Editor’s note: In letters sent after the Oct. 8 U.S. Senate debate between Abdul El-Sayed and Mike Rogers, most writers either viewed the debate as a wash, or believed El-Sayed was the winner. We strive to present a fair reflection of reader sentiment when publishing letters to the editor, but the two letters from readers who considered Rogers the winner contained racial and ethnic slurs ‒ as well as demonstrably false claims about El-Sayed ‒ and thus did not meet our standards for publication.

There are no winners here

I don’t think anyone won that debate, especially the people of Michigan. Both candidates spent the entire time sniping at each other, speaking over each other and the moderating and generally being their worst selves. They didn’t show any consideration for the issues or the people they’re supposed to want to represent. If I had a third choice, I would be considering it.

Jennifer Little

Linden

I want to see more decorum

Both candidates were equally as bad. Mostly, they avoided answering the questions that were asked and spent more time picking on their opponent. They both talked over each other and showed a lack of decorum. I watched the debate so I could hear each candidates position on different subjects, not to hear what each candidate thought their opponents position was on the subject.

While the moderator did ask questions about the wars in the Middle East, the follow up question should have been about the war in Ukraine. A question about the Ukraine war would show if the candidates were consistent on their positions or if they flip flopped on that issue.

Frankly, I am looking for someone like retiring U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, who can calmly state his position and can work across the isle to get things done. I did not see that in the debate. For the next debate the non-speaker’s microphone should be turned off and the candidates need to express their own position, not give us their interpretation of their opponents position.

Barry Brickner

Farmington Hills

I just want to hear solutions

I don’t really care what their opinion is of each other is, or who they think is at fault for our problems, I just wanted to know what they were going to do to help fix these problems and how it fixes the problems. I hated that they kept bashing each other on every issue.

Wayne Ring

Muskegon

Rogers is stuck with Trump

Neither won, but Rogers looked like an idiot. He is stuck the Trump policies. They really didn’t have quality answers and look sad in debating. The moderator seemed hopeless in trying to get the answers.

Antoine Dukes

Milwaukee

Just answer the questions

Do we really want to send either of these men to represent us? There were questions that neither bothered to answer because they were too preoccupied with quarrelling between themselves, and telling us why not to vote for the other guy. How about telling us why we should vote for you?

The people of Michigan lost this debate. What a missed opportunity. The decorum displayed by these individuals was despicable. I went into this debate thinking that I didn’t really want to vote for either of them. When the debate was over, I was certain of it.

Len Wahl

Athens, Michigan

1 question the candidates should answer

During the next debate it would be great if the moderator asks both candidates, “Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election?”

Anne Daugherty

White Lake

Rogers’ Trump reversal seems phony

I feel Abdul El-Sayed won the debate tonight. It’s obvious Mike Rogers is trying to win voters over by scaring and frightening them about Abdul El-Sayed being a Muslim. Rogers is trying to tie El-Sayed to ISIS, The Muslim brotherhood, the Taliban or whatever else he thinks Michigan voters will be fearful of and scared about. I hate fear-based politicking, yet it has worked at times. Donald Trump specializes in lying fear based marketing.

I don’t know what Michigan voters will make out of tonight’s debate. Between the two of them El-Sayed spoke clearly and directly about the concerns we have as Michiganders regarding how expensive gas is for our cars, health care for our bodies, and day care for our children has become.

And El-Sayed made it clear Trumps tariffs and war in Iran are chiefly responsible for these excessive costs in Michigan. And I agree with him. As for Rogers who totally supported the War in Iran and all of Trumps tariffs, he’s trying to sing a different tune now after looking at the polls and finally recognizing Michiganders are sick of Trumps tariffs and stupid war in Iran. Rogers’ problem is he has been totally in lockstep with Trump, so his reversal now seems phony as he just changed his opinion on these issues only a few days ago.

Larry Anderson

Northville

Rogers lies about El-Sayed

Rogers continually attacked Dr. El-Sayed and had nothing to say about the problems of health care, education, family leave, inequality, tariffs, and affordability.

Rogers is totally in the pocket of corporate donors and refuses to hold them accountable.

He totally lies about El-Sayed’s position on condemning Hamas attack, but refuses to acknowledge the genocide being committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

Steven Martin

Traverse City

Rogers’ attacks on El-Sayed reveal his vulnerability

Mike Rogers’ ad hominem attacks on Abdul revealed his vulnerability as he desperately will do or say anything to win election. At the close of the debate Abdul looked unflappable. Rogers can be seen looking down and clawing at his collar. That summed up his predicament. Rogers cannot weasel out of his Trump and corporate money connections and his right wing Republican record.

Geordie Wilson

Saginaw

Rogers is an empty suit

Abdul did what he needed to do, while Rogers did nothing to separate himself from being a warmongering, Trump puppet who is more concerned about culture wars and anti-Muslim fearmongering than anything else. He’s an empty suit, and Abdul has the moxie and compassion to win this election.

