Michigan Senate candidate El-Sayed declines to disavow Hasan Piker’s past comments

East Lansing, Michigan — Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed declined during a campaign stop Tuesday to denounce Hasan Piker’s past comments and defended the popular far-left streamer’s place in the Democratic Party amid attacks from the center-left.

In an interview with POLITICO while standing next to Piker, El-Sayed said he believes it’s “critical” that Democrats embrace Piker, who has drawn criticism from Democrats and Republicans over his comments about Israel and U.S. foreign policy — including from El-Sayed’s two most formidable opponents, Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) and Democratic state Sen. Mallory McMorrow.

In 2019, Piker said on his livestream that “America deserved 9/11,” though he later apologized for the remark. In the aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, Piker strongly condemned the Israeli response in Gaza and has disparaged the government in terms some Jews and supporters of Israel have labeled antisemitic.

Asked if he would disavow any of Piker’s views, El-Sayed said attempts to pin Piker’s past comments to him amounted to a “gotcha game.”

“I’m not here to disavow people’s views,” El-Sayed said. “This whole gotcha game, platform policing, cancel culture — I thought we were over it.”

El-Sayed’s comments quickly drew attention from Republicans, who circulated video of his remark online while noting Piker’s divisive past.

El-Sayed defended the decision to appear with Piker on the campaign trail, where the two spoke to a room of about 400 people at Michigan State University, and said hesitancy to engage with left-wing surrogates like him is “exactly why Democrats too often fail to get our message out to everybody.”

El-Sayed and Piker also campaigned at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor on Tuesday.

Piker downplayed attacks from other Democrats, including the center-left think tank Third Way and some potential 2028 presidential candidates, suggesting they were delivering “talking points that someone else has given them.”

“It is a heinous smear at the end of the day, and it's one that many of these groups actually apply, because they can't have a conversation about Israel's influence over American foreign policy on moral terms,” Piker said. “So instead of attacking the message, they attack the messenger.”