导的投票揭示了民主党在以色列问题上的新分歧
史蒂文斯随后给出了尖锐回应:“感谢你澄清你并没有称我为食人魔。”
美国宾夕法尼亚州联邦参议员约翰·费特曼于2025年11月10日在华盛顿特区国会山参议院会议厅外就投票事宜向记者发表讲话。(安德鲁·哈尼克/盖蒂图片社摄)
这场争议源于埃尔-赛义德近期在一次与捐赠者的Zoom会议上发表的言论,据《政治报》报道,埃尔-赛义德当时在讨论如何利用他在密歇根州8月4日初选和11月大选的胜利,打造一个全国性平台,推动民主党进一步左转,并支持未来的初选挑战,例如挑战费特曼。
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402297039112
“理想情况下,你先把一个食人魔插在长矛上,然后其他人都会收到信号,”埃尔-赛义德在《政治报》获得的录音中说道。埃尔-赛义德在录音中并未点名史蒂文斯;然而,一些民主党人将该言论解读为指向她。支持史蒂文斯的密歇根州民主党众议员希拉里·斯科尔滕称该言论是“暴力、粗俗的威胁”,并表示候选人应致力于降低政治对立的热度。
曾在拜登政府任职的尼拉·坦登,现任左翼智库美国进步中心主席,将该言论与此次初选中愈演愈烈的性别歧视指控联系起来。
“称你的女性对手为你想要插在长矛上的食人魔,这并不能洗清这场初选存在严重性别歧视的指控,”坦登在X平台上写道。
美国以色列公共委员会资金与以色列问题引发激烈对抗
支持史蒂文斯的数千万美元外部捐款成为争议焦点,主持人多次追问这位众议员,亲以色列团体是否会影响她在任期间的行为。
当被主持人提及的超过4600万美元的美国以色列公共委员会相关捐款,是否会让选民担心她会听从该团体的“摆布”时,史蒂文斯回应道:“绝对不会”,并为自己支持两国方案的立场辩护。
“我一直立场明确、态度一致且行事透明,”史蒂文斯说,“我希望看到长期和平。”
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402298776112
埃尔-赛义德辩称,这笔捐款暴露了两位候选人之间的根本分歧,他声称美国以色列公共委员会支持的团体之所以支持史蒂文斯,是因为“他们知道她会投出可靠的一票”。
“我们之间的区别就在于这4600万美元的美国以色列公共委员会捐款,”埃尔-赛义德说,“他们在这场竞选中创下了纪录,以帮助 elect 我的对手。”
他随后将这笔捐款与史蒂文斯近期投票支持向以色列追加援助直接挂钩,指责以色列政府正试图“扼杀巴勒斯坦自决的可能性”。
“我希望你们的税款花在密歇根州,用于建设密歇根州的学校、医疗保健和道路,”埃尔-赛义德说,“我认为把钱送到那里去杀害儿童和妇女是对我们税款最糟糕的使用方式。而这恰恰就是4600万美元的捐款所能买到的东西。”
埃尔-赛义德随后补充道,美国不应该“打美国以色列公共委员会首先希望我们参与的愚蠢战争”。
史蒂文斯反驳称,外部团体同时在支持两位候选人的竞选,并指责埃尔-赛义德受益于部分由他岳父资助的超级政治行动委员会。
史蒂文斯就未披露的纳税申报表和额外收入向埃尔-赛义德发难
史蒂文斯继续质疑埃尔-赛义德的财务透明度,正如她在本月初的辩论中所做的那样,指责他拒绝披露完整的纳税申报表,同时赚取了约30万美元的额外收入。
“你没有披露你的完整纳税申报表——你在播客节目中担任嘉宾时还有30万美元的其他收入,还兜售小罗伯特·肯尼迪会点赞的所谓医疗保健偏方,”史蒂文斯指责道。
“你说要把金钱从政治中清除,把钱放进人民的口袋,但仍然没有人知道是谁把钱放进了你的口袋,”她补充道,这场辩论中她一直在试图将埃尔-赛义德描绘成一个更热衷于播客、高调政治盟友和打造全国知名度,而非从事密歇根州代表的平凡工作的人。
埃尔-赛义德回应称,他已经披露了要求提交的财务披露文件,并区分了这些备案文件与史蒂文斯要求的完整纳税申报表。
“我们已经提交了所有财务披露文件,”埃尔-赛义德称该问题是“转移注意力的手段”,随后将透明度的争议矛头转向史蒂文斯,质疑支持她竞选的外部组织背后的捐赠者。
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402296266112
史蒂文斯称自己是“这场竞选中唯一不是百万富翁的人”,并认为埃尔-赛义德的财务状况可能会给共和党在11月的竞选中提供更多攻击材料。
“共和党人在大选期间会发现什么可以用来攻击他的东西?”她问道。
埃尔-赛义德称参议院阻挠议事“反民主”
当被问及民主党参议员们未能做到的最重要的事情是什么时,埃尔-赛义德立刻将矛头指向了立法阻挠议事规则及其通常要求的60票门槛。
“我反对阻挠议事,”埃尔-赛义德说,“我认为阻挠议事在很多方面都是反民主的。”
特朗普要求瑟恩保持参议院开会状态,直至《拯救美国法案》通过
美国国会大厦穹顶在2025年11月12日周三亮起灯光,当时众议院返回华盛顿就重新开放政府进行投票。(比尔·克拉克/CQ-滚球公司通过盖蒂图片社摄)
埃尔-赛义德辩称,废除阻挠议事规则将有助于民主党通过《PRO法案》,该法案将扩大工会组织和集体谈判保护,对违反劳动法的行为处以更严厉的处罚,并 override 州级关于强制工会会费的工作权限制。他表示,这还可以为更有力的反垄断执法扫清道路,埃尔-赛义德称这种执法需要更激进,同时也为对亿万富翁征收财富税和《全民医保》法案铺平道路。
“目前,我们民主面临的最大风险是阻挠议事——参议院中的阻挠议事是反民主的——以及政治中的金钱问题,”他说。
移民海关执法局的交锋暴露了民主党对手之间的深刻分歧
两位候选人还就美国移民和海关执法局(ICE)的未来展开了辩论,史蒂文斯称ICE是一个“流氓机构”,而埃尔-赛义德则称其为“暴政机构”,并呼吁彻底废除该机构。
史蒂文斯表示,她正在国会领导一项努力,将分配给ICE的700亿美元资金重新定向到医疗保健、食品援助和地方社区。“一分钱都不要再给这个正在造成破坏的流氓机构,”史蒂文斯说,她指责ICE滥用权力,恐吓移民家庭。
一名移民和海关执法局(ICE)特工站在巨大的美国国旗前。在最高法院裁决允许特朗普政府终止超过30万海地人的临时保护身份后,ICE预计将加强执法行动。(照片由查利·特里博/法新社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄)
与此同时,埃尔-赛义德指责史蒂文斯虚伪,称她此前曾四次投票支持增加ICE的资金,并赞扬过该机构的人员。
“我说过我们需要废除ICE,”埃尔-赛义德说,“ICE就是要让街头的准军事力量常态化。”
当被问及“废除ICE”这句话是否与“ defund the police ”一样带有政治包袱时,埃尔-赛义德辩称,政府仍可以通过一个替代机构来执行移民法并保障南部边境的安全。
他片刻后升级了批评言辞,称ICE是“一个暴政机构”。
“我认为除了撤销该机构,然后从零开始重建之外,没有其他办法,”埃尔-赛义德说。
史蒂文斯驳斥了他的做法,称其更侧重于言辞而非治理。
“抱怨和口号不是解决方案,”她说,并指出她曾参观过ICE的拘留设施,并在国会中努力改革该机构。
亚历克·舍梅尔是福克斯新闻数字频道的政治记者,原籍北卡罗来纳州夏洛特,现居住在华盛顿特区-巴尔的摩都会区。
Dems clash over AIPAC money, ‘ogre’ attack and electability during crucial Senate debate
2026-07-28T04:00:57-04:00 / Fox News
El-Sayed refused to apologize for remarks that had his own party angry, while Haley Stevens pressed him on $300,000 in outside income
By Alec Schemmel Fox News
Published July 28, 2026 4:00am EDT
Michigan Democrat accuses Abdul El-Sayed of ‘deeply sexist attacks’
Rep. Hillary Scholten accused Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed of making sexist remarks about female Democrats, including Rep. Haley Stevens and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/44fcd5e3-a36f-425b-9c18-842a5283ec88
Listen to this article
8 min
The battle between the Democratic Party’s far-left flank and establishment wing spilled onto the stage Monday night during battleground Michigan’s fiery Senate debate.
The debate took place one week ahead of the pair’s Aug. 4 primary battle, with both candidates using the final face-off to sharpen their competing arguments over who could best represent Michigan — and defeat Republican candidate, former Rep. Mike Rogers, in the November 3 general election.
During Monday night’s clash of the Democratic Party’s competing wings, El-Sayed doubled down on his “ogre on a pike” remark and declined to apologize, but clarified it was not specifically directed at Stevens but rather a different moderate Democrat in Congress. Meanwhile, El-Sayed also repeated his attacks on pro-Israel and corporate spending supporting Stevens, while he also rejected the “socialist” label some have given him, describing himself as a “just a capitalist who understands how capitalism works.”
Stevens, on the other hand, questioned what El-Sayed was “hiding” by not releasing his full tax returns, an attack she carried over from the pair’s first one-on-one debate earlier this month, and portrayed his rhetoric, outside income and national political ambitions as potential general-election liabilities when it came to taking on Rogers and trying to win the U.S. Senate seat they are vying for.
SWING-STATE POLL SPELLS TROUBLE FOR FAR LEFT AS SCHUMER-BACKED CANDIDATE DOMINATES WITH CRITICAL VOTING BLOCS
Retiring Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., has abandoned his neutrality in Michigan’s high-stakes Democratic Senate primary, backing U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, pictured left, as party leaders rally to stop progressive rival Abdul El-Sayed, pictured right, from winning the nomination.(AP Photo/Kristen Norman)
El-Sayed confirms Fetterman was the ‘ogre,’ declines to apologize
El-Sayed stood by the substance of his controversial “ogre on a pike” remark when pressed by the moderator about whether he regretted the rhetoric, which earned him backlash from his own party, but clarified it was about Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn., not Stevens as some had speculated.
“I was referring to a guy named John Fetterman,” El-Sayed said, accusing the Pennsylvania Democrat of getting elected on one set of values before “completely throwing those values in the mud.”
El-Sayed did not apologize for or retract the metaphor. Instead, he argued that he had previously pushed back against unkind treatment of Stevens, including after she was booed at a Michigan Democratic Party convention.
REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: THE REPUBLICAN-LED VOTE THAT REVEALED DEMOCRATS’ NEW DIVIDE ON ISRAEL
Stevens later offered a pointed response: “Thank you for clarifying that you didn’t call me an ogre.”
U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., speaks to reporters outside the Senate Chamber during votes on Nov. 10, 2025 on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
The controversy stemmed from comments El-Sayed made during a recent Zoom meeting with donors, Politico reported, adding that El-Sayed was discussing how to use his victory in Michigan’s upcoming Aug. 4 primary and the November election to build a national platform to move the Democratic Party further left and support future primary challenges, such as against Fetterman.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402297039112
“Ideally, you put one ogre on a pike, and then everyone else gets the message,” El-Sayed said, according to audio obtained by Politico. El-Sayed did not name Stevens in the recording; however, some Democrats interpreted the remark as referring to her. Rep. Hillary Scholten, D-Mich., who has endorsed Stevens, called the remark a “violent, vulgar” threat and said candidates should be working to lower the political temperature.
Neera Tanden, a former Biden administration official who leads the left-wing think tank the Center for American Progress, connected the remark to broader accusations of sexism that have roiled the primary.
“Calling your female opponent an ogre you want to put on a pike is not beating the rap that this race has some serious sexism,” Tanden wrote on X.
AIPAC money and Israel fuel fierce confrontations
Tens of millions of dollars in outside spending supporting Stevens became a central flashpoint, with the moderator repeatedly pressing the congresswoman on whether pro-Israel groups would influence her conduct in office.
Asked whether the more than $46 million in AIPAC-related spending cited by the moderator should concern voters that she would do the group’s “bidding,” Stevens responded, “Absolutely not,” and defended her support for a two-state solution.
“I have been very clear, consistent and transparent,” Stevens said. “I want to see long-term peace.”
NEW YORK TIMES RAISES EYEBROWS BY REFERRING TO AIPAC AS ‘HARD-RIGHT’ PRO-ISRAEL GROUP
El-Sayed argued that the spending exposed a fundamental difference between the candidates, claiming AIPAC-backed groups supported Stevens because “they know that she’ll be a reliable vote.”
“The difference between us is $46 million of AIPAC spending,” El-Sayed said. “They’ve set a record in this race to help elect my opponent.”
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402298776112
He then tied that spending directly to Stevens’ recent vote supporting additional aid to Israel, accusing the Israeli government of working to “foreclose on the possibility of Palestinian self-determination.”
“I want your tax dollars spent in Michigan to provide schools in Michigan, to build healthcare in Michigan, to build roads in Michigan,” El-Sayed said. “And I think that money sent over there to kill kids and women is the worst use of our tax dollars. And yet that’s exactly what $46 million in spending will buy you.”
El-Sayed later added that the United States should not be “fighting stupid wars that AIPAC wants us to fight in the first place.”
Stevens countered that outside groups were supporting both campaigns and accused El-Sayed of benefiting from a super PAC funded in part by his father-in-law.
Stevens presses El-Sayed over unreleased tax returns and outside income
Stevens continued to question El-Sayed’s financial transparency, as she did in their debate earlier this month, accusing him of refusing to release his full tax returns while earning approximately $300,000 in outside income.
“You have not released your full tax returns — $300,000 in other income while you sat in the podcast chair, and you hawked junk healthcare cures that RFK Jr. would thumbs up,” Stevens charged.
“You talk about getting money out of politics and putting money in people’s pockets, but still, no one knows who’s putting the money in your pocket,” she added, continuing a debate-long effort to portray El-Sayed as more interested in podcasts, high-profile political allies and building his national celebrity than doing the unglamorous work of representing Michigan.
El-Sayed responded that he had released his required financial disclosures, drawing a distinction between those filings and the full tax returns Stevens had demanded.
“We released all of our financial disclosures,” El-Sayed said, calling the issue “a distraction” before turning the transparency argument back on Stevens and questioning the donors behind outside organizations supporting her campaign.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6402296266112
Stevens described herself as “the only non-millionaire in this race” and argued that El-Sayed’s finances could give Republicans additional material to use against him in November.
“What are the Republicans going to uncover in the general election that they will use against him?” she asked.
El-Sayed brands the Senate filibuster ‘anti-democratic’
Asked to identify the most important thing Senate Democrats were failing to do, El-Sayed immediately targeted the legislative filibuster and the 60-vote threshold it often imposes.
“I oppose the filibuster,” El-Sayed said. “I think the filibuster has been anti-democratic for a lot of reasons.”
TRUMP DEMANDS THUNE KEEP SENATE IN SESSION UNTIL SAVE AMERICA ACT PASSES
The U.S. Capitol dome is illuminated as the House of Representatives returns to Washington to vote to reopen the government on Wednesday, November 12, 2025.(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
El-Sayed argued that eliminating the filibuster would help Democrats pass the PRO Act, which would expand union-organizing and collective-bargaining protections, impose tougher penalties for labor-law violations and override state right-to-work restrictions on mandatory union fees. He said it could also clear a path for stronger antitrust enforcement, which El-Sayed said needs to be more aggressive, as well as a wealth tax on billionaires and Medicare for All.
“Right now, the biggest risks to our democracy are the filibuster — it’s anti-democratic in the Senate — and money in politics,” he said.
ICE clash exposes sharp divide between the Democratic rivals
The candidates also battled over the future of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, with Stevens calling ICE a “rogue agency” while El-Sayed labeled it “tyrannical” and called for abolishing it altogether.
Stevens said she was leading an effort in Congress to redirect $70 billion allocated to ICE toward healthcare, food assistance and local communities. “Not a penny more for this rogue agency that is wreaking havoc,” Stevens said, accusing ICE of abusing its power and frightening immigrant families.
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent stands before a large American flag. ICE is expected to ramp up enforcement operations following the Supreme Court’s decision allowing the Trump administration to end Temporary Protected Status for more than 300,000 Haitians.(Photo by Charly Triballeau/ AFP via Getty Images)
Meanwhile, El-Sayed accused Stevens of hypocrisy, alleging that she had previously voted four times to increase ICE funding and had praised its personnel.
“I’ve said that we need to abolish ICE,” El-Sayed said. “ICE is about normalizing paramilitary force on our streets.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Pressed on whether the phrase “abolish ICE” carried the same political baggage as “defund the police,” El-Sayed argued that the government could still enforce immigration laws and secure the southern border through a replacement agency.
He escalated the criticism moments later, calling ICE “a tyrannical agency.”
“I think there is no way to get past that except to undo the agency and then build from scratch,” El-Sayed said.
Stevens rejected his approach as focused more on rhetoric than governing.
“Complaints and slogans aren’t solutions,” she said, pointing to her visit to an ICE detention facility and her efforts to change the agency through Congress.
Alec Schemmel is a Politics Reporter for Fox News Digital who is originally from Charlotte, North Carolina but now resides in the Washington D.C.-Baltimore Metro Area.
发表回复