Ryan Felber

Grand Rapids

Rogers attacked El-Sayed’s ethnicity

Mike Rogers spent the entire debate attacking El-Sayed’s ethnicity while being very vague on the solutions to the high cost of living, reigning in Donald Trump’s grift or anything of real concern to a working class voter like myself

Dalton Roberson

Detroit

These two seem to genuinely dislike each other

Rogers and El-Sayed did not stray from their talking points, with El-Sayed accusing Rogers of being bought and paid for by wealthy business interests, being “in the bag” for Trump and gaining great wealth from his involvement in politics, while Rogers accused El-Sayed of being under the influence of foreign interests such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and supporting an expensive, unworkable Medicare for all. Numerous more petty side points were bickering over including El-Sayed’s mother and sister and Rogers’ mansion in Florida.

I doubt whether this debate changed the minds of anyone who has been paying attention, but it could affect the thinking of some viewers who have not been following the progress of the campaigns.

But on second thought, only those who have been paying attention are likely to have taken the time to view this spectacle.

I was left with the sense that the debate was not performance, but that the two men genuinely dislike each other.

Fred Foley

Lake Orion

El-Sayed was more effective

Long Answer: My husband and I watched tonight’s Senate debate and came away feeling that Abdul El-Sayed presented himself more effectively than Mike Rogers.

Although I would not support Rogers, I was particularly disappointed by what we perceived as his relentless personal attacks against El-Sayed. The repeated references to alleged ties to Hamas, ISIS and El-Sayed’s family struck us as inflammatory and inappropriate for a serious political debate.

We appreciated that El-Sayed did not respond with similar attacks. His restraint was refreshing. However, we also wished he had addressed these serious accusations directly rather than leaving them unanswered.

Michigan voters deserve a thoughtful discussion of the issues facing our state and country, not a debate dominated by personal accusations. Candidates should be prepared to defend their positions, challenge their opponents on policy and substantiate serious allegations.

We would welcome more substance and less hostility in our political debates.

Kathleen Hintz

Kewadin

I blame Trump

I think we can thank Donald Trump for the fact that political debates have devolved into attacks rather than honest discourse about issues critical to our democracy and important to voters. The norm and standards he set 10 years ago have led to a stagnation in intellectual discourse and actions which enhance the lives of Americans.

Patricia Faletti

Canton

I wish Mallory McMorrow had been on that stage

Tonight we saw two candidates with very different perspectives. We also saw two candidates with deep flaws. The bickering, the name calling and lack of decorum denigrated the entire process. True, it was Rogers who was scraped the bottom of the protocol barrel, essentially accusing Sayed of being a terrorist who set the tone. Sadly El-Sayed too often took the bait.

I was left wondering just how did we pass on the opportunity to have Mallory McMorrow on that stage. Chuck Schumer has a lot to answer for throwing the party’s support behind the incompetent Haley Stevens.

I’ll vote for El-Sayed because I don’t trust Rogers … and because I’m not a racist who thinks all Muslims are terrorists. In truth, we lost a chance to send a great candidate to the U.S. Senate, all because the Democratic old guard can’t say no to Israel.

Mark Pontoni

Lansing

Rogers is Trump’s yes man

The debate between Mike Rogers and Dr. Abdul El-Sayed was a landslide. El-Sayed answered every question with his plans and Rogers took every chance he could to tear down El-Sayed and his background. I don’t know that Rogers did anything to separate himself from the idea that he is just Trump’s yes man.

I truly believe Dr. El-Sayed when he says he will fight for the people of Michigan. He may turn out to be a con man, but I know Rogers and Trump are con men. So, give the candidate the vote who expresses their plans clearly and concisely over a candidate I know doesn’t have my basic interests in mind.

Neil Allen

Macomb

Nothing to say about affordability

Other than his constant racist attacks on Abdul El-Sayed and his family, Mike Rogers had nothing to say about helping Michigan’s affordability crisis. Obviously, Mike Rogers follows Donald Trump in all ways, including his name calling. Let’s address the real issues our state and country are facing instead of constantly belittling people of different faiths, nationalities, gender, sexual orientation and the like.

Virginia Latra

Macomb

El-Sayed is empathetic

I believe Abdul El-Sayed makes the best candidate for the State of Michigan. He projects awareness of and empathy of ordinary Americans, and not the 1% that has taken over our country.

Jeanie Ojeda

Livonia

I feel El-Sayed won, because Mike Rogers wouldn’t answer the questions and kept trying to turn it into a cultural issue, i.e., he kept making accusations related to terrorist groups supporting El-Sayed, etc. If that’s the case, then bring the evidence, but it’s what he’s done the whole time and it’s old and tiring.

El-Sayed tried to stay focused on the issues that people are concerned about, i.e., health care, education, housing affordability, etc. He topped it off by saying tax the rich and stop starting wars as a solution for the national debt. Both of those are valid and measurable causes to huge debt we find ourselves in.

Brian MacKillop

Howell

Submit a letter to the editor at freep.com/letters, and we may publish it in print or online.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Abdul El-Sayed, Mike Rogers … or maybe McMorrow: Who won U.S. Senate debate | Letters

Reporting by Detroit Free Press / Detroit Free Press

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect